From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 13 02:01:34 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA07699; Mon, 13 May 2002 02:01:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 02:01:34 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205130601.CAA07699@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #251 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 May 2002 02:00:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 251 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Technologies Enabling the Telecoms Industry (Anthony E. Seigman) Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received (John Higdon) Re: Payphone Fee Scams (Steven Lichter) Re: Identifying "Out of Area" Calls Using ANI? (John Higdon) Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing (DMSTRANS) DMS FCDRSRCH Q (DMSTRANS) Re: Need Help Toshiba PBX Perception (NOSPAM) Phone in Colors Other Than Black? (Roy Smith) Re: Setting Modem String (John David Galt) Study: Telemarketers Lose Voices (Ed Ellers) LSU Sues Law Student Over Web Site (ptownson@lcs.mit.edu) Recent News Items on Fraud, Identity Theft (Monty Solomon) ID Thieves Mine For Gold on Jail Sites (ptownson@lcs.mit.edu) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Anthony E. Seigman Subject: Re: Technologies Enabling the Telecoms Industry Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 19:25:15 -0700 Organization: Stanford University In article , John McHarry wrote: > Burt Renolds wrote: >> Could anybody give me some good resources for completing a >> presentation on technologies that enable the telecoms industry?? > Bankruptcy? Look under author Jeff Hecht on amazon.com. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 19:25:53 -0700 Subject: Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.249.13@telecom-digest.org, Danny Burstein wrote: > I personally take all e-mail from that place, as well as its brethren, > and kick it into a spam box. I also filter out e-mail that asks me to > reply to one of those addresses. Does spam (other than the promotions Yahoo recently sent out that drew major criticism) REALLY come from Yahoo, or do the spammers simply forge Yahoo email addresses in the From: line? > Perhaps one piece in 50 is real. That sender, if I'm up to it, gets a > note saying "sorry, if you want your note read by a human use a real > ISP, not one whose business model assists spammers." A perusal of the headers of spam that has ostensibly come from Yahoo email addresses reveals that it originated elsewhere ... and Yahoo had nothing to do with it at any point along the route. You can hardly hold Yahoo responsible for spammers who make up Yahoo addresses and put them on their email. > Similarly, if ISPs and the gateways adopted a simple change in their > pricing schemes, then spam would drop dramatically and it would be much > easier to filter out the few remaining problems. Really serious spammers don't use ISPs at all. They buy raw bandwidth and provide their own services. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Silicon Valley, CA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 12 May 2002 02:48:02 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Payphone Fee Scams > Now if he was calling spammers that have 800 numbers, he would be > doing mankind a favor. > So close, yet so far. Maybe we can persuade Texas to give the death penalty for spammers, they like executing people!! Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 19:48:53 -0700 Subject: Re: Identifying "Out of Area" Calls Using ANI? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.250.4@telecom-digest.org, was written: > Caller calls line A and is automatically forwarded to line B (which is > associated with my 800 #). Unfortunately the ANI that gets recorded > is the phone number of line A, not the orginal caller's number. Is > there a way to forward a call so the original ANI stays intact? > Would a call diverter work? Are there any other ways to determine an > "out of area" number without involving the telco? Short answer: no. ANI data does not travel the same highway as Caller ID information. Caller ID (an SS7 "CLASS" feature) will pass through a forwarded number as if the phone in the middle did not exist. As a matter of fact, that is almost true as far as the call setup by the STP is concerned. ANI data, on the other hand, is part of trunk-side signaling, and is never passed to customers, unless they have trunk-side connections. What you see in your Caller-ID display is never ANI, but Caller-ID, generated and passed as part of the SS7 protocol. (Sometimes IXCs will generate a CID field where none existed from the original caller and place the phone number of the caller, derived from ANI, into that field. You will then see that number on your display AND from that point on, that number would be passed through forwarding. But the few carriers that do this only do it when CID is not already present from the originating number.) I'm amazed that after a multi-year hiatus from participation in TELECOM Digest, some of the same old misconceptions linger on. At the top of the list is confusion of ANI with Caller-ID. If you always bear in mind that the purpose and implementation of each is not related to the other, it is easier to see why expected call-forwarding behavior does not occur. Think about this: if ANI were passed through a forwarded number, it would create some very disturbing effects. If your neighbor forwarded his phone to Tokyo, and you called your neighbor to chat, you certainly wouldn't want YOUR ANI passed to his long distance company, now would you? That mushi-mushi would bill to you and not him if it did! John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Silicon Valley, CA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well John, I said this before, but it *is* good you are back. And we have so many relatively new readers/ participants in this forum, I'm not surprised to see many of the old topics getting rehashed for the benefit of newcomers. I suspect it will go on that way. PAT] ------------------------------ From: markmollig@aol.com (DMSTRANS) Subject: Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing Date: 11 May 2002 21:14:28 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ google@fasttrackmonkey.com (CS) wrote in message news:: > Hi all, > Perhaps someone here can help me with this problem. I got a new phone > line about one month ago, and since I've had it, it rings a little > "half-ring" about once an hour. The ring is so short that caller-id > doesn't register anything. *69 doesn't return anything either. > I called Verizon, and they basically tried to sell me call-block > (which they said might not work because the calling number may not > register) or call intercept. They sent me to repair, and they > verified that it wasn't the local switch doing it's periodic "line > testing". > I don't want to pay more money to fix what must be a simple problem > ... Does anyone have any ideas short of changing my number? I'm not > even convinced it's necessarily a real call, but some screw-up at the > CO. I'm not aware of any services on my line that would cause this. > It would be cool if voicemail could ring a little reminder, but the > rep says nothing I have would account for this behaviour. It sounds like the telco is running an ALIT Automatic Line Insulation Testing. This is normally run at night, and when it tests capacitance on the line, it will somtimes cause a "phantom" ring to occur. I would ask the telco to remove your line from their ALIT run routine. dmstrans ------------------------------ From: markmollig@aol.com (DMSTRANS) Subject: DMS FCDRSRCH Q Date: 11 May 2002 21:29:25 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ This is somthing that has been bugging me for awhile, appreciate any suggestions. When we need to run a trace of the called number in our OCC Active file, I will use the SRCHFIL OCC ACTIVE & SETKEY CALLEDNO NPA.NXX.XXXX EXECSCRCH >. Anyway, when I DISPLAY the actual call records I find it very frustrating trying to figure out when the call actually takes place. There is no military time given. I will get ORIGTIME 31786 and a DISCTIME 31805. I know this is in second increments, but then to figure out how many seconds from 12:00 to figure out when the call occured drives me crazy! Is there any easy formula or way I can look at these call results and get the time the call took place easier? BTW they also have this numbering on the ORIGDATE 156. Any comments from other Translations Techs would be appreciated! Thanks! DMSTRANS ------------------------------ From: NOSPAM Subject: Re: Need Help Toshiba PBX Perception Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 17:56:31 GMT This site might be useful: http://www.toshiba-phones.com Do you have the login and password? Or, are you trying to program with a 20 button display set? Ray wrote in message news:telecom20.250.8@telecom-digest.org: > I have a Toshiba Perception PBX. I need help loging into the system to > change system settings. Anyone out there with experience with this > system please help me. ------------------------------ From: Roy Smith Subject: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 18:01:45 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC I watched the movie "61" this afternoon. It's about Roger Maris's attempt to break Babe Ruth's single-season home run record in 1961. Now, call me a geek, but I was surprised when the phone in the Maris's house was light blue, not black. At one point, another phone shows up in a shot with some other non-black color. Wasn't 1961 a little early for decorator color phones? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not know when they started for sure; all I know is what I had. In early 1962 I lived in an apartment- hotel in Chicago, and had a two-line, turn-button, 'Palmolive Green', rotary-dial phone in my apartment. Actually two, one for my living room and one for the bedroom. Both had 25 foot green cords, and green cords from the phone to the wallbox. One side of the turn button was my personal line, HYDe Park 3-3714. The other side of the turn button was the building switchboard line. Down on the first floor in the dining room for the building they had a six-button, five line phone with a blank faceplate, since it was served entirely by the switchboard for the building. The building manager had a phone like that in her office also, but her phone had a dial on it like mine since she also had a private direct line with outside dialtone not served from the switchboard. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John David Galt Subject: Re: Setting Modem String Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 18:35:27 -0700 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Robert, A., Fink, "M. D." wrote: > I have attempted to set up a new dialup connection in DUN, but it is > not clear to me *where* I need t type in the modified modem string in > order to force the modem to connect only at v.34 or lower. Windows 98's Dial-Up Networking stores all the modem command strings it uses in the Windows Registry. To view and edit them, click the Start button, select Run, and type in REGEDIT as the program to run. Then open these folder icons (keys) in regedit's left pane: My Computer HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE System CurrentControlSet Services Class Modem 0000 If you have installed more than one modem driver on your system, the first one will have the above name, and the rest will have 0001, 0002, and so on in place of 0000. All the subkeys under 0000 (or whichever one your v.34 device is) will contain the AT command strings the driver sends to the modem. To edit a string, highlight it in the right pane and hit Return. Be sure to take notes of what you change, so that you can undo any changes if they don't work. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Study: Telemarketers Lose Voices Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 21:58:37 -0400 CHICAGO (AP) -- Telemarketers are losing their voices, new research suggests. That could mean fewer interrupting phone calls at dinnertime, but the news isn't good for people whose paychecks depend on their voices. In a survey by University of Nebraska scientists, telemarketers were twice as likely to report vocal problems as non-telemarketers. About a third reported their work was hampered by an average of five symptoms, including loss of voice, hoarseness, voice-cracking and dry throat. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7804-2002May12?language=printer ------------------------------ From: ptownson@lcs.mit.edu Subject: LSU Sues Law Student Over Web Site Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 21:48:08 CDT http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/176519.html LSU Sues Law Student Over Web Site By Michael Bartlett, Newsbytes BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA, U.S.A., 10 May 2002, 4:11 PM CST Douglas Dorhauer has a tiger by the tail. The second-year student at Louisiana State University's law school is the target ... he has a web page using a name similar to a web site run by the university. They think *he* should have to get rid of his web site, because people might be confused. Go to the link at the start of this report above. 2001 Post Newsweek Tech Media Group ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 23:48:21 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Recent News Headlines of Interest About Identity Theft Vulnerability Is Discovered in Security for Smart Cards By JOHN MARKOFF SAN FRANCISCO, May 12 - Two University of Cambridge computer security researchers plan to describe on Monday an ingenious and inexpensive attack that employs a $30 camera flashgun and a microscope to extract secret information contained in widely used smart cards. The newly discovered vulnerability is reason for alarm, the researchers said, because it could make it cost-effective for a criminal to steal information from the cards. Smart cards are used for dozens of different applications, including electronic identity protection, credit and debit cards and cellular phone payment and identity systems. The Cambridge researchers said they had discussed their discovery with a number of card manufacturers, and several had acknowledged the vulnerability. One company reported that its security testing teams had already considered types of attacks similar to the one mounted by the Cambridge team and that they believed their products were not vulnerable. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/13/technology/13SMAR.html May 13, 2002 Credit Card Theft Thrives Online as Global Market Losses Grow By MATT RICHTEL Tens of thousands of stolen credit-card numbers are being offered for sale each week on the Internet in a handful of thriving, membership-only cyberbazaars, operated largely by residents of the former Soviet Union, who have become central players in credit-card and identity theft. The marketplaces - where credit card prices fluctuate with supply and demand in a sort of black stock market - offer a window into a crime that costs the financial system $1 billion or more a year. They also show how readily personal information is being stolen and traded in the computer age. But the same Internet technology that has enabled the theft and sale of credit cards also provides a veritable transcript of the criminal activity, and a real-time peephole into the attitudes, ethic - and sometimes honor - among the thieves. The chat forums indicate as well that several dozen of the top participants recently have discussed gathering at a credit-card reseller's conference in Odessa, Ukraine, at the end of this month. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/13/technology/13CARD.html Large-scale identity theft is painful reminder of risk By Bruce Mohl, Globe Staff, 5/12/2002 Ford Motor Credit Co. recently sent 13,000 people certified letters warning them that an unauthorized inquiry had been made on their credit reports and that they were now at risk for credit fraud and identity theft. The letters not only were a shock to the recipients but another painful reminder of how prevalent identity theft has become. It is the fastest-growing white-collar crime in America and is being conducted on a scale unthinkable just a few years ago. Federal agencies offer all sorts of tips on how to help consumers protect their personal information to prevent identity theft, but here was a case where the thieves broke into a credit reporting agency and downloaded the files of 13,000 potential targets. ------------------------------ From: ptownson@lcs.mit.edu Subject: ID Thieves Mine For Gold on Jail Sites Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 21:22:34 -0700 ** ID thieves mine for gold on jail sites ** If keeping Social Security numbers off the Internet is a bit like trying to plug holes in a leaky dam, the U.S. justice system has left a floodgate open. http://www.msnbc.com/modules/exports/ct_email.asp?/news/750428.asp ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax : 775-255-9970 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #251 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 13 13:00:10 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA17190; Mon, 13 May 2002 13:00:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 13:00:10 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205131700.NAA17190@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #252 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 May 2002 12:59:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 252 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #332, May 13, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Telecom Update (Canada) #324, March 18, 2002 (Carl Moore) Re: Payphone Fee Scams (David L) Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? (Ed Ellers) Re: Cable vs DSL for IP telephony (Phil McKerracher) Re: Number Portability For Residences (Carl Moore) Re: Information Request (Carl Moore) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 10:01:39 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #332, May 13, 2002 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 332: May 13, 2002 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** AT&T CANADA http://www.attcanada.com ** BELL CANADA http://www.bell.ca ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** AT&T Debtholders Seek to Replace Board ** Bell Names New CFO ** Teleglobe Layoffs and Bankruptcy Predicted ** Nipissing Towns to Get DSL ** Competitors Say Telcos Defying CRTC Directive ** GT Says Aliant Violating Tariffs ** Bell Offers Wireless Access to Desktop Resources ** RFP for Contribution Fund Administrator ** Directory Company Signs Consent Order ** Rogers Offers TV-Internet Bundles ** Sympatico Byte-Caps Start in June ** New Area Code Set for 519 ** Navigata Buys Co-Location Centres ** Financial Results Cisco Group Telecom Microcell Primus ** Pond to Head iMagic ** Is Your Data Network Ready for Voice? ============================================================ AT&T DEBTHOLDERS SEEK TO REPLACE BOARD: Holders of $458 million of AT&T Canada's debt have asked an Ontario court for the right to replace AT&T's current Board, which, they say, has been "oppressive and unfairly prejudicial" to their interests. AT&T says the application is groundless and without merit. BELL NAMES NEW CFO: After "a joint selection process conducted by both SBC and Bell," former Bell ExpressVu President David McLennan has been named Chief Financial Officer of Bell Canada. He replaces Jon Klug, who is returning to SBC. ** SBC, which owns 20% of Bell Canada, has the right to name Bell's CFO. Some observers believe McLennan's appointment reflects a decision by SBC to distance itself from Bell. ** Tim McGee, former Chief Legal Officer at Bell Canada, is now President of Bell ExpressVu. Richard Mannion is Bell's new CLO. TELEGLOBE LAYOFFS AND BANKRUPTCY PREDICTED: An unconfirmed report in the May 9 Washington Post says that Teleglobe Inc. will soon lay off 800 employees and file for bankruptcy protection. Industry rumours say that attempts to find a buyer have failed, and that the company may be liquidated. NIPISSING TOWNS TO GET DSL: The Nipissing Integrated Community Network (NipNet) and Bell Canada are partnering -- with funding from the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund and FedNor -- to extend Bell Sympatico high-speed service to 13 small towns in the North Bay area this year. ** The current issue of Telemanagement examines this and four other northern broadband initiatives. COMPETITORS SAY TELCOS DEFYING CRTC DIRECTIVE: AT&T Canada charges that Bell Canada and Telus are not providing unbundled loops to competitors within the time frames ordered by the CRTC (see Telecom Update #323). The CRTC says AT&T's application "raises serious issues" and has asked for comments. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/Eng/2002/8622/a4-19.htm GT SAYS ALIANT VIOLATING TARIFFS: Group Telecom believed it had won a competitive tender to Memorial University in Newfoundland, but lost it when Aliant improved its bid. GT says it believes Aliant's new pricing is below-tariff and would not pass an imputation test. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/Eng/2002/8622/g7-03.htm BELL OFFERS WIRELESS ACCESS TO DESKTOP RESOURCES: Using technology from Vancouver-based Motivus Software, Bell Mobility now offers access to desktop files, e-mails, and attachments from a wireless PDA or laptop. RFP FOR CONTRIBUTION FUND ADMINISTRATOR: The Canadian Portable Contribution Consortium has issued a Request for Proposals for a vendor to serve as the Administrator of the National Contribution Fund from 2003 through 2005. Proposals are due by June 28. To receive the RFP, call Stephen Whitehead at 613-236-3882, or e-mail whitehead@johnstonbuchan.com. DIRECTORY COMPANY SIGNS CONSENT ORDER: The Competition Bureau says that Phone Directories Company Inc. has paid a $5,000 penalty and consented to a 10-year order requiring it not to make false or misleading claims. Businesses in the Kamloops and Okanagan Valley areas of B.C. complained that the U.S.- based company misled them about publication dates, number of copies distributed, and distribution area. ROGERS OFFERS TV-INTERNET BUNDLES: Rogers Cable has begun offering various combinations of digital TV channels bundled with Hi-Speed Internet for $99.95 a month, or with "Hi-Speed Lite" for $79.99, to customers who own or purchase a digital set-top box. SYMPATICO BYTE-CAPS START IN JUNE: Bell Canada says that new options on Sympatico Internet service -- including controversial charges for usage above preset monthly limits -- will be introduced in mid-to-late June. The changes were first described publicly in Telecom Update #330. ** The Toronto Star quotes Rogers Cable VP Alex Krstajic as saying the cableco will implement a similar byte cap this summer. NEW AREA CODE SET FOR 519: The North American Numbering Plan administrator has assigned 226 as the second area code in 519, to be introduced in 2005. (See Telecom Update #330) NAVIGATA BUYS CO-LOCATION CENTRES: Navigata Communications, formerly RSL Com Canada and now a unit of SaskTel, has bought co-location facilities in Vancouver and Calgary from BridgePoint International. (See Telecom Update #318) FINANCIAL RESULTS: ** Cisco Systems reports sales of US$4.8 billion for the quarter ended April 27, about the same as the previous quarter and 2% more than last year. Net income was $729 million, 10% more than the previous quarter. The day following this announcement, Cisco shares rose 24%. ** Group Telecom's first quarter sales were $57.6 million, 19% more than last year but 6% less than the previous quarter. The EBITDA loss was $10.8 million, compared to $24.8 million last year. ** Microcell Telecommunications had first quarter sales of $140 million, 17% more than last year; its net loss was $95.3 million. Microcell added 26,566 net subscribers, compared to 56,339 last year. Three days before Microcell's report, Moody's reduced the cellco's debt rating. ** Primus Telecom Canada had first quarter net revenue of $66.1 million and EBITDA of $15 million. This is the first time that the wholly owned unit of Virginia-based Primus Telecom has reported financial results. POND TO HEAD IMAGIC: Gerry Pond has been named CEO of iMagicTV, whose software delivers TV signals over phone lines. Until December 2001, Pond was EVP of Aliant, a part-owner of iMagic. IS YOUR DATA NETWORK READY FOR VOICE? In the May issue of Telemanagement, Jay Brandstadter analyzes the hidden cost of many Voice over IP installations: complex and expensive LAN/WAN upgrades. Also in Telemanagement #195: ** Speech Recognition Software Put to the Test ** First Steps in Disaster Planning ** Lessons from a Continent-Wide Multimedia Call Centre Single copies of Telemanagement #195 are $75 each -- call 905-686-5050 ext 500 and charge to Visa, American Express, or Mastercard. Save 49% with a 10-issue subscription -- go to http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 09:54:07 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Telecom Update (Canada) #324, March 18, 2002 I found this: > TIW PULLS OUT OF BRAZIL: Telesystem International Wireless > says it is withdrawing from the Brazilian market in order to > concentrate on its wireless holdings in Czechoslovakia and > Romania. Czechoslovakia? Why does it not account for split of that country into Czech & Slovak republics? ------------------------------ From: davidlind@my-deja.com (David L) Subject: Re: Payphone Fee Scams Date: 13 May 2002 06:30:22 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ aes wrote in message news:: > In article , Tom Williams > wrote: >> A talk show radio show host started his program tonight by talking >> about an interesting payphone scam. It seems that some clever folks >> installed payphones in their houses. They then proceeded to call as >> many toll free 800 type numbers as possible, collecting the 24 cent >> fee from each. One guy racked up over $5,000,000! Now they're >> starting to be indicted. > Why is this a "scam", exactly? I've long wondered if I could do this, > and then sit around at odd hours dialing back to all the 800 numbers > of all the b-----ds who send me spam faxes. Might be nasty -- but > what rules does it violate? I don't know how they would ever find a jury, let alone get one to convict someone of calling junk faxers. I've called some Fax spammers back on payphones. It's strangely satisfying. David ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 11:49:53 -0400 Roy Smith wrote: > I watched the movie "61" this afternoon. It's about Roger Maris's attempt > to break Babe Ruth's single-season home run record in 1961. > Now, call me a geek, but I was surprised when the phone in the > Maris's house was light blue, not black. At one point, another > phone shows up in a shot with some other non-black color. Wasn't > 1961 a little early for decorator color phones? Not at all. AFAIK, general availability of other colors in the Bell System was in the mid-1950s, with some non-black phones having been available on a custom basis as far back as the 1930s (white 202 sets can be seen in a number of old movies). One goof I have been seeing in films and TV shows is that modular phones (made in the 1970s-1980s) are often used in scenes that take place before the mini-modular system was introduced; while the 500, 554 and other phones look basically the same, the cords look different. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not know when they started for > sure; all I know is what I had. In early 1962 I lived in an apartment- > hotel in Chicago, and had a two-line, turn-button, 'Palmolive Green', > rotary-dial phone in my apartment. Actually two, one for my living > room and one for the bedroom. Both had 25 foot green cords, and green > cords from the phone to the wallbox. One side of the turn button was > my personal line, HYDe Park 3-3714. The other side of the turn button > was the building switchboard line. Down on the first floor in the > dining room for the building they had a six-button, five line phone > with a blank faceplate, since it was served entirely by the switchboard > for the building. The building manager had a phone like that in her > office also, but her phone had a dial on it like mine since she also > had a private direct line with outside dialtone not served from the > switchboard. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Phil McKerracher Subject: Re: Cable vs DSL for IP telephony Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 13:07:25 +0100 Chip G wrote in message news:telecom20.249.2@telecom-digest.org: > The keys to successful use of VoIP are many. In general, I think you > will have the same experiences whether you are using DSL or cable > modem. Some considerations: [Lots of good stuff snipped] > ...3. Minimal lost packets (while e-mail and web traffic can be pretty > forgiving, voice and video need reliable streams of data. That is why > you generally see them implemented via UDP instead of TCP. If too many > packets are lost, the conversation can become unintelligible ... I think you might be misunderstanding this. If UPD packets lost they stay lost, whereas with TCP they get retransmitted until they arrive intact. UDP is unreliable, TCP is reliable. UDP is generally used for VoIP because the occasional lost packet is preferable to a delay while retransmission takes place. Phil McKerracher www.mckerracher.org ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 09:40:41 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Number Portability For Residences It came to my attention that special services like call forwarding were lost when I had my phone service moved to my present home, and this happened later when I took up the then Conectiv-Communications local-calling plan, ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 09:51:35 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Information Request Delaware, where I no longer live, went to countywide calling areas some years ago, but there is noise at least at the New Castle-Kent county line, because the Smyrna exchange, whose area of service is apparently MOSTLY in Kent County, does spill over into far southern New Castle County. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax : 775-255-9970 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #252 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed May 15 21:03:52 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA04192; Wed, 15 May 2002 21:03:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 21:03:52 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205160103.VAA04192@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #253 TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 May 2002 21:00:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 253 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Adminsitrivia: Some Messages Lost in Transit (editor@telecom-digest.org) Re: Best Way to Keep Children Safe on the Net (lizard@saurasite.com) Local Governments Sue FCC Over Cable Ruling Losses (Monty Solomon) Attack of the Phone Cloners (Marcus Didius Falco) Rural Telecoms Voice Support For Breaux-Nickles Broadband (Marcus Falco) Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? (Tom Brown) Re: Legitimate Enhanced Cell Phone Antenna? (Marcus Didius Falco) Defnity R 9.5 R-10 Software (vivek) Re: Change Local Service, Keep My Number? (maryjane@oblivian.net) Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing (Steve Michelson) Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (Geof Welsh) Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (C. Zwanzig) Last Laugh! Sorry, Wrong Number (1999 Story) (Carl Moore) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: editor@telecom-digest.org (TELECOM Digest Editor) Date Wed, 15 May 2002 00:00:00 CDT Subject: Administrivia: Some Messages Lost in Transit On Tuesday, May 14 I recieved a larger than usual amount of virus messages and spam. Most days there are around 75-100 virus messages and the same number of spam messages. In the process of sweeping it all into the bit bucket, about a dozen good messages got tossed also. (Sorry). It was impossible to recover them. What you see in this issue is the remains of what was available to me as of about 7 pm, Wednesday. If your message is not here, you will need to resubmit it with my apologies for the mishandling. ------------------------------ From: lizard@saurasite.com Subject: Re: Best Way to Keep Children Safe on the Net Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 22:47:14 +0200 On Mon, 06 May 2002 21:05:31 -0700, in comp.dcom.telecom you wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But the use of .com internationally > usually is done like this: somesite.com.uk or somesite.com.ca. And Pat, while it's nice to see you back, it's NOT nice to see you so confused. Uk would be "somesite.co.uk" for example, and a similiar site in S.Africa would be "somesite.co.za" ... However, having said that, there is no problem registering a South African (or presumably from almost any other coutry) site as a .com .... I have one myself, and I'm in Cape Town. > Tell me this: if the year was 1975 or 1980 and the suggestion was made > to hook all, or a major portion of the homes in the USA with computers > all wired together through a network, how many objections and reasons 1975 ?? I would probably have wondered about your sanity. 1980 ?? I would have thought you were a visionary -- I was just one of many who were just starting to dream of things like that by 1980. Of course overexposure to good SF probably had a lot to do with that! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well okay, it is 2002 and you may either question my sanity or consider me a visionary; your choice. You can either shape up and do it right, or the government will see to it that you don't do it at all. Substitute 'do it' and 'don't do it' with the verbs of your choice. I am **not** a fan of big government (or any government at all, as I believe the ONLY legitimate purpose of government is to do what we cannot conveniently do for ourselves, i.e fire protection, street/sewer/water repairs, etc). But you may be assured, most assuredly, the government is looking at the internet with hungry eyes. One more big, juicy, good thing to regulate. We've already seen hints of the government power involved. Best get your acts together, even if some of you sysadmins need to put in some overtime on the job. Begin tacking and taping up the electronic 'no minors allowed' signs. Do everything in your power to make entry into 'adult' establishments on the net as difficult as possible. Remember, nothing works perfectly. Just get your corner swept out and in order, and encourage your nearby net neighbors to do the same. Just as you have seen the net go from nothing to everything in twenty years, assume twenty years from now this place will be crawling with all sorts of new people looking for ways to break social rules and get away with it. You are correct; in other than USA sites, the 'com' locations are expressed as 'co.uk' or 'co.ca' etc. (In other words the 'commercial' phrase comes in the middle and the country name is the suffix, and the /m/ is elimiated in com.) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 18:46:35 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Local Governments Sue FCC Over Cable Ruling Losses By Christina Ling WASHINGTON, May 14 (Reuters) - Groups representing the nation's local governments on Tuesday said they were suing the Federal Communications Commission in federal court over a ruling they say will cost them $300 million in revenues from lost cable fees this fiscal year alone. The lawsuit concerns the FCC's March decision to insulate high-speed Internet services offered by cable companies like AOL Time Warner Inc (NYSE:AOL) and AT&T Broadband (NYSE:T) from extensive regulations. The FCC tentatively concluded that, under the law, local authorities are not allowed to charge a fee for the cable Internet service like the fee currently charged for video programming offered by the cable operators. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=27169812 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 20:42:53 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Attack of the Phone Cloners NewsScan Daily, 14 May 2002 ("Above The Fold") ATTACK OF THE PHONE CLONERS A team of engineers from IBM and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology have found a way to capture the data necessary to "clone" a cell phone in 60 seconds. Previous methods used to copy the identifying data that enables calls to be charged to another person's phone took about eight hours. The researchers found that they could gain valuable information about the numerical "key" a phone uses to uniquely identify its owner by timing how long the phone's chip took to complete certain tasks and by measuring changing current flows across the chip. Taken together, the information revealed what was being done to the numerical key. The researchers say that chips can be protected against this type of espionage by making sure all computational tasks take the same amount of time, or by changing the way a chip carries out certain computations. (BBC News 14 May 2002) http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1984000/1984887.stm SMART CARDS REVEAL ALL DURING CAMERA FLASH A flash of light can cause sensitive information stored on a smart card microprocessor to be revealed, say UK researchers at Cambridge University, who've found that firing light from an ordinary camera flash at parts of a smart card chip can assist a thief in determining the sensitive information stored on the card, including the cryptographic key used to secure financial transactions. The attack is described as "semi-invasive," as only part of a chip's protective covering must be removed in order to "flash" it. Meanwhile, another group at Cambridge has developed a microchip design that would resist this technique, using a more complex "asynchronous" microprocessor that would not respond in the same way to light interference. (New Scientist 13 May 2002) http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992273 Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 20:48:55 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Rural Telecoms Voice Support For Breaux-nickles Broadband CQ Daily Monitor Midday Update 5-14-02 RURAL TELECOMS VOICE SUPPORT FOR BREAUX-NICKLES BROADBAND BILL Executives from 62 rural telephone companies wrote to Sens. John B. Breaux, D-La., and Don Nickles, R-Okla. today supporting legislation (S 2430) the pair cosponsored that would direct the Federal Communications Commission to put telephone companies on equal regulatory footing with their cable counterparts for high-speed Internet services. Telephone companies, notably the regional Bells, are restricted by the 1996 telecommunications law (PL 104-104) from offering broadband services until they have demonstrated they have opened their local markets to competition. They also must lease their lines to rivals at FCC-regulated rates. Cable providers, which have almost 70 percent of the broadband market, are not subject to such regulations. The rural companies said the bill would help to lower their costs, which are on average higher than the rest of the industry. The measure is opposed by Commerce Chairman Ernest F. Hollings, D-S.C., who has introduced competing legislation (S 2448) that would authorize billions in grants and loan guarantees to speed broadband deployment in rural and underserved areas. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: kibri@eudoramail.com (Tom Brown) Subject: Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? Date: 14 May 2002 20:27:03 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Ed Ellers wrote in message news:: > Roy Smith wrote: >> I watched the movie "61" this afternoon. It's about Roger Maris's attempt >> to break Babe Ruth's single-season home run record in 1961. >> Now, call me a geek, but I was surprised when the phone in the >> Maris's house was light blue, not black. At one point, another >> phone shows up in a shot with some other non-black color. Wasn't >> 1961 a little early for decorator color phones? > Not at all. AFAIK, general availability of other colors in the Bell > System was in the mid-1950s, with some non-black phones having been > available on a custom basis as far back as the 1930s (white 202 sets > can be seen in a number of old movies). As A followup to Pat and Roy's comments. I was just at the Telco Museum in San Francisco at the Fromer Pac Bell HQ (Pioneers museum) they have a sample case with sample plastic phone colors (miniature phones) in tan, deep brown, green (avocado), Gray, red, P. Blue and Yellow. These are for 1950's Phones. In my collection I have 500 desk sets in gray, brown, red, lt. blue, dark blue (at&t), black, orange, avocado, tan, white (500 type dial sets). If you count ITT and Stromberg Carlson type 500 sets there are even more colors (I forgot Pink). I just today repaired a 1960 Princess Rose Beige (Pink) near mint phone for a local antique dealer, she also hav a 1960 Powder Blue with original box! They all are tested and working, the princess is so old it needs a wall ringer (no bell inside, only a lead slug). For Pat, on a related topic, I have a WE Touch tone that has the switch on the faceplate, In addition, it hs the left switch hook that lifts up to a second position when the receiver is off the hook, Like a data phone, any comments or insights on what it might have been for (a hint) it has the silver metal connector rather than standard one, and 8 pins are soldered with wires in the connector. All of my colleagues know it is a mulit line phone, no one has any idea of the reason for the odd arrangement. Thanks for your help folks! Tom (Please No Spam) Yes, I am still looking for Autovon Stuff too (Phone Sets) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That lifted-out left plunger on the phone hook was the equivilent of an 'exclusion key'. You've heard of that, I assume. Those took a two-pair (or larger) cable coming in from the telco central office. That phone instrument was the first one on the line, with other, 'extension' phones following on the same number. The phone pair came into the premises on one pair, was split inside the phone by lifting that plunger and forcing two metal clips inside the phone apart from each other, thus splitting the connection. Then the second pair in the phone cable coming in was used to take the same connection back out to other extension phones on the premises. When the user on the 'master phone' (the first one on the line, with the splitter) wanted privacy in his calls he merely had to lift the left plunger and the other phones down the line would go dead. Once that user would hang up, the other phones would come back to life. If privacy was not needed, he simply would not raise the plunger up all the way. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 00:16:27 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Legitimate Enhanced Cell Phone Antenna? At 04:17 PM 5/8/2002, editor@telecom-digest.org noted in response to rock_spambust_violin@yahoo.com (Tom Hansen) who said: > I have a Nokia 5165, and there are spots in my home where I just can't > get a signal. > I know that the antenna on my unit is replaceable. Are there > LEGITIMATE replacement antennas that can improve reception? (I'm NOT > TALKING those totally fake "cell phone antenna booster" things that > are advertised on cable.) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have two Nokia 5165 phones and do not > know how to 'replace the antenna'. I know Mike Sandman (mike@sandman.com) > has a pretty good external antenna that stands in the corner on a pole > and attaches externally to the Nokia antenna stub. He also knows the > source for an external (rooftop or side of building) antenna that you > point in the direction of the cell site which then comes on a cable to > inside your building where a booster unit retransmits the signal to > the cell phone's own antenna. Ask Mike what advice he would give on > this. PAT] I did a google search some weeks ago and found a number of cell phone linear amplifiers and antennae. However, they connect directly to the cell phone. There are some that are "passive," but they are designed for use in the car, and connect through the windshield. There is supposedly a good brand (which I've forgotten). An amplifier or antenna that connects directly to the phone will keep you from moving around. If you're looking for backup service in case of natural disaster, you should know that the recent tornado in La Plata, MD (a force 4, downgraded from force 5), took out enough cellular towers so that there was no cellular service in town. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: vivek Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 23:50:58 +0530 Subject: Definity R9.5 R-10 Software Hi, all you need to go for voip on your existing Definity is to go for R 9.5 or R 10 software and buy a clan and a medpro card. Being a part of Avaya India, I would recommend you to go for R 10 as you will get some features better than existing in R 9.5 ... cya, vivek ------------------------------ From: maryjane@oblivian.net Subject: Re: Change Local Service, Keep My Number? Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 13:41:00 GMT Organization: Cox Communications You can go back and forth all you want (at least in California you can) but you must not issue a disconnect order. It must be a transfer-of-carrier order with no interruption in service. That is the protocol for retaining your number. Carl Moore wrote: > Before I write of my own situation, what prompted the comment > about changing from Cavalier back to Verizon? > My own local service is currently thru Cavalier, because it picked up > (from Conectiv Communications, affiliated with my local electric > supplier) the local-service plan which included northern Delaware, and > I do have some traffic going from my phone into Delaware. This plan > was made available in the Elkton and North East exchanges way up in > the northeastern corner of Maryland, and the calling areas going back > to C&P have no local service to Delaware, even from Elkton to Newark. > In changing the local service from Verizon to Conectiv (and then > having Cavalier pick it up) my number stayed the same, and I don't > know what would become of my number if I changed back to Verizon. ------------------------------ From: Steve Michelson Subject: Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 13:24:11 -0400 Organization: ITS - NetNews One reason a "half-ring" would occur is if you have activated call forwarding. Whenever a call comes in, it gets forwarded to the new number, and the phone at the location of the actual dialed number gets a little "chirp" of a ring to remind you that the feature is active. If you are getting calls regularly, then it's possible that your line has selective call forwarding that is activated for one or more numbers. Perhaps the previous "owner" of the number had set that up? Find out what the deactivation code for call forwarding is, and dial it. See if that fixes the problem. CS wrote in message news:telecom20.246.12@telecom-digest.org: > Hi all, > Perhaps someone here can help me with this problem. I got a new phone > line about one month ago, and since I've had it, it rings a little > "half-ring" about once an hour. The ring is so short that caller-id > doesn't register anything. *69 doesn't return anything either. ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 15:00:49 -0400 Organization: Bell Sympatico John Higdon wrote: > Does spam (other than the promotions Yahoo recently sent out that drew > major criticism) REALLY come from Yahoo, or do the spammers simply > forge Yahoo email addresses in the From: line? Although Yahoo is a popular domain to use when forging "From" addresses, at work I see several spam a day that really do come from/through Yahoo servers (verified that the IP addresses of the servers connecting to mine are registered to Yahoo at ARIN.) I don't know what changed not too long ago to make it practical for spammers to send bulk mail via Yahoo accounts -- and Yahoo still delivers only a fraction of the spam that we receive -- but something has changed and made Yahoo a significant spam delivery mechanism. > Really serious spammers don't use ISPs at all. They buy raw > bandwidth and provide their own services. For hosting web sites, cgi scripts, and even their own DNS servers, yes ... but the spam is customarily sent via throwaway ISP accounts so that it doesn't matter to the spammer that the account may be canceled within hours. Sending from an unrelated account gives spammers the opportunity to tell the companies that host their web sites or provide connectivity that they were innocent bystanders and not connected with the bulk e-mail. As ISPs became more likely to dismiss such claims quickly, spammers were even hosting their spamvertised web sites on dial-up accounts and only using their 'permanent' connectivity to operate DNS servers so that they could move the web site as soon as the dial-up account was cancelled. It's difficult to convince most ISPs to act quickly to disconnect a customer on the basis that they are operating a DNS service that facilitates moving web sites quickly so that they can continue to profit from spamming even as other companies' abuse desks disconnect their web servers. Today many spammers host in China, where complaints currently seem to fall on deaf ears (much as they had done in the past in other places such as Russia or Costa Rica ... but what internet transit provider is going to entertain appeals to disconnect China Telecom because they host spammers' web sites ... and, if they do, where will the next spammer-friendly hosting haven be? The spammers will continue to play this game indefinitely because it doesn't cost much to play and there's always another sucker to be found. So, what is needed to curtail spam? First and foremost, internet service and access providers need to take it seriously and invest in enforcing anti-spam policies, something that I do not expect to happen while the companies are giving higher priority to reducing expenses such as payroll rather than conserving bandwidth. Much of the spam distribution channel would be rendered nonfunctional if more internet service providers blocked incoming connections to proxy servers and outgoing connections to mail servers other than their own (already a common practice) and access providers included -- and enforced -- a clause requiring their customers to secure their mail and proxy servers. Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.361 / Virus Database: 199 - Release Date: 07/05/2002 ------------------------------ From: zbang@Radix.Net (Carl Zwanzig) Subject: Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Date: 15 May 2002 19:39:42 GMT Organization: RadixNet Internet Services NOSPAM wrote: > Once we stop UCE, we should all go after all of the businesses that > send out millions of tons of paper to our US Post mail boxes which > ultimately becomes millions of tons of paper in our land-fills and > millions of dead trees in our forest. At the same time, go after all of the people not recycling those mailers, and the municipalities that don't have easy recycling programs. z! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:24:38 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Last Laugh! Sorry, Wrong Number (1999 Story) I noticed this but it's from 3 years back: Sorry, wrong number -- Mixed-up callers take their O.J. Simpson anger out on local lawyer. Boston Globe, March 21, 1999 ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #253 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 17 00:38:00 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA24700; Fri, 17 May 2002 00:38:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 00:38:00 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205170438.AAA24700@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #254 TELECOM Digest Fri, 17 May 2002 00:37:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 254 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received (Barry Margolin) Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad idea. (Joey Lindstrom) Technology and Costs Involved in Setting Up Call Card Operation (Sid S.) Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? (BV124@aol.com) Telcordia Certification? (Ray) Global Positioning / Accuracy is Addictive (Monty Solomon) Re: Legitimate Enhanced Cell Phone Antenna? (James Gifford) Re: Backup Phone Service (Colin Sutton) AT&T Sparkletone(sm) (Jack Dominey) Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? (Tom Brown) Question on Avaya Legend (Aaron Anodide) Toll Free 800 Needed for UK Termination (Judith Oppenheimer) Telecom Bait-n-Switch: How to Fight? (Yuri Victorovich) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 01:04:16 GMT In article , Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > John Higdon wrote: >> Does spam (other than the promotions Yahoo recently sent out that drew >> major criticism) REALLY come from Yahoo, or do the spammers simply >> forge Yahoo email addresses in the From: line? > Although Yahoo is a popular domain to use when forging "From" > addresses, at work I see several spam a day that really do come > from/through Yahoo servers (verified that the IP addresses of the > servers connecting to mine are registered to Yahoo at ARIN.) > I don't know what changed not too long ago to make it practical for > spammers to send bulk mail via Yahoo accounts -- and Yahoo still > delivers only a fraction of the spam that we receive -- but something > has changed and made Yahoo a significant spam delivery mechanism. Maybe this stuff is actually coming from Yahoo and their affiliates. Yahoo has an account option for whether you're willing to get mail from them and their affiliates offering services, and a few weeks ago they blanket-changed all their members' options to "Yes". So now all the people who haven't gone in and changed their settings back are presumably getting all these advertisements. Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net Genuity, Woburn, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 19:54:53 -0600 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. On Wed, 15 May 2002 21:03:52 -0400 (EDT), Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > So, what is needed to curtail spam? First and foremost, internet > service and access providers need to take it seriously and invest in > enforcing anti-spam policies, something that I do not expect to happen > while the companies are giving higher priority to reducing expenses > such as payroll rather than conserving bandwidth. Much of the spam > distribution channel would be rendered nonfunctional if more internet > service providers blocked incoming connections to proxy servers and > outgoing connections to mail servers other than their own (already a > common practice) and access providers included -- and enforced -- a > clause requiring their customers to secure their mail and proxy > servers. I have to object to this idea of preventing users (dial-up, DSL, whatever) from connecting their mail clients to mail servers other than that of the ISP. A LOT of people have a legitimate need to connect to another mail server, maybe the company mail server or something like that. NetZero started doing that here in Calgary - three people that I know of left them for that reason. I myself have dedicated DSL connectivity and host several domain names on behalf of friends and a few business clients: they need to be able to connect to MY mail server. Your proposal would prevent this. / From the desk of Joey Lindstrom / When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout. / -- Dr. Richard Ames, "The Cat Who Walks Through Walls" / (Robert Heinlein) ------------------------------ From: nysharan@yahoo.com (Sid S.) Subject: Technology and Costs Involved in Setting up Calling Card Operation Date: 15 May 2002 19:29:13 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hello there, I am looking for detailed and complete information on technology, costs, resources, companies that would have expertise on setting this up. For a basic acceptable system what would typical costs be? How much time are we looking at here to set this up? Are there any resources on the Internet that I could look up? Any information/leads/links etc. are greatly appreciated. Thanks, SS ------------------------------ From: BV124@aol.com Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 22:52:48 EDT Subject: Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? I believe that the "pull up" button on the left side (or the switch hook on the wall version) also acted as a 'hold' key. I.E., if you were talking on Line#1 and Line#2 rang, you "pulled up" the button (or switch hook) and it "answered" the 2nd line. Then you could use the face place button to switch back and forth between the two lines. When you pushed the "hook/button" back to its "rest" position, it released the other line. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is correct, and there was a *third* position for the turn button as well. In addition to being able to turn it one way or the other while switching lines (using the plunger/hook in the upright position to hold the call on the other line), you could also momentarily press down on the button to connect mementarily another pair of contacts. This allowed for a buzzer in some other extension phone, informing the person there to pick up the incoming call on line one or (twist the button) line two. Or you could put the incoming call on hold (raise the plunger) and consult with a person on the other line (twist the button, dial the other number) or twist the button, then momentarily depress it and consult with another person on a direct-connect style line. Those phones had several standard ways of using the colored wire pairs. Red/green was pair one, yellow/black was pair two, and blue/white was pair three. That blue/ white pair three could be used different ways, depending on how it was wired. Momentarily connected, it would serve to buzz a 'buzzer' on the other end. Momentarily sent to ground, it was used for a coin-bypass mechanism on old fashioned payphones where money was required to get a dialtone or an operator's response. I dunno how many of you remember hearing my experience *many years ago* wiring up a coin by-pass on the payphone in my uncle's Walgreen drugstore so he could get his local calls free. In general practice, if the phone was a two-line turn button model, then the raised left plunger was to hold the other line and if there was no turn-button for a second line then it was used as an 'exclusion key'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ray Subject: Telcordia Certification? Organization: BELLSOUTH.net Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 23:16:27 -0400 I was wondering if anyone that frequents this group is Telcordia certified in SS7? If so, are there study guides available like there are for MS certification? My experience with SS7 is mostly ISUP Call processing and TCAP AIN 0.1 Office Triggers. I can imagine there's a lot more needed for certification. What study material is available? If you are certified, did it help you with your career? Thanks, Ray ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 23:57:36 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Global Positioning / Accuracy is Addictive From The Economist print edition The invention of GPS married ideas from quantum mechanics and relativity with the need to track Russian satellites. Most remarkable of all, the concept-now the basis of a $12 billion industry-was put together over a single weekend. http://www.economist.com/science/tq/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1020779 ------------------------------ From: James Gifford Subject: Re: Legitimate Enhanced Cell Phone Antenna? Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 22:07:56 -0700 Organization: Nitrosyncretic Press Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > If you're looking for backup service in case of natural disaster, you > should know that the recent tornado in La Plata, MD (a force 4, > downgraded from force 5), took out enough cellular towers so that > there was no cellular service in town. Having seen more than one really, really ugly infestation of celltoweritis, I'd bet there are towns that would pay the tornado a bounty. :) | James Gifford - Nitrosyncretic Press | | http://www.nitrosyncretic.com for the Heinlein FAQ & more | | Tired of auto-spam... change "not" to "net" for replies | ------------------------------ From: Colin Sutton Subject: Re: Backup Phone Service Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 13:15:44 GMT Organization: BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.net.au) Marcus Didius Falco wrote in message news:telecom20.253.7@telecom-digest.org: [...] > If you're looking for backup service in case of natural disaster, you > should know that the recent tornado in La Plata, MD (a force 4, > downgraded from force 5), took out enough cellular towers so that > there was no cellular service in town. The bush fires south of Sydney last Christmas did the same. For 3 days we had no power, no phone, the only access road was blocked, so no way to buy food or candles. Luckily we had a gas barbeque and slowly melting food in the freezer. The weather at least was hot, but a pity about all those ashes falling on the beach. The mobile phone returned to service after the landline. Colin Sutton ------------------------------ From: Jack Dominey Subject: AT&T Sparkletone(sm) Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 11:33:12 -0400 Organization: The Maynard G. Krebs Memorial Work(!?)station Reply-To: look@my.sig In response to moderator PATs query about the AT&T Sparkletone(sm), I got the following from AT&T Network Services: "The Sparkletone will not interfere with fax machines or modems because it will play during that brief instant before the call is answered at the distant end. Fax machines and modems synchronize with each other after the connection has been established and the call is answered. "To further validate this point, AT&T has played a Sparkletone on the calls of more than 20 million customers during the past couple of years without a single problem with a fax machine or modem." The Sparkletone is a new feature for the AT&T Unlimited calling plan, but has been used for some time on AT&T Calling Card calls. Jack Dominey AT&T High Availability and Security Services ------------------------------ From: kibri@eudoramail.com (Tom Brown) Subject: Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? Date: 16 May 2002 08:57:55 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ kibri@eudoramail.com (Tom Brown) wrote in message news:: Ed Ellers wrote in message news:: Pat -- Thanks for the comments on the odd phone I mentioned, you are the first person who could explain exactly what it was and what it did. I have been wondering about that phone for almost a year. I knew it was multi line, I did not know about the exclusion switch. In looking at other phones in the collection, I see that feature on one other 5 line key phone, and on my 5 line autovon key phone also. Many thanks! Tom > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That lifted-out left plunger on the > phone hook was the equivilent of an 'exclusion key'. You've heard > of that, I assume. Those took a two-pair (or larger) cable coming in > from the telco central office. That phone instrument was the first > one on the line, with other, 'extension' phones following on the > same number. The phone pair came into the premises on one pair, > was split inside the phone by lifting that plunger and forcing two > metal clips inside the phone apart from each other, thus splitting > the connection. Then the second pair in the phone cable coming in > was used to take the same connection back out to other extension > phones on the premises. When the user on the 'master phone' (the > first one on the line, with the splitter) wanted privacy in his calls > he merely had to lift the left plunger and the other phones down the > line would go dead. Once that user would hang up, the other phones > would come back to life. If privacy was not needed, he simply would > not raise the plunger up all the way. PAT] ------------------------------ From: anodide@hotmail.com (Aaron Anodide) Subject: Question on Avaya Legend Date: 16 May 2002 10:53:03 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hello, I am working on custom auto attendant software that will (hopefully) integrate to the Legend. It seems to have a behavior that is causing me considerable trouble. The steps to see this are: 1) receive a call on an analog voice mail port; 2) flash to put the incoming party on hold; 3) call a third party on an outside line; 4) have the third party hang up on you; 5) Legend *automatically* takes the original incoming party off hold - no hook flash required. The automatic behavior in step 5 happens when the outside line hangs up. The call progress analysis on my dialogic card (which is plugged into the analog voice mail port) seems to get seriously confused in the case of a quick pick up and hang up. Extra detail here might get in the way of my real question ... Can this behavior given in step 5 above be turned off? I would like the Legend configured such that once a party is placed on hold, a hook flash is mandatory to bring them back. If someone can help, it would be extremely appreciated. If someone can direct me to professional services that might be able to help, I'd also be thankful. If the answer if "that's the way the Legend works and there's nothing you can do", I'd also like to know so I can spend my time tweaking Dialogic, instead of investigating the Legend. Aaron ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 14:37:47 -0400 From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines I've been queried by a company that wants to offer its UK customers a US toll free number that terminates on a UK landline. Can anyone help these folks out? tia - Judith Oppenheimer http://JudithOppenheimer.com http://ICBTollFreeNews.com 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert ------------------------------ From: yuri@tsoft.com (Yuri Victorovich) Subject: Telecom Bait-n-Switch: How to Fight? Date: 16 May 2002 20:27:13 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I was using RSL-Com international service. I was making international calls to Netherlands and the rate was good. Than I had to start calling cellphone there. I called the company beforehand and asked if the rate is going to be different. And the lady nicely told me: no, rate is the same regardless of if it's cell or not. Fine, I started calling this number. After a month I got a bill with 9 times higher rate because cellphone in Netherlands is actually lot more expensive. Agency (I figured out that it was an agency with whom I signed up) says: yes, we made a mistake. But we can not make an adjustment so you have to pay and than don't call there any more. Or call the billing company (RSL). RSL tells: no, please give it to us in writing that agency gave you the rate or settle with agency which is separate company. But I never got in writing anything from any of them -- agency or company -- except bills. Now they are saying: you have to pay or we file to collection. But why should I pay if I agreed to the different (much lower) rate and they told me the different rate? It was their inadvertent mistake, but not mine. So why should I be responsible. They just pointing to each other, no single point of responsibility. PUC tells: we don't deal with international issues. So how to fight those Mickey Mouse companies covering each other? ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #254 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 18 22:17:31 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA29237; Sat, 18 May 2002 22:17:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 22:17:31 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205190217.WAA29237@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #255 TELECOM Digest Sat, 18 May 2002 22:16:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 255 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (J. Higdon) Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines (Chuck Till) Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines (Joseph Singer) Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines (Len Stewart) Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing (Pete Weiss) Domain Naming Conventions For Business in Various Countries (B. Goudreau) Echo With Cell Phones (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Telecom Bait-n-Switch: How to Fight? (Denis Mcmahon) Re: Telecom Bait-n-Switch: How to Fight? (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Cable vs DSL for IP Telephony (Chip G) Competition? (John Higdon) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (Al Iverson) Cellphone Chats, Courtesy of the Television Airwaves (Monty Solomon) AT&T Outage Makes "Top Ten" List (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Receiving Emergency Alert Messages via SMS/Email to Celfon (Hoffman) Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Monty Solomon) Re: So Much Junk Mail (Carl Moore) 1-800-CALLLAT (JimWeiss@aol.com) Re: Last Laugh! Peoria AZ Jails People Who Don't (Gordon S. Hlavenka) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 23:27:35 -0700 Subject: Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.254.1@telecom-digest.org, Barry Margolin wrote: > Maybe this stuff is actually coming from Yahoo and their affiliates. > Yahoo has an account option for whether you're willing to get mail > from them and their affiliates offering services, and a few weeks ago > they blanket-changed all their members' options to "Yes". So now all > the people who haven't gone in and changed their settings back are > presumably getting all these advertisements. Yes, I was aware of this. But just for your dining and dancing pleasure, here are ten examples of what I'm talking about in terms of forgery. (I could find no legitimate email from yahoo.com in today's log.) 1. Sender claims to be: jennymooreus@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "server3.baires.web.com" Server is actually: unknown on DATAMARKETS (Buenos Aries) network 2. Sender claims to be: PCoba2507@yahoo.de Connecting server claims to be: "cpimssmtpa16.msn.com" Server is actually: host245-109.pool21759.interbusiness.it 3. Sender claims to be: customersupportrep23783@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "wetware.wetware.com" Server is actually: wetware.wetware.com 4. Sender claims to be: kkk5012@yahoo.co.kr Connecting server claims to be: "yahoo.co.kr" Server is actually: unknown (on hananet.net network) 5. Sender claims to be: sentto-6438852-72-1021564803-diane=marleys.r.us.com@returns.groups.yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "bolero.rahul.net" Server is actually: bolero.rahul.net 6. Sender claims to be: customersupportrep24318@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "ecom1" Server is actually: ll-61-56-194-7.ll.sparqnet.net 7. Sender claims to be: ucandoit320858v83@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "yahoo.com" Server is actually: c210.h061013104.is.net.tw 8. Sender claims to be: mikeoconner@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "jw.dpc.hebnet.gov.cn" Server is actually: unknown (on china-netcom.com) 9. Sender claims to be: blackpaperpublishing@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "211.184.29.2" Server is actually: unknown (on unitel.co.kr network) 10.Sender claims to be: Jennifer0760l20@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "yahoo.com" Server is actually: host.18.54.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com All I did was grep today's log for "yahoo" and took the first ten entries in order of occurrence. Note that NOT ONE is legitimately from either yahoo.com or from a legitimate yahoo.com user. From my standpoint, I would say that anyone making a fuss about Yahoo being guilty of spamming is giving the company a bad rap. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone remember about ten years ago when that goofy guy in Staten Island, NY (or maybe it was Queens) was selling magazine subscriptions over the net by impersonating a female college student (she was non-existent) who was writing everyone to tell them that she and her fellow students (from whatever country they were in) had found 'these great deals on US magazines they all enjoyed reading' and how 'just as a favor', mind you, she was passing along the subscription details, and the magazine subscription company's fax number so the rest of us could benefit from her wisdom in selecting magazines for us to read. I've forgotten his name, but he was *so* funny. Someone here in this Digest suggested that local New Yorkers could dial up the fax machine, use a mobius loop of all black paper to go around->around->around in his fax machine until his paper ran out or the little light in the scanner burned out. I guess that happened a couple times, because the next email letter from the 'lady going to school in the foreign country' suggested that when we contacted the company fax machine it should be during the day 'when they are there in the office' because they 'turn off the fax machine when they go home for the night'. Someone here reading this Digest had another solution: he polled the computer of the New York State divison of Driver's Records on the goofy one and published his record of traffic accidents, occassional tickets received for parking in no parking zones, etc. and the fact that there was no record of insurance for his Machine. The goofy one retaliated by contacting individually the Trustees of Northwestern University in Evanston, IL where this Digest was located temporarily. He actually called them one by one *at their home numbers*. Ah, the good old days of the early nineties, when we had a useable Usenet/Internet, and we all thought spam was a passing fad with Spam King and a few others including the goofy one. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ctill@nc.rr.com (Chuck Till) Subject: Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 10:58:44 GMT Organization: Road Runner - NC > I've been queried by a company that wants to offer its UK customers > a US toll free number that terminates on a UK landline. The UK site could get a Universal International Freephone Number, with a country code of 800. US callers would dial 011 800 xxxxxxxx. Unfortunately many US callers would suspect this would still be billed to them, because public awareness in the US of UIFN is very low -- inform the US callers that the calls are truly free. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 05:34:26 -0700 Organization: Drizzle Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com I've been queried by a company that wants to offer its UK customers a US > toll free number that terminates on a UK landline. > Can anyone help these folks out? http://www.kall8.com will terminate calls to any destination including international locations. The rate per minute varies depending on the destination. For terminating on a ring to number in the UK it's 10 cents/minute for normal land lines and 35 cents/minute to mobiles. Personal replies most likely will not be read. Please reply in the newsgroup ------------------------------ From: Len Stewart Subject: Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 15:15:24 UTC Organization: www.TelcoSupport.net Judith, This shouldn't be much of a problem at all. The company I worked for previously offered the service (they have since gone bankrupt). The call is picked up by the LEC and passed to the LD carrier who translates the number as it normally would be done, but instead of translating it to a US number, it is translated to an international number and sent off. Having been involved in the technical end of this, I had 800/0800/Toll Free numbers in many European countries which all pointed to my US number. A piece of cake. Len S. ------------------------------ From: pete-weiss@psu.edu (Pete Weiss) Subject: Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 13:16:01 -0400 Organization: Penn State University -- Office of Administrative Systems On Wed, 15 May 2002 13:24:11 -0400, Steve Michelson wrote: > Find out what the deactivation code for call forwarding is, and dial > it. See if that fixes the problem. If this fixes the problem, then the subscriber would never have successfully received any calls that were more than 1/2 ring long. Right? Pete ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 11:51:27 PDT From: bobgoudreau Reply-To: BobGoudreau@nc.rr.com Subject: Domain Naming Conventions For Businesses in Various Countries PAT wrote: > You are correct; in other than USA sites, the 'com' > locations are expressed as 'co.uk' or 'co.ca' etc. (In other words > the 'commercial' phrase comes in the middle and the country name > is the suffix, and the /m/ is elimiated in com.) PAT] This still isn't quite right. I think his point was that the conventions, or lack thereof, are completely up to each country. So, as mentioned above, British businesses will often be found under *.co.uk. But the convention in Australia is *.com.au; and in Canada, there is no "commercial phrase" at all, just top-level *.ca domains. Of course, most decent-sized non-US companies usually will nevertheless also attempt to get a plain old *.com domain alongside any "national" domain. Thus, nortel.com gets you to the same page as nortel.ca; likewise with telstra.com.au and telstra.com; and with bt.co.uk and bt.com. Bob Goudreau Cary, NC ------------------------------ Subject: Echo With Cell Phones Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 19:39:55 GMT Friends of mine just got a set of three Verizon cell phones (one for each family member) and they tell me that they only get echo when they call my landline. Is this possible? I thought echo-cancellation was on the calling side. Any thoughts? Thanks, Joel ------------------------------ From: Denis Mcmahon Subject: Re: Telecom Bait-n-Switch: How to Fight? Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 20:55:17 +0100 Organization: E-Menu Ltd Reply-To: denisrt@pickaxe.net yuri@tsoft.com (Yuri Victorovich) wrote: > Agency (I figured out that it was an agency with whom I signed up) > says: yes, we made a mistake. But we can not make an adjustment so you > have to pay and than don't call there any more. Or call the billing > company (RSL). Agency screwed up, your case is against the agency, not RSL. Write to the agency, pointing out that they screwed up and that you hold them responsible for the difference between the rate they advised you and the rate you have been charged. You can't blame RSL for the agency screwup, it wasn't an RSL screwup. Rgds, Denis McMahon / +44 7802 468949 / denis@pickaxe.net sulfnbk is not a virus, see the symantec virus encyclopaedia! Now restocking killfile, new entrants welcome: trolls, spam, xpost cascades, OT ads, top posters & terminally clueless! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 17:39:48 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Telecom Bait-n-Switch: How to Fight? yuri@tsoft.com (Yuri Victorovich) wrote: > Agency (I figured out that it was an agency with whom I signed up) > says: yes, we made a mistake. But we can not make an adjustment so you > have to pay and than don't call there any more. Or call the billing > company (RSL). > RSL tells: no, please give it to us in writing that agency gave you > the rate or settle with agency which is separate company. But I never > got in writing anything from any of them -- agency or company -- > except bills. Now they are saying: you have to pay or we file to > collection. > But why should I pay if I agreed to the different (much lower) rate and > they told me the different rate? It was their inadvertent mistake, but > not mine. So why should I be responsible. > They just pointing to each other, no single point of responsibility. > PUC tells: we don't deal with international issues. > So how to fight those Mickey Mouse companies covering each other? Write to the FCC. The FCC has jurisdiction over international issues. Or let it go to collection. When it goes to collection, then the first time the collection company sends a letter, offer the collection company the amount you think you owe. Don't negotiate, don't bargain, and if they start yelling, hang up. Do give them an explanation that you were told the rate by the agency, and any attempt to collect any other amount will go to court (which they will suspect will be sympathetic). If they accept your offer, then don't let them write a "telecheck." You write a check, and put on the front and the back (just above the space where they endorse), that this is "Payment in Full on Account No. XXXXX." I went through such a scenario with MCI, and all worked out, except that the lousy collection agent didn't mark the account "paid in full," so now, once a year, I get a letter from a new collection agency. I have to call them, utter the words "consumer fraud," and they mark the account "customer denies any money is owed." Then I wait another year. (So far I've had to say "consumer fraud" to two collection agencies.) The new collection agencies tell me to call MCI, but, since MCI refused to negotiate (I would have negotiated to "split the difference" and MCI would have been a LOT better off, even neglecting the collection agent's cut), I don't bother. I just keep my records handy. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: Chip G Subject: Re: Cable vs DSL for IP Telephony Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 23:29:41 GMT Phil McKerracher wrote in message news:telecom20.252.5@telecom-digest.org: > Chip G wrote in message > news:telecom20.249.2@telecom-digest.org: >> The keys to successful use of VoIP are many. In general, I think you >> will have the same experiences whether you are using DSL or cable >> modem. Some considerations: > [Lots of good stuff snipped] > >> ...3. Minimal lost packets (while e-mail and web traffic can be pretty >> forgiving, voice and video need reliable streams of data. That is why >> you generally see them implemented via UDP instead of TCP. If too many >> packets are lost, the conversation can become unintelligible ... > I think you might be misunderstanding this. If UPD packets lost they > stay lost, whereas with TCP they get retransmitted until they arrive > intact. UDP is unreliable, TCP is reliable. > UDP is generally used for VoIP because the occasional lost packet is > preferable to a delay while retransmission takes place. Thanks for clarifying my statement Phil. After re-reading, I can see how it could have been misleading. I agree with you that UDP is "unreliable" and TCP is "reliable". That is actually part of my point. The nature of TCP ensures that all of the packets arrive ... regardless of the sequencing. TCP provides for retransmission if some packets are lost. Of course, in the context of real-time media streams this makes no sense. It does little good to receive and playback the third word in a sentence before playing the first two. Voice can sustain some lost packets and still be intelligible ... hence the use of UDP. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 17:14:50 -0700 Subject: Competition? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Over the past couple of days, the newspapers have been a-buzz with the latest California PUC decision lowering the rates SBC can charge so-called competitors who want to resell local telephone service. The decision is hailed as the beginning of "real competition" in California. What nonsense! It is ALL SBC service, straight from SBC central offices. The only distinction is that instead of paying SBC directly for the service they receive, customers can choose to pay a middleman to take a cut for doing absolutely nothing. Boy, that will sure spur competitive advances! If there is a major outage, I can imagine which customers will "come back up" first. Competitive customers will have to report service problems to their "phone company" who will then (at its leisure) pass the report to SBC. But the long distance companies (who have been itching to resell local telephone service) will find that the sword cuts both ways. With robust "competition" present, the PUC will be forced to sign off on a request by SBC to offer long distance service in the state. In the meantime, the true facilities-based competitors will find their job that much harder, with the resellers competing against them with service priced below cost. Since the resellers bring nothing to the party except the act of moving money around, their costs of operation will be negligible. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: al56g@radparker.com (Al Iverson) Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Organization: Please don't email replies Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 20:23:42 -0500 In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > On Wed, 15 May 2002 21:03:52 -0400 (EDT), Geoffrey Welsh wrote: >> So, what is needed to curtail spam? First and foremost, internet >> service and access providers need to take it seriously and invest in >> enforcing anti-spam policies, something that I do not expect to happen >> while the companies are giving higher priority to reducing expenses >> such as payroll rather than conserving bandwidth. Much of the spam >> distribution channel would be rendered nonfunctional if more internet >> service providers blocked incoming connections to proxy servers and >> outgoing connections to mail servers other than their own (already a >> common practice) and access providers included -- and enforced -- a >> clause requiring their customers to secure their mail and proxy >> servers. > I have to object to this idea of preventing users (dial-up, DSL, > whatever) from connecting their mail clients to mail servers other > than that of the ISP. A LOT of people have a legitimate need to > connect to another mail server, maybe the company mail server or > something like that. A lot of people used to have legitimate reasons to use open relaying mail servers, and spammers ruined those too. Give it up, the "I deserve to connect to any mail server I want" war is long since lost. BTW actually most users don't need it. I use AOL when travelling. They redirect SMTP to their rate-limiting server. It worked just fine. I could even connect to the company mail server with pop3 just fine. On the various servers I've administrated for various entities over the years, I've always recommended blocking SMTP access from sites that aren't supposed to be running mailservers. It stops spammers from inside your network, and it stops spammers from outside your network relaying spam through a network box (often I'd find an old Solaris box running a ghastly old Sendmail that nobody knew about). Internet access isn't a right; it's a private service contracted between you and the ISP. If you don't like the terms of that contract, vote with your feet. If you don't like that your ISP blocks port 25, find a different provider. If you don't like that other sites block connections from you on port 25 because you're on a dynamic IP and listed in a spam stopping list like Gordon Fecyk's PDL, then you're pretty much out of luck; you don't own or have any say over the servers that choose to use those lists. Al Iverson -- http://www.radparker.com -- Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA Support Minnesota Jazz -- Disclaimer: All of my opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 00:30:24 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cellphone Chats, Courtesy of the Television Airwaves By ROY FURCHGOTT WHO says television is useless? Someday it may help eliminate the phrase "Can you hear me now?" from the cellphone lexicon. A company in Ridgeland, Miss., is developing technology that would send and receive cellphone calls on a little-used part of a broadcast television signal. If used to augment current cellphone sites, it could mean fewer dead spots in reception at a comparatively low cost. It might also help usher countries without widespread cell networks into the wireless age. The company, SIGFX, is testing a prototype phone system on an experimental one-kilowatt station. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/16/technology/circuits/16NEXT.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 01:54:23 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: AT&T Outage Makes "Top Ten" List OK, it's not really a "Top Ten" list, but it is a list of ten. Anyway, Technology Review has published a list of Technology disasters, and number 8 is the AT&T outage: http://www.techreview.com/articles/scigliano0602.asp?p=9 (The full article is http://www.techreview.com/articles/scigliano0602.asp ) Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com My hovercraft is full of eels. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Receiving Emergency Alert Messages via SMS/Email to Celfons Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 14:11:22 GMT >>> Set up instructions are described here >>> http://208.184.24.125/rc202903.html >> Ah, but how do you enter the phone number for SMS? I don't see that >> anywhere on their site. I would recommend against giving out the e-mail address of your cell If spammers get it, you'll have to change your cell phone number, which is a real pain. Better would be to get a different e-mail address that allows forwarding, and use that one, forwarded to your phone. If spammers get the forward-only e-mail address, just change it. (And from the "Subject:" line, it looks like this is for emergencies? I've found SMS to be very unreliable during ordinary peak hours. I would not rely on it for emergencies.) Joel ------------------------------ Subject: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 09:05:43 -0400 From: Monty Solomon From: Geoff Gariepy Subject: The FCC's Coming for Your Radar Detector ... Because You're Going to use it to Steal Gasoline. Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 13:09:30 -0400 Apparently, ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed an endorsement with the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors because the 25 million devices in use interfere with high-tech payment systems now becoming popular at the gas pump. ... http://www.politechbot.com/p-03544.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 10:25:28 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: So Much Junk Mail I do get some (junk) emails about a new game and even about new virus-finding tools, and they have the attachment removed by virus-detection at this end. Incoming mail to cmoore@arl.army.mil is sent to two places: Unix mail and Lotus notes. ------------------------------ From: JimWeiss@aol.com Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 16:57:56 EDT Subject: 1-800-CALLLAT Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 16:51:51 -0400 From: "cgbnews" Subject: CGB NEWS The Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau has recently posted a consumer alert on what has become known as *fat finger dialing*. Fat finger dialing is a new scheme that can result in consumers paying sever al times more than expected. The scheme goes something like this: You place a collect call from a public phone or payphone, intending to use a service like 1-800-CALL-ATT or 1-800-COLLECT. But you misspell or hit an incorrect button when dialing. You accidentally dial something like 1-800-CALLLAT. You get connected to the party you wished to call, but the phone company that connects you is not the one you thought you were using. Instead, it is a company that secured 800 numbers similar to well-known ones (i.e., a company secures the number *800-CALLLAT*). The company is banking on the possibility that you might accidentally misdial your intended number. If this happens, you are probably unaware you are using a different phone carrier than the one you intended to use because you don*t know you misdialed. Often, the co mpany won*t identify itself to you or the person receiving the collect call before connecting the call. See our consumer alert online at http://www.fcc. gov/cgb/consumerfacts/carelessdialing.html If you suspect you*re a victim of this scheme, contact the phone company that charged you for the call in question. The company*s number should be list ed on your phone bill. In some cases, FCC rules may also protect you. We have simplified our complaint procedures with a new Web page entitled Filing a Complaint with the FCC is EASY at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/complaintfiling.html. You are currently subscribed to fcc-consumer-info@info.fcc.gov as: NBJimWeiss@aol.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-fcc-consumer-info-12886L@info.fcc.gov If you need assistance with your subscription to this list, or if you have questions or comments, please reply to this message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 02:13:15 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Peoria AZ Jails People Who Don't Take Down Lights This is not really telecom-related, but is a followup to a thread back in February. Anyway apparently this idiocy is not limited to Arizona. Carpentersville, IL officials threatened to fine a local woman for displaying a lighted American Flag which they said was in violation of their holiday decorations ordinance. Now, they're backpedaling: "The ordinance is for Christmas decorations, so people don't have them up all year long," [Community Development Director Patrick] Grill said. "The fact that they haven't heard from us since the first letter, it means we're likely not pursuing it. Flag decorations are fine." "...[L]ikely not pursuing it." Har! Read the whole story at: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-0205170160may17.story (You could create an account at the Tribune website to access this story. Or, you could just be "johnqpublic" with a password that's "easytoremember" :-) Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com My hovercraft is full of eels. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #255 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 20 00:21:01 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA17548; Mon, 20 May 2002 00:21:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 00:21:01 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205200421.AAA17548@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #256 TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 May 2002 00:20:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 256 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Fingerprint Readers Fooled with Gelatin Molds (Marcus Didius Falco) Call Display On 2nd Phone Not Working (w00t) Mobile Amplified Headset? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Which Prepaid Int'l GSM SIM Card is the Best? (Prof. Shurajit Gopal) Help with Tie Mod Key 16 (DONSHADDIX@aol.com) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Denis Mcmahon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (John Higdon) More on Radar Detectors; Other News Headlines of Interest (Monty Solomon) Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI (Saab Guy) Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines (Robert Woolley) Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (Colin Sutton) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (John Higdon) Re: Echo With Cell Phones (John Higdon) Re: Economics, Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (Geoffrey Welsh) Bob Epstein of Sybase at ERN on June 12 (EntreSource) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 15:37:39 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Fingerprint Readers Fooled with Gelatin Molds of If memory serves, the guy who did this experiment, Tsutomu Matsumoto, is the fellow who caught Kevin Mitnick a couple of years ago. Obviously, he's not a guy to mess with! :-) * Original: FROM..... Dave Farber ------ Forwarded Message From: Chris Hoofnagle Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 08:30:49 -0400 Subject: Fingerprint Readers Fooled with Gelatin Molds of *Latent* Prints Dear Dave, This is from Bruce Schneier's Crypto-Gram. (http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram.html) Thought it would be of interest. Regards, Chris http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0205.html#5 Fun with Fingerprint Readers Tsutomu Matsumoto, a Japanese cryptographer, recently decided to look at biometric fingerprint devices. These are security systems that attempt to identify people based on their fingerprint. For years the companies selling these devices have claimed that they are very secure, and that it is almost impossible to fool them into accepting a fake finger as genuine. Matsumoto, along with his students at the Yokohama National University, showed that they can be reliably fooled with a little ingenuity and $10 worth of household supplies. Matsumoto uses gelatin, the stuff that Gummi Bears are made out of. First he takes a live finger and makes a plastic mold. (He uses a free-molding plastic used to make plastic molds, and is sold at hobby shops.) Then he pours liquid gelatin into the mold and lets it harden. (The gelatin comes in solid sheets, and is used to make jellied meats, soups, and candies, and is sold in grocery stores.) This gelatin fake finger fools fingerprint detectors about 80% of the time. His more interesting experiment involves latent fingerprints. He takes a fingerprint left on a piece of glass, enhances it with a cyanoacrylate adhesive, and then photographs it with a digital camera. Using PhotoShop, he improves the contrast and prints the fingerprint onto a transparency sheet. Then, he takes a photo-sensitive printed-circuit board (PCB) and uses the fingerprint transparency to etch the fingerprint into the copper, making it three-dimensional. (You can find photo-sensitive PCBs, along with instructions for use, in most electronics hobby shops.) Finally, he makes a gelatin finger using the print on the PCB. This also fools fingerprint detectors about 80% of the time. Gummy fingers can even fool sensors being watched by guards. Simply form the clear gelatin finger over your own. This lets you hide it as you press your own finger onto the sensor. After it lets you in, eat the evidence. Matsumoto tried these attacks against eleven commercially available fingerprint biometric systems, and was able to reliably fool all of them. The results are enough to scrap the systems completely, and to send the various fingerprint biometric companies packing. Impressive is an understatement. There's both a specific and a general moral to take away from this result. Matsumoto is not a professional fake-finger scientist; he's a mathematician. He didn't use expensive equipment or a specialized laboratory. He used $10 of ingredients you could buy, and whipped up his gummy fingers in the equivalent of a home kitchen. And he defeated eleven different commercial fingerprint readers, with both optical and capacitive sensors, and some with "live finger detection" features. (Moistening the gummy finger helps defeat sensors that measure moisture or electrical resistance; it takes some practice to get it right.) If he could do this, then any semi-professional can almost certainly do much much more. More generally, be very careful before believing claims from security companies. All the fingerprint companies have claimed for years that this kind of thing is impossible. When they read Matsumoto's results, they're going to claim that they don't really work, or that they don't apply to them, or that they've fixed the problem. Think twice before believing them. Matsumoto's paper is not on the Web. You can get a copy by asking: Tsutomu Matsumoto Here's the reference: T. Matsumoto, H. Matsumoto, K. Yamada, S. Hoshino, "Impact of Artificial Gummy Fingers on Fingerprint Systems," Proceedings of SPIE Vol. #4677, Optical Security and Counterfeit Deterrence Techniques IV, 2002. Some slides from the presentation are here: My previous essay on the uses and abuses of biometrics: Biometrics at the shopping center: pay for your groceries with your thumbprint. Chris Hoofnagle, Legislative Counsel +1.202.483.1140 (tel) Electronic Privacy Information Center +1.202.483.1248 (fax) 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW Suite 200 hoofnagle epic.org Washington, DC 20009 USA http://www.epic.org/ http://www.privacy.org/ For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: bonka27@hotmail.com (w00t) Subject: Call Display On 2nd Phone Not Working Date: 19 May 2002 15:49:14 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I've haven't been able to get in contact with any Telus tech support reps (my phone company) so maybe you guys can help me out. I am subscribed to their Call Display service. Our main phone, which is a cordless phone with a caller id device, works flawless with incoming calls. However, I recently purchased a GE (corded) slimline phone w/ built-in call display, so I can have the call display function in my room. Anyways, this is the phone that's been giving me all the trouble. I've exchanged the phone 3 times already so the one I have now should work fine. The call display almost NEVER seems to work. 99% of the time, when a call is coming in, I get a "NO DATA" message on the display. Of that 1% left, those were the 2 calls that did manage to show up on the phone. According to the GE manual, "NO DATA" means "no caller id signal has been detected, or caller id service has not been activated". When I move the corded phone around the house trying it on different wires, I still get the same message. However, one thing is that my house only has 1 phonejack outlet (that is activated) for all the phones in the home. I used a 3-line modular triplex jack to split the single line so there is 1 phone in the living room, 1 in my mom's and 1 in mine. Could this be a phonejack problem? Remember, my phone did manage to get 2 calls to display, so that leaves me thinking. My house is pretty damn old so the equipment could be dying, but our caller id device works dandy. ------------------------------ Subject: Mobile Amplified Headset? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 00:58:39 GMT Ihave a Plantronics over-the-head headset ("portable hands free"). But while sometimes it works fine, sometimes I have trouble hearing. I have the same problem using this headset with my 2.4GHz phone at home. So, does anyone know of a battery-powered amplified headset? Or another solution? I have good hearing, so I can't be the only person with this problem. I'll be grateful for any help. Many thanks. Joel (joel@exc.com) ------------------------------ From: Prof. Shurajit Gopal Subject: Which Prepaid Int'l GSM SIM Card is the Best? Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 20:28:54 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Hello there! Can someone tell me which International GSM "Prepaid" SIM Card is the most economical and the best (preferably with a US number)? Thanks and regards, Prof. Shurajit Gopal Department of Mass Communication North Greenville College PO Box 1892 Tigerville, SC 29688, USA Phone: 864-414-1812 Fax: 815-364-3365 E-mail: ShurGopal@AOL.COM ------------------------------ From: DONSHADDIX@aol.com Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 19:32:38 EDT Subject: Help With Tie Mod Key 16 I need to find a place in the east that repairs or sales a Mod Key 16/60006a units. I used Aztec East Inc in Norwalk CT, but they have gone out of business. Have any ideas? Thanks, DAS ------------------------------ From: Denis Mcmahon Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 17:54:50 +0100 Organization: E-Menu Ltd Reply-To: denisrt@pickaxe.net Monty Solomon wrote: > Apparently, ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed an endorsement with > the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors because > the 25 million devices in use interfere with high-tech payment systems > now becoming popular at the gas pump. Did I get that right? A radar detector, which is basically a sensitive receiver, screws up the pumps? Do we have to turn off our FM radios in petrol stations now? Sounds like, smells like .... Rgds, Denis McMahon / +44 7802 468949 / denis@pickaxe.net sulfnbk is not a virus, see the symantec virus encyclopaedia! Now restocking killfile, new entrants welcome: trolls, spam, xpost cascades, OT ads, top posters & terminally clueless! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 13:48:36 -0700 Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.255.16@telecom-digest.org, Monty Solomon wrote: > Apparently, ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed an endorsement with > the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors because > the 25 million devices in use interfere with high-tech payment systems > now becoming popular at the gas pump. Interesting. Radar detectors are merely receivers, not transmitters. Sounds like a redesign of the pay at the pump systems might be in order. Besides, radar detectors were around first. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: First, as Denis McMahon says in the message before this one, and as you note, they are RECEIVERS, not transmitters, but all receivers do have very tiny transmitters in them to handle the IF (intermediate frequency) conversions, etc. That being said, if radar detectors make that much of a difference, then all radios should be banned, especially the kind that make positive, purposeful, transmissions; i.e. CB radios, police radios, etc. But that is not the point. The joke is on you. Remember a few months ago, or maybe it was a year ago, they were on the same tangent about cell phones at petrol stations? Only instead of diddling the meters in the pumps, the allegation was they would produce a tiny spark and the fumes would start a major fire at the petrol station. They got no where with that one, so now the emphasis is on radar detectors, another bane in a police officer's existence. The FCC should realize radar detectors *already, and always have been* a violation of the communications laws. You are entitled to *listen* to almost any radio band anytime (you 'listen' in this case when the radar detector apparatus 'listens' for the presence of police radar), but you are not permitted to act upon, or benefit from *what you hear* on the radio*, especially a police transmission. You act upon or benefit from the transmission which was not intended for yourself when you reduce your automobile speed or otherwise watch for police activity in the immediate area. You benefit by not getting a speeding ticket or being taken to jail. I suppose if you could convince the authorities that you were merely listening out of intellectual curiosity to the signals and that you did not act upon what you heard (did not slow down your driving speed) and did not benefit from what you heard (that is, did not care if you were taken away to jail), then I would guess you could have a radar detector device and use it lawfully. But since the only purpose is to 'listen' to police transmissions and respond to your own benefit, then how could they be legal under existing FCC rules? What makes these devices any different than listening to verbal communication on a police radio for example, about a bank robbery then relaying the information to the bank robbers who are in your car or hiding nearby? Admittedly, this business about radar detectors/cell phones causing some problems at the gas station is just a crock. And you are not going to see police radios turned off at gas stations or banned when police are driving their cars anytime soon. Meanwhile, you are just a 'civilian'; you will follow the rules and obey. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 22:35:29 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: More on Radar Detectors; Other News Headlines of Interest Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 23:32:17 -0400 From: Alan Dixon These guys are blowing this out of proportion. The "bottom line" below is ludicrous. This pending FCC proposal (ET Docket 01-278 [FCC 01-290]) seeks only to regulate radar detectors manufactured in the future. Existing detectors would remain exempt from certification. In fact, having radar detectors certificated in the future could possibly give manufacturers and consumers some leverage in court when fighting state and local bans on these devices. Certification would provide clear evidence that such bans would definitely be contrary to federal objectives. Also, many, though not all, state-of-the-art radar detectors have substantially reduced IF emissions to avoid detection by VG-2Ó devices. (At least two alternative methods are used for this purpose, as well.) http://www.politechbot.com/p-03547.html May 18, 2002 Curb the Endless Ringing of the Telemarketers By JOHN J. MILLER WASHINGTON It happened again the other night: I was bottle-feeding the baby when the phone rang, just out of reach. I put the baby down -- he immediately started to squawk -- rose from my chair and picked up the receiver. The caller wasn't my wife saying when she'd be home or my editor wondering when I'd file. It was a tape-recorded message from a local window dealer offering a free estimate. By the time I had hung up, my little boy was in a full-blown cry. A few days later, at a weekly strategy meeting for conservatives, I listened to the usual presentations from candidates, think tanks and interest groups. Toward the end, a representative from the telemarketing industry bad-mouthed a proposed Federal Trade Commission rule change that he said would expand government power and throttle small business -- the sort of thing that normally reminds me of why I'm a right-winger. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/18/opinion/18MILL.html Why hackers are a step ahead of the law By Greg Sandoval Staff Writer, CNET News.com May 14, 2002, 4:00 a.m. PT The nightmare for Ecount, an online gift certificate service, began last year when a hacker broke in to the company's system and stole personal information belonging to its customers. Nine months later, the criminal is still at large. The thief has brazenly taunted executives with repeated e-mails while staying ahead of investigators, deftly wiping away his electronic fingerprints and covering his tracks at every turn. http://news.com.com/2009-1017-912708.html ------------------------------ From: Saaby@MyRealBox.com (Saab Guy) Subject: Re: The Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI Date: 18 May 2002 20:48:28 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I don't know if we ever made a final decision os this one but I found the real catch ... the other people you call have to be enrolled in the Neighborhood or have local service from MCI ... real bummer because if every single person in the US CHOOSE to sign up it would be considered a monopoly and be shut down, just like if we all CHOOSE to use Microsoft products they must be checting and have to split up. ------------------------------ From: Robert Woolley Subject: Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 11:07:44 +0100 Organization: posted via Easynet On Fri, 17 May 2002 05:34:26 -0700, Joseph Singer wrote: > I've been queried by a company that wants to offer its UK customers a US >> toll free number that terminates on a UK landline. >> Can anyone help these folks out? > http://www.kall8.com will terminate calls to any destination including > international locations. The rate per minute varies depending on the > destination. For terminating on a ring to number in the UK it's 10 > cents/minute for normal land lines and 35 cents/minute to mobiles. Except it's now going up to 35 cents a minute to uk landlines as of 1 May. rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk ------------------------------ From: Colin Sutton Subject: Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 13:21:24 GMT Organization: BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.net.au) John Higdon wrote in message news:telecom20.255.1@telecom-digest.org... > In article telecom20.254.1@telecom-digest.org, Barry Margolin wrote: >> Maybe this stuff is actually coming from Yahoo and their affiliates. >> Yahoo has an account option for whether you're willing to get mail >> from them and their affiliates offering services, and a few weeks ago >> they blanket-changed all their members' options to "Yes". So now all >> the people who haven't gone in and changed their settings back are >> presumably getting all these advertisements. See the article "More on Klez" in http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.07.html#subj9 *Some* of the yahoo addresses could come from klez. > 4. Sender claims to be: kkk5012@yahoo.co.kr > Connecting server claims to be: "yahoo.co.kr" > Server is actually: unknown (on hananet.net network) yahoo.co.kr resolves to kr.yahoo.com, the Korean yahoo site, for me. Colin Sutton ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 09:24:21 -0700 Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.255.12@telecom-digest.org, Al Iverson wrote: > Internet access isn't a right; it's a private service contracted between > you and the ISP. If you don't like the terms of that contract, vote with > your feet. If you don't like that your ISP blocks port 25, find a > different provider. If you don't like that other sites block connections > from you on port 25 because you're on a dynamic IP and listed in a spam > stopping list like Gordon Fecyk's PDL, then you're pretty much out of > luck; you don't own or have any say over the servers that choose to use > those lists. If I find myself out in the field unable to access my own mail servers (the only ones I will EVER use for email) due to some over-exuberant ISP who feels the need to become the net police by blocking outbound port 25, I simply use an SSH tunnel to reach the server. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 09:35:09 -0700 Subject: Re: Echo With Cell Phones From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.255.7@telecom-digest.org, Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: > Friends of mine just got a set of three Verizon cell phones (one for > each family member) and they tell me that they only get echo when they > call my landline. Is this possible? I thought echo-cancellation was > on the calling side. This is probably due to a poor hybrid on your phone that allows received audio to be turned around and sent back to the caller. With the advent of digital coding on most cellphone calls, the transmit/receive delay accentuates poor isolation. The cellphone side is a four-wire circuit; your phone is two wire and depends on a hybrid to sort it out on your end. If this is done poorly, no amount of "echo suppression" can compensate without introducing intolerable artifacts into the conversation. Try using a different phone on your end and see if that makes a difference. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 15:01:43 -0400 Organization: Bell Sympatico John Higdon wrote: > (I could find no legitimate email from yahoo.com in today's log.) > From my standpoint, I would say that anyone making a fuss about Yahoo > being guilty of spamming is giving the company a bad rap. Well, since I wrote that it was so (not so much that Yahoo was a spammer, but that spam was coming through Yahoo), I guess it behooves me to offer up the proof. I apologize in advance to anyone who might be offended by the spam, which is presented verbatim below. ARIN says that the IP which sent us this spam (216.136.172.133) belongs to Exodus, but is suballocated to Yahoo. As I wrote earlier, I see these regularly, so it appears to have become practical for spammers to use Yahoo servers. --- Today's spam example follows --- Received: from web14103.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.172.133]) by mail.markham.insystems.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id LC455BM7; Fri, 17 May 2002 03:59:57 -0400 Message-ID: <20020517080001.46946.qmail@web14103.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [209.29.81.54] by web14103.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 17 May 2002 01:00:01 PDT Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 01:00:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Daigoro Daveda Subject: See me and my friends having fun at: To: inkblot@usa.pipeline.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-619217967-1021622401=:46882" --0-619217967-1021622401=:46882 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii --0-619217967-1021622401=:46882 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii --0-619217967-1021622401=:46882-- Yo man, wanna see some nice girls with animals, etc? Click HERE to see. If the site doesn't appear the first time, try it again.


Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.362 / Virus Database: 199 - Release Date: 07/05/2002 ------------------------------ From: EntreSource Subject: Bob Epstein of Sybase at ERN on June 12 Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 11:41:07 -0700 Reply-To: EntreSource [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Some of our Bay area readers may wish to attend this event and if EntreSource is there, tell him/her/it that normally I do not like to run these notices, but like my competitor the *New York Times*, I always print all the news that fits, and early this Monday morning, I did not have that much to use. PAT] JUNE EVENT Networking, speaker, hors d'oeuvres, and no-host cocktails Place: Spenger's Restaurant in Berkeley (directions below) Sponsor: The Entrepreneurs Resource Network www.EntreSource.org Date: Wednesday, June 12 Time: 6 to 8 pm; Introductions at 6:15 sharp. Cost: $20 covers lavish hors d'oeuvres, pay for your own drinks RSVP: No reservations needed. Non-members welcome! Please invite your friends and colleagues to attend! Attendees are encouraged to bring lots of business cards plus promotional materials to be set out on the tables! SPEAKER: BOB EPSTEIN, CO-FOUNDER OF SYBASE Bob Epstein will speak about practices that worked in launching Sybase and in launching his current company, GetActive and how it is not enough to have a great product, you need to start a great company to have a successful product launch. Dr. Bob Epstein co-founded Sybase, GetActive Software, Zight (formerly Colorado Microdisplay), Britton-Lee, and Environmental Entrepreneurs. Currently, he is working with GetActive, a software company for membership-based organizations to use for active, on-line members. Bob is also a trustee of the Natural Resources Defense Council, the leading US environmental organization influencing state and national policy. bob@bobepstein.to www.GetActive.com www.e2.org SPENGER'S: OUR PERMANENT HOME! Monthly networking events are now being held at Spenger's Restaurant in Berkeley on the second Wednesday of every month. And there is a lavish buffet of hors d' oeuvres and a no-host full bar. We must charge $20 per person admission fee to cover the cost of the food, room rental, bar set up, taxes, and gratuity. Please bring cash or a check made out to ERN. Mark your calendar for second Wednesdays! JULY SPEAKER SBA - The Small Business Administration. Arthur Washington will talk about how to get financing from the SBA. Locally, the SBA is known as the EBSBDC and is one of the Entrepreneurs Resource Network's generous co-sponsors. www.ebsbdc.org CO-SPONSORS Bay Area Regional Technology Alliance (BARTA) www.barta.org East Bay Small Business Development Center (EBSBDC), www.ebsbdc.org ENTREPRENEURS RESOURCE NETWORK The Entrepreneurs Resource Network is a nonprofit corporation providing resources, seminars and networking opportunities for entrepreneurs, startups and expanding businesses. For more information about us, see our Web site at www.EntreSource.org DIRECTIONS TO OUR VENUE: SPENGER'S Spenger's Restaurant is at the corner of University Avenue and Fourth Street, one block from the 580/80 freeway. Take the 580/80 freeway to Berkeley. Take the University exit and head east on University Avenue (toward the Berkeley Hills). Turn right at the first signal light onto Sixth Street. Turn right at the first block: Addison. Travel two blocks and turn right again at Fourth Street. Spenger's is ahead, just after the overpass. Park on the street for free. Parking in the lot is free for the first 1.5 hours. If this isn't clear, visit www.MapQuest.com and enter Spenger's address: 1919 Fourth Street, Berkeley. Spenger's was purchased by the same restaurant group that owns Kuleto's in San Francisco. They made minor renovations to the interior, keeping the charm of the old wood rooms with nautical decor. The menu was completely changed. No longer the home of deep fried prawns, the new Spenger's has a very upscale menu with fabulous food. Plan to stay for dinner with your new friends! ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #256 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 20 12:50:02 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA26755; Mon, 20 May 2002 12:50:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 12:50:02 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205201650.MAA26755@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #257 TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 May 2002 12:49:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 257 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea (Jack) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea (H Peter Anvin) Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI (Bob Natale) Re: Which Prepaid Int'l GSM SIM Card is the Best? (Jeremy Lee) Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines (Joseph Singer) EchoStar Loses Bid to Offer Local TV Beyond Market (Monty Solomon) Metromedia Fiber Network files for Chapter 11 (Monty Solomon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Ed Ellers) Re: Cable vs DSL for IP Telephony (Barry Margolin) Re: Help With Tie Mod Key 16 (Gerry Belanger) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 01:55:40 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On Fri, 17 May 2002 20:23:42 -0500, al56g@radparker.com (Al Iverson) wrote: > In article , Joey Lindstrom > wrote: [...snip...] >> I have to object to this idea of preventing users (dial-up, DSL, >> whatever) from connecting their mail clients to mail servers other >> than that of the ISP. A LOT of people have a legitimate need to >> connect to another mail server, maybe the company mail server or >> something like that. > A lot of people used to have legitimate reasons to use open relaying > mail servers, and spammers ruined those too. Give it up, the "I > deserve to connect to any mail server I want" war is long since lost. Ummm, I don't think he was saying he should be able to connect to any mail server he wants. He wants to connect to one he is authorized to use. There is a big difference. > BTW actually most users don't need it. I use AOL when travelling. They > redirect SMTP to their rate-limiting server. It worked just fine. I > could even connect to the company mail server with pop3 just fine. Still, people may have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use an ISP's mail server. It's a well known fact that the system administrator can read all mail passing through the server. I can think of a lot of reasons that might not be desirable, that have nothing to do with spam. > On the various servers I've administrated for various entities over > the years, I've always recommended blocking SMTP access from sites > that aren't supposed to be running mailservers. It stops spammers from > inside your network, and it stops spammers from outside your network > relaying spam through a network box (often I'd find an old Solaris box > running a ghastly old Sendmail that nobody knew about). > Internet access isn't a right; it's a private service contracted between > you and the ISP. If you don't like the terms of that contract, vote with > your feet. If you don't like that your ISP blocks port 25, find a > different provider. If you don't like that other sites block connections > from you on port 25 because you're on a dynamic IP and listed in a spam > stopping list like Gordon Fecyk's PDL, then you're pretty much out of > luck; you don't own or have any say over the servers that choose to use > those lists. You know, I'm trying to figure out how this is any different from a local telephone company saying "you can't use any long distance company except ours." Well, with one big exception -- an ISP isn't a common carrier. A few stunts like this, however, and ISP's could suddenly find themselves the target of increased government regulation. It's easy to say "vote with your feet" if you live in an area with multiple choices in ISP's. But what you may be forgetting is that there are many rural areas where there is only one local dialup ISP, and there places all over the country (in both rural and metropolitan areas) where there is only one option for broadband access. I really hate the idea of any increased federal regulation over the Internet, but the exception to that would be if it becomes a widespread practice for ISP's to start deciding on their own which ports at which sites people can and cannot access. At the very least, they should have to state up front (in their advertising, not just in the fine print of some document you don't receive until AFTER you've signed up) that they're not offering true Internet access, but only partial access instead. To me, it doesn't seem much different from buying phone service and then finding out that you're not allowed to call certain perfectly valid numbers (or certain entire exchanges) because your phone company doesn't want to send traffic to them (yes, that's happened, and in one case the phone company in question got slapped by the state PSC). Now, just so everyone is perfectly clear about what I'm objecting to, I am NOT saying that you cannot or should not restrict your mail server so that it's only useable by your customers (or by others at certain "trusted" fixed IP addresses, if you wish). What I am saying is that if you wanted to allow your brother-in-law (employee, girlfriend, whatever) on the other side of the country to send mail though your web server, and you've set up a rule that allows connections from his IP address, the ISP that HE uses should not be intercepting that traffic. It's a given that you feel differently about this, and maybe you would never give access to anyone else outside your own IP block. But, that is your choice. Up until now, one of the strengths of the Internet has been that one control freak can't block off legitimate communications without going to extraordinary lengths (probably something only a dictator of a non-democratic country could pull off). I'm sure I hate spam as much as you do, if not more, but I'm not so sure that restricting e-mail in every which way possible isn't doing more harm than good. Now, what I really wish is that the folks who set the standards for the Internet would come up with a new type of e-mail that kind of a cross between regular e-mail and instant messaging. The problem with IM is that the recipient assumes you want an immediate response, and that's not always the case. What I envision is a new kind of e-mail that would go direct from machine to machine, using the server only as a backup (like instant messaging). The big advantage to this is that spammers can keep changing their e-mail addresses, but most don't have unlimited access to IP blocks, so it would be a lot easier to reject communications from spammers, and also you'd have better security of e-mail. Unfortunately, if it's not free, people won't use it (sorry, "postage people", but free e-mail is one of the big reasons people use the net and IMHO you're spitting into the wind if you think any scheme that involves payment for even an initial e-mail will work), and if there's not one standard that everyone uses, it will be useless because people would have to run multiple e-mail clients. But I wish some of the people who develop these peer-to-peer file sharing applications would put some effort into coming up with peer-to-peer e-mail, that gives you guaranteed delivery to the recipient's system (or as close as it can get), encryption built-in and transparent to the user, and the ability to easily and positively block further communications from anyone who tries to spam - in fact, the client could be set up on kind of a "voting" system, where each time a message is flagged as spam by a user, that information is shared with the other clients, and if an IP address starts accumulating a high number of spam complaints it's automatically locked out (the clients automatically reject mail from that address) for a certain length of time (configurable by the user, not some central administrator type, but with a default of perhaps seven days). The big problem with e-mail today is that most users have no way to reject it until it's already in their mailbox. In my vision, users would have full control over who they want to receive e-mails from, and a spammer would never even be allowed to connect to most systems. Also, the fact that your system connects with each recipient individually would slow you down plenty if you were a spammer - no more connecting to some negligent admin's server and dumping a gazillion spam messages on him, that he then tries to deliver. I suspect that about 80% of the code needed to do this is already present in instant messaging clients and servers and/or file sharing programs - the biggest thing that needs to be done would be to design a client that looks like an e-mail client rather than an IM client. Anyway, just a thought that will probably never see the light of day beyond this forum. Jack [Spammers finally found the last "throwaway" e-mail address I used, so it's no longer valid. Hopefully this one will last a bit longer, but can be discarded just as easily!] ------------------------------ From: H. Peter Anvin Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Date: 19 May 2002 21:44:17 -0700 Organization: Transmeta Corporation, Santa Clara CA John Higdon wrote in : > If I find myself out in the field unable to access my own mail servers (the > only ones I will EVER use for email) due to some over-exuberant ISP who > feels the need to become the net police by blocking outbound port 25, I > simply use an SSH tunnel to reach the server. Also, many mail clients support SMTP over SSL (normally on port 465.) Also, if you control the mail server, there is nothing that keeps you from opening up a different port than port 25 ... hpa at work, in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 00:54:28 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Colin Sutton wrote about Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently > John Higdon wrote in message > news:telecom20.255.1@telecom-digest.org... >> In article telecom20.254.1@telecom-digest.org, Barry Margolin wrote: >>> Maybe this stuff is actually coming from Yahoo and their affiliates. >>> Yahoo has an account option for whether you're willing to get mail >>> from them and their affiliates offering services, and a few weeks ago >>> they blanket-changed all their members' options to "Yes". So now all >>> the people who haven't gone in and changed their settings back are >>> presumably getting all these advertisements. > See the article "More on Klez" in > http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.07.html#subj9 > *Some* of the Yahoo addresses could come from klez. >> 4. Sender claims to be: kkk5012@yahoo.co.kr >> Connecting server claims to be: "yahoo.co.kr" >> Server is actually: unknown (on hananet.net network) > yahoo.co.kr resolves to kr.yahoo.com, the Korean yahoo site, for me. I filter a lot of my spam, so it doesn't actually get to me. Indeed, the address from which I post is a "spam trap." However, I've been noticing an enormous amount of spam from Chinese addresses these days, particularly stuff giving "remove" addresses at "hanmail.com." Six months ago the spammers were using arabia.com, and a year ago it was an African address. However, I have to say I've been getting a lot of spam from Yahoo lately, often with Yahoo's advertising on the bottom, and with Yahoo all over the headers. > In article telecom20.255.12@telecom-digest.org, Al Iverson wrote: >> Internet access isn't a right; it's a private service contracted between >> you and the ISP. If you don't like the terms of that contract, vote with >> your feet. If you don't like that your ISP blocks port 25, find a >> different provider. If you don't like that other sites block connections >> from you on port 25 because you're on a dynamic IP and listed in a spam >> stopping list like Gordon Fecyk's PDL, then you're pretty much out of >> luck; you don't own or have any say over the servers that choose to use >> those lists. > If I find myself out in the field unable to access my own mail servers (the > only ones I will EVER use for email) due to some over-exuberant ISP who > feels the need to become the net police by blocking outbound port 25, I > simply use an SSH tunnel to reach the server. Actually, if it's your own private server, there's no earthly reason to use port 25. Use any port you want on the server and configure your Emailer accordingly. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 01:46:31 -0400 From: Bob Natale Subject: Re: The Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI Saaby@MyRealBox.com (Saab Guy) wrote: Hi, > I don't know if we ever made a final decision on this one but I found > the real catch ... the other people you call have to be enrolled in the > Neighborhood or have local service from MCI Do you have a reference for this claim? I can't detect that from scanning the info at www.TheNeighborhood.com. Thanks, BobN ------------------------------ From: J3r3my L33 Subject: Re: Which Prepaid Int'l GSM SIM Card is the Best? Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 09:50:00 -0400 Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County It depends on the roaming agreements and where you would like to use it. I'm not sure what roaming agreements VS or ATT have for their Prepaid SIM but I do know the most economical and wide roaming card is the Swisscom SIM but you have a EU number, and is very expensive to use in the US. Not sure what your calling pattern is going be like, but if you buy an unlocked phone, get a basic VS account for the US, then get a Swisscom for travel. The Swisscom is good for a year of prepaid units without having to recharge it. Hope it helps. Jeremy Prof. Shurajit Gopal wrote in message news:telecom20.256.4@telecom-digest.org: > Can someone tell me which International GSM "Prepaid" SIM Card is the most > economical and the best (preferably with a US number)? > Thanks and regards, > Prof. Shurajit Gopal > Department of Mass Communication > North Greenville College > PO Box 1892 > Tigerville, SC 29688, USA > Phone: 864-414-1812 > Fax: 815-364-3365 > E-mail: ShurGopal@AOL.COM ------------------------------ From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 08:14:12 -0700 Organization: Drizzle Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On Sun, 19 May 2002 11:07:44 +0100, Robert Woolley wrote: > On Fri, 17 May 2002 05:34:26 -0700, Joseph Singer > wrote: >>> I've been queried by a company that wants to offer its UK customers a US >>> toll free number that terminates on a UK landline. >> http://www.kall8.com will terminate calls to any destination including >> international locations. The rate per minute varies depending on the >> destination. For terminating on a ring to number in the UK it's 10 >> cents/minute for normal land lines and 35 cents/minute to mobiles. > Except it's now going up to 35 cents a minute to uk landlines as of 1 > May. You read the rates changes wrong. The rate to point to regular numbers in the UK is still 10 cents/minute. Calls to "special services" which means/includes mobiles is 35 cents/minute. When you access their rates page a window pops up with the new rates for certain countries plus "special services." The UK is not among the adjusted rates. Rates to regular UK numbers are still 10 cents/minute. Personal replies most likely will not be read. Please reply in the newsgroup. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:12:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EchoStar Loses Bid to Offer Local TV Beyond Market WASHINGTON, May 20 (Reuters) - EchoStar Communications Corp. (NASDAQ:DISH) lost a bid to broadcast a local television channel beyond that market when the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear the satellite television provider's appeal of a lower court ruling. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=27247876 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:14:16 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Metromedia Fiber Network Files For Chapter 11 NEW YORK, May 20 (Reuters) - Metromedia Fiber Network Inc. (NASDAQ:MFNXE) said on Monday it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, becoming the latest high-speed communications network operator to buckle under a heavy debt load and stiff competition. The company, which is backed by Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE:VZ), said it will continue to operate during its restructuring. It hired Impala Partners to assist during the reorganization and UBS Warburg to advise on strategic alternatives. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=27248295 ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:29:21 -0400 John Higdon wrote: > Besides, radar detectors were around first. You should know better than that. Part 15 unintentional radiators (such as superhet receivers) aren't allowed to cause interference, and have to be shut down if they do. ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Cable vs DSL for IP Telephony Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 15:44:35 GMT In article , Chip G wrote: > Phil McKerracher wrote in message > news:telecom20.252.5@telecom-digest.org: >> UDP is generally used for VoIP because the occasional lost packet is >> preferable to a delay while retransmission takes place. > The nature of TCP ensures that all of the packets arrive > ... regardless of the sequencing. TCP provides for retransmission if > some packets are lost. Of course, in the context of real-time media > streams this makes no sense. It does little good to receive and > playback the third word in a sentence before playing the first > two. That wouldn't happen with TCP. It also ensures that all the packets are processed by the receiving application in the order that they were originally sent by the sending application. If the packet containing the first two words is lost, the one with the third word will be held in a buffer until that packet is retransmitted. What you would hear is a brief pause followed by what was said. > Voice can sustain some lost packets and still be intelligible ... > hence the use of UDP. However, phone lines are also used for some non-voice applications, such as touch-tone menus. This is why most VoIP protocols include a special way to encode DTMF tones, which includes receipt confirmation. Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net Genuity, Woburn, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. ------------------------------ From: wa1hoz@qsl.net (Gerry Belanger) Subject: Re: Help With Tie Mod Key 16 Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 16:07:48 GMT In article , DONSHADDIX@aol.com wrote: > I need to find a place in the east that repairs or sales a Mod Key > 16/60006a units. I used Aztec East Inc in Norwalk CT, but they have > gone out of business. Have any ideas? What used to be Aztec East has gone through several ownership/management changes. It's current incarnation is Aztec Capital, LLC, Orange CT. You can call them at 866-607-1179. Gerry Belanger,Newtown, CT. To reply, make the obvious mods to wa1hoz_at_qsl (dot) net ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #257 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed May 22 18:32:17 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA12802; Wed, 22 May 2002 18:32:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 18:32:17 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205222232.SAA12802@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #258 TELECOM Digest Wed, 22 May 2002 18:31:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 258 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (Richard Cox) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (F Goldstein) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (Al Iverson) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (Walter Dnes) Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (Dave Garland) Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (John Higdon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (John Higdon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Dave Grebe) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Stretch) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 18:36:27 +0100 From: Richard D G Cox Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited On Mon, 20 May 2002 05:55 UT, Jack, who claimed to be "unspammable-4719@workbench.net", wrote: > I don't think he was saying he should be able to connect to any mail > server he wants. He wants to connect to one he is authorized to use. > There is a big difference. There is indeed. But how does the network administrator KNOW that the server he is trying to connect to, is one that he is authorised to use? What authority has he -- or can he produce? The authority he should have is embedded in the SMTP Auth protocol, and uses a different port number -- for which the remote SMTP server should have made proper provision. In many cases they won't have, and mostly this is because the administrator doesn't understand the differences between a message SUBMISSION and a message TRANSFER. If you want an ISP to validate credentials and provide access for one specific user to one specified SMTP server that they are "authorised" to use, that's fine too ... but that takes skill and effort and neither of those come for free. Are you prepared to pay the REAL cost of that? > people may have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use an ISP's mail > server. It's a well known fact that the system administrator can read > all mail passing through the server. Sure. As can the government (in most countries). In fact they can read all your mail *if they want to* regardless of whether or not it is being stored on their mailserver. The ISP has access to everything, so if you don't trust the ISP, don't use their network! > You know, I'm trying to figure out how this is any different from a local > telephone company saying "you can't use any long distance company except > ours." Well, with one big exception -- an ISP isn't a common carrier. Big difference. With Telcos, customers (usually) PAY for Long Distance. Email, on the other hand, more usually comes postage-due. The only benefit an ISP gets from insisting you do not use other mail servers, is that they do not get blamed for the likely abuse that WILL occur if they allow access (generally) elsewhere. > A few stunts like this, however, and ISP's could suddenly find themselves > the target of increased government regulation. If certain ISPs continue to allow abuse from their networks, then THEY are likely to find themselves on the receiving end of government regulation. (Are you listening, US Sprint?) Particularly, right now, in China, since the Chinese government discovered just how extensively their IP addresses are blocked worldwide as a result of their failing to curb abuse. > What I am saying is that if you wanted to allow your brother-in-law > (employee, girlfriend, whatever) on the other side of the country to > send mail though your web server, and you've set up a rule that allows > connections from his IP address, the ISP that HE uses should not be > intercepting that traffic. They are NOT intercepting it, provided the connection is set up correctly. As you will find, if you research the concept of "MAIL SUBMISSION AGENT". > The big problem with e-mail today is that most users have no way to reject > it until it's already in their mailbox. Again, everything is possible but there is a cost and that means a price. If you research www.spamcop.net you will find that exactly the service you want is available, and at a very *modest* price! > In my vision, users would have full control over who they want to receive > e-mails from, and a spammer would never even be allowed to connect to most > systems. That's a vision a lot of us share. It doesn't work with existing software or protocols. Considerable Research and Development work will be required and SOMEONE will have to pay for it. Since a certain vendor now gives away mail (client) software for free, it is difficult to assess what the market might be for such enhanced mail software - and at what price it might then be available. Richard D G Cox Penarth, UK: 029 2031 1111 (To reply, take out the office) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 13:37:18 -0400 From: Fred R. Goldstein Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Jack on Mon, 20 May 2002 01:55:40 sed, > Now, what I really wish is that the folks who set the standards for > the Internet would come up with a new type of e-mail that kind of a > cross between regular e-mail and instant messaging. The problem with > IM is that the recipient assumes you want an immediate response, and > that's not always the case. What I envision is a new kind of e-mail > that would go direct from machine to machine, using the server only as > a backup (like instant messaging). The big advantage to this is that > spammers can keep changing their e-mail addresses, but most don't have > unlimited access to IP blocks, so it would be a lot easier to reject > communications from spammers, and also you'd have better security of > e-mail. What you're asking for is the NORMAL type of email that prevailed on the Internet before the days of the Winsock! The Internet (and its TCP/IP protocol suite) are inherently peer-to-peer. And so is mail. The native mail protocol is SMTP, and you send mail end to end without any involvement in the middle. The mail reader on the end system reads the mail off of the local spool that the SMTP daemon delivered it to. You don't remember this because most modern clients are on PC-type machines, which are not assumed to be up and running on the net 7x24 the way SMTP nodes are. Back when was at DEC a decade ago, I had a VAXstation in my office running all the time, with an SMTP address. Mail arrived whenever it did. I didn't poll a server. I didn't use a relay. But with PCs, we aren't assumed to always be up. So we delegate the SMTP-receipt function to a POP or IMAP server, at our ISP or belonging to our employer/organization, and poll it when we're on line. The send-without-relay function is more an OS decision. Windows chooses to not implement an SMTP relay agent, like sendmail; instead, most clients just pass the mail to a relay server which does. Lots of Linux and other Unix workstation users run their own mail relay, be it sendmail, postfix, qmail, or something else. > But I wish some of the people who develop these peer-to-peer file > sharing applications would put some effort into coming up with > peer-to-peer e-mail, that gives you guaranteed delivery to the > recipient's system (or as close as it can get), encryption built-in > and transparent to the user, and the ability to easily and positively > block further communications from anyone who tries to spam - in fact, > the client could be set up on kind of a "voting" system, where each > time a message is flagged as spam by a user, that information is > shared with the other clients, and if an IP address starts > accumulating a high number of spam complaints it's automatically > locked out (the clients automatically reject mail from that address) > for a certain length of time (configurable by the user, not some > central administrator type, but with a default of perhaps seven days). If you run your own SMTP, you can do your own filtering; again, many Unixheads do. And there are "blackhole" lists out there which suggest which originators are most likely spammers. This tends to be tricky to administer -- you think it's easy to stay ahead of the spammers? -- which is one reason many end users don't want to do their own peer to peer mail. ------------------------------ From: al56g@radparker.com (Al Iverson) Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Organization: Please don't email replies Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 19:30:12 -0500 In article , Jack wrote: >> BTW actually most users don't need it. I use AOL when travelling. They >> redirect SMTP to their rate-limiting server. It worked just fine. I >> could even connect to the company mail server with pop3 just fine. > Still, people may have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use an > ISP's mail server. It's a well known fact that the system > administrator can read all mail passing through the server. Who could just as easily sniff your SMTP traffic. If that's a concern, it's ssh tunnel time. Al Iverson -- http://www.radparker.com -- Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA Support Minnesota Jazz -- Disclaimer: All of my opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ From: Walter Dnes Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Reply-To: waltdnes@waltdnes.org Date: 21 May 2002 23:54:25 -0400 On Mon, 20 May 2002 01:55:40 -0400, Jack, wrote: > Still, people may have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use > an ISP's mail server. It's a well known fact that the system > administrator can read all mail passing through the server. I > can think of a lot of reasons that might not be desirable, > that have nothing to do with spam. In which case, you have no business whatsoever sending it over the net in cleartext where *ANYBODY* with a sniffer can read it. > I really hate the idea of any increased federal regulation over > the Internet, but the exception to that would be if it becomes > a widespread practice for ISP's to start deciding on their > own which ports at which sites people can and cannot access. > At the very least, they should have to state up front (in their > advertising, not just in the fine print of some document you > don't receive until AFTER you've signed up) that they're not > offering true Internet access, but only partial access instead. The sad fact is that open relays, and direct-to-MX via port 25 have been grossly abused by spammers. Unwilling recipients of these spams find that refusing to accept any email from sites that allow these practices greatly reduces the amount of spam, with comparitively little loss of legitimate email. My former ISP, Sympatico, found that out. At one point, with a bit over half-a-million customers, they were right up there on the SpamCop statistics with multi-million subscriber outfits like AOL/MSN/Hotmail/Yahoo etc. They were being blocked by a lot of small lists, and RBL was being rumored. Sympatico rolled out port-25 blocking, and they dropped off the radar as far as the count of spam complaints was concerned. > Now, just so everyone is perfectly clear about what I'm objecting to, > I am NOT saying that you cannot or should not restrict your mail > server so that it's only useable by your customers (or by others at > certain "trusted" fixed IP addresses, if you wish). What I am saying > is that if you wanted to allow your brother-in-law (employee, > girlfriend, whatever) on the other side of the country to send mail > though your web server, and you've set up a rule that allows > connections from his IP address, the ISP that HE uses should not be > intercepting that traffic. You seem to be forgetting a very important fact here. The vast majority of people use ISP's that provide *DYNAMIC* IP addresses. As soon as you hang up, it's available for the next person to use. This allows an ISP to have 10 or 20 customers per IP address; not everybody is going online at the same time. This effectively anonymizes the sender. The ISPs that do provide static IP addresses generally allow them outbound port-25. > I'm sure I hate spam as much as you do, if not more, but I'm not so > sure that restricting e-mail in every which way possible isn't doing > more harm than good. Otto von Bismarck once said that a man who states he believes an idea "in principle" has no intention whatsover of implementing it. I'm getting rather tired of the bleeding-heart liberal types who wring their hands over the spam problem, but yell and scream about anybody who tries to do something about the problem. You may view some of the self-defense measures against spam as evil. But they're the lesser of two evils, versus doing nothing. Deal with it. > What I envision is a new kind of e-mail that would go direct > from machine to machine, using the server only as a backup (like > instant messaging). The big advantage to this is that spammers > can keep changing their e-mail addresses, but most don't have > unlimited access to IP blocks, so it would be a lot easier to > reject communications from spammers, and also you'd have better > security of e-mail. [...deletia...] > But I wish some of the people who develop these peer-to-peer file > sharing applications would put some effort into coming up with > peer-to-peer e-mail, that gives you guaranteed delivery to the > recipient's system (or as close as it can get), encryption built-in > and transparent to the user, and the ability to easily and positively > block further communications from anyone who tries to spam You're effectively talking about asking every net newbie to be a sysadmin and run a server that's accepting connections from the internet 24x7. Do you realize the implications? Hint; experienced veterans who follow security newsgroups religiously still get their machines cracked. Having every AOL'er and MSN'er and everybody's grandmother running a server will be the end of the internet. Walter Dnes I'm not repeating myself; I'm an X Window user, I'm an ex-Windows user ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Organization: Wizard Information Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 23:50:18 -0500 It was a dark and stormy night when Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > I've been > noticing an enormous amount of spam from Chinese addresses these days, As have I. Since it is known that the Chinese government monitors email to Chinese addresses (with technological help from assorted US companies such as Cisco), I think that complaints will be most effective if they involve thank-yous for contributions to Falun Gong, acknowledgements of messages regarding the struggle to free Tibet, Vietnamese plans to invade China, Taiwanese plans to assert control over a newly "reunited" China, encrypted messages, and the like (use your imagination). If we make Chinese ISPs nervous about accepting spammer accounts, if we waste the Chinese secret police's time monitoring suspicious emails and questioning the recipients, that's all to the good. And if a spammer gets taken out and shot, well, that's a little harsh, but it's still a win-win situation. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 10:28:04 -0700 Subject: Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.256.11@telecom-digest.org, Colin Sutton wrote: >> 4. Sender claims to be: kkk5012@yahoo.co.kr >> Connecting server claims to be: "yahoo.co.kr" >> Server is actually: unknown (on hananet.net network) > yahoo.co.kr resolves to kr.yahoo.com, the Korean yahoo site, for me. But but the actual IP address of the connecting host (in my case) did not have any rev. resolution and was (according to APNIC) on another network completely. Anyone can put "yahoo.co.kr" in the HELO. In this case, it was bogus, as were all my other examples of email supposedly originating from Yahoo. No offense, but since I didn't include the IP address of the spam host, how could you know to what it resolved? I'm sure that the IP resulting from a lookup of "yahoo.co.kr" would resolve back to that canonical name. In article telecom20.257.3@telecom-digest.org, Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > Actually, if it's your own private server, there's no earthly reason > to use port 25. Use any port you want on the server and configure your > Emailer accordingly. And that, of course, is effectively what an SSH tunnel does ... over a secure link, at that. Naturally, port 25 still has to work in the clear since one of the primary duties of my mail server is to receive email from others. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 14:36:28 -0700 Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.257.9@telecom-digest.org, Ed Ellers wrote: > John Higdon wrote: >> Besides, radar detectors were around first. > You should know better than that. Part 15 unintentional radiators > (such as superhet receivers) aren't allowed to cause interference, and > have to be shut down if they do. I would want to see some very convincing data that the miniscule radiation from a radar detector's local oscillator interferes with POS data equipment. I look at this complaint in the same light as the nonsense that cellphones can cause fires and explosions at gas stations. Without some sort of compelling evidence backing up these urban legend events, we could end up with the war of mythical disturbances and interactions firmly encoded into legislation and regulation. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: Tony Pelliccio Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 21:51:17 GMT In article , denisf@pickaxe.net says: > Monty Solomon wrote: >> Apparently, ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed an endorsement with >> the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors because >> the 25 million devices in use interfere with high-tech payment systems >> now becoming popular at the gas pump. > Did I get that right? > A radar detector, which is basically a sensitive receiver, screws up > the pumps? > Do we have to turn off our FM radios in petrol stations now? > Sounds like, smells like .... A receiver has an oscillator present that generates the IF for the received signal. Yes, this is known to radiate a little bit and could potentially mess with an RF based reader system. Tony ------------------------------ From: Dave Grebe Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 23:31:18 -0400 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises I use a radar detector myself, and a big source of false alarms is other peoples' radar detectors. Like any other superhet radio the local oscillators can interfere with each other. So if the FCC decides to act on this these things *may* happen: - Radar detectors will get more expensive. Maybe prohibitively so, maybe not. - False alarms from other detectors will be reduced / eliminated. - Radar detector detectors used in areas where the detectors are illegal will either stop working entirely or be reduced in effectiveness. Ed Ellers wrote: > You should know better than that. Part 15 unintentional radiators > (such as superhet receivers) aren't allowed to cause interference, and > have to be shut down if they do. ------------------------------ From: Stretch Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 02:05:05 GMT Organization: Road Runner - Texas John Higdon wrote: > In article telecom20.255.16@telecom-digest.org, Monty Solomon wrote: >> Apparently, ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed an endorsement with >> the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors because >> the 25 million devices in use interfere with high-tech payment systems >> now becoming popular at the gas pump. > Interesting. Radar detectors are merely receivers, not transmitters. Sounds > like a redesign of the pay at the pump systems might be in order. Besides, > radar detectors were around first. Most radio receivers use a technique called superheterodyne, which involves generating a frequency similar to the one being recieved, and using the interference between the two as an "amplifier" of sorts. I'm not an RF guru, but I bet any ham could explain it better. Virgiina police have used this (the small leakage from radar detectors) to fine motorists who violate the state's ban on the units. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: First, as Denis McMahon says in the > message before this one, and as you note, they are RECEIVERS, not > transmitters, but all receivers do have very tiny transmitters in > them to handle the IF (intermediate frequency) conversions, etc. That > being said, if radar detectors make that much of a difference, then > all radios should be banned, especially the kind that make positive, > purposeful, transmissions; i.e. CB radios, police radios, etc. > But that is not the point. The joke is on you. Remember a few months > ago, or maybe it was a year ago, they were on the same tangent about > cell phones at petrol stations? Only instead of diddling the meters > in the pumps, the allegation was they would produce a tiny spark and > the fumes would start a major fire at the petrol station. They got no > where with that one, so now the emphasis is on radar detectors, > another bane in a police officer's existence. > The FCC should realize radar detectors *already, and always have been* > a violation of the communications laws. You are entitled to *listen* > to almost any radio band anytime (you 'listen' in this case when the > radar detector apparatus 'listens' for the presence of police radar), > but you are not permitted to act upon, or benefit from *what you hear* > on the radio*, especially a police transmission. You act upon or benefit > from the transmission which was not intended for yourself when you > reduce your automobile speed or otherwise watch for police activity in > the immediate area. You benefit by not getting a speeding ticket or > being taken to jail. I suppose if you could convince the authorities > that you were merely listening out of intellectual curiosity to the > signals and that you did not act upon what you heard (did not slow > down your driving speed) and did not benefit from what you heard (that > is, did not care if you were taken away to jail), then I would guess > you could have a radar detector device and use it lawfully. But since > the only purpose is to 'listen' to police transmissions and respond to > your own benefit, then how could they be legal under existing FCC > rules? What makes these devices any different than listening to verbal > communication on a police radio for example, about a bank robbery then > relaying the information to the bank robbers who are in your car or > hiding nearby? Uhh ... I have to admit I haven't had too many bank robbers hide in my car lately. Two courts in my area have been forced to admit that many thousands of speeding tickets handed out for years are entirely bogus, and that the municipalities knowingly operated highly profitable business operations, with the complicity of both the police and the courts, to fine motorists who were breaking no law. Five officers equipped with one radar gun can generate over $10,000 per hour, and you can pay up, "or else". No used-car salesman or three-card monte dealer could hold a candle to this bunch. I know that the whole "burden of proof" thing is a silly concept (as did the court: 24 hours after each summons was issued, they mail out an arraignment notice, with a return address of "COLLECTIONS DEPARTMENT" on the envelope, with six different ways to pay the fine, but not one single word about the right to question the charge. This is the court, mind you, not the police department.) In a personal case, I used the opportunity to take note of my own radar detector going off to make obsevations about the circumstances, which forced even that same court to conclude that the charge of speeding could not be supported when questioned. (I'm being diplomatic about that part.) > Admittedly, this business about radar detectors/cell phones causing > some problems at the gas station is just a crock. And you are not > going to see police radios turned off at gas stations or banned when > police are driving their cars anytime soon. Meanwhile, you are just a > 'civilian'; you will follow the rules and obey. PAT] I take the rules exactly as seriously as the people enforcing them do. :-) ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #258 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed May 22 22:26:31 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA16119; Wed, 22 May 2002 22:26:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 22:26:31 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205230226.WAA16119@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #259 TELECOM Digest Wed, 22 May 2002 22:26:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 259 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cops Fret About Being Targets of Cellphone Surveillance (Joe Wineburgh) Telecom Update (Canada) #333, May 21, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) Wanted: Incoming Call Timer (Mark Gibson) Looking For a Needle in a Haystack! Help! (Kim Fuller) Where to Buy Northern Telecom Phones For Home Use? (john63401@yahoo.com) High Court Says States Can Be Sued In Federal Court (Marcus D. Falco) Looking For 800 Service for UK and Australia Callers (onshore@netcom.ca) Re: Echo With Cell Phones (Michael D. Sullivan) Rapid Rise in U.S. Mobile Telephone Usage - Survey (Monty Solomon) New Hotmail Account Information Causes Confusion (Marcus Didius Falco) More Businesses Want to Give You Information (David B. Horvath, CCP) Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI (Saab Guy) Surfing On the Computers at Work?? How Safe Are You? (offers.com.jp) Re: Best Way to Keep Children Safe on the Net (Bill Horne) Last Laugh! Another Worldcom Long-distance Horror Story (Tom Betz) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joe Wineburgh Subject: Cops Fret About Being Targets of Cellphone Surveillance Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 12:52:27 -0400 Found this quite intriguing... #JOE -----Original Message---- Subject: Cops Fret About Being Targets of Cellphone Surveillance Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 20:20:43 PDT From: Nick Santucci Subject: Cell Phones Snoop on Cops (fwd) Drug gang members are going high tech :) Forwarded from a law enforcement newsletter NEW GENERATION CELL PHONE 'AUTO-ANSWER' COULD TIP OFF POTENTIAL SUSPECTS It has been brought to our attention that many new generation cellular phones have an 'auto-answer' feature that allows the phone to answer a call automatically without the user's physical contact. Apparently, this feature is designed for 'hands free' operation for disabled individuals, and individuals operating their phones while driving. Further, it was posted in a Louisiana State Police Special Bulletin (dated May 2) that DEA contacts in New York have received reports from agents that their CI's know of drug gang members who are indeed aware of this feature and use it to gather intelligence from law enforcement. "They will allow themselves to be picked up and then 'leave' a phone in their vehicle to gather intelligence from them later or they will secretly hide a phone in an officer's vehicle or in a spot that they know that law enforcement gathers at to glean intelligence," the bulletin reads. Further, an April 2 edition of the bulletin detailed a scenario involving one of these cellular phones, but at the time the Louisiana State Police were unable to confirm the origin of the scenario. However, representatives from the department told Xxxxxx that they have since been contacted by the Phelps County (Missouri) Sheriff's Department identifying that department as the origin for the scenario. The scenario featured a Nextel phone, in particular, that was found in a truck that officers were searching. There were 65 pounds of marijuana in the sleeper. During the search, the cellular phone began ringing while it sat in the holster on the dashboard. When the phone stopped ringing, the officers assumed that voicemail kicked in, however, they learned later that the phone was set in auto-answer. The caller was the intended recipient of the marijuana. Incidentally, he was able to overhear the officers during their search of the vehicle. Not only did this give away details of the search to the individual on the phone, but it also potentially jeopardized the safety of the officers. Louisiana State Police has confirmed the details of the auto-sound feature through Nextel. The feature can be accessed by pressing the * key and then the # key. Then hit the arrow key until you see the auto-answer option. You can also find out whether or not the feature is actually on, and you can program how many rings it will take to activate it, or to ring silently. As stated in the Louisiana State Police Special Bulletin, April 2 edition: "This is a potentially serious threat to agents especially in a controlled delivery environment. Always check cell phones to make sure what kind they are. Be especially careful of Nextel phones when found and make sure the auto-answer feature is turned off or at least no one says anything near it that can be heard and tip off a potential suspect." We have sent this warning out strictly to inform you of the POTENTIAL danger you could face if you find yourself in a similar situation. The phone itself poses no threat, but as with any device featured in our Weapons Warnings, in the hands of the wrong people it could be used in a potentially dangerous way. Specifically, these phones could be used as a communication device that could release official law enforcement information to a potential suspect. POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 11:14:20 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #333, May 21, 2002 TELECOM UPDATE published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 333: May 21, 2002 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** AT&T CANADA http://www.attcanada.com ** BELL CANADA http://www.bell.ca ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Teleglobe Creditors May Sue BCE ** Blouin Replaces Edwards at Emergis ** Nortel Files Plan to Raise US$2.5 Billion ** Supreme Court to Hear Utility Pole Dispute ** Juniper Buys Unisphere Networks ** Call-Net Says Bell Violating Winback Rules ** Rogers AT&T Signs Purolator for Parcel Tracking ** MTS Tests TV Over DSL ** Aliant Files Memorial U. Centrex Tariff ** CRTC Turns Down Centrex Contract Changes ** Aliant "Unlimited Features" Proposal Denied ** Telus Announces Digital Expansion ** Entourage Buys Videotron Technical Services ** Peer 1 Appoints CFO ** Yak Dial-Around LD to Use Telus Network ** Financial Results Look Communications Minacs Worldwide ** Dortmans to Lead Call Centre Seminar ============================================================ TELEGLOBE CREDITORS MAY SUE BCE: As Telecom Update reported in an Extra edition on May 15, an Ontario court has granted Teleglobe bankruptcy protection under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act. A group of Teleglobe bondholders says it is considering legal action against BCE Inc. for cutting financial support to the company. ** Bell Canada says that it is arranging for network backup from AT&T, Equant, Sprint, Telstra, and others to carry overseas traffic if necessary. BLOUIN REPLACES EDWARDS AT EMERGIS: Pierre Blouin has been named CEO of BCE Emergis, replacing Brian Edwards, who has resigned. Blouin was previously CEO of Bell Mobility; his replacement has not been named. ** In other changes, John Sheridan, President of Bell Canada, has been named Bell's Chief Operating Officer as well. Stephen Wetmore, Bell Canada's Vice-Chair, Corporate, is now also Executive VP of BCE. NORTEL FILES PLAN TO RAISE US$2.5 BILLION: Nortel Networks has told Canadian and U.S. regulators that it plans to raise up to US$2.5 billion over the next 25 months through sale of various forms of securities. ** Nortel has signed a five-year contract to supply U.S. Cellular, the eighth-largest wireless carrier in the U.S., with CDMA 1X wireless equipment worth US$320 million to $375 million. SUPREME COURT TO HEAR UTILITY POLE DISPUTE: The Supreme Court of Canada has agreed to hear a Canadian Cable Television Association appeal of last year's Federal Court ruling that the CRTC cannot set rates for cableco use of hydro poles. ** In 1999, the CRTC set a rate of $15.89/month for cableco use of hydro poles; the hydro utilities, which want to charge more, appealed to the Federal Court (see Telecom Update #202, 292). JUNIPER BUYS UNISPHERE NETWORKS: Juniper Networks has agreed to pay about US$740 million in cash and stock to buy Massachusetts-based Unisphere Networks, a Siemens subsidiary that makes edge routers. Siemens will own 10% of the merged company. CALL-NET SAYS BELL VIOLATING WINBACK RULES: Call-Net charges that Bell Canada continues to call Call-Net local customers within the first three months -- in some cases before the customer transfer has taken place -- to persuade them to return to Bell, despite CRTC rules prohibiting such action (see Telecom Update #315). http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/Eng/2002/8622/C25-16.htm ROGERS AT&T SIGNS PUROLATOR FOR PARCEL TRACKING: Purolator Courier has agreed to use the Rogers AT&T GSM/GPRS network to provide mobile data services to more than 6,000 Symbol Technologies handheld computers used by Purolator employees across Canada. ** Rogers' BlackBerry e-mail devices can now send files over the Internet to a printer or fax machine using a service from PrinterOn. MTS TESTS TV OVER DSL: Manitoba Telecom has begun a trial of digital TV delivered via DSL over phone lines. The trial, with 200 participants, will run six to eight months. (See Telecom Update #302) ALIANT FILES MEMORIAL U. CENTREX TARIFF: On May 7, Aliant Telecom filed a tariff for the Centrex rates ($20.53/line in a three-year contract) it offered Memorial University earlier in April. GT Telecom had complained to the CRTC that the Memorial proposal was below tariff (see Telecom Update #332). http://www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2002/a53.htm#21 ** In its reply to GT's complaint, Aliant says that it made a "billing error" -- now corrected -- by supplying modem lines to Memorial University at residential rates. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/Eng/2002/8622/g7-03.htm CRTC REJECTS CENTREX CONTRACT CHANGES: Telecom Orders 2002- 196, 2002-198, and 2002-199 deny applications by Aliant and Bell Canada to revise Minimum Contract Period terms for Centrex service. The Commission says incumbent telcos' use of MCPs is under review in the price caps decision, to be released shortly. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2002/o2002-196.htm http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2002/o2002-198.htm http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2002/o2002-199.htm ALIANT "UNLIMITED FEATURES" PROPOSAL DENIED: Telecom Order 2002-197 turns down an application by Aliant to offer residence customers up to 11 features at a flat rate of $12/month. The Commission was not satisfied that this rate would cover costs. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2002/o2002-197.htm TELUS ANNOUNCES DIGITAL EXPANSION: Telus Mobility says that it now offers digital wireless service to an additional 5.4 million Ontario and Quebec residents, thanks to network buildouts and its digital roaming agreement with Bell Mobility. ENTOURAGE BUYS VIDEOTRON TECHNICAL SERVICES: Entourage Technology Solutions has finalized its agreement to buy Videotron's TV and Internet installation and repair services. (See Telecom Update #323) PEER 1 APPOINTS CFO: Vancouver-based Peer 1 Network, which provides international Internet access and server co-location services, has named James P. Taylor, formerly of Chicago Aerosol, as CFO. YAK DIAL-AROUND LD TO USE TELUS NETWORK: Telus has signed a $100 million, five-year deal to supply wholesale long- distance to Toronto-based Yak Communications, which claims 300,000 recurring customers of its dial-around long distance service. FINANCIAL RESULTS: In the first quarter: ** Look Communications had sales of $15.6 million, 30% less than last year but 5% more than the previous quarter. Look said it gained a net 1,000 business customers in the quarter. Net income: $1.3 million. ** Minacs Worldwide sales were $62.0 million, 14% more than the previous quarter. Operations outside Canada provided 63% of revenues. Net earnings were $1.2 million. DORTMANS TO LEAD CALL CENTRE SEMINAR: Henry Dortmans, President of Angus Dortmans Associates, will lead a special public presentation of the internationally acclaimed seminar "Essential Skills and Knowledge for Effective Incoming Call Centre Management" in Toronto, May 29-30. ** "For managers who are new to the call centre environment, this seminar provides a solid foundation to build upon. For managers who are experienced in the call centre environment, this seminar provides useful tools to improve management skills" -- Linda Noble, Business Manager, Telus ** "Henry is very knowledgeable, responsive, informal, and professional. He kept the group on topic, and he is very organized. The seminar would be beneficial to any company." -- Joan Letendre, Real Time Management Group, SaskTel To register, call 1-800-672-6177 or go to http://www.incoming.com ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: mark@markg.co.uk (Mark Gibson) Subject: Wanted: Incoming Call Timer Date: 22 May 2002 11:18:48 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I'm looking for a device to allow timing of incoming phone calls on a computer. Basically it needs to signal the computer when the call is answered -- to start a timer, and again when the call is terminated (at either end) -- to stop the timer. This is the only functionality required. It is on UK phone lines (we use NTL if that makes a difference). I've search the internet, and the closest thing i've found is a DIY device called Alltel by Shane Wegner (http://www.cm.nu/~shane/alltel/) - DTMF decoding is not required. I'm a bit wary of building devices for phone lines, so does anyone know of a commerical device I could buy for this purpose. Or alternatively can someone point me in the direction of phone line information for the UK. Cheers, Mark Gibson ------------------------------ Subject: Looking for a Needle in a Haystack! Help! Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 14:36:44 -0600 From: Kim Fuller Hello! I am trying to locate some info on a class someone I work with is interested in possibly having some employees attend. He is not sure of the name exactly, but it's something like "Telephone 101" and it's a one-day course in Sacramento. You may or may not be able to assist me, but when I came across your website, I thought it was worth a try. I do not know who hosts the training or really anything else. I would appreciate any information you could provide that would point me in the right direction. Thank you! Kim Fuller Administrative Assistant The Rye Telephone Co ------------------------------ From: john63401@yahoo.com Subject: Where to Buy Northern Telecom Phones for Home Use? Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 18:15:16 GMT I'd like to buy a nice NT phone with Call ID and answering machine built in ... for my home office. Any idea what model I should get ... and where to order one via mail order? I want something better built then the stuff you see at Walmart. Also ... if there are any other brands I should consider ... let me know. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 15:06:14 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: High Court Says States Can Be Sued In Federal Court The Supreme Court giveth and the Supreme Court taketh away. This is exactly the strategy that the ILECs have been saying they would follow in the wake of the decision last week upholding FCC rules on UNEs. Deep pockets litigation dragged out forever. Indeed, it was specifically Verizon that had said last week that it would be drawing out the litigation state by state. Note that this decision hasn't gotten NEARLY the publicity of the earlier one. CQ DAILY MONITOR MIDDAY UPDATE Published by Congressional Quarterly and the CQ Daily Monitor www.CQ.com Monday, May 20, 2002 - 1:55 p.m. HIGH COURT SAYS STATES CAN BE SUED IN FEDERAL COURT UNDER TELECOM LAW The Supreme Court ruled 8-0 today that states can be sued in federal court for their activities implementing the 1996 Telecommunications Act (PL 104-104), the Associated Press reported. Justices refused requests by Maryland's regulators to shield states from lawsuits by telephone companies. The ruling is the court's second in a week stemming from the 1996 law, which sought to spur competition in local phone service. Last week, justices upheld a federal plan for making the transition. Today's ruling means states must deal with potentially lengthy federal court litigation from companies angry over how state utility boards or other regulators are following the law. Maryland attorneys had argued that companies dissatisfied with state decisions should be restricted to challenges in state courts. The court also held that state commissioners could be sued individually. The ruling came in the case of Verizon Maryland v. Public Service Commission of Maryland. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: onshore@netcom.ca Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 13:36:08 -0700 Subject: Looking For 800 Service for UK and Australia Callers I am looking for a wholesale service that a customer can call me from the UK or Australia on an 800 line and have it terminate in my office in the US or Canada. Thanks, Please e-mail me at onshore@netcom.ca ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Echo With Cell Phones Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 23:52:17 GMT On Sun, 19 May 2002 09:35:09 -0700, no-spam@no-spam.radiomonopoly.com wrote: > In article telecom20.255.7@telecom-digest.org, Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: >> Friends of mine just got a set of three Verizon cell phones (one for >> each family member) and they tell me that they only get echo when they >> call my landline. Is this possible? I thought echo-cancellation was >> on the calling side. > This is probably due to a poor hybrid on your phone that allows > received audio to be turned around and sent back to the caller. With > the advent of digital coding on most cellphone calls, the > transmit/receive delay accentuates poor isolation. One source of delay is the conversion from analog to digital and back. Any A/D or D/A conversion inherently introduces some delay. The delay is greater when using the complex codecs employed in digital cellular service than when doing simple PCM. Another is the extensive processing involved in digital transmission through congested airwaves. A less likely further source of delay is the relatively rare use of satellite circuits by some system operators for backhaul. > The cellphone side is a four-wire circuit; your phone is two wire and > depends on a hybrid to sort it out on your end. If this is done > poorly, no amount of "echo suppression" can compensate without > introducing intolerable artifacts into the conversation. Actually, the cellphone side is a wireless circuit that uses separate radio links for the uplink and downlink. This is analogous to a four- wire telephone circuit, but it is not one. The cellular switch interconnects with the telco facilities in a four-wire circuit, but that is no different from a wireline end office's interconnection. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 20:43:19 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Rapid Rise in U.S. Mobile Telephone Usage - Survey WASHINGTON, May 20 (Reuters) - Americans used about 456 billion minutes on their mobile telephones last year, up 76 percent over 2000, as revenue jumped 24 percent to $65 billion, said a new industry survey released on Monday. While the average monthly minutes of use rose to 385 minutes from 266 minutes, or 44.7 percent, the average monthly bill rose just 4.6 percent to $47.37 from $45.27, according to the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Assocation. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=27254066 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 21:46:58 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: New Hotmail Account Information Causes Confusion Edupage, May 20, 2002 A new feature of the Hotmail e-mail program allows users to see all of their options for sharing of personal data. The feature was added, according to Microsoft representatives, to give users full access to their account settings. However, many Hotmail users have been surprised to learn that their accounts were set to opt them in to certain kinds of promotions and data sharing. Although Microsoft asserts that it has not changed anyone's settings and has not modified its privacy policy, some users insist otherwise. Analyst David Ferris said users whose options were set to share data had probably agreed to that and were confused by the terms of agreement for their accounts. He applauded Microsoft for giving users access to the information and the option to change it. PCWorld, 17 May 2002 http://www.idg.net/ic_863486_1794_9-10000.html Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 22:13:37 -0400 From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) Subject: More Businesses Want to Give You Information > National Corporation is seeking 5-6 Business reps per state to make > $8,000-$25,000 PLUS a month. ... > This is not MLM, or franchising. ... > Call 1-877-386-8389 24 hours a day to see and hear all the BENEFITS, And > possibly set up a Phone interview. ------------------------------ From: Saaby@MyRealBox.com (Saab Guy) Subject: Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI Date: 20 May 2002 23:10:07 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ > Do you have a reference for this claim? > I can't detect that from scanning the info at www.TheNeighborhood.com. I didn't catch it right at first either, go to: https://www.mci.com/localsignup/jspHelp/benefitDescription.html#unlimited_ld It seems to have all the little info windows for the Java rollovers, or so I suppose, well scroll down to "Unlimited Neighbor-to-Neighbor calls" it says: Neighbor-to-Neighbor lets you call any other Neighborhood, or MCI Local customer, at no extra charge. These Neighbor-to-Neighbor calls are automatic - you don't need to give out the names and numbers of the people you call Make your long distance calls from home any time, any day of the week ... continuing on down we find that ... Unlimited Neighbor-to-Neighbor calls Neighbor-to-Neighbor lets you call any other Neighborhood, or MCI Local customer, at no extra charge These Neighbor-to-Neighbor calls are automatic - you don't need to give out the names and numbers of the people you call Make your long distance calls from home any time, any day of the week Low long distance rate for all calls outside of The Neighborhood: Call anyone in the U.S. who is not enrolled in The Neighborhood or MCI local service for 7cents per minute - includes state-to-state, in-state and local toll calls Rates apply to calls you make day or night, weekday or weekend Rates exclude Federal Universal Service Fee. Additional state-specific fees apply. CA residents pay 5c a minute for local toll calls. So yeah, as I understand it it is unlimited long distance to other neighborhood members or people with MCI for local, thats it ... anyone want to call and ask?? Ryan ------------------------------ From: onceoffoffer@offers.com.jp Subject: Surfing On the Computers at Work? Just How Safe Are You? Organization: blah Reply-To: Surfsec@whatyouneedtoknow.com Date: Tuesday, 21 May 2002 23:15:57 -0600 Do you surf the internet and send E-mail at work? Your work PC will be full of evidence. It is becoming common in the workplace for companies to copy and investigate the contents of workers computers out of hours -- without your consent or knowledge. This is perfectly legal and it is happening now! Your job could be at risk, what would happen to you if you lost your job? People like you are losing their jobs right now because of their Internet activities in America and the UK. According to an APBNews report, 73.5% of all companies admit they "record and review their employees' communications and activities on the job." Download NOW -- http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/go.shtml?A657037+ There is no need for you to play Russian roulette with your job, family, car, property and everything else that depends on it! Act now! We can help, Evidence Eliminator can protect you from the dangers of the Internet! Download today with no risk, guaranteed. Act now! And transform your computer into a safe, clean and faster machine! Download NOW -- http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/go.shtml?A657037+ Do you have an ex-spouse or ex-partner with a grudge against you, have you been "Grassed"? Has anyone ever put a floppy disk in your computer? Is someone after your job? Can you honestly say that you really know for sure what may have been accidentally downloaded or purposefully hidden on your PC? If you have a business, protect your workplace and computers with Evidence Eliminator. Don't get investigated -- get protected! Download NOW -- http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/go.shtml?A657037+ Evidence Eliminator is proven to defeat the exact same forensic software as used by the US Secret Service, Customs Department and Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). Download NOW -- http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/go.shtml?A657037+ It is a proven fact ... routine Forensic Analysis equipment such as EnCase and F.R.E.D. used by Private and Business Investigators, Law-Enforcement and others, can recover evidence from parts of your hard drive that you thought were empty, parts that you had cleaned. Download NOW -- http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/go.shtml?A657037+ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I included this spam in this issue because of my own curiosity on exactly how they are doing something different (for example) than merely washing (and following up with bleaching) the /tmp files on your hard drive; the indexes to same; making sure the internet history/filename completion things are all removed; cookies are all gone, etc. The America On Line 'washing machine' (which they were giving away free a couple months ago) not only removes all those things above, but also offers to 'bleach' the shitty load seven or ten times as needed by overwriting the 'clean' disk then washing it again several times. What more needs to be done than that? I should put this formula here for everyone to copy. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Anonymous on Request Subject: Re: Best Way to Keep Children Safe on the Net Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 14:26:20 GMT Organization: ATT Broadband Babu Mengelepouti wrote: > On Fri, 3 May 2002 11:34:59 -0500, Patrick Townson wrote: >> There are so many stories in the media lately about children and sex >> things. One of the big things in recent years has been demands on >> librarians and schools to have filters on the Internet connection in >> the school, so that kids won't be able to see much of the net. We >> know the problems with that approach. There is no such thing as a >> computerized filter that will cover all the angles while not stepping >> on good, valid web sites/news, etc. Nothing takes the place of good >> human judgment. > > [snip] > Great to see you back in the saddle again, and stirring the pot of > controversy as before. Ditto. > There are some major problems with this approach. [snip] > I think there's a pretty simple solution. It's an adult world, and the > Internet is an adult place. If you don't believe that your kids are > mature enough to handle that reality, and you don't care to supervise > them, then don't allow your kids online at all. [snip] FWIW, my policy is that my child only visits web sites I've already seen, and I have a Linux firewall that cuts out any attempt to visit something I haven't approved. With a default policy of "Deny", only sites I explicitly enter are allowed. It's a lot more work than you'd think, but it's the only solution I'm comfortable with. Bill Horne PGP key: http://pgp.dtype.org:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xB1D7BB90 ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Last Laugh! Another Worldcom Long-distance Horror Story Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 22:41:08 UTC Organization: XOme Rather amusingly told: Fair use: "So let's get this right, we argued. Unless we'd previously run up a barenaked, full price phone bill of hundreds of dollars of calls in a few days -- and people only enroll with MCI Worldcom to avoid such tariffs -- we couldn't be reprieved? "'That's the policy of the High Toll Department. And it looks like you have no such bills' "Admit it, it's creative. As we pointed this out: "'So it's like, you're fitted up on a murder rap. But unless you can provide evidence of previous unconfessed murders, you're going to stay in the clink?' "'That's the policy of the High Toll Department,' he confirmed. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not sure I understand this one. I mean, MCI is well known for their high rates and hidden charges, which they refer to as their low rates and straight forward billing, but how about some background on this if you know it. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #259 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 23 22:01:31 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA05105; Thu, 23 May 2002 22:01:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 22:01:31 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205240201.WAA05105@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #260 TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 May 2002 22:01:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 260 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Jay Hennigan) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (John Higdon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Hudson Leighton) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (John R. Levine) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea (Stanley Cline) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea (John McHarry) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea (Joe Lindstrom) Re: Echo With Cell Phones (John Higdon) Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? (Robert A. Fink, M. D.) Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (Steven Lichter) Boot-up Relationship to Disconnects (Robert A. Fink, M. D.) Re: Last Laugh! Another Worldcom Long-Distance Horror Story (Ed Ellers) Re: Last Laugh! Another Worldcom Long-Distance Horror Story (Tom Betz) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jay@west.net (Jay Hennigan) Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Organization: Disgruntled Postal Workers Against Gun Control Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 23:08:53 GMT On Mon, 20 May 2002 11:29:21 -0400, Ed Ellers wrote: > John Higdon wrote: >> Besides, radar detectors were around first. > You should know better than that. Part 15 unintentional radiators > (such as superhet receivers) aren't allowed to cause interference, and > have to be shut down if they do. You should know better than that. :-) Part 15 intentional radiators (such as "speedpass" pay-at-the-pump interrogators) must accept any interference they receive, including that which causes undesired operation. If the radar detector's local oscillator causes interference to a licensed service, you're correct. The pay-at-the-pump transponders are themselves part 15 devices and as such not subject to protection from interference. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > The FCC should realize radar detectors *already, and always have been* > a violation of the communications laws. You are entitled to *listen* > to almost any radio band anytime (you 'listen' in this case when the > radar detector apparatus 'listens' for the presence of police radar), > but you are not permitted to act upon, or benefit from *what you hear* > on the radio*, especially a police transmission. You act upon or benefit > from the transmission which was not intended for yourself when you > reduce your automobile speed or otherwise watch for police activity in > the immediate area. You benefit by not getting a speeding ticket or > being taken to jail. The predictable result of a driver "hearing" police radar would be for that driver to ensure that he is obeying the law. For it to be a violation of the law to obey the law is somewhat of a catch-22. There was a case a while back of some folks who sat around the bend from a police radar speed trap holding signs reading "30 MPH - Radar!!" where they were cited for interfering with a police officer. They were found not guilty because their actions were encouraging motorists to obey the law and as such could not be interfering with the legitimate duties of police. One should always obey traffic laws. Especially so when energy is present in certain portions of the microwave spectrum. > I suppose if you could convince the authorities > that you were merely listening out of intellectual curiosity to the > signals and that you did not act upon what you heard (did not slow > down your driving speed) and did not benefit from what you heard (that > is, did not care if you were taken away to jail), then I would guess > you could have a radar detector device and use it lawfully. A burglar using a scanner to know if he's tripped a silent alarm would be a different case, as the signals are being used in the commission of a crime. But the user of a radar detector is using it as a reminder to avoid commiting crimes. Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Administration - jay@west.net NetLojix Communications, Inc. - http://www.netlojix.com/ WestNet: Connecting you to the planet. 805 884-6323 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 16:36:32 -0700 Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.258.10@telecom-digest.org, Stretch wrote: > Most radio receivers use a technique called superheterodyne, which > involves generating a frequency similar to the one being recieved, and > using the interference between the two as an "amplifier" of sorts. I'm > not an RF guru, but I bet any ham could explain it better. Radiated products of reception from these receivers are incidental, not intended. As such, they are very faint, having to meet strict FCC guidelines for type acceptance. If they are interfering with data equipment, there is a serious design flaw in that data equipment and it needs to be dealt with by the manufacturer of that device. If these receivers are interfering with some wireless aspect of the POS system, too bad. That unlicensed wireless data transmission is subject to the same "can't interfere with other services; must accept interference from other devices" rules that govern every other Part 68 device. Unlicensed wireless operation gets no regulatory protection in deployment, even if it belongs to a big oil company! John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 19:33:16 -0500 Organization: MRRP In article , John Higdon wrote: (snip) > I would want to see some very convincing data that the miniscule > radiation from a radar detector's local oscillator interferes with POS > data equipment. > I look at this complaint in the same light as the nonsense that > cellphones can cause fires and explosions at gas stations. Without > some sort of compelling evidence backing up these urban legend events, > we could end up with the war of mythical disturbances and interactions > firmly encoded into legislation and regulation. BTW: one of the local gas stations chains puts out so much RF from I assume their cash registers, that I know when I a within a block of them just by the noise from my Ham radio. They don't have the RF pay system Hudson http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: 23 May 2002 09:47:10 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I would want to see some very convincing data that the miniscule > radiation from a radar detector's local oscillator interferes with POS > data equipment. Subsequent articles reported that there was one moderately popular model that interfered, but the manufacturer quickly redesigned it so the ones they're making now don't. It's a tempest in a teapot. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 04:12:06 -0400 Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org On 21 May 2002 23:54:25 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: > sender. The ISPs that do provide static IP addresses generally allow > them outbound port-25. Earthlink does not. Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 23:49:54 GMT Walter Dnes wrote: > On Mon, 20 May 2002 01:55:40 -0400, Jack, > wrote: >> Still, people may have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use >> an ISP's mail server ... > Otto von Bismarck once said that a man who states he believes an > idea "in principle" has no intention whatsover of implementing it. I'm > getting rather tired of the bleeding-heart liberal types who wring their > hands over the spam problem, but yell and scream about anybody who tries > to do something about the problem. You may view some of the > self-defense measures against spam as evil. But they're the lesser of > two evils, versus doing nothing. Deal with it. I love the Bismark quote. Sounds a bit like Mark Twain or Amborse Bierce. On the other hand, I feel like puking on you crypto-Nazis calling everyone who advocates an opinion slighty differing from your own a "bleeding heart liberal." The opposite of liberal is illiberal. Deal with it. "T'is sport to hoist the engineer on his own petard." Name calling aside, there are points to be made on multiple sides of this issue. ISPs need to contol spam from networks they are responsible for, but there are also legitimate reasons for running one's own mail server. It is more difficult, but not impossible, to do the former while allowing the latter. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 18:11:57 -0600 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. On Wed, 22 May 2002 18:32:17 -0400 (EDT), Richard D G Cox wrote: >> I don't think he was saying he should be able to connect to any mail >> server he wants. He wants to connect to one he is authorized to use. >> There is a big difference. > There is indeed. But how does the network administrator KNOW that the > server he is trying to connect to, is one that he is authorised to use? > What authority has he -- or can he produce? OK, I'm the one who started this thread and we've gotten a little off the track, so let me try to restate this. I have a DSL link and a few servers operating in my basement. I host 24 domain names, many of which are "vanity" domain names being used primarily for email purposes. For example, and I'll use a real-life example since it's already listed on several websites anyways (and thus this isn't likely to increase his incoming spam all that much), my friend Tommy Albelin has registered "albelin.com" and I host it - his email services, his web services, his DNS services, the works. If you send fanmail to "tommy@albelin.com", the MX records point to my mail server. The question that was raised was this: some ISP's block port 25 unless it's a request to relay through their OWN servers. This prevents Tommy from sending mail via mail.albelin.com, which resolves to *MY* IP address and *MY* server. Yes, he has authorization to use this server. He has to POP-before-SMTP, but once he's met that requirement, he can send mail "from: tommy@albelin.com" "to: hockeyfan@bourgeoismail.com" via my server. I've been asked "well, why not just have him send it through his own ISP's SMTP server?" I can think of three problems right off the bat: 1) Security. Granted, a packet sniffer can sniff anything, but it's a LOT easier for some snoopy sysadmin at Tommy's ISP to see what he's sending if it goes through their email server than if he bypasses it and goes straight to mine. 2) Some ISP's (perhaps many?) won't permit this. For example, if he sends a message "from: tommy@albelin.com" "to: telecom@telecom-digest.org", that the ISP's mail servers are responsible for. He would have to switch to using his "talbelin@jerseyispname.com" account to send mail, in which case we've defeated the entire purpose of having his own domain name. 3) Many (most?) ISP's have relatively low limits in terms of the SIZE of an email message that you wish to move through their server (either SMTP relay or POP3 storage). Typically, 5,000,000 bytes seems to be quite common. Tommy and I trade *LARGE* files from time to time - 20 to 30 megabytes at a throw. Without being able to access my server DIRECTLY, he'd be up a creek. (And no, we're not trading illegal MP3 files, though some of the files ARE in MP3 format, heh heh). Similarly, he also has need to send large files to other recipients hosted by other servers (who also allow large attachments). As part of the service I provide for him, I'm quite willing to relay these large attachments -- but the point is that he needs access to my port 25 to do this. If I have to use another port, that means setting up a second mail server, because my existing server will only monitor one port at a time, and it must be able to also continue receiving (port 25) SMTP mail from other sources. I hope I've clarified this a little bit. This situation may seem a bit unusual but it really isn't all that unusual at all, and is becoming more common. > If you want an ISP to validate credentials and provide access for one > specific user to one specified SMTP server that they are "authorised" > to use, that's fine too ... but that takes skill and effort and neither > of those come for free. Are you prepared to pay the REAL cost of that? They shouldn't be blocking his use of port 25 on a remote server in the first place. In Tommy's case, they don't -- he has no complaints (I think his ISP is Comcast -- whoever the cable company is down in Newark), but I've had a few OTHER customers who've had to switch ISP's because of their blocking port 25 (and refusing to stop blocking). For the record, if anyone's reading this in the Calgary area, both Nucleus and Cadvision (now Telus) get my thumbs up. NetZero gets a thumbs-down. :-) >> You know, I'm trying to figure out how this is any different from a local >> telephone company saying "you can't use any long distance company except >> ours." Well, with one big exception -- an ISP isn't a common carrier. > Big difference. With Telcos, customers (usually) PAY for Long > Distance. Email, on the other hand, more usually comes postage-due. > The only benefit an ISP gets from insisting you do not use other mail > servers, is that they do not get blamed for the likely abuse that WILL > occur if they allow access (generally) elsewhere. A growing number of ISP's are co-operating with blacklist organizations and informing them of the range of IP's in their dial-up pools, which are then added to a separate blacklist database. Those mail servers with no actual need to accept direct-to-MX mail from dial-up users (I would be an exception) can simply block them based on this database lookup. (I, on the other hand, can't do this or I risk blocking my legitimate customers, so I wind up having to accept a higher volume of spam). >> A few stunts like this, however, and ISP's could suddenly find themselves >> the target of increased government regulation. > If certain ISPs continue to allow abuse from their networks, then THEY > are likely to find themselves on the receiving end of government > regulation. (Are you listening, US Sprint?) Particularly, right now, > in China, since the Chinese government discovered just how extensively > their IP addresses are blocked worldwide as a result of their failing > to curb abuse. It just seems to me that taking this block-port-25 approach is rather heavy-handed, akin to swatting a fly with a jackhammer. Yes, you curb abuse, but you also curb the usefulness of the service you offer. And it WILL cost an ISP customers -- but I guess what you're saying is that by FAILING to take this approach, they'll lose even more. >> The big problem with e-mail today is that most users have no way to reject >> it until it's already in their mailbox. > Again, everything is possible but there is a cost and that means a price. > If you research www.spamcop.net you will find that exactly the service > you want is available, and at a very *modest* price! No thanks -- these are the same cretins who blacklisted *ME* because one idiot reported me as a spammer, after receiving a message in a mailing list much like the Telecom Digest, in which he had to DOUBLE-OPT-INTO. He didn't even bother reading the actual message, he just flipped it to Spamcop and said "this guy's a spammer". And Spamcop never bothered to ASK ME about it. Hey, I'm all in favour of strong efforts towards stopping spam, but these guys seem more interested in relishing the "power" and less interested in the "responsibility" side of the ledger -- and they refuse to clean up their messes. On Wed, 22 May 2002 18:32:17 -0400 (EDT), Fred R. Goldstein wrote: > If you run your own SMTP, you can do your own filtering; again, many > Unixheads do. And there are "blackhole" lists out there which suggest > which originators are most likely spammers. This tends to be tricky > to administer -- you think it's easy to stay ahead of the spammers? -- > which is one reason many end users don't want to do their own peer to > peer mail. Agreed -- I filter against four different anti-spam databases and that catches about 90% of it. Alas, that still lets 10% through. As I mentioned above, I could probably get this down to 2%-3% if I had the freedom to also filter against dial-up accounts - but in choosing to operate the way I do (and allow direct-to-MX SMTP transmission directly from my clients, who're using dial-up type accounts with dynamic IP's), I have to accept that increased risk. But the blackholes do a pretty darned good job. I'm pleased to recommend: http://www.ordb.org http://www.spamsites.org http://www.spamhaus.org http://www.spews.org / From the desk of Joey Lindstrom / "Everybody lies, innocent or guilty. Each lies for their own reasons." / --Everything I Need To Know I Learned From Babylon 5 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 21:48:20 -0700 Subject: Re: Echo With Cell Phones From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.259.8@telecom-digest.org, Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > Actually, the cellphone side is a wireless circuit that uses separate > radio links for the uplink and downlink. This is analogous to a four- > wire telephone circuit, but it is not one. The point is that it behaves like one, in essence carrying separate transmit and receive paths from the wire line originating switch. I'm well aware that wireless uses no wires. We in the industry refer to anything that behaves like a four-wire circuit (regardless of the actual transmission medium) as a four-wire circuit when discussing its characteristics. Fiber isn't wire, either, but it still carries data that acts as a four-wire equivalent. Incidentally, there is one other source of echo that I have discovered in cellphone conversations: the wireless phone. It has no electrical path between transmit and receive, but it has an acoustical one. Some users turn the volume up to a point where the microphone picks up sound from the earpiece. With the delays inherent in the digital codec process, an echo develops that is heard by the wire line party. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: Robert A. Fink, M. D. Subject: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 16:04:27 -0700 Organization: Robert A. Fink, M. D., FACS, P. C. Reply-To: rafink@attglobal.net I have posted here before about problems with maintaining v.90 dialup connections (ATTGlobal mainly). A number of possibilities have already been checked out (including testing of the phone lines) and no clear cause has yet been determined. I just noticed (in the past two days), that when my computer is having trouble maintaining a connection (later in the day), and I reboot the machine (WIN98), the connection is fine the next time that I dial up. The computer has 256MB RAM installed, but most of the time, when the standard desktop is running, only about 120MB of RAM is free (I use MemTurbo to monitor the RAM). When the free RAM drops below 100MB, that is when the connection problems appear. The above suggests that something is "hogging" my RAM and that the free RAM is decreasing. My questions: 1. Can this phenomenon interfere with the ability to maintain a dialup connection? 2. How do I access my "startup Group" in order to disable some of the programs which are starting up and which continue to run when not needed? Many thanks, Bob Robert A. Fink, M.D., FACS, P. C. 2500 Milvia Street Suite 222 Berkeley, California 94704-2636 USA Telephone: 510-849-2555 FAX: 510-849-2557 "Ex Tristitia Virtus" ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 23 May 2002 02:11:28 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently dave.garland said: > And if a spammer gets taken out and shot, well, that's a little > harsh, but it's still a win-win situation. As I always say: The only good spammer is a dead one! Have you hunted one down today? (c) I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Roast In Hell Company. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. ------------------------------ From: Robert A. Fink, M. D. Subject: Boot-up Relationship to Disconnects Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 16:57:15 -0700 Organization: Robert A. Fink, M. D., FACS, P. C. Reply-To: rafink@attglobal.net I have posted here before about repeated disconnects from a 56K dialup connection (modem negotiates at between 49333 and 52000). I have had the telco (PacBell) out to check the lines and they are OK (I am currently out of range for DSL and have not yet gone ahead with ISDN). The disconnect problem appears to be time-related, and I had thought that it was traffic-related. Well, there is a new piece to the "puzzle". I have discovered that if I access the Internet immediately after a boot-up, all goes well. The second connection (within the same session) is usually associated with dropped connections. A reboot "fixes" the problem. The RAM seems to "leak" while the machine is running (the machine has 256MB installed, but at boot-up, there is only about 140MB free, and this decreases over time to about 100MB. When the free RAM drops below 100, that is when I seem to have the disconnect problems. Using MemTurbo, I have defragmented the RAM and even "scrubbed' it, but it appears that only a reboot fixes the disconnection problems. I have elimiated from my Startup list all programs which are unnecessary, but there are still a few more than I will kill as I try to troubleshoot this further. Do the above "symptoms" help any to make a "diagnosis"? Best, Bob Robert A. Fink, M.D., FACS, P. C. 2500 Milvia Street Suite 222 Berkeley, California 94704-2636 USA Telephone: 510-849-2555 FAX: 510-849-2557 "Ex Tristitia Virtus" ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Another Worldcom Long-distance Horror Story Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 18:59:56 -0400 PAT, the TELECOM Digest Editor, noted: > I am not sure I understand this one. I mean, MCI is well known for their > high rates and hidden charges, which they refer to as their low rates and > straight forward billing, but how about some background on this if you know > it." As best I can tell from reading the Register story (actually at http://www.theregus.com/content/28/25007.html), The Register moved its San Francisco office across town, and somehow their MCI discount plan didn't get moved over to their new number, causing them to run up a massive bill with frequent overseas calls, and raising a red flag with MCI's fraud department. When the author called to try to clear up the matter and claimed that the bill was excessive, not only could the fraud department not fix the billing, but they demanded proof that this was a normal calling pattern or else they would cut off service. (Which makes some sense -- I guess some people might run up a big bill over a few days and then try to welch on it,) And The Register couldn't prove that this was a normal calling pattern because they hadn't had such a big bill, since before the move they were on a discount plan! Dunno why MCI wouldn't accept a previous bill showing a similar calling pattern but at lower rates ... ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Another Worldcom Long-distance Horror Story Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 02:45:48 UTC Organization: XOme Quoth Tom Betz in news:telecom20.259.15@telecom-digest.org: > "'That's the policy of the High Toll Department,' he confirmed. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not sure I understand this one. I > mean, MCI is well known for their high rates and hidden charges, which > they refer to as their low rates and straight forward billing, but > how about some background on this if you know it. PAT] First, let me correct the URL: The guy moved, and even though he had been promised that he'd keep his low International rate, Worldcom charged him bust-out retail. Then, seeing an unusually large bill, they turned off his long-distance service, requiring him to show a previous bust-out retail bill (which he had never had, because he had a bargain rate plan) before they would turn it back on -- or to just pay the balance right then and there on the bust-out retail bill. He tells it so much better than I could, that people would be better served just to read it. I love this paragraph, him talking to the High Toll Department droid: "I tried the hippy goodness trip. 'You were born an honest man, and raised as an honest man, and now you sit in a call center, with a bogus bill, asking me to prise my ass open a little wider, so you can steal my money?'" ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #260 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 24 00:37:03 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA07516; Fri, 24 May 2002 00:37:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 00:37:03 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205240437.AAA07516@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #261 TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 May 2002 00:37:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 261 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Denis Mcmahon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (John Higdon) Re: Looking for a Needle in a Haystack! Help! (EM Handler) Re: Looking for a Needle in a Haystack! Help! (Jack) Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI (Stan Cline) Vanity Facts (Melvin Broekaart {at} tollfree-l@yahoogroups.com) Re: Where to Buy Nortel Phones for Home Use (Claire Pieterek) Re: Where to Buy Nortel Phones for Home Use (EM Handler) PRI Service (vid2001) Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? (Matthew Black) Warning Regarding ECG Communications' New Minimum Usage Charge! (Jack) Fight Spam or Promote it? (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Can WorldCom Dig Out? (Eric Friedebach) Re: Cops Fret About Being Targets of Cellphone Surveillance (H. Leighton) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Denis Mcmahon Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 02:20:32 +0100 Organization: E-Menu Ltd Reply-To: denisrt@pickaxe.net TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to John Higdon by writing: > The FCC should realize radar detectors *already, and always have been* > a violation of the communications laws. You are entitled to *listen* > to almost any radio band anytime (you 'listen' in this case when the > radar detector apparatus 'listens' for the presence of police radar), > but you are not permitted to act upon, or benefit from *what you hear* > on the radio*, especially a police transmission. Hi Pat, We had new case law on this in the UK recently -- the radar detector detects the presence of a transmission, it does not detect the content. The judgment was that of the Queens Bench Divisional Court on 29th January 1998, the Court concluded that the radar transmission was not communicating a 'message' and therefore equipment designed to detect the presence of the transmission could not decode any such message. Rgds, Denis McMahon / +44 7802 468949 / denis@pickaxe.net sulfnbk is not a virus, see the symantec virus encyclopaedia! Now restocking killfile, new entrants welcome: trolls, spam, xpost cascades, OT ads, top posters & terminally clueless! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 19:41:08 -0700 Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.260.3@telecom-digest.org, Hudson Leighton wrote: > BTW: one of the local gas stations chains puts out so much RF from I > assume their cash registers, that I know when I a within a block of > them just by the noise from my Ham radio. > They don't have the RF pay system So that means that people's credit and debit card info is flying about in the air as well. Recently, it was discovered the some folks were sitting out in a Best Buy parking lot free scooping up the non-encrypted data from the wireless cash registers, gleaning a cornucopia of credit card data. A few days ago, my business partner drove into a car dealership and turned on his laptop. To his astonishment, the dealer's LAN was on the air and fully in the clear. Not only that, the hosts were not password-enabled. Had he been so inclined, he could have snooped through, captured, altered, or deleted any and all of the customer database. The lesson here is that you now use your credit or debit card in a POS device at your peril. For all you know, your card number is flying through the air and being intercepted by not just one, but multiple thieves. Sometimes I wonder about the mental horsepower of some of these systems' designers and the judgment-impaired merchants who put their faith in them. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ Reply-To: EM Handler From: EM Handler Subject: Re: Looking for a Needle in a Haystack! Help! Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 00:54:25 GMT Here is another collection of links that you may find useful: http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm to solve your problem. Kim Fuller wrote in message news:telecom20.259.4@telecom-digest.org: > I am trying to locate some info on a class someone I work with is > interested in possibly having some employees attend. He is not sure of > the name exactly, but it's something like "Telephone 101" and it's a > one-day course in Sacramento. You may or may not be able to assist me, > but when I came across your website, I thought it was worth a try. I do > not know who hosts the training or really anything else. I would > appreciate any information you could provide that would point me in > the right direction. Thank you! ------------------------------ From: Adams, John (Jack) Subject: Re: Looking for a Needle in a Haystack!Help! (Telephone 101) Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:57:20 -0400 I'm not sure about a one day course in Sacramento, but TRA and Telcordia offer quite a selection of dial tone digest courses in a variety of formats, including instructor led. http://www.800teachme.com/ (Telcordia's web site for training) http://www.tra.com/ (Telecommunications Research Associates) Hope this helps. > I am trying to locate some info on a class someone I work with is > interested in possibly having some employees attend. He is not sure of > the name exactly, but it's something like "Telephone 101" and it's a > one-day course in Sacramento. You may or may not be able to assist me, > but when I came across your website, I thought it was worth a try. I do > not know who hosts the training or really anything else. I would > appreciate any information you could provide that would point me in > the right direction. Thank you! ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 04:10:19 -0400 Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org On 20 May 2002 23:10:07 -0700, Saaby@MyRealBox.com (Saab Guy) wrote: > Unlimited Neighbor-to-Neighbor calls Neighbor-to-Neighbor lets you > call any other Neighborhood, or MCI Local customer, at no extra charge > These Neighbor-to-Neighbor calls are automatic - you don't need to That is for the $29.99 (in Atlanta anyway) "Neighborhood Choice" plan. The $49.99 (in Atlanta anyway) "Neighborhood Complete" plan does indeed include ALL domestic LD calls. See the difference here: http://www.theneighborhood.com/res_local_service/jsps/join_plans.jsp?state=GA&Bus_Ind=RES&wireSolution=Y&group=012&cos=NoCos&ANI=7703950000 Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 15:48:55 +0200 From: Melvin Broekaart Subject: Vanity Facts TollFree Moderator's Note: Please copy your replies to tollfree-l. For a Dutch client of mine I'm looking for facts, figures and graphs as proof of the possitive effect of a tollfree vanity number. Vanity calling is slowly becoming well known in The Netherlands and decision-makers are looking for hard evidence before ordering their number. If you can provide me with any information, please send it to my business adress: melvin@informatienummer.nl Thanks, Melvin Broekaart ------------------------------ From: pieterek@spamcop.net Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 07:03:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Where to Buy Nortel Phones For Home Use john63401@yahoo.com asked about this ... john63401, I suggest you check out Rat Shack. If you're lucky enough to find a discontinued model on sale, that IMHO is the best, since it will be the one at the best price. Otherwise, they are a little pricy, but they are very reliable. I have had the same one (sorry -- don't know what model -- it's in storage ATM) for 5 years with no problems. It is a discontinued model that I bought on sale for ~$90. It has caller ID, call waiting caller ID, a digital answering machine with multiple mailboxes, 2 line capability, and more features than I will probably ever use. Good luck! Claire Pieterek pieterek@spamcop.net ------------------------------ Reply-To: EM Handler From: EM Handler Subject: Re: Where to Buy Northern Telecom Phones for Home Use? Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 00:57:51 GMT Try http://www.intelevoice.com . Also, here is another collection of links that you may find useful: http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm wrote in message news:telecom20.259.5@telecom-digest.org: > I'd like to buy a nice NT phone with Call ID and answering machine > built in ... for my home office. > Any idea what model I should get ... and where to order one via mail > order? > I want something better built then the stuff you see at Walmart. ------------------------------ From: ramachandranvidya@hotmail.com (vid2001) Subject: PRI Service Date: 23 May 2002 07:41:31 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ In our T1 world, I hear the term PRI quite a bit. What is this? What are the advantages of a PRI T1 vs a traditional Voice T1? ------------------------------ From: lb_centaur@yahoo.com (Matthew Black) Subject: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? Date: 23 May 2002 15:00:13 GMT Organization: California State University, Long Beach With all the fancy features found in current cell phones, why can't someone build a phone that keeps an accurate tally of plan minutes used? I'm speaking of a phone that tracks both peak and off peak minutes. These phones have a built-in clock that synchronizes with the service provider when powered on. My plan has 250 peak and 1250 off peak minutes. Why can't phones be programmed with the peak and off peak schedules? I know some people own VCRs that still blink "12:00" because they can't figure out technology. For these folks, the default phone behavior could track total minutes only. Given the sophistication of most cell phone users, many would gladly spend a few minutes to program their peak/off peak schedule. This would also benefit my provider because I wouldn't have to call in to check my account status using non-plan minutes. matthew ------------------------------ From: Jack Subject: Warning Regarding ECG Communications' New Minimum Usage Charge! Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 12:14:08 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com If you have visited the abtolls.com site to pick a long distance carrier, you may have selected ECG Communications. If you EVER have less than $10 in usage each month then you should know that ECG is now imposing a monthly fee of $4.95 for all accounts billing LESS than 10 dollars in long distance usage in any given month. So if you bill $0 to $9.99 they will just add $4.95 to your bill. My mother got a bill with this charge added, but since there was no prior notification, the ECG representative took the $4.95 off her account this one time but we had to cancel the account to avoid further billings (I understand they tried to notify customers by e-mail, but my mother is elderly and doesn't have e-mail, and besides that, everyone knows that e-mail isn't always reliable -- messages can and do get lost in transit, especially now that some ISP's are using hyperactive filters). So now I have to shop for a new carrier for my mother, and the biggest criteria is that it should have no minimum or monthly usage charges (and should be available in Verizon Michigan exchanges). Any suggestions? In my personal opinion, what ECG has done seems like a real scam -- they probably had their reasons but from the consumer's end it seems really scummy. The company originally promoted its service as having no monthly minimums or usage charges, and then after a year or so of use with no problems, suddenly they switch everything. To me, this sort of aggravation is probably what drives some people to a plan like MCI's "The Neighborhood", despite the high monthly charge. Even if you don't make enough calls in a month that you would always save money, the fact that (hopefully) you won't get hit with nasty surprises with no advance notice (and I realize I'm making a big assumption here, but it's probably one that most potential customers would make) may be what drives some to sign up. Anyway, I personally will never recommend ECG Communications to anyone again. I don't know what happened that made them decide to impose this charge, but it just seems like a scummy trick to me. Jack The return e-mail address in this message will vaporize once the spammers find it. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 11:38:18 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Fight Spam or Promote It? A while back I posted a message to telecom-digest; today I received this: > << IMPORTANT INFORMATION! >> > This is an automated message. > The email you sent (copied below) requires confirmation before being > delivered. To confirm that you sent the email, please simply reply to > this email (you don't need to edit or include anything other than the > current subject line). This need be done only once -- as soon as your > address has been verified as belonging to a real person, all future > email will simply be delivered. > --- Original Message Follows --- > This email account is protected by: > Active Spam Killer (ASK) V2.1.beta1 - (C) 2001-2002 by Marco Paganini > For more information, visit http://www.paganini.net/ask > --- Original Message Follows --- > Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 01:54:23 -0500 > From: "Gordon S. Hlavenka" > Subject: AT&T Outage Makes "Top Ten" List The return address points to Keith (mumble), someone I don't know and certainly didn't mail a copy of the post to. Furthermore, if Keith receives the Digest by email, it would arrive as a concatenation of many messages with a "Digest" header. So, my question is: Is this just a case of Keith having his anti-spam software misconfigured, or is it a particularly sneaky way for a spammer to harvest "good" addresses from c.d.t? Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com My hovercraft is full of eels. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, it wasn't me. I think he must be misconfigured. *I* am the sender of the mail, so Keith should be asking me to verify, not you. The fact that he asked you means his software reads down through the message looking for things it finds disagreeable, which is fine, I guess, for anti-spam software. But he should have stopped looking for 'From ' or 'From:' once he got past the header information. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 10:46:34 PDT From: Eric Friedebach Reply-To: friedebach@yahoo.com Subject: Can WorldCom Dig Out? Can WorldCom Dig Out? Forbes.com, Dan Ackman, 05.10.02 NEW YORK - WorldCom displays some interesting images on its Web site, including one of an ice-climber deep inside a crevasse. The climber is in a dark and narrow hole, but above there is light. Can WorldCom get there? Thursday, more bad news piled on the embattled telecom company: Moody's Investor Service and Fitch Ratings both downgraded the company's debt to "junk" status amidst concerns that its finances are still deteriorating. The downgrades themselves will increase the company's cost of borrowing. http://www.forbes.com/2002/05/10/0510topnews.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: Cops Fret About Being Targets of Cellphone Surveillance Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 23:12:22 -0500 Organization: MRRP In article , Joe Wineburgh wrote: > Subject: Cops Fret About Being Targets of Cellphone Surveillance > Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 20:20:43 PDT > From: Nick Santucci > Subject: Cell Phones Snoop on Cops (fwd) > Drug gang members are going high tech :) > Forwarded from a law enforcement newsletter > NEW GENERATION CELL PHONE 'AUTO-ANSWER' COULD > TIP OFF POTENTIAL SUSPECTS snip > As stated in the Louisiana State Police Special Bulletin, April 2 > edition: "This is a potentially serious threat to agents especially in > a controlled delivery environment. Always check cell phones to make > sure what kind they are. Be especially careful of Nextel phones when > found and make sure the auto-answer feature is turned off or at least > no one says anything near it that can be heard and tip off a potential > suspect." Maybe taking the batteries out of the cell phone would cure the problem. -Hudson http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #261 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 24 22:22:47 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA24491; Fri, 24 May 2002 22:22:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 22:22:47 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205250222.WAA24491@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #262 TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 May 2002 22:23:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 262 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Interim Approval for Internet Telephone Numbering System (Anne Shroeder) Good News About the 419 Scams From Nigeria (David Chessler) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Mike Lamb) Re: Surfing On the Computers at Work? Just How Safe Are You? (J. McHarry) Re: Wanted: Incoming Call Timer (EM Handler) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea (Al Iverson) Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? (Tom Brown) Help; How Can I Realize Clock Extraction (sunjc) Build Your Own Washing Machine Program (Willis H. Ware) Re: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? (Matthew Black) Re: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? (Barry Margolin) Re: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? (Mickey Ferguson) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Anne Shroeder - Webmaster, Internet Society Subject: Interim Approval for Internet Telephone Numbering System (ENUM) Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 16:14:36 -0400 Reply-To: lance@isoc.org FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 24 May 2002 Interim Approval for Internet Telephone Numbering System (ENUM) Provisioning -- Countries wishing to implement ENUM system may now do so. -- System offers promise of standardized international Voice and Video on IP services. Washington, DC - May 24, 2002 - The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) announce interim approval for a single domain for ENUM, a technology that builds a bridge between the public switched telephone network and the Internet. Voice on IP networks today operate by translating telephone numbers to IP addresses and placing an H.323 or SIP call to the device. The interchange format and translation record has not heretofore been standardized, limiting the possibility of deployment of multi- corporate and international Voice on IP services. Under the ENUM proposal, E.164 numbers can be represented as Internet Domain Names,providing a scalable and standard way to translate the numbers, and opening the way to such services. ITU has begun approving delegations for the purposes of trials. "The lack of an interoperable standard way to turn a telephone number into an IP Address has been one factor limiting the deployment of Voice on IP services internationally", said Leslie Daigle, Chair of the Internet Architecture Board. If desk-mounted computers or servers are given telephone numbers as well as mnemonic names, this system further enables common telephone handsets to place Voice or Video on IP calls to such computers. This is a significant step towards integrating Internet-based services with the global telephone network, and the current agreements between IAB and ITU will allow trials to take place. Patrik Faltstrom, member of the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), said that "the integration of the desktop telephone and computer allows corporations to simplify their internal networks." Roy Blane, Chair of ITU-T's Study Group 2, concurred, saying that "In the long term this protocol may facilitate many new internet services. In the short term, countries wishing to trial the system can begin work on developing it." This interim approval is made possible due to cooperation between ITU, IAB and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). As outlined in the ENUM specification document, RFC 2916, sub-domains from a single domain will be delegated after acceptance by the registries according to the existing assignment of country codes in the telephone address space. Information on how the ENUM registration requests will be processed can be found at http://www.ripe.net/enum/ About ISOC The Internet Society is a non-profit, non-governmental, open membership organization whose worldwide individual and organization members make up a veritable "who's who" of the Internet industry. It provides leadership in technical and operational standards, policy issues, and education. ISOC is the organizational home of the International Engineering Task Force, the Internet Architecture Board, the Internet Engineering Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force - the standards setting and research arms of the Internet community. About the IETF The Internet Engineering Task Force is an international community of network designers, operators,vendors, and researchers concerned with the evolution of the Internet architecture and the smooth operation of the Internet. The definition of the ENUM protocol, as proposed by the IETF can be found at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2916.txt. The IETF is an organized activity of the Internet Society. About ITU The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is a global organization where the public and private sectors cooperate for the development of telecommunications and the harmonization of national telecommunications policies. Study Group 2 of the ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T), where work on ENUM is being carried out, is the Lead Study Group on Service definition, Numbering, Routing and Global Mobility and is responsible for the operational aspects of service provision, networks and performance. More information on the ENUM protocol, and the issues related to it, can be found at http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/worksem/enum/index.html. POC: Patrik Fltstrm Leslie Daigle Scott Bradner Roy Blane Richard Hill Lynn St.Amour *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@www.isoc.org with UNSUBSCRIBE press in the body. [Leave the subject blank.] Please read our Terms of Use Agreement for all discussion lists: http://www.isoc.org/members/discuss/tou.shtml *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 18:10:03 -0400 From: David Chessler Subject: Good News About the 419 Scams From Nigeria. According to "The World", a radio news program from WGBH and the BBC, South African police have arrested about a half-dozen people who have been perpetrating the internet scams (called 419 after the section of the Nigerian criminal code that applies). These are the ones where you are invited to help launder some money for a very high percentage. Anyhow, those arrested were 4 Nigerians, a South African, and someone from Cameroon. However, this didn't clear up the whole problem: I got another offer from the son of a Nigerian political figure who's now on trial for corruption. I don't know why abetting corruption should be an attractive "story" -- I guess it says something about the mindset of these spammer-scammers. This scammer uses Yahoo mail -- the headers are consistent, and there is the little ad at the bottom. ____ ____ David Chessler, Ph.D., President | | | ' David Chessler and Associates |_/ & \_, Economic, Telecommunications, Statistical, ____ and Antitrust Consulting /____\ Phone: +1-301-229-9514 / \ Fax: +1-301-229-3984 dsc69@columbia.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although those arrests were made, I think it was only a drop of water in a very big bucket of same. Those '419 scams' are *so* prevalent, with nearly everyone, it seems, getting in on the act. Either that, or those few people arrested were very, very busy, fast typists. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike Lamb Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 01:52:01 -0400 Organization: Navix Internet Subscribers Huum, I ended up reading this because I've had to do my once every 5 year or so radar detector upgrade. I try to learn and update myself on the latest radar detector news then. And I ended up here, reading. :-) Let me add from being loosely associated with LE and the political end of this, that the assertion that radar detector interference with other devices (oil companies?) is NOT the main reason for wanting restrictions on detectors. Everyone writing here has seemed to overlook the poilitical end of this. (This applies to most everything else also!) Whether one agrees or not, law enforcement and the entire justice system of the US is actually more a business than a public service. If one studies how these institutions are actually ran and mangaged, and especially if one knew the basics of how public is regarded, it can be easily seen that the purpose for regulating and or eliminating detectors has a whole different reason than interference with some other device. In short the public is a customer and the LE/court system is the seller. They sell justice for a price, which ultimately results in the restrictions of our rights, what little we have left, and turning them into priviledges. (BTW 30 years I was taught in school that driving was a right, NOT a priviledge.) In short many in the poilitical system, as well as in related business' sees radar detectors as a hindrance to their profits! Therefore these groups and people seeks further laws to rectify what they deem lower than possible profits, or to maximize profits. In North Carolina, every couple of years there is a renewed effort to ban radar detectors, and every year the margin of defeating this group becomes more narrow. We just went through this last winter, and it was close! While I know some of you may read my post as being off base, or conspiratorial, I say these things from the standpoint of having actually been involved in the political end of this in being an aide to a state rep. (Haven't been recently involved though.) Finally to all of you who may pose the question; How does the oil compaines stand to actually profit from the above, if what I say is true? I 100% guarantee you, that if one could take the time to track down the PACS of ALL companies involved, you would find that these PACS are composed of some of the same people *representing* BOTH or several of the involved compaines, as well as some politicians. Oil companies and insurance companies, as well as banks shares many people, executives sitting on each others' boards. I had the intriguing task of helping track down one such association a few years back, concerning a sponsored/supported state bill. It took 3 of us almost a month to track down all the tie-ins we could find. So the reason any oil company supports this, or any other company, is because of associated PAC members, plus cross assciations of its' board members. The best way to fight such inane, conspiratorial and strawman acts is to focus on the companies supporting such legislation, and then address your public legislatures, *including* your knowledge or disdain for any company and or PACS attempting to manipulate your rights through the actions they are taking. As long as the legislatures understands that the public knows and is addressing the problem, and them *KNOWING* the root cause of the instigators of any such sponsored bill, they are more likely to not lean as favorably to the companies and the sponsored bill. The old addage, "The truth is stranger than fiction." aptly applies in politics. Denis Mcmahon wrote in message news:telecom20.256.6@telecom-digest.org: > Monty Solomon wrote: >> Apparently, ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed an endorsement with >> the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors because >> the 25 million devices in use interfere with high-tech payment systems >> now becoming popular at the gas pump. > Did I get that right? > A radar detector, which is basically a sensitive receiver, screws up > the pumps? > Do we have to turn off our FM radios in petrol stations now? > Sounds like, smells like .... > "Sometimes I wonder about the mental horsepower of some of > these systems' designers and the judgment-impaired merchants who put > their faith in them." Why would they care to what happened to your money, except that they end up with part of it? And how's the average customer to be any wiser regardless to how is information is manipulated or lost; By whom? Cheers, Mike Lamb PS: You gotta think of things from a business standpoint! ;-) John Higdon wrote in message news:telecom20.261.2@telecom-digest.org: > In article telecom20.260.3@telecom-digest.org, Hudson Leighton wrote: >> BTW: one of the local gas stations chains puts out so much RF from I >> assume their cash registers, that I know when I a within a block of >> them just by the noise from my Ham radio. >> They don't have the RF pay system > So that means that people's credit and debit card info is flying about > in the air as well. Recently, it was discovered the some folks were > sitting out in a Best Buy parking lot free scooping up the > non-encrypted data from the wireless cash registers, gleaning a > cornucopia of credit card data. > A few days ago, my business partner drove into a car dealership and > turned on his laptop. To his astonishment, the dealer's LAN was on the > air and fully in the clear. Not only that, the hosts were not > password-enabled. Had he been so inclined, he could have snooped > through, captured, altered, or deleted any and all of the customer > database. > The lesson here is that you now use your credit or debit card in a POS > device at your peril. For all you know, your card number is flying > through the air and being intercepted by not just one, but multiple > thieves. Sometimes I wonder about the mental horsepower of some of > these systems' designers and the judgment-impaired merchants who put > their faith in them. ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Surfing On the Computers at Work? Just How Safe Are You? Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 23:24:47 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I included this spam in this issue > because of my own curiosity on exactly how they are doing something > different (for example) than merely washing (and following up with > bleaching) the /tmp files on your hard drive; the indexes to same; > making sure the internet history/filename completion things are all > removed; cookies are all gone, etc. The America On Line 'washing > machine' (which they were giving away free a couple months ago) not > only removes all those things above, but also offers to 'bleach' the > shitty load seven or ten times as needed by overwriting the 'clean' > disk then washing it again several times. What more needs to be done > than that? I should put this formula here for everyone to copy. PAT] If the worry is about stuff you do on your computer at work, the product is not too useful, no matter what. A company can just use a "sniffer" to look at the traffic on its network and apply the relevant filters. For cleaning guilty files off a hard drive, there are programs to write over the entire drive multiple times with different patterns. I don't think I would trust anything that attempted to preserve anything on the drive. For seriously guilty files, I would follow that up with incinerating the drive down to the slag level. If you are just trying to avoid your network admins finding something on a routine scan, something like the mentioned "washing machine" should do fine. Of course, it would have to be run more often than whatever backups the company runs on your hard drive. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now that I have DSL my computer stays on all the time, and I am likely to be sitting here anytime of day or night. Therefore, I leave my 'washing machine' in the background to run every ten or twelve hours. It comes on that often automatically and washes then bleaches all the stinky, smelly /tmp files, and destroys all the cookies. Yeah, I lose a few 'good cookies', but I guess that is the price I pay. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: EM Handler From: EM Handler Subject: Re: Wanted: Incoming Call Timer Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 00:56:05 GMT Would a contact manager help. ACT! performs this function when using a call control interface with TAPI. Here is another collection of links that you may find useful: http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm Mark Gibson wrote in message news:telecom20.259.3@telecom-digest.org: > I'm looking for a device to allow timing of incoming phone calls on a > computer. Basically it needs to signal the computer when the call is > answered -- to start a timer, and again when the call is terminated (at > either end) -- to stop the timer. This is the only functionality > required. It is on UK phone lines (we use NTL if that makes a > difference). I've search the internet, and the closest thing i've > found is a DIY device called Alltel by Shane Wegner > (http://www.cm.nu/~shane/alltel/) - DTMF decoding is not required. I'm > a bit wary of building devices for phone lines, so does anyone know of > a commerical device I could buy for this purpose. Or alternatively > can someone point me in the direction of phone line information for > the UK. ------------------------------ From: al56g@radparker.com (Al Iverson) Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Organization: Please don't email replies Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 20:23:27 -0500 In article , Fred R. Goldstein wrote: > What you're asking for is the NORMAL type of email that prevailed on > the Internet before the days of the Winsock! The Internet (and its > TCP/IP protocol suite) are inherently peer-to-peer. And so is mail. > The native mail protocol is SMTP, and you send mail end to end without > any involvement in the middle. The mail reader on the end system > reads the mail off of the local spool that the SMTP daemon delivered > it to. > You don't remember this? Hmm, just like you don't remember UUCP? Al Iverson -- http://www.radparker.com -- Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA Support Minnesota Jazz -- Disclaimer: All of my opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 21:43:35 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? Robert A. Fink, M.D. wrote: > I just noticed... When the free RAM drops below 100MB, > that is when the connection problems appear. > The above suggests that something is "hogging" my RAM and that the > free RAM is decreasing. My questions: > 1. Can this phenomenon interfere with the ability to maintain a dialup > connection? If you are using a controller-based modem, the amount of free RAM will have no affect whatsoever on your ability to maintain connections. (Although it may have an affect on your ability to run software which uses the modem -- the connection will stay up as long as the host doesn't drop you for inactivity...) If you are using a "winmodem" (also called, "modem for windows") then most of the modem is actually a piece of software running on your PC. Low memory can adversely affect this software and thus, your connection. This leads to my one point: >>>=========-> Winmodems are crap. If you are non-technical, the easy way to determine whether you have a winmodem is by price; winmodems are generally in the $30-and-under range, often seen as "$9.99 with a $10 rebate". Controller-based modems are generally $50-$100. Whatever you paid for a winmodem, you have been ripped off. Including "$9.99 with a $10 rebate". If your PC was built within the last 3 years or so, and the modem came with it, it's probably a winmodem. > 2. How do I access my "startup Group" in order to disable some of the > programs which are starting up and which continue to run when not > needed? Right-click on the Start button, left-click on "Open", double-click on "Programs", then double-click on "Startup". Or, in Win98/Me, click Start, select Run, and type "msconfig". And get a real modem. Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com My hovercraft is full of eels. ------------------------------ From: kibri@eudoramail.com (Tom Brown) Subject: Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? Date: 23 May 2002 19:58:16 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ kibri@eudoramail.com (Tom Brown) wrote in message news: : I thought I would add to the color conversation that last weekend I snagged a Salmon Pink Western Electric Trimilne Phone. I thought I had every color emaginable, only to find another one that I did not have. Toward the end of Western Electric, it seems that WE/ATT came up with some very different colors to enhance design acceptability. I have noted that the later colors include a dark blue (vs liughter blue of older phones) a salmon Pink (ve rose beige), I also recall a 'pea' green that looked like a washed out avocado and even a charcoal (blue?), Can anyone add any other colors to this list? I forgot to add an alternative red (brighter than the classic deep red). What have I missed? Thanks Folks! Tom (Please no spam) ------------------------------ From: sunjc@0451.com (sunjc) Subject: Help, How Can I Realize Clock Extraction Date: 23 May 2002 20:42:48 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, I am developing the E1 tester. How can I realize clock extraction from the HDB3 signals. Please tell me the method or some chips which can realize it. Thanks, Best regards. ------------------------------ Reply-To: willis@rand.org Subject: Wire up Your Own Washing Machine Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 13:37:56 -0700 From: Willis H. Ware >>> ... I should put this formula here for everyone to copy. PAT] YES, pls do. I looked all over the Evidence ... web site and never did find out how much it cost. I did discover that it is not yet available in box form. Willis Ware RAND Santa Monica [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is not that hard, really. You just 'cd' to the directory where the internet temp files are stored and then delete those files. Then do the same thing in the directory where the cookies are stored. But be careful; there are some index files there which are locked and cannot be erased when the computer is running. It helps to write that little program in DOS and then put it in your startup file or your shutdown area. You have to do the cleaning out there either *before* Windows comes to life or *after* it has started to die, in order to bust those indexes as well. If you don't zap and bleach them, then you might as well not do it at all. In the process of erasing each file, you have to tell the computer to not only erase each one, but also to scribble again on each file and wash it a second time. Then do it a third and fourth time, to meet the standards of that top-secret government agency. That's the 'bleaching' part. Get rid of all those unsightly stains in your underpants. Maybe I will type it all out here sometime. Since I had my brain aneurysm, I really have not felt that well, and I grow tired easily. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lb_centaur@yahoo.com (Matthew Black) Subject: Re: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? Date: 24 May 2002 14:49:19 GMT Organization: California State University, Long Beach In article , lb_centaur@yahoo.com says: > With all the fancy features found in current cell phones, why can't > someone build a phone that keeps an accurate tally of plan minutes > used? I'm speaking of a phone that tracks both peak and off peak > minutes. Someone asked me via e-mail: How would that benefit the cell company? ANSWER: By cell company, I'm assuming you mean my service provider, not the equipment manufacturer. This feature benefits my provider because I would no longer place free (non-billable minutes) calls to get an account update. By not using bandwidth, other calls don't complete with my inquiry, the service provider doesn't build extra capacity to handle status calls. Calling for status updates does not consume plan minutes and it's a free call. Does this clarify the benefits? matthew ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 15:54:25 GMT In article , Matthew Black wrote: > With all the fancy features found in current cell phones, why can't > someone build a phone that keeps an accurate tally of plan minutes > used? I'm speaking of a phone that tracks both peak and off peak > minutes. My guess: because it doesn't benefit the cellular providers very much. If they make it easy for you to tell when you're about to use up your base minutes, you're more likely to avoid going over. Since they charge more for those excess minutes, they'll lose out on this valuable revenue. > This would also benefit my provider because I wouldn't have to call in > to check my account status using non-plan minutes. They probably don't get enough of these calls for the benefit to be of value. Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net Genuity, Woburn, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Mickey Ferguson From: Mickey Ferguson Subject: Re: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 16:42:09 GMT Simple reason. Because they would rather people aren't aware of their usage. If the average user was aware he was getting close to his threshold of included minutes, he might curtail his usage. What they want is for people to go over their limits, because they get lots of money that way. Yes, it would be a very useful feature for the consumer, but one that is in direct conflict with the cell provider's interests. Matthew Black wrote in message news:telecom20.261.10@telecom-digest.org: > With all the fancy features found in current cell phones, why can't > someone build a phone that keeps an accurate tally of plan minutes > used? I'm speaking of a phone that tracks both peak and off peak > minutes. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #262 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 25 00:33:30 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA26312; Sat, 25 May 2002 00:33:30 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 00:33:30 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205250433.AAA26312@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #263 TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 May 2002 00:33:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 263 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson News Headlines of Interest (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Vanity Numbers (Henry1708@aol.com) Re: Vanity Numbers (Paul Langhorst) Intercom Over WAN via IP? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI (Chris Boone) Minnesota Opts In On Privacy (Eric Friedebach) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (Walter Dnes) Re: Warning Regarding ECG Communications' New Minimum Usage (John Levine) Re: PRI Service (John Higdon) Re: PRI Service (EM Handler) Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? (John David Galt) Net Scam Purports to Be From U.S. Soldier (editor@telecom-digest.org) Two FBI Agents Charged In Internet Fraud Scheme (editor@telecom-digest) Re: Help, How Can I Realize Clock Extraction (Ken Becker) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 21:21:24 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: News Headlines of Interest Edupage, May 24, 2002 FCC ISSUES NEW RULES FOR WIRELESS SPECTRUM The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) this week changed some of the rules for the 2.4 GHz spectrum. Under the old rules, data transfer rates for the spectrum were limited to 11 Mbps. Because of this cap, technologies such as orthogonal division multiplexing (OFDM) that operate at higher data rates had to use the 5.1 GHz band, which has some disadvantatges compared to the 2.4 GHz band, including a weaker signal and more difficulty traveling through walls. The new rules remove the cap on data rates, giving approval for the recently introduced 802.11g standard to operate in the 2.4 GHz spectrum. The changes also allow the coexistence of wireless LAN and Bluetooth devices. InfoWorld, 23 May 2002 http://www.idg.net/ic_865444_1794_9-10000.html NewsScan Daily, 24 May 2002 ("Above The Fold") WORLD'S STRICTEST CELL PHONE RADIATION LAW? IN CHINA! China, which is below international norms for most environmental standards, is considering strict new regulations that would cut cell phone radiation emissions by half of what they are overseas. The cost to cell phone makers would be enormous, because China represents such a huge market for cell phones and because manufacturers would have to redesign their entire operations, from R&D to production. Scientific studies have so far failed to find any evidence that cell phone emissions cause brain cancer, but the World Health Organization (WHO) has also said that further research is necessary before ruling out that possibility. (Reuters/USA Today 24 May 2002) http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2002/05/24/china-cell-radiation.htm CQ Daily Monitor Midday Update 5-24-02 HOLLINGS URGES 'OBJECTIVE' FCC REVIEW OF MEDIA CONSOLIDATION RULE Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ernest F. Hollings, D-S.C., wrote to Federal Communications Commission Michael K. Powell last night urging the agency to consider competition and consumer issues as it reviews its rules on media consolidation. The letter, also signed by Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee Chairman Herb Kohl, D-Wis., and ranking Republican Mike DeWine, Ohio, said the lawmakers want to ensure "an objective analysis of competition and program diversity issues associated with media consolidation." The FCC is currently reviewing a long-standing rule that bars a company from owning television stations that collectively reach more than 35 percent of U.S. households. In February, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals ordered the FCC to justify the rule or rewrite it. The court also overturned a rule that had prevented one company from owning both television stations and cable franchises in a single market. In a separate letter, Hollings wrote to Powell to urge "a measured and rational transition" to digital wireless phone service from analog cellular service. [UPDATE] EDUCAUSE Washington Update, May24, 2002 STATE POLICYMAKERS TESTIFY "THERE IS NO BROADBAND CRISIS" The Senate Commerce Committee continued to hear testimony on methods for deploying broadband services in this country. Touted as "Tauzin-Dingell, Part II" by Senate Commerce Committee Chair Ernest Hollings (D-S.C.), the hearing focused on the role of local competition in spurring broadband deployment. Unlike the first hearing, where only the bill's sponsors, Representatives Billy Tauzin (R-La.) and John Dingell (D-Mich.), testified, Wednesday's hearing provided a forum for opposing viewpoints. Representatives Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Chris Cannon (R-Utah) both testified in opposition to Tauzin-Dingell. Congressman Markey stressed that Tauzin-Dingell was "unnecessary," noting that high prices inhibit Americans from subscribing to broadband services and arguing that services need to be identified that make broadband worthwhile. Following that testimony, a panel of state policymakers agreed that no broadband crisis exists, but that the rural access issue requires attention. While the hearing centered on the implications of Tauzin- Dingell, the panel also took issue with Senator Breaux's (D-La.) Broadband Regulatory Parity Act of 2002 (S.2430), namely its provision precluding state regulators from regulating broadband equipment and services. While Senator Breaux offered to change the language to ensure that states maintain their current authority, he believes that the states do not have said authority to begin with, given the interstate nature of data services. For a hearing witness list, see the Senate Commerce Committee Web site at http://commerce.senate.gov/ Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: 24 May 2002 13:24:14 -0000 Subject: Re: Vanity Numbers From: HENRY1708@aol.com Melvin, We're also trying to get the message across re Vanity Numbers in the UK. As there is very little scope for vanity toll free numbers in the UK (since most 0800 numbers already taken up), we are working ewith 0845 and 0870 number ranges (not toll free). For more info look at our websites: www.dialabc.co.uk and www.0845-0870.com where we've got info on vanity numbers. Henry Newrick 0845 FOR NUMBERS (0845 367 6862) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:43:43 -0400 From: Paul Langhorst Subject: Re: Vanity Numbers Regarding the use of vanity numbers in the UK, one of the major drawbacks is the low penetration of phone sets with alpha characters on the key pad. Most new sets conform to the US standard, with the addition of Q on 7 and Z on 9, but many of the imbedded base of older phones, do not contain letters. It has been some time since I dealt directly with the UK, but when I did, I had developed the distinct opinion that UK consumers did not regard Freephone as desired service - at least not to the degree that it is in the US. It seemed consumers they did not like someone else paying for their call. Unlike the US, all calls in the UK are billed at some metered rate per minute. In the US most local calls are free (for a flat fee), so making out of state calls "free" via 800 was a distinct marketing advantage. In the UK and in other countries, all calls are metered which seems to minimize interest in Freephone (toll free). Another thing I experienced was that freephone generated a lot of prank phone calls. Again, I think this is a result of the metering issue. Kids know that 0800 is free and that the records don't show up on the bills arriving at home. Why would anyone make a prank call if they have to pay for it? Good luck. Paul Langhorst Vice President of Marketing 800 Adept, Inc. "Specialists in Toll Free Locator Services" 1-888-298-9643 US: 1-314-966-7615 ------------------------------ Subject: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 17:40:55 GMT I'm looking for an intercom application that will work over our WAN via IP. Ideally, this would involve only port 80, because part of our WAN is stuck behind a firewall over which I have no control. The idea is that each of a dozen computers (all, fortunately, on T1 lines or better) will have a button on the screen that the user can push to be connected to the "group chat" session. I think that Yahoo! and Netscape both have something like this. Has anyone used these? Do I have other (free) options? Many thanks. Joel (joel@exc.com) ------------------------------ From: Cboone@earthlink.net Subject: Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 17:54:30 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net BUT the Neighborhood plans do NOT include FCC line charge fees and other state fees, etc ... I thought about changing to MCI after seeing the plans advertised ... looked nice ... My SWB bill with just a little LD on it is $45-50 a month ... BUT after looking at the other charges added on, the MCI final total would probably be over $58 or 60. I dont make THAT much LD to justify it. Chris Stanley Cline wrote: > The $49.99 (in Atlanta anyway) "Neighborhood Complete" plan does > indeed include ALL domestic LD calls. See the difference here: [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am reminded of how, back in the early 1970's, when MCI was first getting started after having filed a fraudulent petition with the FCC asking for permission to operate a private microwave service for a few *limited* customers between Chicago and St. Louis, they then tried to defraud everyone by making all sorts of outrageous claims about their service. Remember, in those days (early seventies) all zero-plus went to AT&T and there was no such thing as ten-ten. icrowave ommunications nc and outhern

acific ailroad nternal etwork ele- communications which were the originals had to use dialup lines. That is, if you chose to use those two upstarts, you had to dial seven-digit local numbers (in the few major cities they chose to serve), then when you heard a new dialtone, you dialed the three digit area code of the city you wanted to call, and the remainder of the LOCAL number. You were literally sent over a microwave to the city you were calling, then plopped down in a central office switch *in that city* to complete the call. Therefore, dialing your local number for MCI, followed by 212+911 got you the New York City Police, although they did not know that would happen until a few customers brought it to their attention. The upstarts *were* a wee bit cheaper on the long haul portion of the call, but because Illinois Bell (as Ameritech was known in those days) supervised on everything, if you had to dial your distant number several times (because it was busy) in order to get through once, then you had to pay IBT *for their portion* in any event. AT&T of course charged you for the entire *completed call*, but nothing for the 'free ride' to the toll switcher on Canal Street downtown. So while the long distance portion of your phone bill went down, the local call portion (they were called 'message units') went up dramatically. It was like our correspondent noted here: add in the tax and the other incidentals (which MCI would never mention unless backed against the wall) and the total cost of your phone bill was about ten percent higher than when AT&T was handling it all. And oooh, their telesleaze, er, sales people were so demanding and agressive. If you said you did not want their service, they'd come back and accuse you of being an idiot: after all, who wouldn't want a cheaper phone bill each month? "But Mr. Townson, WHY would you want to pay more on your phone bill each month?" was their standard retort to anyone who said no thanks. But the 1970's were basically an anti-Bell period. People who wanted to 'get one over on the phone company' (or thought they could) all migrated to MCI in droves. MCI hasn't really mended their ways at all. I do think the FCC and the Federal Trade Commission have slapped them a few times and made them behave a little better; but it is pretty much a hopeless proposition. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 11:16:31 PDT From: Eric Friedebach Reply-To: friedebach@yahoo.com Subject: Minnesota Opts In On Privacy Gov. Jesse Ventura signs Internet privacy bill. By John Rendleman, Informationweek.com, May 22, 2002 Despite opposition from Internet service providers and online retailers, Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura signed legislation Wednesday afternoon enacting the first state law in the country that spells out procedures that Internet companies must follow before using data collected from subscribers. The law will take effect in March. ISPs, Internet content providers, and online marketers say that if other states follow suit, the proliferation of potentially conflicting Internet privacy laws will hinder their operations nationally. http://www.informationweek.com/story/IWK20020522S0009 Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: Walter Dnes Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Reply-To: waltdnes@waltdnes.org Date: 24 May 2002 16:39:24 -0400 On Thu, 23 May 2002 18:11:57 -0600, Joey Lindstrom, wrote: What you need to do is look at ssh-tunneling. It'll solve a *LOT* of your problems, if not all of them. > The question that was raised was this: some ISP's block port 25 > unless it's a request to relay through their OWN servers. This > prevents Tommy from sending mail via mail.albelin.com, which resolves > to *MY* IP address and *MY* server. ssh *NORMALLY* goes via port 22, but can be changed to other values. > Yes, he has authorization to use this server. He has to > POP-before-SMTP, but once he's met that requirement, he can send > mail "from: tommy@albelin.com" "to: hockeyfan@bourgeoismail.com" > via my server. Hello ... you've been complaining about "security". Are you aware that normal POP involves sending userID and password in clear text ? This is generally not a problem if you've dialed directly into your own ISP, or use end-to-end-encryption (e.g. ssh-tunneling). However, if Tommy is dialed into his own ISP, and he's logging into your machine, then *HE'S SENDING HIS USERID AND PASSWORD OVER THE INTERNET IN CLEAR TEXT* !!! > 1) Security. Granted, a packet sniffer can sniff anything, but it's > a LOT easier for some snoopy sysadmin at Tommy's ISP to see what he's > sending if it goes through their email server than if he bypasses it > and goes straight to mine. *EVERYTHING* goes through the ISP's modem and their router. If they want to snoop they can snoop. As I mentioned above, he'll be sending his userID+password in clear text over the net if you have your way. > 2) Some ISP's (perhaps many?) won't permit this. For example, > if he sends a message "from: tommy@albelin.com" "to: > telecom@telecom-digest.org", that the ISP's mail servers > are responsible for. He would have to switch to using his > "talbelin@jerseyispname.com" account to send mail, in which case > we've defeated the entire purpose of having his own domain name. That is a stupid practice, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with port-25 blocking. That stunt alone is reason to leave an ISP. I'm not going to try to defend that stupidity. One of the arguments behind port-25 blocking is that your ISP can provide SMTP service. Not being able to use a valid address is *NOT* adequate service. > A growing number of ISP's are co-operating with blacklist > organizations and informing them of the range of IP's in their > dial-up pools, which are then added to a separate blacklist > database. Those mail servers with no actual need to accept > direct-to-MX mail from dial-up users (I would be an exception) > can simply block them based on this database lookup. Which does nothing to address the problem of spammers going direct-to-MX to open relays. Oh ... add yet another blacklist for innocent ISP's to have to consult before deciding whether to accept email. > It just seems to me that taking this block-port-25 approach is > rather heavy-handed, akin to swatting a fly with a jackhammer. > Yes, you curb abuse, but you also curb the usefulness of the > service you offer. And it WILL cost an ISP customers -- but I > guess what you're saying is that by FAILING to take this approach, > they'll lose even more. Yup. Lesser of two evils. Wide open relays used to be courtesy. Spammers abused them, and now they're deprecated. Ditto direct-to-MX from dialups. Ditto formmail webscripts. Sigh. Walter Dnes I'm not repeating myself; I'm an X Window user, I'm an ex-Windows user ------------------------------ Date: 24 May 2002 00:44:30 -0400 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Warning Regarding ECG Communications' New Minimum Usage Charge! Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > My mother got a bill with this charge added, but since there was no > prior notification, the ECG representative took the $4.95 off her > account this one time but we had to cancel the account to avoid > further billings (I understand they tried to notify customers by > e-mail, but my mother is elderly and doesn't have e-mail ... There was a notice about the new fee on the front page of the paper bill for a couple of months before they imposed it. You can get PDFs of previous months' bills at https://myecgaccount.com/, so you might check and see if your mom's bills had the notice. I suspect they did. > In my personal opinion, what ECG has done seems like a real scam -- Aw, come on. Phone companies change their rates all the time. If they really changed the rates with no notice, that would be tacky, but I don't think they did. ECG still seems to be the cheapest dial-1 carrier for those of us who live in NECA (non-RBOC) areas. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 22:07:05 -0700 Subject: Re: PRI Service From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.261.9@telecom-digest.org, vid2001 wrote: > In our T1 world, I hear the term PRI quite a bit. What is this? What > are the advantages of a PRI T1 vs a traditional Voice T1? Primary Rate ISDN is what it stands for. It is a 1.54 mb, B8ZS stream containing framing for twenty-three 64 kb bearer channels and one 64 kb data channel. The advantage is flexibility and speed. The bearer channels carry voice and the data channel carries the call setup data. Not being in-band, the signaling is virtually instantaneous. Incoming calls are set up by the data channel to any available bearer channel. This allows for an unlimited number of directory numbers to be served with the number of simultaneous calls limited by the number of bearer channels. The data channel can serve multiple PRI circuits, so additional PRIs can carry twenty-four bearer channels each, assuming all the PRIs terminate on the same switch. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ Reply-To: EM Handler From: EM Handler Subject: Re: PRI Service Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 20:39:12 GMT T1 has become the generic name for a digital trunk with in-band signaling, typically channelized for 24 voice paths. PRI, also a digital circuit, is the nickname for Primary Rate Interface of the Integrated Services Digital Network or PRI/ISDN. PRI typically has 23 voice paths (referred to as 'B' channels) and 1 signaling or 'D' channel. PRI is usually superior when compared to most T1 configurations. You can find other useful links at http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm "vid2001" wrote in message news:telecom20.261.9@telecom-digest.org: > In our T1 world, I hear the term PRI quite a bit. What is this? What > are the advantages of a PRI T1 vs a traditional Voice T1? ------------------------------ From: John David Galt Subject: Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 15:20:46 -0700 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Robert, A., Fink, "M. D." wrote: > I just noticed (in the past two days), that when my computer is having > trouble maintaining a connection (later in the day), and I reboot the > machine (WIN98), the connection is fine the next time that I dial up. > The computer has 256MB RAM installed, but most of the time, when the > standard desktop is running, only about 120MB of RAM is free (I use > MemTurbo to monitor the RAM). When the free RAM drops below 100MB, > that is when the connection problems appear. > The above suggests that something is "hogging" my RAM and that the > free RAM is decreasing. My questions: This is what's known in the trade as a "memory leak". Some programs allocate RAM while they are running, but fail to release it before they exit. Thus over time, more and more of your machine's RAM becomes unusable because it is marked as "in use" even though the process that "owns" it no longer exists. Eventually you reach the point where nothing will run, and all you can do is to reboot the PC. You may be able to identify the program that is causing the leak by checking the amount of free memory with MemTurbo before and after you run a particular program. But unless you have access to the source code of the program, chances are there is nothing you can do about the problem. It would be nice if Windows had a "garbage collector" to find and free these blocks of memory when they become "orphaned", but if such a utility exists, I haven't seen it. For what it's worth, this problem is not unique to Windows. The Mac and some mainframes suffer from it too. > 1. Can this phenomenon interfere with the ability to maintain a dialup > connection? That depends on the programs your connection uses, and in particular, whether they need to continually allocate memory "on the fly". > 2. How do I access my "startup Group" in order to disable some of the > programs which are starting up and which continue to run when not > needed? The obvious answer is to look in C:\Windows\Startup, but that is only one of several ways that programs can be made to start up automatically whenever you reboot (Windows) or log in (Windows NT). The actual lists of auto-startup programs are found in the Windows registry. Hit Start -> Run, type in "regedit", and look in this hierarchy of "folders". My Computer HKEY_CURRENT_USER Software Microsoft Windows CurrentVersion Run RunOnce Be warned: it is possible to thoroughly screw up your system using "regedit", and all changes are immediate (no Save step is needed). Be sure to write down the old values of anything you change, so you can change it back if you need to. You might also look at www.regedit.com, which is a good hints site. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 01:09:32 EDT From: ptownson@sbcglobal.net Subject: Net Scam Purports to Be From U.S. Soldier Here is another example of a 'Nigerian-like' scam. That's the main reason I do not think the arrests made in South Africa reported in our last issue will do the entire job of stopping these scams. Click on the URL below for the rest of this story: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,53553,00.html ------------------------------ From: ptownson@sbcglobal.net Subject: Two FBI Agents Charged In Internet Fraud Scheme Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 00:55:53 CDT Read this entire article at http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/176730.html but here is a summary if you prefer. Two FBI Agents Charged In Internet Fraud Scheme By David S Hilzenrath, Washington Post WASHINGTON, D.C., U.S.A., 23 May 2002, 5:12 AM CST Two FBI agents passed confidential information about investigations of companies to participants in a stock-manipulation scheme, according to a federal indictment. ------------------------------ From: Ken Becker Subject: Re: Help, How Can I Realize Clock Extraction Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 02:34:09 GMT sunjc wrote: > Hi, > I am developing the E1 tester. How can I realize clock extraction > from the HDB3 signals. Please tell me the method or some chips which > can realize it. Geez, sunjc. Where have you been? There are over 50 chip sets that receive an E1/T1 and generate clock, 8 kHz sync, and what all. Dig into www.agere.com and check out LIU's for T1/E1. While you're at it, head over to PMC-sierra.com for their E1/T1 line devices. Heck, just go over to google and type "t1/e1 LIU and you're going to get buried. (I just tried it: google is great for tracking down parts. Type in 74ACT74 and you'll pop up every manufacturer of a quad D flip flop that exists). Ken Becker Lucent Technologies ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #263 From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 27 01:55:12 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA27560; Mon, 27 May 2002 01:55:12 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 01:55:12 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205270555.BAA27560@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #264 TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 May 2002 01:54:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 264 Inside This Issue: Happy Memorial Day! Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? (Stretch) Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? (Pete Weiss) Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Yahoogroups in RBL (Marcus Didius Falco) New High Speed Internet Solution (Andy Goodman) Voicestream VM ... What's up With It? (mindreader) Re: Warning Regarding ECG Communications' Minimum Usage Charge! (Jack) Spammer With Both an 888# AND an 877#! (John Mianowski) Nortel Switch For Sale (Steve Christie) Re: Disabling MS-Windows Start-up Programs (Colin Sutton) Re: Net Scam Purports to Be From U.S. Soldier (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? (Robert A. Fink, M. D.) Re: Good News About the 419 Scams From Nigeria (Chris Patterson) News Headlines of Interest 5/26/02 (Monty Solomon) Alternate Local SPs in Boston Area For Consumers? (Daniel Rosenzweig) Re: Vanity Numbers (Hendrik Rood) Another E-mail Spammer With a Toll Free Number (Steven Lichter) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stretch Subject: Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 04:28:39 GMT Organization: Road Runner - Texas I tried a package called (I think) CU-seemee, which was a fairly simple videoconferencing system. They have a "bridge" product that allows several people to link up and see/hear the rest of the group. We tried it over a company LAN, and it worked fairly well, and over low-delay WAN connections it was tolerable. In the end, people were just uncomfortable leaving a "live" camera or microphone around, and went back to just dialing each other up. Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: > I'm looking for an intercom application that will work over our WAN > via IP. Ideally, this would involve only port 80, because part of our > WAN is stuck behind a firewall over which I have no control. > The idea is that each of a dozen computers (all, fortunately, on T1 > lines or better) will have a button on the screen that the user can > push to be connected to the "group chat" session. > I think that Yahoo! and Netscape both have something like this. Has > anyone used these? Do I have other (free) options? ------------------------------ From: pete-weiss@psu.edu (Pete Weiss) Subject: Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 08:02:56 -0400 Organization: Penn State University -- Office of Administrative Systems On Fri, 24 May 2002 17:40:55 GMT, joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote: > The idea is that each of a dozen computers (all, fortunately, on T1 > lines or better) will have a button on the screen that the user can > push to be connected to the "group chat" session. I don't know about voice, but there are instant messaging clients offered that can interact with one more free services e.g., AIM, ICQ, IRC, MSN, Yahoo! One meta client is Trillian: http://www.trillian.cc/ You don't need to be a paying customer of AOL nor ICQ in order to register (and use) a screen name. AOL allows for the creation of a private chat room so that all can view the interactive text messaging. Pete ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 13:16:56 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? "Dr. Joel M. Hoffman" wrote: > I'm looking for an intercom application that will work over our WAN > via IP. Ideally, this would involve only port 80, because part of our > WAN is stuck behind a firewall over which I have no control. > The idea is that each of a dozen computers (all, fortunately, on T1 > lines or better) will have a button on the screen that the user can > push to be connected to the "group chat" session. Roger Wilco is a walkie-talkie app aimed at gamers, but it may do what you need. http://download.com.com/3000-2121-7026813.html?legacy=cnet http://www.resounding.com Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com My hovercraft is full of eels. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 May 2002 22:59:47 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Yahoogroups in RBL * Original: FROM..... Randall Head People who subscribe to insghtbb.com or to attbi.com and surely others got a rude surprise yesterday if they belong to a yahoogroup - yahoogroups made its way into an RBL to which those ISPs subscribe, and NO mail from any yahoogroup was delivered to anyone@insightbb.com or to anyone@attbi.com. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: andygoodmanhome@yahoo.com (Andy Goodman) Subject: New High Speed Internet Solution Date: 25 May 2002 20:24:28 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Has anyone heard of Hotlens Internet TurboBooster at http://www.hotlens.com? It claims to be a cost-effective way for an ISP to establish itself as leader of high speed solution providers through 3 - 5 times faster delivery of web sites to its subscribers using desktop, notebook and PDA. It claims that it delivers web content faster because it optimizes and compresses web content before sending them over dial-up and wireless connections. It also claims to support filtering of background music, popup and advertisement banner image/shockwave/applet. In addition, it claims to support user-friendly layout conversion to make web pages usable and productive on PDA. Can anyone please share his or her experience with this product? Regards, Andy ------------------------------ From: bsolucky@hotmail.com (mindreader) Subject: Voicestream VM ... What's Up With It? Date: 26 May 2002 09:16:04 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi folks! I am running into this GSM conditional forwarding business again where when calls are forwarded from my phone into voicemail while I am roaming outside of the Southeast, instead of those incoming calls going directly into my personal voice mail box (on VS/Powertel southeast VM - +18509809000), they go to to the main backdoor VM greeting where the caller has to enter my cell number in order to leave me a message. The problem is that I usually forward my office and home numbers to my cell when I am out of town and since callers don't know my cell number (they know only the number they "originally" called me at which then forwarded to my cell and onto VM), therefore they can't leave me a message at the main backdoor VM greeting. Of course if I am using my phone anywhere in the Southeast (even central florida old Arial market) calls are routed to my personal voice mail box without a problem regardless of how the call comes in. This is extreamly annoying and is causing me to miss important messages. As you can see from the thread below, the issue was explained to me by one of VS's techs earlier this year. However, when I was experiencing this problem again a couple of weeks ago (was on Voicestreams network in Dallas, TX) I called CS (both to VS west and old Powertel) to report this issue and this time they were extreamly uncooperative and said that there is nothing I can do but let everyone I know my cell number so they can leave me a message at the backdoor prompt. That obviously defeats the whole forwarding from office or home scheme that works so well in my home market. My reply to them was basically like... "well, my phone is displaying "voicestream" right now when I am here in Dallas, so why should forwarding work any differently than it does in GA, AL, FL, etc? So ... does anyone know if VS has decided to "give up" on trying to alleviate this forwarding issue? Rick. >>> "Santosh Krishnan" wrote in message >>>news:... >>> Why does my VM not follow me where I go? >>> If someone calls me up, it asks >>> them to enter the number they are trying to >>> reach before it gives them the >>> VM. No one cares to enter my number, >>> so I don't receive important VM unless >>> I turn off the damn phone!!! >>>Any clues? > "mindreader" wrote in message > news:d10c9041.0201181442.564905aa@posting.google.com... >> I have been having this problem for a while as well. Very annoying! >> However, this is not all Voicestream's fault. According to a tech >> with voicestream who has been involved with this issue this has to do >> with the landline T1 lines that are supplied by the local telco to the >> wireless provider you are roaming on (or even the voicestream >> region/subsidiary you're roaming on). Apparently the local telco's >> have to register your voicestream number's NXX (first three digits of >> your phone number) in their equipment in order to correctly >> forward/divert the call back to YOUR voice mail box (instead of to the >> general voice mail gateway - which is what you are experiencing). >> Voicestream has been working with telco's all over the country to make >> sure all that the local T1's are programmed with Voicestream's NXX >> number ranges. However, the Baby Bells are notorious for not >> cooperating with other companies, particularly ones they consider >> their rivals (e.g. Verizon) so voicestream has had a very tough time >> getting the local telco's to do whatever programming is needed in >> order for call diversion to work correctly. I personally have had >> good "forwarding" experiences while roaming on GSM systems where PAC >> BELL is the local telco but almost never having things work correctly >> where Verizon was the local land-line telco. >> Pretty much the only thing you can do is to try and call your HOME >> voicestream customer support number when you are in an area and >> experiencing this problem and ask to talk to a tech about this issue. >> Now you will need to HOPE, PRAY, HOPE, PRAY, DO A RAIN DANCE AND HAIL >> MARYS that CS will let you talk to a tech directly because, it is >> useless to explain to CS what the problem is because they a. don't >> understand the problem, b. don't want to understnad the problem, c. >> don't care, or d. insist that callers put in YOUR cell number into the >> gateway and leave you a message that way (personally I can't do that >> because I forward my home calls to my cell, so when people get to the >> voice mail gateway, they try to put in my home number (since that's >> all they know) which obviously doesn't work since the VM system wants >> my cell number). >> Next, if you manage to actually be transferred to a tech, you need to >> HOPE, PRAY, HOPE, PRAY, DO A RAIN DANCE AND HAIL MARYS that the tech >> is aware of this specific issue with forwarding. If they do, they'll >> pass your issue to the right department where they'll find out who the >> local land-line telco that is handling the area you're in and will >> contact them with voicesteam's NXX numbering scheme to program into >> their equipment. Once the local Bell does that, you'll be able to >> divert calls directly to your voice mail box just like in your home >> area. >> --Rick. > "242" <242@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:4L728.19687$k11.537940@read1.cgocable.net... > Correct! This info has recently been broadcast to vs cc, they are aware > of the issue and techs are trying to resolve with telco. ------------------------------ From: Jack Subject: Re: Warning Regarding ECG Communications' New Minimum Usage Charge! Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 02:08:08 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On 24 May 2002 00:44:30 -0400, johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote: >> My mother got a bill with this charge added, but since there was no >> prior notification, the ECG representative took the $4.95 off her >> account this one time but we had to cancel the account to avoid >> further billings (I understand they tried to notify customers by >> e-mail, but my mother is elderly and doesn't have e-mail ... > There was a notice about the new fee on the front page of the paper > bill for a couple of months before they imposed it. You can get PDFs > of previous months' bills at https://myecgaccount.com/, so you might > check and see if your mom's bills had the notice. I suspect they did. Ah, but here's the rub: When I first signed her up for the service, I thought they were going to send a bill each month in which there was any usage. I quickly discovered (after my mother complained about not getting a bill for her long distance) that they only bill when the amount due exceeds $10, or after three months, whichever comes first. She didn't like that (she really wanted to be billed for her usage each month!) but accepted it. For about six or eight months all was fine. Then they sent a notice that they wanted to do online billing. However, at that time they were using some fancy scripting or something on their web site -- I know not what the actual problem was -- but in any case, I could not get in to view her account. I called ECG and told them about that, and mentioned that she is elderly and does not use a computer nor does she have an e-mail address, and without hesitation the representative offered to send paper bills. Great, I thought, since this is what my mother really wanted anyway. Well, they did, sort of. They still would only send the bill when she'd accumulated $10 in usage (every two or three months) but would only give the detail for the last month. This really upset my mother, because she wanted itemization for all her calls (you have to realize that she's in her upper 80's; I sometimes suspect she still resents not getting personally handwritten bills anymore!) :-) At that point I figured out that if I used an older version of Netscape I could get into the ECG web site enough to pull up past bills. So when they'd send her one, I'll pull up and print out the last couple months that they didn't send her, and she could check off her calls. Well, this latest bill covered two months (and showed detail for only one), so you may be right about the notice having appeared on last month's bill. But the problem is that because she hadn't yet accumulated another $10 in usage, they didn't send her that bill. Before anyone says I should have gone online and looked at the bill every month, please bear in mind that a) it was a genuine pain in the @$$ to access their site, because of whatever scripting they used, and b) when she signed up they said they would send her a paper bill in the mail each month, which is the only kind of billing she wanted. And besides, I never anticipated this sort of problem. I can understand ECG not wanting to send a bill until there is a certain minimum accumulated usage, but you'd think that when the bills contain a notice of a change in billing that would specifically impact those who don't make $10 in toll calls each month, they'd make it a point to send out that month's bill (or at least the notice) to those people. >> In my personal opinion, what ECG has done seems like a real scam -- > Aw, come on. Phone companies change their rates all the time. If > they really changed the rates with no notice, that would be tacky, but > I don't think they did. Well, after I posted my warning to the MI-Telecom mailing list (a Michigan-specific e-mail list), another user of their service wrote to say that he hadn't received any notification either. I'm sure none of us know what percentage of users may have or may not have received the notice, but it's apparent that some didn't. > ECG still seems to be the cheapest dial-1 carrier for those of us who > live in NECA (non-RBOC) areas. I decided to try another carrier for my mother's account, called Total Call International (which I think you'll find is also available in the non-RBOC areas, since they use Qwest as their underlying carrier, as does ECG). Not only do they have no monthly minimums (confirmed by two different calls to company's 800 number) but their rate for intrastate calls in Michigan is a lot lower (which isn't a big factor because virtually everyone my mother calls long distance is out of state). Their interstate rate is virtually the same as ECG's. The only downside is they say it will take 5-7 days to get the service activated. A friend says he's been using them for six months on two lines, and he is "very satisfied" (his words). Of course I realize they could change their rates next month too, but then I don't think any carrier guarantees to hold their rates these days. But if they do, I hope they'll at least give some advance notice! Today someone was telling my mother that you can buy a prepaid calling card at Sam's Club that works out to about three cents a minute (I was with her at the time). Only problem there is neither she nor I have a membership at Sam's Club (and wouldn't buy enough there to make it worthwhile) and besides that, my mother can barely handle dialing 11 digits (actually, I had to program the numbers she calls into a speed dial phone) and I'm fairly certain that using a calling card would totally mystify her. But what I don't understand is, you'd think it would cost more to handle calling card calls (even prepaid ones) than calls where the line is presubscribed. What's the catch with those prepaid calling cards (or is there any)? Can you really get a better deal with them than by using one of the least expensive presubscribed carriers? Jack The return e-mail address in this message will vaporize once the spammers find it. Resources for Michigan Telephone Users page: http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A handwritten bill? I had one in my grandmother's collection of stuff we found after she died in 1978 or so. She was from this part of the country originally, as was I born here. She had a handwritten bill from Southwestern Bell, dated 1937. A buck and a half for a month's worth of service, and a prepaid self addressed envelope to the phone company here in Independence at the office on 6th and West Maple Street. That building is now used as a central office on the second floor. A very elegant script for the bill, handwritten showing the month of service plus a long distance call which was more than the month of local service. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Mianowski Subject: Spammer With Both an 888# AND an 877#! Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 12:05:00 -0500 Organization: Nortel I think everybody knows the drill by now: IMPORTANT: Free report on all corporations found in asset search. Let Us Tell you the TRUTH / SAME DAY SERVICE. Toll Free at 1 888 729 8976 and PROTECT YOURSELF. ***************** ADDITIONAL SERVICE ***************** ************** MISSING PERSON SEARCHES ***************** ************ ** WE FIND THEM OR NO CHARGE ** ************ **** WE RUN THESE SEARCHES WITH YOU ON THE PHONE **** ********************SAME DAY SERVICE*********************** ********* CALL TOLL FREE 1 877 269 3892 TO SCHEDULE ******** [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, everyone knows the routine by now, but getting rid of those pests is like bombing and spraying roaches. They just keep returning no matter what. PAT] ------------------------------ From: steven.christie1@ntlworld.com (Steve Christie) Subject: Nortel Switch For Sale Date: 25 May 2002 06:54:34 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Nortel DMS 100 MTX/GSM/CDMA Switch with all peripherals to achieve call processing. Backup DC power plant included. Switch consists of: 1 SNSE (Super Node Space Enhanced) Series 70 processor, disk storage capacity, message switch, Enhanced Network W/16K non-blocking matrix. 1 LPP (link peripheral processor) capable of SS7/CCS7/Ethernet Protocol. 1 DTC/ICP (Digital Trunk Controller/Intelligent Cellular Peripheral) for T1 Generation. Could be E1 compatible. 1 IOC (Imput/Output Controller) for man-machine interface W/Monitors, Printer and additional disk storage space. 1 MCAM (Analog Module) for Analog Trunks such as voice anouncements, conference call, alarm system and tone generation. As an option: 1 DPCC (High Capacity SuperNode W/Series 70 Processors) 1 ENET (Enahanced Network) Capable of 64K Non-Blocking Matrix. This Switch configeration comes with a full DC Power Plant. SERIOUS ENQUIRY ONLY ... SHIPPING AND INSTALLATION CAN BE QUOTED. ------------------------------ From: Colin Sutton Subject: Re: Disabling MS-Windows Start-up Programs Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 14:51:31 GMT Organization: BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.net.au) ; "M. D." wrote in message news:telecom20.260.9@telecom-digest.org: [...] > 2. How do I access my "startup Group" in order to disable some of the > programs which are starting up and which continue to run when not > needed? Mike Lin's http://www.mlin.net/StartupCPL.shtml makes it easy. Using his start-up control panel you can view and move programs between: * user start-up folder * all users start-up * HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE (all users) run registry * HKEY_CURRENT_USER run registry * run once at next start-up or temporarily or permanently remove them. Very useful when an installation puts them in the wrong place. http://www.mlin.net/StartupMonitor.shtml is another good one. Colin [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And also very dangerous territory to be in unless you know the registry very, very well. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Net Scam Purports to Be From U.S. Soldier Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 12:49:14 -0400 Organization: Bell Sympatico wrote: > Here is another example of a 'Nigerian-like' scam. ... with a bit of the movie "Three Kings" thrown in! ------------------------------ From: Robert A. Fink, M. D. Subject: Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 14:35:29 -0700 Organization: Robert A. Fink, M. D., FACS, P. C. Reply-To: rafink@attglobal.net Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote: > If your PC was built within the last 3 years or so, and the modem came > with it, it's probably a winmodem. The modem, a Supra 56K PCI voice modem, was installed as a separate "component" (the PC was built to specifications). It is not a "winmodem". Best, Robert A. Fink, M.D., FACS, P. C. 2500 Milvia Street Suite 222 Berkeley, California 94704-2636 USA Telephone: 510-849-2555 FAX: 510-849-2557 "Ex Tristitia Virtus" ------------------------------ From: chris@mce.com (Chris Patterson) Subject: Re: Good News About the 419 Scams From Nigeria. Date: 25 May 2002 21:41:32 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Yes, the Nigerian scam e-mails. 60 Minutes did a segment on this years back. It is a cottage industry in Lagos where the perpetrators hope to illicit banking info, ask for forwarding amounts of money to "facilitate" the release of the "big bucks" etc ... It is all a scam of course. On the 60 Minutes episode the chronicled the adventures of a preacher who actually flew to meet the "Prince" only to end up kidnapped and held for ransom. Not much you can do about them with the exception of reporting them for spamming. I myself read them for their humor value as the writers are always outdoing themselves with their outlandish claims. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 May 2002 13:21:21 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: News Headlines of Interest 5/26/02 U.S. not getting wireless message. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/18/BU239258.DTL Watch out for hidden long-distance charges. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/18/BU162445.DTL Cellular, DSL services lower need for land lines. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/18/BU194380.DTL A maze of cell phone service http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/18/BU113102.DTL Cutting through the static to find the right phone plan. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/18/BU69607.DTL Hackers gain entry to key state database Personnel files were breached last month for 265,000 workers Ryan Kim, Chronicle Staff Writer Saturday, May 25, 2002 Computer hackers have cracked into the state's personnel database and gained access to financial information for all 265,000 state workers, including Governor Gray Davis, officials said Friday. The database, housed at state's Teale Data Center in Rancho Cordova, holds names, Social Security numbers, and payroll information for everyone from office workers to judges. Authorities said that so far they have found no evidence that the information has been used illegally. "There was a breach in the data base, but there is no information to suggest that any of the information has been used to date," said Sacramento County sheriff's spokesman James Lewis. The governor's office alerted state workers to the breach Friday and provided information on how they can further protect their personal information. Merger would benefit only AT&T, Comcast By Steve Early and Myles Calvey, Globe Staff, 5/26/2002 Massachusetts cities and towns have a big decision to make this spring about AT&T's pending sale of its cable TV subsidiary to Philadelphia-based Comcast Corp. Hearings were held around the state last month so community-based cable franchising authorities could assess the local impact of this transaction. It affects 1 million Massachusetts households, 150,000 in Boston alone. If approved by federal regulators, the $72 billion marriage of America's biggest cable TV provider, AT&T Broadband, with the third largest will create a new cable giant with 40 percent of the market and 22 million customers nationwide. The brokers of this deal -- the billionaire Roberts family, which controls Comcast, and AT&T chief executive Michael Armstrong -- will definitely benefit from it. Armstrong plans to leave his troubled telecom firm behind and become chairman of AT&T Comcast once Broadband is spun off. But it's less clear how cable TV customers and workers will fare. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/146/business/Merger_would_benefit_only_AT_T_Comcast+.shtml ------------------------------ From: danielzr@netzero.net (Daniel Rosenzweig) Subject: Alternate Local SPs in Boston Area for Consumers? Date: 26 May 2002 18:02:24 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Are there any competative local Service Providers for consumers available in the Boston Suburbs (Newton)? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: 25 May 2002 10:43:20 -0000 Subject: Re: Vanity Facts From: Hendrik Rood > For a Dutch client of mine I'm looking for facts, figures and graphs as > proof of the possitive effect of a tollfree vanity number. > Vanity calling is slowly becoming well known in The Netherlands and > decision-makers are looking for hard evidence before ordering their > number. > If you can provide me with any information, please send it to my > businessadress: melvin@informatienummer.nl Melvin, During 1996-1997 KPN Telecom, our national incumbent, has distributed two booklets about toll-free numbers (servicenummers they called it in Dutch). One of them describing experimental research by their ergonomy and user interface lab together with Erasmus University, who looked at commercial perception. Alas this was mainly directed at user preferences and recognition for "short" versus "long" 800-numbers and the influence of repetition in the number on users memory. Vanity numbers where only mentioned in the passing. You might give it a try to call Eric Cleij at KPN's headquarters (he is the telecommunications consultants point of contact and distributed that booklet in 1997). The booklet was however written in Dutch, but I assume you are able to read that language. To give you and other readers of the list a short glimpse of the results of this 800-ergonomy research: Purchasers of "golden" numbers tend to overrate the ease of their number e.g. 800-3388777 is experienced by the 800-owner as easy to remember, but in reality the average citizen only remember the very "repetitive" or "regular" numbers such as 0800-1212121 or 0800-1234567. E.g. potential 800-number purchasers pay a premium over reality. This overrating of the value of an "easy to remember" telephonenumber. They effectively found that the more expensive Short 800-numbers were really providing a service to the consumer. A consumer is far more able to remember 0800-0100 by head than she/he is able to distinguish 11-digit length numbers. I have the strong impression that additional research, which KPN Research labs planned to perform on 800-vanity numbers has resulted in similar facts for alphanumeric dialling. Thus slightly disappointing and relatively light effects. However I am not aware of publicly published results. The very distinct nature of the US-market with national retailers competing against the local shop who can be reached at the local flat rate created the main initial demand for 800-numbers. From my own research it is easily discovered that all countries with local metering have 800-traffic levels at 1-5% instead of the near 40% of long distance traffic volume the US has for 800-numbers. This means the market you are operating in is very different. It is risky to argue with US success stories for the European 800 market. E.g. alphanumeric vanity numbers different from the company name or their major brands are just that: vanity numbers, that require large sums of money to really attract the publics awareness. Kind regards, Hendrik Rood ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 26 May 2002 11:50:27 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Anothr E-mail Spammer with a Toll Free Number ...to teach this individual about the cost of owning an Toll Free number... -----Original Message----- (877) 852-8732 To find out how you can loose 10 to 15 pounds a week safely without and drugs. Quick Silver Enterprises. =================================================== Remember it is against the law to harrass anyone by telephone. Also you should use a payphone so that the operator can make a little money. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, Steve, another entry for which we all appreciate your purusing the open minefield called the Internet. But I really have to wonder what good it does, it any ... when I was living in Junction City, Kansas three years ago, the landlord came around one day to bomb the roaches out of existence. He brought 'bombs' of roach spray, several cans of spray, roach motels, the works. I stayed in another room that night and the next day when I saw a couple hundred of the little buggers evacuting their nest near the floorboard behind the cooking stove. Will all your efforts ever get rid of them? Probably not ... like cockroaches, if there was a nuclear explosion as part of a world war, I suspect roaches would survive it all; and spammers also. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #264 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue May 28 13:54:26 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA22581; Tue, 28 May 2002 13:54:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 13:54:26 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205281754.NAA22581@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #265 TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 May 2002 13:54:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 265 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #334, May 27, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Alternate Local SPs in Boston Area For Consumers? (Fred Goldstein) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (David Harmon) Re: PRI Service (Jeff Grossman) Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? (Andrew Yeomans) Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Panasonic KX-F780 (no man) What is This (Email) World Coming To? (David B. Horvath, CCP) Isterra Calling Card Problems (Quinn Michael) Query: International Phone Calls Using Internet (J.T. Thompson) What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? (Author) Re: Another E-mail Spammer with a Toll Free Number (Steven Lichter) Re: Another E-mail Spammer with a Toll Free Number (Mentzer) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 13:33:19 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #334, May 27, 2002 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 334: May 27, 2002 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** AT&T CANADA http://www.attcanada.com ** BELL CANADA http://www.bell.ca ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Price Cap Decision to Be Released Thursday ** AT&T Canada Raises Millions ** U.S. Court Slows Teleglobe Reorganization ** Rogers Intros GPRS Data Service ** Calgary to Put Wireless LANs in Schools ** BCI Asks Hearing on Nasdaq Delisting ** IBM to Sell Mitel 3100 ** TIW Warns of Coming Cash Crunch ** Microsoft to Open Canadian Call Centre ** Computer Use Increases Among Farmers ** Teleglobe, 360networks Delay Financial Results ** Persona Raises $225 Million ** Stratos Sells Shares to Pay Down Debt ** Metromedia Seeks Creditor Protection ** Correction -- Utility Poles ** How to Confront the Spam Crisis ============================================================ PRICE CAP DECISION TO BE RELEASED THURSDAY: On May 30 at 4:00 p.m., the CRTC will release its long-awaited price cap decision. Watch for a special edition of Telecom Update Friday morning, highlighting key aspects of the decision. ** The decision will be available on the CRTC website, as are the submissions, comments, and evidence submitted in this proceeding. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/Eng/2001/8678/C12-11.htm#4d AT&T CANADA RAISES MILLIONS: AT&T Canada has raised $85.5 million by monetizing currency interest rate swaps. Its banks have agreed to provide access to another $200 million when it produces an acceptable business plan following the CRTC price cap decision. U.S. COURT SLOWS TELEGLOBE REORGANIZATION: The U.S. Bankruptcy Court has refused to grant protection to Teleglobe's U.S. subsidiaries in the form the company requested. Teleglobe says it will consider alternatives, including a Chapter 11 filing. ROGERS INTROS GPRS DATA SERVICE: The new Rogers AT&T Portage Plus service allows selected GPRS-equipped cellphones to act as wireless modems for laptops or PDAs. The start-up fee for the service is $129; usage charges range from $30 for 5 MB/month to $145 for 80 MB/month. Customers who sign on by June 30 get six months' unlimited usage for $50/month. CALGARY TO PUT WIRELESS LANs IN SCHOOLS: The Calgary Board of Education has decided to equip more than 200 primary and secondary schools with wireless LANs, enabling students to move laptops room-to-room without losing network connections. Avaya will supply the 11 Mbps wireless LAN technology, which will be used by 90,000 students. BCI ASKS HEARING ON NASDAQ DELISTING: Nasdaq says BCI no longer complies with the Minimum Bid Price requirement for continued listing. BCI has asked for a hearing to review this decision; its TSX listing is unaffected. IBM TO SELL MITEL 3100: IBM has agreed to sell Mitel's 3100 Integrated Communications Platform and 6000 Managed Applications Server through its distribution channels, as part of its small business solutions product line. TIW WARNS OF COMING CASH CRUNCH: TIW reports revenues of $139 million in the first quarter, 37% higher than last year. Net income of $39.5 million includes a $48 million one-time gain. TIW warns that its cash obligations during the next 12 months "exceed its committed sources of funds and cash on hand." (See Telecom Update #319) MICROSOFT TO OPEN CANADIAN CALL CENTRE: Microsoft Corp. plans to establish an international technical-support centre in Mississauga that will employ 50 people. COMPUTER USE INCREASES AMONG FARMERS: StatsCan reports that 40% of Canadian farms used computers in 2001, twice the proportion in 1996. Seven out of 10 farm computer users surfed the Internet for commodity prices, weather reports, and other information. TELEGLOBE, 360NETWORKS DELAY FINANCIAL RESULTS: Teleglobe and 360networks both say that they will not file annual and first quarter reports by the required dates because of financial problems related to their attempts to restructure. PERSONA RAISES $225 MILLION: Persona Inc, formerly Regional Cablesystems, has set up a $225 million line of credit with six Canadian banks and says it now has $120 million available for further acquisitions in Canada. STRATOS SELLS SHARES TO PAY DOWN DEBT: Stratos Global, which provides satellite telecom services, has raised $149 million in new equity, which will be used to repay debt. ** Stratos reports first quarter revenue of US$79.4 million, 21% higher than the same period last year. Net income: $2.8 million. METROMEDIA SEEKS CREDITOR PROTECTION: New York-based Metromedia Fiber Network, which joined with Telus to build a fibre network in Toronto, has filed for bankruptcy protection. Metromedia sold Telus its interest in the Toronto project in December. (See Telecom Update #254, 325) CORRECTION -- UTILITY POLES: Telecom Update #333 incorrectly cited the CRTC-determined rate for cableco use of hydro poles. The correct price is $15.89/year. HOW TO CONFRONT THE SPAM CRISIS: A tidal wave of junk e-mail threatens to destroy the usefulness of e-mail for business. A special feature in the May issue of Telemanagement proposes measures to bring the spam crisis under control. Also in Telemanagement #195: ** Is Your Data Network Ready for Voice? ** First Steps in Disaster Planning ** Why IP Telephony Lags in Call Centres Single copies of Telemanagement #195 are $75 each -- call 905-686-5050 ext 500 and charge to Visa, American Express, or Mastercard. Save 49% with a 10-issue subscription -- go to http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 10:04:25 -0400 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: Alternate Local SPs in Boston Area For Consumers? danielzr@netzero.net (Daniel Rosenzweig) asks, > Are there any competative local Service Providers for consumers > available in the Boston Suburbs (Newton)? Mostly the cable companies. Newton is lucky to have real cable competition. Both AT&T-B and RCN offer telephone service. I've found AT&T's (former MediaOne, not TCI) to be far superior to VZ's, both on service and price. (It is not Voice over IP; it is far more reliable than their cable modem service.) But you do have to be careful to pick the right plan. Some plans give a more generous local calling area than VZ, some plans though may be quite narrow, or cost more than VZ for out-of-local coverage. I'm not sure about loop-based competition. A few CLECs are in Newton, but other than resellers, I haven't heard a lot of interest in residential service. (I know one who is considering entry but isn't in Newton yet.) ------------------------------ From: David Harmon Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Organization: Form follows function. Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 14:56:11 GMT On Thu, 23 May 2002 18:11:57 -0600 in comp.dcom.telecom, Joey Lindstrom wrote: > The question that was raised was this: some ISP's block port 25 > unless it's a request to relay through their OWN servers. This > prevents Tommy from sending mail via mail.albelin.com, which resolves > to *MY* IP address and *MY* server. Yes, he has authorization to use > this server. He has to POP-before-SMTP, but once he's met that I thought servers that were specifically set up for that kind of usage would accept connects on some port other than 25. ------------------------------ From: Jeff Grossman Subject: Re: PRI Service Organization: Stikman.com Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 19:00:51 GMT EM Handler wrote: > T1 has become the generic name for a digital trunk with in-band > signaling, typically channelized for 24 voice paths. PRI, also a > digital circuit, is the nickname for Primary Rate Interface of the > Integrated Services Digital Network or PRI/ISDN. PRI typically has 23 > voice paths (referred to as 'B' channels) and 1 signaling or 'D' > channel. PRI is usually superior when compared to most T1 > nconfigurations. When I was researching T-1's for my office, I noticed that a PRI will come with more features then a standard T-1. For instance, you get caller ID standard with a PRI. This might not be standard across the country, but it was here in Southern California. Also, they say that it is quicker to get a dial tone with a PRI than it is with a standard T-1. But, all of this comes with a price. The PRI was about double the price than the standard T-1 for me. Jeff Grossman (jeff@stikman.com) ------------------------------ From: Andrew Yeomans Subject: Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 22:03:19 +0100 Organization: ntlworld News Service Robert A. Fink M.D. wrote in message news:telecom20.264.12@telecom-digest.org: > The modem, a Supra 56K PCI voice modem, was installed as a separate > "component" (the PC was built to specifications). It is not a "winmodem". Don't necessarily believe it. Check first on http://www.idir.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html . Some of the ones listed there precisely fit your description, but are winmodems. If it plugs into a serial port, then it won't be a winmodem. But most internal cards nowadays are. Andrew Yeomans ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 01:26:34 GMT I wrote: > I'm looking for an intercom application that will work over our WAN > via IP. Ideally, this would involve only port 80, because part of our > WAN is stuck behind a firewall over which I have no control. > The idea is that each of a dozen computers (all, fortunately, on T1 > lines or better) will have a button on the screen that the user can > push to be connected to the "group chat" session. Several people responding, but not with anything that seems like it will work. Why is this so hard? Isn't this basically the same technology as text chat? Couldn't a voice stream be encoded within the same technology designed for text? Joel ------------------------------ From: no man Subject: Panasonic KX-F780 Organization: yes man Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 02:06:24 GMT Anyone else know anything about this fax machine? I don't have a user manual for it, but would love an online version if anyone else could point me in the right direction. Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 07:02:03 -0400 From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) Subject: What is This (Email) World Coming To? What is this world coming to? First it is the slime of the earth that use SPAM, then semi-reputable places like the Chubb Institute, and now "good" companies like Gevalia Coffee! > You may also call us at 1-800-GEVALIA (1-800-438-2542), 24 hours a > day, 7 days a week. David [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'm beginning to think we are fighting a losing battle **based on the economics of email delivery**. There is no real incentive for spammers to stop. Email is **so cheap to send** and **relatively effective in reaching people**, so what if there are a certain number of economic casualties like occassional toll-free phone lines with spiraling costs. Still less expensive than buying a million postage stamps. I think the whole system of processing email on the net has to change before there is going to be any difference. There will have to be some economic burden on the users of email before we see any changes (i.e. 'pay as you use them' email post offices. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 08:10:29 -0400 From: Quinn Michael Organization: BAH Subject: Isterra Calling Card Problems We have Isterra long distance (we learned about it in TELECOM Digest) and are happy with one exception -- our Verizon (northern VA) call intercept, the one that blocks "out of area" or "not available" calls, will not accept calls to our house made with our calling card, where my company MCI card got right through from the same Verizon payphone in Maryland over the weekend; same thing happened recently from a hotel room in VA, so it's definitely the card. Has anyone else experienced this? Anyone know of a comparable LD carrier with competitive rates (around 5 cents a minute interstate) where this will not happen? Thanks, Mike ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 09:36:35 +0000 From: J.T. Thompson Subject: Query: International Phone Calls Using Internet Query: Anyone use the internet for international phone calls? What programs do you use; do you need ISDN or DSL or satellite access to avoid buffering; how does it work; what are the advantages and disadvantages? ------------------------------ From: jm04469@yahoo.com (Author) Subject: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? Date: 27 May 2002 09:41:33 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I have to do a paper for school on what is required to start a cable telivision network. The only site to date that has this information is cablemaven.com but they want $159 for which I cannot afford. If anyone can point me to free sources on the Internet, it would be greatly appreciated. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you can't afford to buy the report for this from cablemaven.com then you definitly cannot afford to start a cable network. You have to begin with huge gobs of money and little or no expectations of any return on your investment. There are a lot of things on your checklist; maybe others here will write you with the sordid details. But start by having a huge bank account and expect several year's investment before you see any return at all for your efforts. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 27 May 2002 15:55:28 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Anothr E-mail Spammer with a Toll Free Number TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > Will all your efforts ever get rid of them? Probably not ... like > cockroaches, if there was a nuclear explosion as part of a world war, > I suspect roaches would survive it all; and spammers also. PAT] I believe it was P.T Barnham who said a sucker is born every minute. So as long as new people get on the net it will keep on. Also some of the numbers are just toll free voice mails which only cost ... 10 cents per call, so nothing may stop them, that is other then the supplier will get hit with the payphone charges with each call. The numbers where you get a real company or person will get their attention. Until IPs are hit in the pocket book with fines, nothing will stop it. On another subject I got several e-mails on the Nigerian oil scams and forwared it to an address that their government set up. They are serious about stopping it, from a reply I got if caught they will spend a lot of years in jail. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So the King in Nigeria has decided to crack down on the scamspam has he? Well, good. Let's see if we can notice any difference a year or two from now. Why don't I think we will see any difference? PAT] ------------------------------ From: bassbozo@yahoo.com (mentzer) Subject: Re: Anothr E-mail Spammer with a Toll Free Number Date: 27 May 2002 15:58:39 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Why would I waste my time doing something so juvenile? Let me guess ... "two wrongs make a right," perhaps? Or maybe "the end justifies the means"? I don't think so. Grow up, kid, and do something productive. mm stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) wrote in message news:... > Remember it is against the law to harrass anyone by telephone. Also > you should use a payphone so that the operator can make a little > money. > Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the > Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. > > The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) > Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, Steve, another entry for which we > all appreciate your purusing the open minefield called the Internet. > But I really have to wonder what good it does, it any ... when I was > living in Junction City, Kansas three years ago, the landlord came > around one day to bomb the roaches out of existence. He brought > 'bombs' of roach spray, several cans of spray, roach motels, the > works. I stayed in another room that night and the next day when I > saw a couple hundred of the little buggers evacuting their nest near > the floorboard behind the cooking stove. Will all your efforts ever > get rid of them? Probably not ... like cockroaches, if there was a > nuclear explosion as part of a world war, I suspect roaches would > survive it all; and spammers also. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #265 ****************************** ISSUE 266 GOT MAILED OUT OF ORDER. 267 WAS MAILED BUT 266 DID NOT GO OUT UNTIL MONDAY NIGHT AND FOLLOWS AFTER 267 From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 31 15:34:52 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA19186; Fri, 31 May 2002 15:34:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 15:34:52 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205311934.PAA19186@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #267 TELECOM Digest Fri, 31 May 2002 15:36:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 267 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) EXTRA, May 31, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) MyLine Local Service - First Coast-to-Coast Local Phone Company (myexcel) Workstation User Cannot Hear the System Intercom Thru SeriesE (Keith) Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? (James Gifford) MCI Neighborhood and Fax/Modem(ISP) Usage, no DSL (Doug Reuben) Wi-Fi 'Hot Spots' Allow Laptop, PDA User to be Tracked (Monty Solomon) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (Zed) They Will Never Learn (Steven Lichter) This Month's Nagware Request (TELECOM Digest Editor) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 09:56:54 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) EXTRA, May 31, 2002 *********************************************************** TELECOM UPDATE EXTRA! ** CRTC RELEASES PRICE CAPS DECISION CONSUMERS ARE THE BIG WINNERS AT&T MAY APPEAL ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 334a: May 31, 2002 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** AT&T CANADA http://www.attcanada.com ** BELL CANADA http://www.bell.ca ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ May 31, 2001: Consumers are the big winners in the CRTC's Price Caps decision, released yesterday. Both the incumbent phone companies and their major competitors are unhappy, and AT&T Canada says it may file an appeal. The 232 pages of CRTC Telecom Decision 2002-34 set the framework for regulating the major telephone companies for the next four years. Highlights include: ** Basic residential service rates, on average, will not increase unless inflation exceeds 3.5%. Within this cap, no individual rate may increase more than 5% per year, and rates for optional services such as voice mail and call waiting may not increase more than $1 per year per feature. ** Business service rate increases are limited, on average, to inflation rate. No individual rate elements can increase more than 10% per year. ** The telcos' markup on essential services used by competitors has been cut from 25% to 15%. ** Digital Network Access service, which competitors have been paying retail rates for, must now be offered to competitors at cost+15%. ** Customers and competitors will be entitled to rebates if telcos fail to meet Quality of Service standards. The CRTC will open several follow-on proceedings to consider such issues as payphone rates, a consumer bill of rights, and other questions. Overall, it appears that the decision will reduce the fees paid by competitors to use telco facilities by 15% to 20%. This is much less than the 50% to 75% they wanted -- but more than the telcos thought appropriate. Consumer groups have welcomed the decision. Philippa Lawson of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre said that "Hopefully, ordinary consumers will now start seeing some benefits from competition in the local phone market." The telcos, which wanted to increase residence rates and opposed reductions to competitor rates, say they will have to study the decision more fully to assess its impact. Representatives of Bell Canada and Telus both criticized the restrictions on their ability to raise rates. AT&T Canada and Call-Net, which had hoped for much larger discounts on competitor services, expressed disappointment. AT&T CEO John McLennan called it a "disappointing decision," and promised to "explore all options ... including a possible appeal." http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2002/dt2002-34.htm ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ============================================================ ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: Subject: MyLine Local Service - First Coast-to-Coast Local Phone Company Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 01:12:59 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - West [Editor's Note: Although the following comes close to sounding like MLM and I feel a little uneasy about using it here, the concept of a national coast-to-coast 'local calling area' is an interesting concept. I thought I would let readers think it over and see where the discussion takes us. This is not, so far as I know, the same 'MyLine' service I sold here a few years ago. Maybe these folks bought the name to use it. PAT] Excel "MyLine" Local Service ROLL-OUT PREVIEW "The United States' First Coast-to-Coast Local Phone Company" >>> Unprecedented Opportunity for Substantial Income <<< I'm a national recruiter for the fastest growing company in the communications industry and I'm looking for a few sharp people interested in making some serious income. Do you know anyone who may be interested? The following overview is privileged information on the referral-marketing program and income potential associated with the rollout of Local Telephone service with the merger of Excel Communications and VarTec Telecom, which was finalized in March 2002. (www.excel.com / www.VarTec.com) The new partnership, VarTec-Excel, is looking for key individuals to assist in the state-by-state nationwide rollout of what is called "MyLine" local phone service. These entrepreneurs will be the ONLY source for customers to subscribe to this one-of-kind, groundbreaking Local Phone plan. VarTec-Excel will help these reps make money with the referral program described below. The financial rewards in the form of monthly residuals and bonuses will be substantial for those who are on board when the green light is given to register customers around the country. >> HOW YOU CAN EARN SUBSTANTIAL INCOME: The primary responsibility for the VarTec-Excel business owner will be to gather "WEBS" of customers on the calling plan. These customers who are referred to use the MyLine service will be able to call each other and never have to pay a long distance fee! That's right, they can talk for as long as they want and never pay a dime!!! Imagine the possibilities. As an example: If you're an Excel business owner with 10 personal "My Line" customers, and each one refers just three friends or relatives to Excel Local Service, who each refer just three more, etc. you will receive anywhere from 2-10% of all the phone bills, each and every month! The monthly cost for My Line local phone service depends on individual state tariffs, but is anticipated to be a flat rate of $29, $39, and $49 per month. Up to 10 features are included in the price: Unlimited Local Calls, Call Waiting, Call Forwarding, Caller ID, 3-Way Calling and long-distance calling from 3.9 - 6.9 cents per minute. Remember, My Line customers on the "Value" and "Complete" plans can call each other unlimited and never pay long distance, no matter where they live. Doesn't matter if they are across the street or across the country!! Between My Line customers, these are considered LOCAL calls. Also, there are no "per-call minimums." Excel broke historic records when they grew from $31 Million in revenue to over $1.2 Billion in just 3 years by marketing deregulated Long Distance (LD) using this method. Today, VarTec-Excel is a $2.5 BILLION telecom giant, and unlike the 90's, they have the entire network and switches already in place. With revenue projections for 2005 near $10 Billion, you will see an explosion that will make the 1993 growth record pale by comparison. Can you find a reason NOT to take part in this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity? Join our team of Excel Reps! Contact me at Blake McCoach VarTec-Excel Communications 714.846.6558 home office myexcel@socal.rr.com www.excelir.com/xlr8me ------------------------------ From: keithwvaughn@hotmail.com (Keith) Subject: Workstation User Cannot Hear System Intercom Thru Dterm SeriesE Date: 29 May 2002 15:41:54 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hello, Was hoping that maybe someone might be able to answer the following question, given this info: Telephone Units: Dterm Series E - DTP-8D-1 System: NEAX 2000 IVS Integrated Voice Server Configurable Software: MATWorX 32 version: 2.5.34 Hosted on: Windows NT 4 Server SP6a We have a workstation that cannot hear the system Intercom thru their telephone; Switch the telephone unit, and New telephone still can't hear the intercom (Old telephone plugged into separate location CAN hear it). Looking for Key Chart for Features (Hoping just missing a Specific Key Feature config) can't seem to locate ??? Our software, is remotely configured for us via VNC. So we're not familiar with the MATWorX 32 software configurations. Thanks In Advance; appreciate you taking the time to comment. ------------------------------ From: James Gifford Subject: Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 17:02:54 -0700 Organization: Nitrosyncretic Press Author wrote: > I have to do a paper for school on what is required to start a cable > television network. 3,735,921 feet of cable. :) | James Gifford - Nitrosyncretic Press | | http://www.nitrosyncretic.com for the Heinlein FAQ & more | | Tired of auto-spam... change "not" to "net" for replies | ------------------------------ From: Interpage Network Services Inc. Subject: MCI Neighborhood and Fax/Modem(ISP) Usage, no DSL Organization: http://www.interpage.net Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 15:10:58 GMT Hello, I'm looking for some dispositive information (from MCI's web site or in writing, ie, brochures, newspaper ads, etc.) regarding MCI's "Neighborhood" $50 plan with unlimited local and long distance. (MCI becomes your local and LD provider.) According to MCI, (as best I can tell), you may only use "The Neighborhood" for *voice* calls. What few guidelines they have posted on the various pagers on their web site (the PDF file in mostly unreadable to me) indicate that non-voice calls may be billed at a different rate, but it is not clear what that rate will be. Since MCI takes over both local, INTRA and INTER LATA toll, their policy would effectively prohibit both fax and modem traffic (to an ISP for example). (Curiously, there is no high-speed/broadband data offering with their "Neighborhood" package; a combo product would make their offering much more attractive; as it stands, if you currently have ADSL multiplexed over your voice line it seems you may have to get rid of the DSL in order to sign up with MCI.) Asking consumers to not use non-voice services and at the same time not provide an alternative to data dialup (via ISP) strikes me as brain-dead (well, this IS MCI after all ... :), let alone somewhat deceptive and unintuitive as sending faxes or logging on to an ISP are (IMO) commonplace in many households now. This reminds me of Sprint a few years ago with their unlimited weekends saying "You may not use 3-way calling with the Sprint Unlimited Plan" (which the slimey people at Sprint never told anyone about until after they re-rated your bills at a non-unlimited rate!), but on a scale which may adversely affect a significantly larger number of consumers (not too many people use 3-way; I think many more people use fax machines and dialup internet service). I'm very reluctantly considering giving them a try, but without a definitive statement on what may or may not be used (and pricing) I'm reticent to even bother. MCI has a horrible customer service history with us (we used to use them as the 1+ carrier on some of our cellphones when cellular LD was NOT included as a component of airtime minutes), and just talking to someone who could carry on a coherent conversation there was trying, let alone answer and/or resolve a problem. Any info would be appreciated! Thanks in advance! -Doug d1@interpage.net www.interpage.net (510) 315-2750 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 15:11:14 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wi-Fi 'Hot Spots' Allow Laptop, PDA User to be Covertly Tracked By Simson L. Garfinkel Special to The Seattle Times If you have one of those fancy new wireless Wi-Fi or 802.11(b) cards in your laptop or handheld computer, you probably know about the increasing number of "Wi-Fi hot spots" where you can get wireless Internet access -- often without paying. What you may not know, experts warn, is that these hot spots can also use your wireless card to track your movements as you walk around. Meanwhile, other people using the same hot spots can covertly monitor all of the information that you send over the air. ------------------------------ From: gc@Radix.Net (Zed) Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? Date: 31 May 2002 17:19:06 GMT Organization: Spontaneous In article , David B. Horvath, CCP wrote: > What is this world coming to? First it is the slime of the earth that > use SPAM, then semi-reputable places like the Chubb Institute, and now > "good" companies like Gevalia Coffee! >> You may also call us at 1-800-GEVALIA (1-800-438-2542), 24 hours a >> day, 7 days a week. > David > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'm beginning to think we are fighting > a losing battle **based on the economics of email delivery**. There is > no real incentive for spammers to stop. Email is **so cheap to send** There may be an incentive for the large more reputable companies. I don't know how long ago recorded telemarketing calls started. The first one I got was a bit over 20 years ago. It was from Prudential Insurance. Of course, I have never done any business with them since. In the years since then, I have noticed that the telemarketing recordings seldom mention a company name. They'll just give a number to call. These companies don't want their name associated with telemarketing. Spamming may be cost effective even if it produces a very small number of sales. If it becomes obvious that people really hate spammers and that it is a good way of getting a bad reputation, there may be some hope of the big guys avoiding it. OTOH, as evidence of increasing use of spam by small companies: http://www.blacksnowcloud.com. Yes, I am now getting spam for septic tank cleaner; about half a dozen in the last week. And I have never had a septic tank. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Telemarketing phone calls have been around for more like fifty to sixty years. The advent of direct dialed long distance calls (1950's) and automated collect calling (800 numbers started in the 1960's) made telemarketing extremely lucrative. And yes, you do have a septic tank, or cesspool. It sits on your desk and Usenet pours in there all day long. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 31 May 2002 13:31:57 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: They Will Never Learn ...to teach this individual about the cost of owning a Toll Free number... -----Original Message----- Best Wishes For Great Golf Dana Jones TheBallman Serving the Internet Golf Community Since 1996 888-205-4059 Voice 281-991-6442 Fax 281-991-6800 From Outside The US 435 B-1 FM 1092 Stafford, TX 77477 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Remember it is against the law to harrass anyone by telephone. Also you should use a payphone so that the operator can make a little money. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor (ptownson) Date: 31 May 2002 14:16:00 CDT Subject: Time to Pass the Hat Once Again Well we are again at the end of one month and the start of the next one. In this case, it is the end of spring and the start of summer. Again, I ask you to please remember the importance of supporting your various mailing list/newsgroup moderators with 'subscription' donations as you are able and willing. No one gets cut off here because of their inability or unwillingness to give financial support. Messages are not presented, organized, commented upon or declined for presenta- tion here because of your financial contributions. Whether or not *I* live in the style to which I was formerly accustomed DOES depend on your financial support. Other than my social security disability payments. I have no other income than your gifts. In addition to making payments via check/money order to: TELECOM / Post Office Box 50 / Independence, KS 67301 via credit cards: http//telecom-digest.org Now you can also use credit cards of your choice or Paypal. To do this, go to http://telecom-digest.org and see the 'donate' button at the very bottom of the main page. Thanks very much for your help. Remember, TELECOM Digest is shareware, not freeware. And think of all the spam and virii that never reaches you because I cut it out first. Please do it today. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #267 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jun 3 23:53:09 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA01898; Mon, 3 Jun 2002 23:53:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 23:53:09 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206040353.XAA01898@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #268 TELECOM Digest Mon, 3 Jun 2002 23:53:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 268 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 5/31/2002 ICB Heads Up Headlines (Judith Oppenheimer) Verizon Class-Action Lawsuit, & proposed Michigan legislation (Jack) Excel MyLine Local Service - USA's Coast-to-Coast Local Phone (myexcel) Austin 911 System Flooded: "Simply" a Matter of Human Error (C. Dawson) Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? (Greg Monti) Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? (Author) How Do I Report (900)62-CLAIM Telephone Fraud? (burgerwars) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: 5/31/2002 ICB HEADS UP HEADLINES Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 23:36:05 -0400 ICB HEADS UP HEADLINES for the period ending May 31, 2002 from http://ICBTollFreeNews.com - Covering the Political, Legal and Marketing Arenas of 800, ENUM and Dot Com. ARTICLE ACCESS CODE LEGEND ICB Toll Free News offers two valuable service options: F = Free - News and Features articles P = Premium - Unlimited Site Access including all Articles and Documents. Registration information is not sold, leased or rented. *** For additional information about topics and stories, keyword search here: http://www.icbtollfree.com/Search.cfm. ____________________________________________________ F - NTIA PETITIONED TO REBID ICANN "Half of the signatories to this letter have never been to an ICANN meeting, so I'm not sure why they signed..." said ICANN President Stuart Lynn in reaction to the petition -- an observation both inappropriate and ironic, considering that Stuart Lynn had also never been to an ICANN meeting prior to commencing his employment as its president. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5683 P - U.S. TOLL-FREE SERVICES MARKET Frost & Sullivan estimates that 90% of Americans use toll-free numbers. The U.S. toll-free services market generated $17.28 billion in revenues in 2000. This report points out two market segments for toll-free services, including the following: residential toll-free services, and business toll-free services (small, medium and enterprise.) CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5688 F - ITU UPDATE ON ENUM In keeping with the need to allow for voluntary implementation of the scheme and recognizing that ENUM services are primarily national issues, rapid progress at the international level is necessary to create a stable environment in which investment can be made in the worldwide deployment of ENUM. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5685 F - THE PUBLIC VOICE IN INTERNET POLICY MAKING On Saturday June 22 ,the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in association with INET 2002, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) and Georgia Tech IP3, will host a one-day public symposium on the Public Voice in Internet Policy. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5684 F - SHOULD VERISIGN DUMP NSI? Some analysts are calling for the company to dump its once highly valued domain name registration business. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5682 F - LYNN AND MCLAUGHLIN TO EXIT ICANN Did they jump, or were they putsched? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5680 F - UK ISSUES ENUM REPORT Discusses implementation options and regulatory considerations. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5679 F - ENUM UPDATE Internet Society announces, "Countries wishing to implement ENUM system may now do so." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5677 P - DID THEY TAKE YOUR KIDS HOSTAGE? John Gilmore tells ICANN's Vint Cerf, "I don't want to be considered a friend of what you now stand for." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5681 F - NO FREE .US RIDE FOR NEUSTAR Congressional supporters of the dot-kids legislation dismiss NeuStar's claim that operating the "dot-kids" space would cost too much. "NeuStar got this [dot us] contract from the U.S. Government for free," said Mike Waldron, a spokesman for Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), who cosponsored the [dot kids] bill. "They are going to realize a huge windfall from being awarded this contract." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5675 P - ICANN CONTRACT NONENFORCEMENT, A WHOIS HEARING RECURRING THEME The solution would call for a complete overhaul in the registrar process, according to ICANN Communications Director Mary Hewitt, from the front-end customer sign-up process to quality assurance staffers to ensure the information given was correct. "We agree with the FTC that the domains need to be enforced (by the registrars) and they need to abide by that, but until there's a less-expensive way for the registrar to verify them," it won't happen, she said. Which begs the question, why is ICANN accrediting registrars that can't (or won't) adhere to its Registrar Accreditation agreement? And why doesn't ICANN disaccredit them when they don't? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5676 /=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= advertisement =-=-=-\ 350,000+ toll free business listings, 85% with web sites Serious inquiries only. mailto:sales@800management.com \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=.=/ -- Lost and Stolen Number Retrieval -- ENUM Survival Strategies -- Crisis Resolution -- Vanity Number Issues, Guidance & Navigation -- Tollfree Number Traces -- Representation at SNAC, ENUM & ICANN Forums -- Strategic Leadership + Competitive Intelligence -- Custom Research Reports -- Custom Problem Solving: disputes, litigation support, RespOrg issues, etc. ICB Consultancy -- http://1800TheExpert.com \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=.=/ Looking for the best 800 and long distance rates available today? Choose from multiple programs - Rates as low as 2.9¢ per minute, with no monthly minimums or hidden service charges! Click here: http://WhoSells800.com \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=/ F - STAYING THE COURSE ON INTERNET PRIVATIZATION The recently announced resignations of top ICANN staff raise the specter of a sharp drop in organizational effectiveness. The combination of staff turnover and major restructuring could introduce so much simultaneous change into ICANN that it cannot function effectively. ICANN faces a near-term risk of destabilization. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5687 F - EFF FILES FOR IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO ICANN RECORDS "As even Mr. Lynn admits, ICANN requires dramatic reform," noted EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "The Internet community relies on ICANN's Board members, especially its elected ones, to help find out what has gone wrong and evaluate the proposed solutions. Without access to the basic information about how ICANN has been run so far, Mr. Auerbach cannot help formulate the next incarnation of ICANN to fix the problems of the past." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5674 F - WECANN REVIEWS ICANN There are two classes of reform propositions. First are attempts to improve the proposition of Stuart Lynn, which are ICANN-centric, wanting to address the problems of the ICANN, mostly building on Staff's positions, and in most of the cases they do not propose any source for the ICANN authority (membership or governments). Second, there are propositions concentrating on the interest of the networks. They lead to a very lean ICANN, a disbanded ICANN or a review by the USG either of the choice of the ICANN or of its mission. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5673 P - SNAC ASKS FOR ELEVEN NEW 800 NXXs Frustrated with the non-release of 855, industry hopes additional 800 NXXs will "re-vanitize" the 800 pool. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5672 F - ICANN PROPOSED 2002-2003 BUDGET ... ... leaves no money for public elections ... and any at large ("public interest") costs, "would be funded from external contributions." Why mention it at all? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5671 F - CAN WE REPLACE ICANN? The idea that ICANN's incompetence should be rewarded with more power, more money, and less adult supervision, would be laughable were it not being pursued with such vigor by ICANN staff members who otherwise face the prospect of seeking new employment. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5670 F - VERISIGN SUED FOR SLAMMING Tom Cunningham, BulkRegister chief executive officer, said the damages caused by VeriSign's false advertising are exacerbated by the industry's slow down in new and renewed domain names and is a violation of the Lanham Act. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5668 P - REALNAMES IS HISTORY Founder Keith Teare says, "I am sure that Microsoft will do an excellent job of misinforming the public about the reasons for this decision and so I want to put the record straight." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5667 F - WHOIS ENTITLED TO WHOIS DATA? Available data suggests that existing work by registrars and ICANN has been unsuccessful in assuring the accuracy of WHOIS data. BUT there are relatively few other products that one can buy that require the purchaser to post his name onto a bulletin board that is visible to the world. Why should a person who buys a domain name be subjected to this breach of privacy? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5669 P - WHAT HAPPENS WHEN AN 800 COMPANY GOES BELLY UP? It seeks Bankruptcy Court approval for auction or sale of its property and assets, which for all practical purposes include valuable 800 numbers. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5666 F - GUESS WHERE "AMERICA'S INTERNET ADDRESS(tm)" IS HEADING? "China is the fastest growing Internet market in the world," said Jeffrey E. Ganek, Chairman and CEO of NeuStar. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5664 F - RANDY BUSH FOR (ICANN) PRESIDENT What's it gonna be - a bigger richer ICANN - or a streamlined, working ICANN? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5665 F - DOMAIN NAME MARKET SHOWS STEADY GROWTH New registrations for the domain name market in the first quarter increased 13% to 2.6 million from 2.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2001. Market renewals and extensions increased by 22%. The market renewal rate for the first quarter remained healthy at approximately 52%. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5663 ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ EVERY 3.6 SECONDS SOMEONE DIES FROM HUNGER http://www.hungersite.com/ ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ ABOUT ICB ICB HeadsUp Headlines is sent by request. Subscriptions to ICB HeadsUp Headlines are free to qualified applicants. Visit http://www.icbtollfree.com/reg.cfm?NextURL=Index.cfm to register. To unsubscribe visit http://www.icbtollfree.com/account.cfm and uncheck the Mailing List Subscription box. ___________________________________________________ ADVERTISING For information on advertising in ICB HeadsUp Headlines, mailto:editor@icbtollfree.com, subject: Headlines Advertising ____________________________________________________ Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. ____________________________________________________ Copyright 2002 ICB, Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ From: Jack Subject: Verizon Class-Action Lawsuit, & Proposed Michigan Legislation Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2002 16:38:43 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Here's a couple of recent items that may be of interest to readers of this group. One is Michigan-specific; the other is not. I'll start with the one that is not: Group granted class-action status in suit against Verizon Judge admits unusual nature of reversing earlier decision 5/31/02 By SCOTT HADLY [Santa Barbara, CA] NEWS-PRESS STAFF WRITER In a rare move, Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Thomas Anderle reversed himself and granted class-action status to a group of Verizon Communication customers in a lawsuit over overcharges on monthly phone bills. The judge's decision Wednesday will allow attorneys to obtain detailed billing records from the phone company and determine how many of Verizon's more than 30 million customers nationwide were overcharged during a six-year period and how much. The case, filed in August 2000, includes four local residents who allege that Verizon assigned customers to long-distance carriers that the customers did not pick. They also claim that the company overcharged customers for long-distance calls and then adopted policies to avoid paying cash refunds for those overcharges. Estimates from the company's own records show that more than a million customers were overcharged. The company attributed it to a computer error, which was corrected. But just how much customers were overcharged has yet to be determined, said Pete Bezek, the Santa Barbara attorney handling the case. The full story on this is at: http://news.newspress.com/topsports/053102verizon.htm The law firm's Web site is at: http://www.foleybezek.com/gte/gte.html Comment: If I am reading the law firm's page right, what they are alleging is that GTE not only sometimes routed calls to a carrier other than the customer's preselected carrier, but when they did that, in some cases they also billed the customer more than what the long distance company billed for the call and pocketed the difference. If a customer noticed that something was wrong and complained, they either got a credit against future service or (rarely) a cash refund. But, it seems the law firm is alleging that many customers never noticed the excessive charges. Item #2 (Michigan specific:) The Michigan Telecommunications Act was revised in 2000 to include a provision that requires telephone companies to include "adjacent calling areas" (which can be read as "adjacent exchanges" everywhere but Detroit) within a customer's local calling area. This change in the law has resulted in expanded local calling areas for many telephone customers throughout Michigan. Unfortunately, this provision was inserted into the Act in a section that initially only applies to Ameritech and Verizon. What it says is that any phone company that "provides basic local exchange service or basic local exchange and toll service to less than 250,000 end-users in this state" is exempted from this section of the Act. The net effect is that many Ameritech and Verizon customers in Michigan have already received expanded local calling areas, and some Verizon customers will receive additional expanded local calling in August of 2002. Meanwhile, customers of Michigan's smaller telephone companies, such as CenturyTel, TDS Telecom, and most of the other, smaller companies have not received any expansions of their local calling area (two small companies - Drenthe Telephone and Barry County Telephone - appear to have voluntarily expanded local calling areas, but they are the only ones that I'm aware of that have done so). The way the law is written, most customers of independent companies will not receive expanded local calling to all adjacent exchanges until such time as their telephone company files for, and is granted a rate increase. At that point the telephone company loses their exemption, and must offer expanded local calling. Since in some cases it may be years before a company decides to apply for a rate increase - especially if they know they'll have to expand local calling areas - many customers of these companies are understandably frustrated that they were left out of the local calling area expansion. The situation is particularly frustrating in many exchanges that are adjacent to Ameritech or Verizon exchanges, because customers of those (Ameritech or Verizon) exchanges can place calls into the independent exchanges as a local call, but if the customer in the independent telephone company exchange needs to return the call, they will be hit with a toll charge. House Bill No. 6097 would remove this inequity. This proposed legislation was introduced on May 21, 2002 in the Michigan House of Representatives by Representatives Allen, Bradstreet, Shackleton and Neumann. This legislation is now in the Michigan House Committee on Energy and Technology. If those who are served by the smaller companies (or have friends or relatives who are served by those companies) want to see this legislation become law, now would be a good time to contact your state representative - particularly if he or she serves on the Committee on Energy and Technology. For more information, including a complete list of representatives that server on the committee, see this web page: http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/hb6097.html If you have friends or relatives that live in a part of Michigan served by a phone company other than Ameritech or Verizon, you might want to take a moment and send them the above URL. I'd hate to see this corrective legislation die in committee because no one knew it was under consideration. Jack (The From: e-mail address vanishes like a sand castle at the seashore during high tide, once the spammers find it.) Resources for Michigan Telephone Users page: http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/ ------------------------------ From: wesrock@aol.com (Wes Leatherock) Date: 02 Jun 2002 23:45:48 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: MyLine Local Service - First Coast-to-Coast Local Phone Company > [Editor's Note: Although the following comes close to sounding like > MLM and I feel a little uneasy about using it here, the concept of a > national coast-to-coast 'local calling area' is an interesting > concept. I thought I would let readers think it over and see where > the discussion takes us. This is not, so far as I know, the same > 'MyLine' service I sold here a few years ago. Maybe these folks bought > the name to use it. PAT] [ ... text deleted ... ] > ... The following overview is privileged information on > the referral-marketing program and income potential associated with > the rollout of Local Telephone service with the merger of Excel > Communications and VarTec Telecom, which was finalized in March > 2002. (www.excel.com / www.VarTec.com) A news story in The Daily Oklahoman (Oklahoma City) a day or two ago said VarTec was closing their Tulsa call center. Earlier they had said the center had 1,100 employees, but they would not say how many there were now who would be affected by the closing. No mention at all of Excel. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very, very interesting. Are all telco sales agents a bunch of crooks, or just most of them? The guy who sent me the original piece last week sent me a duplicate of it today, apparently thinking I would run it again for him. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 16:51:02 CDT From: Clive Dawson Subject: Austin 911 System Flooded: "Simply" a Matter of Human Error A story in Wednesday's Austin American-Statesman relates how thousands of Sprint wireless calls from all over the state of Texas were routed to Austin's 911 system for a period of between one and two hours last week. Supervisors had to scramble to fill emergency operator booths, which involved a temporary shutdown of the city's 311 system. Fortunately this took place in pre-dawn hours. It would have been much more serious if it had happened in the middle of the day. A Sprint official stated that the problem was caused by a stray semi-colon in a program used to update their system. The error was fixed as soon as it was noticed. She also said the company's computer system is secure, and she compared the incident to a gardening accident, in which someone severs a cable line while working in the yard. "What happened this time was simply human error," she said. For the full story, see: http://www.austin360.com/auto_docs/epaper/editions/wednesday/news_1.html Clive Dawson AMD Austin, TX ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 00:18:51 -0400 From: Greg Monti Subject: Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? On or about 29 May 2002, someone wrote: > I have to do a paper for school on what is required to start a > television network. First we need to define the word "network". In the US, "cable network" means a programming service that is sold to cable operators and then resold at retail to cable subscribers. In many European and Asian countries, "cable network" means a local or regional cable system, with coaxial cable strung on poles or underground to serve residences and businesses. I assume you mean "programming service". Here are some ideas, based mostly about reading in trade magazines how new cable networks are launched. 1. You'll need to decide whether your new service will be a pay service, like HBO or Showtime, or a basic service like ESPN, CNN, The Travel Channel, etc. Pay services must have compelling programming to get consumers to cough up $10 to $15 per pay channel per month. The cable operators will keep half of that, you get the other half. Basic services will bring in money two ways, described below, but not as much of it per subscriber per month. 2. There are already plenty of general-entertainment cable networks, like TNT, TBS, The National Network (TNN), USA Network, etc. There are also plenty of news and politics networks (CNN, Fox News Channel, CNBC, MSNBC) and plenty of sports networks with Disney (ESPN), Fox and MSG already in the game. You'll need an idea that will draw a niche audience, like an audience that will buy a special-interest magazine. You'll have to be creative. All the good magazine ideas have already been turned into cable networks. Golf magazine now has the Golf Network. Home & Garden magazine already has a cable network. In effect, Time magazine already has a cable channel, CNN (owned by the same company). Hot Rod and Road & Track effectively have a cable network (even if they don't own it), Speedvision. 3. You'll need to get financing for your idea, which would require you to prepare a detailed business plan showing expenses and revenue (and the cost of interest to borrow money to get you through the lean years. 4. Your next challenge will be getting 'shelf space' with the 'retailers', i.e., the cable operators. If you are planning a basic cable network, normally you have two revenue steams: your advertisers pay you for access to your audience, and the cable operators pay you for your service. Be sensitive to the way cable operators must operate. They key to running a cable company in a city or town is to sell large tiers of channels, with a mix of different channels for different interests and charge one flat price per month for them. Consumers cannot buy just CNN and ESPN, they have to buy a whole package of stuff that only a few people want, like The Food Network or Ovation. This provides revenue to Food Network and Ovation, even while they are small and unprofitable. Your trick is to get yourself onto one of these tiers with each cable operator so that, even if your advertisers aren't paying you much (because you have no audience to sell them), you are at least 'visible' to thousands of subscribers. Those subscribers will accidentally tune to your channel as they surf. A few of them will stay and watch and this will eventually add up to some small ratings that you can sell to advertisers. Most cable operators have a rock-bottom-basic tier that usually includes only local broadcast stations, plus any public-access, educational-access or government access channels required by their franchise agreements, and maybe a local classified-ad channel. Then there's 'expanded basic' which is what most people buy, with popular channels like MTV, A&E, Lifetime, CNN, ESPN, BET, etc. Then there's often a 'super basic' tier that might have less popular (but more special-interest-oriented) channels like WAM (for teenagers), Ovation (for arts lovers), Golf, SpeedVision, Eternal Word TV Network (for Catholics), etc. Unless the cable operator has unused channels on one of these tiers, they will have to throw off some channel or service to make room for yours. That will cause consumer ire because no doubt it will be somebody's favorite channel that gets kicked off. Yours needs to bring in more subscribers than the one that was taken off and caused some consumers to cancel. You want to be on the expanded basic tier if you can get there. There are about 8,000 local cable systems in the US and you can deal with them individually, or you can find out what corporate outfit owns them and attempt to negotiate a deal with the corporate office. The biggest owners of cable systems in the US are AOL Time Warner, AT&T (being sold to Comcast), Cablevision, Charter Communications, RCN and Adelphia. The last one is a well-run cable operation but management is skimming profits that belong to the stockholders, the stock price is in the toilet and much of Adelphia may be sold. If you cut a deal with corporate, they have the power to require the local cable systems they own to carry your channel. This will not be easy or free. Even though, in the normal course of business, the cable operator will pay you a few cents per subscriber per month for your channel, you may have to bribe them in cash to get started. The one-time bribe is usually called a "launch fee". You may have to pay each operator $1 or $2 per subscriber (once only) to get them to sign a carriage contract with you. If you get carriage for a one or two year period and can survive that long (you'll need plenty of bank loans because you won't be making a profit), you may be able to parlay it into a real business. There are about 80 million TV homes subscribed to cable in the US. You'll need to get your new network visible in about 10 or 20 million of those in the first one or two years. (Think of the launch fees it would take to get into 20 million subscriber homes at $2 per home -- that's $40 million by itself.) It will be a long climb to get up where Lifetime is, viewable by maybe 75 million subscribers. 5. You'll have to buy programming, either by paying the rights holder of existing programming for the cable rights to that programming, or pay someone to custom-produce programming for you. 6. You'll also need space on a C-band communicatiions satellite toward which cable operators already have a dish pointed. (They will not install a new dish just to receive you.) Expect to spend about $250,000 per month rent for the satellite transponder, plus $20,000 to $200,000 per month for a service company to either uplink, or play back and originate your programming. There's a short blurb that suggests resources about starting up a new cable Network on the National Cable & Telecommunications Association web site at Greg Monti New York, New York, USA gmonti@mindspring.com ------------------------------ From: jm04469@yahoo.com (Author) Subject: Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? Date: 3 Jun 2002 02:55:57 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Thank you for your insightful answer. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There, Author, is the answer you were seeking, had you had the money to buy the report offered here on the net. But you got it for free from us. See ya around! Try and visit us more often. PAT] ------------------------------ From: burgerwars@yahoo.com (burgerwars) Subject: How Do I Report (900)62-CLAIM Telephone Fraud? Date: 2 Jun 2002 06:51:22 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I get an automated call this morning (really early at 6:00 am), telling me to call 900-62-CLAIM to find out how to claim "$500 in unclaimed property" that I'm owed. Problem is, one has to shell-out $19.95 to call that number. I'm due no unclaimed property, and this is nothing but an auto-dialer telling people to call that 900 number so they can collect their part of the $19.95 phone charge. This is nothing but fraud. Who do I report this to to shut this down and send the owners of this thing to jail? Also, if anyone else gets this nonsense phone call, don't call the 900 number. It's a sure trap! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I bet if I went back and listened to the message it would say 'claim $500 in unclaimed property that *you may be owed*'. Those folks are not fools, but they are hoping you may be one. They *never* say anything other than a very general statement which includes phrases like 'may be' or 'records indicate a name like yours' or similar. They might read off some sort of disclaimer in a rapid, quiet, slurred voice that also gets them off the hook if a judge somewhere listens closely to it. What they are hoping is that your GREED will influence you to try and collect the five hundred dollars. Yeah, its a trap alright, and they win based on the greed and ignorance of the called party. I bet they make a fortune. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #268 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jun 4 00:37:19 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA02984; Tue, 4 Jun 2002 00:37:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 00:37:19 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206040437.AAA02984@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #266 TELECOM Digest Tue, 4 Jun 2002 00:40:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 266 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #335, June 3, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) Re-Directing Telephone Calls (cal71) Web vendors for Specialty RJ-xx Plugs, etc? (Anthony E. Siegman) Re: Phone Bots and Spampaigns (kadokev@chicagotribune.com) Question on NEC MAT Software (Peter J. Aikins) News Headlines of Interest 6/4/02 (Monty Solomon) They Still Will Not Learn (Steven Lichter) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (Steven Lichter) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 15:22:01 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #335, June 3, 2002 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 335: June 3, 2002 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** AT&T CANADA http://www.attcanada.com ** BELL CANADA http://www.bell.ca ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Industry Responds to Price Cap Ruling ** Nortel Laying Off Another 3,500 ** AT&T Corp Plans Stock Sale to Buy AT&T Canada ** Publicity Plan Set for Montreal Area Code ** Telus Mobility Launches National 1X ** Telus Moves to Per-Minute Wireless Billing ** User Group Opposes Bit Caps ** Teleglobe U.S. Units File for Chapter 11 ** CRTC Rejects Digital Rate Hikes ** Northwestel Employees on Strike ** Another Directory Fraud Stopped ** Phone Numbers to Map to Internet ** New York Sues Spammer ** Contribution Reporting Simplified ** Satellite Carriers Lose Appeal ** Calgary CLEC Going Public ** Coping With Real-World VoIP Networks ============================================================ INDUSTRY RESPONDS TO PRICE CAP RULING: Telecom company responses to last week's CRTC Price Caps decision were mostly negative. The major exception was Group Telecom which said "Our initial assessment of the decision is that we are pleased to see the commission's regulatory framework continues to foster facilities-based competition." Other comments: ** AT&T Canada President John McLennan calls it "a disappointing decision for competition" because it failed to address "the insurmountable cost advantage enjoyed by the former monopolies over new entrant competitors." ** Call-Net (Sprint Canada) CEO Bill Linton says: "The CRTC had an opportunity to balance the interests of all of the key stakeholders -- consumers, incumbents, and competitors -- but it has failed to do so." ** Bell Canada's Executive Counsel, Bernard Courtois, said that the decision "will place some new burdens on Bell," and promised further comment after a full review. ** Aliant says it is "disappointed" that the CRTC cut the rates competitors pay for telco services, and "surprised" that the Commission denied "greater rating flexibility for residential customers." ** Willie Grieve, Telus Vice-President of Government and Regulatory Affairs, says the decision increases regulation. "It really constrains retail prices, which will restrict the growth of competition during the price cap period." Telecom Update's summary of the decision appeared in a special issue, published on Friday. NORTEL LAYING OFF ANOTHER 3,500: Nortel Networks plans to eliminate 3,500 jobs at its Optical Long Haul division by September, and may sell its optical components manufacturing business. Nortel now aims to reduce its staff to 42,000, 2,000 fewer than previously announced. Overall second quarter sales will be "flat to down 5% from Q1 2002." AT&T CORP PLANS STOCK SALE TO BUY AT&T CANADA: This week AT&T Corp. plans to raise US$2.25 billion by selling AT&T shares and convertible warrants. The proceeds will be used to buy the outstanding shares of AT&T Canada. PUBLICITY PLAN SET FOR MONTREAL AREA CODE: Nine telephone companies have adopted a joint communications plan to prepare Montreal area telephone users for the introduction of a new area code and mandatory 10-digit local dialing in February 2004. The new code, 438, will be an overlay serving the current 514 area. Johanne Lemay of Lemay-Yates Associates is public spokesperson for the group. TELUS MOBILITY LAUNCHES NATIONAL 1X: Telus Mobility has launched 1XRTT higher-speed data service on its cellular network in major cities from Victoria to Halifax. It also now offers 1X wireless modems for laptop computers and PDAs. TELUS MOVES TO PER-MINUTE WIRELESS BILLING: On July 1, new Telus Mobility customers will have their calls rounded up to the next minute for billing, rather than to the next second. Both Rogers AT&T and Bell Mobility are likely to follow suit later this year. USER GROUP OPPOSES BIT CAPS: The Residential Broadband Users' Association says it has 6,900 signatures on a petition opposing plans by Sympatico and Rogers Cable to implement usage limits on their high-speed Internet services, and is currently adding 1,000 names a week. http://www.petitiononline.com/carrick/petition.html TELEGLOBE U.S. UNITS FILE FOR CHAPTER 11: Teleglobe's U.S. subsidiaries have filed for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. bankruptcy code. (See Telecom Update #334) CRTC REJECTS DIGITAL RATE HIKES: On May 29, the CRTC rejected a Bell Canada proposal to increase rates for DS-1 and DS-3 Digital Network Access links. Telecom Decision 2002-32 said that competitors rely on these services, and that Bell did not submit any cost evidence. ** The May 30 Price Caps decision requires telcos to introduce wholesale versions of these services for competitors. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2002/dt2002-32.htm NORTHWESTEL EMPLOYEES ON STRIKE: Three hundred and eighty Northwestel technicians, operators, and clerical workers, members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, have been on strike since May 27. ANOTHER DIRECTORY FRAUD STOPPED: Old scams never die. Peter Kuryliw, sole director of Yellowbusiness.ca, has been fined $30,000 for sending out over 40,000 fake invoices for listings in an Internet directory. The invoices, designed to look like Yellow Pages bills, drew more than $700,000 in payments. The Competition Bureau says that other parties are also under investigation. PHONE NUMBERS TO MAP TO INTERNET: The International Telecommunication Union and the Internet Architecture Board have agreed on interim procedures for mapping telephone numbers to Internet addresses. If implemented, the ENUM protocol will make it possible to call an Internet service through the telephone network and vice versa. http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/inr/enum/index.html NEW YORK SUES SPAMMER: The state of New York has filed a lawsuit against MonsterHut Inc, which allegedly sent more than 500 million advertising e-mails in 2001. MonsterHut, which seems to be based in Niagara Falls, NY, recently changed its headquarters address to Burlington, Ontario. CONTRIBUTION REPORTING SIMPLIFIED: CRTC Telecom Decision 2002-35 simplifies the annual contribution reporting requirements for companies with annual operating revenue of under $10 million. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2002/dt2002-35.htm SATELLITE CARRIERS LOSE APPEAL: The federal government has refused to overturn a CRTC decision that satellite service providers are not exempt from the revenue tax that subsidizes telephone service in high-cost areas. (See Telecom Update #286) http://www.ic.gc.ca/cmb/Welcomeic.nsf/261ce500dfcd7259852564820068dc6d/85256a220056c2a485256bc7004add2c!OpenDocument http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/sf05506e.html CALGARY CLEC GOING PUBLIC: Shift Networks, a company that plans to offer local service, long distance, and Internet access in Calgary-area office buildings, says it has approval for a reverse takeover that will gain it a listing on the TSX Venture Exchange. It plans a $3 million public offering. COPING WITH REAL-WORLD VoIP NETWORKS: In the June issue of Telemanagement, available this week, John Riddell examines the challenge of upgrading corporate data networks for IP telephony. Also in Telemanagement #196: ** Unlicensed Wireless: Another High-Speed Option for Network Planners ** Will VoIP Over Cable Get a Second Chance? ** K-Net: Bringing Broadband to Northwestern Ontario Single copies of Telemanagement #196 are $75 each -- call 905-686-5050 ext 500 and charge to Visa, American Express, or Mastercard. Save 49% with a 10-issue subscription -- go to http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: garnab@hotmail.com (cal71) Subject: Re-directing Telephone calls Date: 1 Jun 2002 07:10:19 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, I work for a comapny which does a lot of business in Auatralia. As a part of my job I have to travel extensively in many different countries. I was initially based in India but presently I am based in Muscat, Oman in the Middle East. I would like to know if there is any service which can do the following: All calls originating from Australia to destinations in India to be re-directed to my mobile phone. I have a number for Muscat, Oman in the Middle East. Would really appreciate if someone could help me out with this ASAP,as I keep on missing a lot of important business calls.Inspite of trying to inform all and sundry of my change of location, there are still a lot of business calls which are made to my Numbers in India. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: aes Subject: Web Vendors For Specialty RJ-xx Plugs, etc? Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2002 08:54:58 -0700 Organization: Stanford University Would appreciate for recommendations on web vendors of speciality RJ-45, RJ-11, etc, plugs and adaptors (at retail, that is onesies and twosies, or small quantities). (After I try Radio Shack.) Specific situation is a building with Cat 5 cables running everywhere, terminated in RJ-45 jacks, and we want to break out individual pairs at various jacks to use for individual phone lines, audio, etc, without digging into the wiring behind the wall plates. Also, *ninety-degree* RJ-45 and RJ-11 plugs -- that is, the wire comes out of the plug *sideways* (or downward) rather than perpendicular to the wall plate? Email cc of reply to siegman@stanford.edu appreciated. ------------------------------ From: kadokev@chicagotribune.com Subject: Re: Phone Bots and Spampaigns Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 19:10:19 UTC Organization: The author does not speak for this organization. Even when you do everything right, some people will be annoyed by any type of cold-calling. I still sometimes will be trying to reach a vendor or friend by phone, and encounter somebody who sees the company name on their Caller-ID display and answers the phone with a shout of: "No, I don't want to subscribe, I don't read newspapers. (CLICK)" Interestingly, part of the reason for this is because the telephone sales group "plays by the rules", and doesn't take any steps to obfuscate the CLID/ANI information. In article , Barry Margolin wrote: > In article , dover@nortelnetworks.com>> wrote: >> John David Galt wrote ... >>> From a purely selfish/amoral point of view, spam makes sense for selling >>> products, because some fraction of a percent of recipients will buy, and >>> the spammer doesn't have to care about the fact that he's annoyed the >>> rest of us. >> He should care ... I make it a habit of listening just long enough to >> find out who or what is calling and add them to my list of vendors >> that I'll never patronize. > If that were common behavior, it would be a problem for vendors. But > since people like you are a tiny minority, they don't have to worry > about it. Absolutely true. This is the reasoning that has lead a number of people to work on solutions to make this behavior more common, by providing improved mechanisms for maintaining and sharing such lists. So far, none have really caught on. Blacklists tend to work only for groups that are tightly-knit and unified behind a religious (Rvd. Donald Wildmon's American Family Association) or quasi-religious (Anti-spam) cause. For the average consumer, following a fad, buying into a trend, or simply the perception of massive savings overrides any desire to make a personal/political/religious statement. This could be the "killer app" for handheld message/presence/P2P -- an easy UI to record/manage/research/share information, both positive and negative, fact and rumor. Kevin Kadow ------------------------------ From: peter_aikins@enterpriseservices.com.au (Peter J. Aikins) Subject: Question on NEC MAT Software Date: 3 Jun 2002 21:02:19 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi folks, Does anyone know if there is a third party software platform that will provide administration access across multiple NEC PABX models (e.g. IVS, IMS, ICS etc.)? I'm getting the shits with NEC persisting with the policy of a seperate MAT package for each model! I mean, it's like Nortel insisting that you use a differect terminal emulator for an Opt11 and Opt61! Many thanks, Peter P.S. Anyone who writes such an application would become a very rich person, I reckon! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2002 22:15:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: News Headlines of Interest 6/4/02 Where piracy and profits converge: Are satellite TV hackers a tool in a global conspiracy? By Bob Sullivan MSNBC May 30 - It's just a thin slice of plastic that's stuck into your satellite TV set-top box when you first bring it home. To viewers, the card is the key that unlocks pay-TV. To corporations, smart cards are much more -- 80 million of them currently unlock one of the world's most influential and lucrative industries. But now, the plastic cards are at the center of a global conspiracy theory - a cutthroat corporate battle, some say, to control the world's living rooms through deception, cheating, and intimidation. ... http://www.msnbc.com/news/745312.asp By Tim Richardson Posted: 05/31/2002 at 09:04 EST The cost of broadband is rising in the US and could dampen demand for high-speed Internet access. The warning comes from California-based ARS after it reported that charges for cable modem and ADSL services had risen on average in the first three months of the year. Cable broadband Internet service prices rose 4 per cent in Q1 2002, from an average of $43.21 a month in December 2001 to $44.95 a month in March 2002. The monthly price of bog standard ADSL increased 1.4 percent over the same time period, from an average of $51.09 in December 2001 to an average of $51.82 in March 2002. http://www.theregus.com/content/6/25106.html Will Americans go for mLife? AT&T is pushing Japanese-style wireless services in the U.S. But until cellphones are as fun to use in New York as they are in Tokyo, a jaded market is likely to keep yawning. By Steve Mollman May 22, 2002 | "I still have Japan-envy," admits Matthew Hart. It's not that Hart doesn't cherish his new cellphone, or appreciate having a real "mLife" before most Americans. It's just that "the 3G videophones they have over there, the ones that open up with the big color screens ..." He trails off wistfully. "We're getting closer, but we're still nowhere near Japan." Hart, a commercial real estate developer in Palm Beach, Fla., is a self-described gadget and cellphone junkie -- he keeps 15 or so retired handsets in his closet. He's the kind of guy who gets a kick out of using his Bluetooth-enabled cellphone as a cable-free modem for his Bluetooth-enabled PowerBook so that he can check his e-mail in a park (just for example). The type who hangs around in chat rooms explaining to innocents the difference between locked and unlocked handsets, and why you should pay more for the latter. The kind who buys a T68i handset -- not officially available in the U.S. yet -- off eBay because it's slightly better than his still-new T68 (a replacement for the Nokia 8890 he got in London). And he's precisely the kind of guy AT&T Wireless must win over with the mMode service launched April 16 (in select US markets including Palm Beach) if it's to have any hope with more typical U.S. cellphone users. A central feature of the company's obscurely marketed mLife "wireless lifestyle," mMode is an imitation of imode, the highly successful, always-on data service offered by NTT DoCoMo in Japan. http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/05/22/mmode/index.html Telecoms called on 'opt-out' approach FCC reconsiders regulation of customer calling data May 28, 2002 Posted: 12:16 PM EDT (1616 GMT) INDIANAPOLIS, Indiana (AP) -- When Jason Settles added his name to Indiana's new "no-call" list, he expected relief from the tyranny of telemarketers. But the computer consultant's dreams of dinner in peace quickly turned to alarm when he learned his own phone company intended to share details of his calling habits with its corporate affiliates. Unless customers call a toll-free number to request otherwise, Ameritech plans to share information about what numbers they call, how often they call and how much they pay. http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/industry/05/28/telecoms.privacy.ap/ From golf to D&D, cell phone games proliferate ASSOCIATED PRESS SAN JOSE, Calif., May 31 - Bored with playing that game called Snake - chasing a black dot with a string of lines - that likely came standard with your cell phone? Try a round of golf instead, or a combat game called Gladiator. Soon, even the ever popular Dungeons & Dragons will be playable on handsets. No longer a gimmick feature, cell phone games have become serious business for wireless carriers. http://www.msnbc.com/news/760022.asp US suffers broadband inflation By Tim Richardson Posted: 05/31/2002 at 09:04 EST The cost of broadband is rising in the US and could dampen demand for high-speed Internet access. The warning comes from California-based ARS after it reported that charges for cable modem and ADSL services had risen on average in the first three months of the year. Cable broadband Internet service prices rose 4 per cent in Q1 2002, from an average of $43.21 a month in December 2001 to $44.95 a month in March 2002. The monthly price of bog standard ADSL increased 1.4 percent over the same time period, from an average of $51.09 in December 2001 to an average of $51.82 in March 2002. http://www.theregus.com/content/6/25106.html The FCC in Context Bob Frankston Preface The FCC is tasked with implementing a complex and increasingly contradictory regulatory regimen. If we simply look at the FCC as another bureaucracy we miss the larger picture. It is important to think about the FCC in the context of the regulatory infrastructure. Examining the FCC decisions in terms of winners and losers misses the point. As long as it is constrained to support the telecommunications infrastructure as it exists, and thus frustrate change, we are all losers. Instead, we must help the FCC act as the agent of change and steward of the industry as it passes through a necessary, even if traumatic, change. The change is happening anyway as witnessed by the increasingly troubled industry. The sooner we complete this transition the sooner we can again focus on the new opportunities rather nostalgia for the one true and perfect telephone company. http://www.frankston.com/Public/ESSAYS/FCCInContext.asp ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 01 Jun 2002 21:25:16 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: They still will not learn -----Original Message----- Would you buy inurance from a spammer, he might have his office in a high speed motor boat to leave with your money, never to be heard from again. Medical Insurance. Over 650,000 doctors 5,800 hospitals and 50,000 outpatient facilities 40,000 pharmacies 20,000 dentists 21,500 vision care professionals SAVINGS UP TO 90% To talk with a Representative call Today 888-294-0975 ...to teach these individuals about the cost of owning an Toll Free number... ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Remember it is against the law to harrass anyone by telephone. Also you should use a payphone so that the operator can make a little money. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 01 Jun 2002 02:08:56 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? > Spamming may be cost effective even if it produces a very small > number of sales. If it becomes obvious that people really hate > spammers and that it is a good way of getting a bad reputation, there > may be some hope of the big guys avoiding it. The big ones use it to, they have other companies do it for them, then claim that they had no idea the company was a spammer. Chase Bank dumped on me for a week, Then one of their vice-presidents has the gull to tell me the company said that I had logged on to their web site and asked to be added on to mailing lists. Ya right I told him, first I don't go to these type of sites and I never give out my e-mail address; this posting one will never get spam, since only addresses on the Q will get through. Also my browser which some of these sites read has its e-mail address as KILLSOB@FU*KSPAMMER.COM. They only way it will end is if the carriers hang the spammers with large bills, allow us to sue the hell out of them, or allow mass hangings of them, maybe Texas, they like executing law breakers. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In case anyone is wondering about the strange numbering of issues, 266 *should have* come out over the weekend, but it did not, and I went right on to 267. So 266 is coming out now, better late than never, I guess. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #266 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jun 5 15:57:25 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA07923; Wed, 5 Jun 2002 15:57:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 15:57:25 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206051957.PAA07923@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #269 TELECOM Digest Wed, 5 Jun 2002 15:55:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 269 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Question on NEC MAT Software (David Clayton) Re: Question on NEC MAT Software (nospam@resi.com) Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Consumer VoIP (floydthebarber) Re: Web Vendors For Specialty RJ-xx Plugs, etc? (Tom Schmidt) Re: Competition? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Echo With Cell Phones (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Keeping Secrets in Hardware: Xbox Case Study (Monty Solomon) ReplayTV Won't Quit, Won't Quit (Monty Solomon) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (Stuart Brorson) MCI Complaint of the Day (Patrick Townson) One Number to Rule Them All (Colin Sutton) Laser Cartridge Spam (Matthew Black) Looking For Audio Samples of Recorded Network Messages (Sharmi Das) Entry For Spammers Directory (John David Galt) E-Mail Spammers Will Never Stop (Steven Lichter) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Question on NEC MAT Software Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 17:57:10 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au peter_aikins@enterpriseservices.com.au (Peter J. Aikins) contributed the following: > Does anyone know if there is a third party software platform that > will provide administration access across multiple NEC PABX models > (e.g. IVS, IMS, ICS etc.)? > I'm getting the shits with NEC persisting with the policy of a > seperate MAT package for each model! I mean, it's like Nortel > insisting that you use a differect terminal emulator for an Opt11 and > Opt61! I remember Switchview (whatever they are called now) made an admin package for Nortels and were working on an NEC version 'bout 5 years ago, I don't know if it was ever completed, but try wwww.switchview.com to check it out anyway. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ From: nospam@resi.com Subject: Re: Question on NEC MAT Software Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 18:17:07 GMT Organization: Broadview Networks InterNetNews Reply-To: nospam@resi.com Not to my knowledge, but I'd be interested, too. We have four versions installed on four PC's ... and you'd best be careful not to use the wrong version with a switch, as it will cause corruption. J On 3 Jun 2002 21:02:19 -0700, peter_aikins@enterpriseservices.com.au (Peter J. Aikins) wrote: > Does anyone know if there is a third party software platform that > will provide administration access across multiple NEC PABX models > (e.g. IVS, IMS, ICS etc.)? > I'm getting the shits with NEC persisting with the policy of a > seperate MAT package for each model! I mean, it's like Nortel > insisting that you use a differect terminal emulator for an Opt11 and > Opt61! My opinions are my own, and not necessarily those of my employer. My email address is valid. ------------------------------ Subject: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 02:51:09 GMT I currently have a DSL connection, which connects to a home network via a Linksys wireless router. It's a very nice setup for me. However, for a couple of months, I'm going to have to go back to a dial-up connection. Does anyone know of a way of connecting the linksys router to a dial-up connection? I suppose this would involve a dialup to Ethernet converter ...? Any ideas? Thanks. Joel Hoffman (joel@exc.com) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I use a linksys router in my home network which by default is routed in/outbound through sbcglobal.net for DSL service. However on rare occassions, it works better for me to connect through a 56 K modem to the local ISP. So, my main computer and one of the laptops have modems built in. I have both modems plugged in to a 'Y' connector cord which runs to the phone box. With a little toggle switch I can pick the modem on either line to run to the phone box and out. Granted, that's not exactly what you were asking about but it is one way to temporarily use a modem on computers which are fixed in place while mainly using the DSL line via linksys. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mc@110.net (floydthebarber) Subject: consumer VoIP Date: 4 Jun 2002 08:06:54 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Does anyone have any information about Vonage, a company that purports to offer complete VoIP service over broadband? ------------------------------ Reply-To: Tom Schmidt From: Tom Schmidt Subject: Re: Web Vendors For Specialty RJ-xx Plugs, etc? Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 19:25:19 GMT "aes" wrote in message news:telecom20.266.3@telecom-digest.org... > Would appreciate for recommendations on web vendors of speciality > RJ-45, RJ-11, etc, plugs and adaptors (at retail, that is onesies and > twosies, or small quantities). (After I try Radio Shack.) > Specific situation is a building with Cat 5 cables running everywhere, > terminated in RJ-45 jacks, and we want to break out individual pairs > at various jacks to use for individual phone lines, audio, etc, > without digging into the wiring behind the wall plates. > Also, *ninety-degree* RJ-45 and RJ-11 plugs -- that is, the wire comes > out of the plug *sideways* (or downward) rather than perpendicular to > the wall plate? > Email cc of reply to siegman@stanford.edu appreciated. A good source of Telcom stuff is Mike Sandman http://www.sandman.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Competition? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 20:07:11 GMT In article , John Higdon wrote: > Over the past couple of days, the newspapers have been a-buzz with the > latest California PUC decision lowering the rates SBC can charge > so-called competitors who want to resell local telephone service. The > decision is hailed as the beginning of "real competition" in > California. The circle is close to complete. In a few years, customers will have exactly what they had 20 years ago, but instead of paying wholesale for everything they'll be paying retail. Progress indeed ... Joel Hoffman (joel@exc.com) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Echo With Cell Phones Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 13:41:19 GMT >> Friends of mine just got a set of three Verizon cell phones (one for >> each family member) and they tell me that they only get echo when they >> call my landline. Is this possible? I thought echo-cancellation was >> on the calling side. > This is probably due to a poor hybrid on your phone that allows > received audio to be turned around and sent back to the caller. With > the advent of digital coding on most cellphone calls, the > transmit/receive delay accentuates poor isolation. > Try using a different phone on your end and see if that makes a difference. But wouldn't all cell phones have a problem calling me, then? Joel ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 13:23:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Keeping Secrets in Hardware: Xbox Case Study Keeping Secrets in Hardware: Xbox Case Study Posted by michael on Saturday June 01, @01:52PM from the peeling-the-onion dept. BS405397 writes "Here is the just released MIT whitepaper on the security holes in the MS X-Box, and for those who are interested, opens up the X-Box pretty nicely." Update: 06/04 12:34 GMT by M: The server appears to be down at the moment. No, I don't have a copy of the paper. Reuters and other news outlets have now picked up the story, two days after Slashdot. http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06/01/1656228&mode=thread&tid=172 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 13:23:50 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ReplayTV Won't Quit, Won't Quit ReplayTV Won't Quit, Won't Quit By Brad King 2:00 a.m. June 4, 2002 PDT While other technology companies have backpedaled under the withering assault of movie- and music-industry lawyers, Sonicblue is pushing forward with its controversial ReplayTV recording device. Sonicblue unfurled a new version of its system just hours after receiving the news on Monday that it wouldn't be forced to watch what its customers are watching. http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,52944,00.html ------------------------------ From: Stuart Brorson Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 02:51:03 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'm beginning to think we are fighting > a losing battle **based on the economics of email delivery**. There is > no real incentive for spammers to stop. Email is **so cheap to send** > and **relatively effective in reaching people**, so what if there > are a certain number of economic casualties like occassional toll-free > phone lines with spiraling costs. This is something about which I have often wondered: Has anybody done any studies about how many people actually *do* purchase services as a result of e-mail spam? Your point is valid: sending spam costs almost nothing, so if just a small handful of people buy something in response to spam, then spam makes economic sense. However, I have a hard time beliving that *anybody at all* buys products advertised via spam. However, spam persists, suggesting that I am wrong. Are there any real studies of this question showing the response rate to (and revenue generated from) spam? Stuart [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, Stuart, there are getting to be millions and millions of people with email. If only two percent of the email-equipped population buys something seen in spam and only half of one percent of those people buys the spam product specifically offered, that's still many thousands of buyers. You said you thought it unlikely that *anybody at all* bought spam products; are you willing to concede that perhaps one percent of the email users now and then send money to a spammer? Since email costs the *individual user* nothing at all then sales to less than one percent of them is still a profit is it not? Consider 'traditional' bulk mail advertising: It is estimated that 'only' one or two percent of the public respond to solicitations, and a response rate of three percent is usually cons- idered a smashing success. Publisher's Clearing House, for example, gets a two percent reponse to its mailings. Before you say that it is doubtful 'anybody at all' responds positively (that is, sends money) to a spammer, try getting to know 'anybody'. The sheer volume of the people with email means even a very, very tiny response is quite successful. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: The Latest MCI Complaint Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 09:56:13 -0500 Complaints against MCI are starting to come in heavily now, and this letter printed below is but one example. I really think history will show MCI to be the company which stole the world's greatest telecom organization away from AT&T now nearly twenty years ago. Read Ms. Duroe's complaint below: > From: Susie Duroe [slduroe@hotmail.com] > MCI local and long distance - privacy manager did not work - still > getting billed for private listing > I reluctantly switched to MCI local and long distance service because of > United Airline miles offered. I specifically asked if they offer privacy > manager, which blocks all unlisted numbers from your phone. They > assured me that they have the service. > When the service became active, I noticed that all of the unlisted > numbers were coming through, and noticed on my first bill that they > were charging me for private listing of my phone number. I contacted > MCI and cancelled private listing, and again inquired about privacy > manager. They said they offer that service, but they were told that > it sometimes does not work in Illinois. Well, it never did work > on my phone, and I kept on getting billed for private listing of my > number. I have called every single time I get a bill, waste about 30 > minutes, and they would finally credit me, and assure me that it > would not be on the next bill ... that was FIVE months ago, and I am > still getting charged for private listing!! I just switched back to > Ameritech, and I will NEVER, EVER use MCI, no matter how much United > Miles they offer me!!! > Susie Duroe ------------------------------ From: Colin Sutton Organization: BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.net.au) Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 15:00:00 A concise guide to ENUM and its implications by Geoff Huston, who helped to give Australia access to the net: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcolumn/2002-06-enum.html Colin Sutton ------------------------------ From: lb_centaur@yahoo.com (Matthew Black) Subject: Laser Cartridge Spam Date: 4 Jun 2002 21:23:38 GMT Organization: California State University, Long Beach I recall someone mentioning a few months ago that an injunction was issued against Vortex Laser Supplies. They were to cease and decist sending e-mail advertisements. My school received three messages directed to about 100 employees. The e-mail was routed through Korea [211.x.x.x]. If an injunction was issued, does someone have the name of the judge & court so I can let them know the order was violated? matthew [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is doubtful that a court order issued in the USA would carry any weight in Korea. That's the wonder- ful thing about email. It is *so cheap* you can even take a side trip to Korea, get a one percent response rate, and still make a mint. PAT] ------------------------------ From: sharmi@avaya.com (Sharmi Das) Subject: Looking For Audio Samples of Recorded Network or Branded Messages Date: 4 Jun 2002 15:20:44 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I am employed at Avaya, a telecommunications company. For my work I need audio samples of recorded network or branded messages which you hear from outbound calls. A recorded message could be an announcement saying this phone number doesn't exist, the circuit is busy, try again later, orr a cell phone message saying This is AT&T. The person you have called is not in the area of network;. If you know of a source for these audio samples - either the messages themselves or someone who might know from how I can acquire samples, I would highly appreciate if you please assist me in my search. Thank you very much for your valuable time. Sincerely, Sharmi [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See Jennifer Martino's web page, "The Web Page You Have Dialed ..." It is listed on our web site at http://telecom-digest.org/linkspage near the bottom of the group of links, however someone other than Jennifer is maintaining it now. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John David Galt Subject: "Spammers Directory" Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 19:24:18 -0700 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Sciety Would the people who post these things mind putting some kind of tag in the subject line (I suggest "SPAMMER:") so that one can filter them out? Thanks! ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 05 Jun 2002 02:47:56 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: E-mail Spammers Will Never Stop ...to teach this individual about the cost of owning an Toll Free number... -----Original Message----- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ (And rare bargains are sometimes available for as low as $200!) How do these payments sound to you? CALL NOW! 1-800-216-6984 *BUYERS MAY INSPECT VEHICLES PRIOR TO PURCHASE *Please: No dealers* ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Remember it is against the law to harrass anyone by telephone. Also you should use a payphone so that the operator can make a little money. I have a good friend that is a car dealer, and there are no deals as this spamming fool claims. Why would even the Govenment sell a car for a penny on the dollar when they know very well they could get much more, plus they get first crack at anything and what is left is junk. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #269 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jun 6 01:15:19 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA16725; Thu, 6 Jun 2002 01:15:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 01:15:19 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206060515.BAA16725@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #270 TELECOM Digest Thu, 6 Jun 2002 01:12:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 270 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Laser Cartridge Spam (Scott Dorsey) Re: Laser Cartridge Spam (John R. Levine) Re: Laser Cartridge Spam (Dave Garland) AT&T 1310 Answering Machine Commands (Richard Tuttle) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (Barry Margolin) Computer Telephony Integration (CTI) for Call Centers (Owen P. Epstein) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (Norm) Re: Echo With Cell Phones (John Higdon) Re: Competition? (John Higdon) Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? (Gene Berkowitz) Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? (Tom Schmidt) NMS AG4000/1600-4T1 (Clay Smith) Telecom IDDD Question (Adam Moore) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Laser Cartridge Spam Date: 5 Jun 2002 22:03:42 -0400 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , Matthew Black wrote: > I recall someone mentioning a few months ago that an injunction was > issued against Vortex Laser Supplies. They were to cease and decist > sending e-mail advertisements. My school received three messages > directed to about 100 employees. The e-mail was routed through > Korea [211.x.x.x]. If an injunction was issued, does someone have > the name of the judge & court so I can let them know the order was > violated? Not offhand, but do a google search in news.admin.net-abuse.email on the name "Sam Khuri" and you'll have a great time. scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 2002 21:02:11 -0400 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Laser Cartridge Spam Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA In article you write: > I recall someone mentioning a few months ago that an injunction was > issued against Vortex Laser Supplies. ... > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is doubtful that a court order > issued in the USA would carry any weight in Korea. ... Of course not, but a US court order carries considerable weight in Atlanta, where Vortex is located, regardless of how his spam is routed over the Net. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Where is our counselor Steve from the Burn in Hell Company? He could probably get a lynch mob of angry netters to enforce the order of the Court over in Korea or Atlanta, wherever Sam K. is hiding. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Laser Cartridge Spam Organization: Wizard Information Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 21:23:55 -0500 It was a dark and stormy night when lb_centaur@yahoo.com (Matthew Black) wrote: > I recall someone mentioning a few months ago that an injunction was > issued against Vortex Laser Supplies. Actually, it was against a gent named Sam Khouri dba Benchmark Print Supply and other names. If your spam is indeed from him, there are some fairly expensive penalties. Info at: http://www.bibliotech.net/spammer.html Then again, if it's from some other random scum, you're outa luck. Dave [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note. Probably we are out of luck. I usually am. Maybe Steve could round up the mob of angry netters from the Burn in Hell Company and have them identify the scum. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Richard Tuttle Subject: AT&T 1310 Answering Machine Commands Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 21:06:09 -0500 I did a search on this model because I just pulled mine out of the closet too but it had no tape and I wanted to find out if I needed a special tape; thanks for letting me know that I do not! There are instructions for the operation of this under the lid (flip up the lid). Do you have these? ... or are there other instructions you need. If you do find additional instructions, can you forward them to me? Thanks, Rick Tuttle ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 21:41:31 GMT In article , Stuart Brorson wrote: > Are there any real studies of this question showing the response rate > to (and revenue generated from) spam? I think two things are going on: 1. Most of the stuff advertised via spam is illegal (e.g. pyramid schemes, the Nigerian scam), immoral (porn), or total crap (I get lots of spam for HGH and registrations in the new TLDs from fly-by-night registrars). These vendors can't make effective use of traditional advertising methods, so spam seems better than nothing. 2. I think the occasional legitimate businesses that make use of spam are probably victims, who have been sold snake oil by the spamming services. I suspect that they tell their customers that their address lists only contain people who have opted in, as well as providing fake studies showing inflated response rates. Even if the customer knows that the response rate is exxagerated, they probably decide that the economics is still valid if they assume a smaller response rate. The spamming industry is basically a black market, so none of the traditional issues of reputation matter to them. You won't hurt a spammer's business by reporting them to the Better Business Bureau. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: .... > Consider 'traditional' bulk mail advertising: It is > estimated that 'only' one or two percent of the public respond to > solicitations, and a response rate of three percent is usually cons- > idered a smashing success. Publisher's Clearing House, for example, > gets a two percent reponse to its mailings. Before you say that it is > doubtful 'anybody at all' responds positively (that is, sends money) > to a spammer, try getting to know 'anybody'. The sheer volume of the > people with email means even a very, very tiny response is quite > successful. PAT] A big difference with traditional direct mail is that it's mostly legitimate products that there's a decent market for; you're likely to see many of the same products advertised in print media and TV. 99% of the stuff advertised via spam is garbage. But you're right about the response rate economics. If snail-mail spam is successful with 1% response rate, I suspect that email spam could be profitable with as little as .01% response rate. But the spamming services don't really care -- they sell their snake oil and it doesn't matter whether it really works -- it's almost all profit to them. Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net Genuity, Woburn, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: Owen P. Epstein Subject: Computer Telephony Integration (CTI) for Call Centers Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 18:39:13 -0400 Tom, I have been managing Computer Telephony Integration (CTI) implementations for several years using Geotel, ICM, Genesys, T-Server, TLIB, TSERVER and thin client desktops. Hope this answers your question! Regards, Owen P. Epstein CRM Consulting/Telephony CTI 1998-Present: Define Call Center infrastructures from the ground-up that include Telecommunications and Telephony requirements, physical facility requirements, and all support functionality to assure smooth Call Center development and integration. Implemented 7 Generations IVRs for Speech conversion and Voice recognition on the Aspect/Generations/Voictek platform. Implemented and project managed gateway deployment between Geotel ICM and Generations IVR for graceful Pre-Route and Post-Route Connectivity. Project managed the deployment of a new Dual Redundant Geotel ICM platform for the Internal Revenue Service, to gain processor and HDS enhanced capacity and performance. CISCO Router Installation and Management. Systems Implementation Manager performing the following duties: Manage a team of between three-to-five persons that define Telephony specification documentation for customers; define the usability and functionality of Telephony buttons for a customer user interface and customer phoneset (Aspect, Nortel, Lucent, Rockwell); define the API integration points between Geotel CTI components and PegaSystems software; define implementation schedule for telephony integration at customer site; implement the PegaSystems telephony functionality in a development/staging/production environment. Owen P. Epstein Computer Telephony Integration 3GSOFTPHONE Systems http://www.3gsoftphone.com mailto:owen.epstein@3gsoftphone.com V = 703-734-6862 F = 208-692-5333 C = 703-585-7320 ------------------------------ From: Norm Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 19:57:29 -0400 Organization: in spasms Some years ago I read a study that said telemarketers only needed a favorable 1% response, so I can only give in: There's no hope. And e-mail is cheaper, relatively speaking - free. At least with telemarketing you can get your name on the Do Not Call or Send lists. There's no such relief from e-mail. I'm reluctant to add a proxy program because I've been bitten by bad interactions between ever-running programs so I cope with filters as bast as possible. Why all these Korean spams tho? They make no sense (obviously). Norm Stuart Brorson wrote: > This is something about which I have often wondered: Has anybody done > any studies about how many people actually *do* purchase services as a > result of e-mail spam? Your point is valid: sending spam costs almost > nothing, so if just a small handful of people buy something in > response to spam, then spam makes economic sense. However, I have a > hard time beliving that *anybody at all* buys products advertised > via spam. However, spam persists, suggesting that I am wrong. > Are there any real studies of this question showing the response rate > to (and revenue generated from) spam? > Stuart > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, Stuart, there are getting to be > millions and millions of people with email. If only two percent of the > email-equipped population buys something seen in spam and only half of > one percent of those people buys the spam product specifically > offered, that's still many thousands of buyers. You said you thought > it unlikely that *anybody at all* bought spam products; are you > willing to concede that perhaps one percent of the email users now and > then send money to a spammer? Since email costs the *individual user* > nothing at all then sales to less than one percent of them is still a > profit is it not? Consider 'traditional' bulk mail advertising: It is > estimated that 'only' one or two percent of the public respond to > solicitations, and a response rate of three percent is usually cons- > idered a smashing success. Publisher's Clearing House, for example, > gets a two percent reponse to its mailings. Before you say that it is > doubtful 'anybody at all' responds positively (that is, sends money) > to a spammer, try getting to know 'anybody'. The sheer volume of the > people with email means even a very, very tiny response is quite > successful. PAT] Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from masochism ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 18:02:56 -0700 Subject: Re: Echo With Cell Phones From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.269.7@telecom-digest.org, Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: >>> Friends of mine just got a set of three Verizon cell phones (one for >>> each family member) and they tell me that they only get echo when they >>> call my landline. Is this possible? I thought echo-cancellation was >>> on the calling side. >> This is probably due to a poor hybrid on your phone that allows >> received audio to be turned around and sent back to the caller. With >> the advent of digital coding on most cellphone calls, the >> transmit/receive delay accentuates poor isolation. >> Try using a different phone on your end and see if that makes a >> difference. > But wouldn't all cell phones have a problem calling me, then? Another possibility would be a weird trunking problem. Also, analog wireless phones, while four-wire in nature, do not have the coding delays of digital phones and would be spared the echo-effect. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 18:07:34 -0700 Subject: Re: Competition? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.269.6@telecom-digest.org, Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: > In article , John Higdon > wrote: >> Over the past couple of days, the newspapers have been a-buzz with the >> latest California PUC decision lowering the rates SBC can charge >> so-called competitors who want to resell local telephone service. The >> decision is hailed as the beginning of "real competition" in >> California. > The circle is close to complete. In a few years, customers will have > exactly what they had 20 years ago, but instead of paying wholesale > for everything they'll be paying retail. Progress indeed ... That is an excellent observation. Until local telecom competitors actually install and maintain their own plants, all we will have is a situation with a single provider furnishing all telecom service, but with a middle man inserted to siphon off revenue. While this may feed some extra mouths, it does not do much for the consumer. The way the wholesale pricing is set up, there is little incentive for these retail telecom outfit to ever turn up plant. After all, they are paying wholesale rates that are below cost (and below the cost of maintaining their own facilities). Why spend money needlessly? John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: Gene Berkowitz Subject: Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 16:30:48 -0400 Reply-To: geneb@ma.ultranet.com In article , joel@exc.com says... > I currently have a DSL connection, which connects to a home network > via a Linksys wireless router. It's a very nice setup for me. > However, for a couple of months, I'm going to have to go back to a > dial-up connection. > Does anyone know of a way of connecting the linksys router to a > dial-up connection? I suppose this would involve a dialup to Ethernet > converter ...? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I use a linksys router in my home > network which by default is routed in/outbound through sbcglobal.net > for DSL service. However on rare occassions, it works better for me > to connect through a 56 K modem to the local ISP. So, my main computer > and one of the laptops have modems built in. I have both modems > plugged in to a 'Y' connector cord which runs to the phone box. With a > little toggle switch I can pick the modem on either line to run to the > phone box and out. Granted, that's not exactly what you were asking > about but it is one way to temporarily use a modem on computers which > are fixed in place while mainly using the DSL line via linksys. PAT] I'm pretty sure Siemens still sells a SOHO BB router that has a serial port for dialup modem "fallback". I'm pretty sure one of the Linksys routers had it, or it might have been Netgear... (I know this doesn't help you much, but I've been thinking about it because I'm in the opposite situation: still on dialup, but cable modem may become available in July. I'd like to set up the router now, and when the cable modem is available, get a "seamless" switchover ...) Gene ------------------------------ Reply-To: Tom Schmidt From: Tom Schmidt Subject: Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 20:55:35 GMT Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote in message news:telecom20.269.3@telecom-digest.org: > I currently have a DSL connection, which connects to a home network > via a Linksys wireless router. It's a very nice setup for me. > However, for a couple of months, I'm going to have to go back to a > dial-up connection. > Does anyone know of a way of connecting the linksys router to a > dial-up connection? I suppose this would involve a dialup to Ethernet > converter ...? Besides the suggestion Pat offered you could set up connection sharing software on one of the systems and simply use the router as a Ethernet hub/switch. But that entails a complete reconfiguration of your LAN. I use a router that supports both Ethernet and a serial port, a Multitech RF500S. The router is set up use my dialup ISP if DSL fails, except for speed it is transparent to the LAN. This has come in very handy a number of times. /Tom ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 14:35:04 -0700 Subject: NMS AG4000/1600-4T1 From: Clay Smith We have the following for sale: NMS AG4000/1600-4T1 NMS AG4000/1600-4E1 NMS AG2000/400-8LS Dialogic D/480SC-2T1 Dialogic D/300SC-E1 Call 602-569-4162 Email ictg@mac.com Regards, Clay CLAY SMITH INTERNATIONAL CONSOLIDATED TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, INC. 3901 East Morrow Drive, Phoenix, AZ 85050 USA Tel. 602-569-4162 Fax. 501-421-1947 ICTG@mac.com tpcg1@home.com IM: TPCG1 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 11:58:07 PDT From: Adam Moore Subject: Telecom IDDD Question Mr Townson, I'm trying to find information on which countries have international calling agreements in place that make using the international dialing codes unnecessary. Example: US-Canada calls do not require country codes. Do you have this information on your website? Or, do you know where I may find it? I have searched some of your website, but have not found anything yet. Thanks, Adam Moore [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Regards USA-Canada, I dunno if there is any agreement in place between the telecom authorities in both countries or if it just is the way it is because of attrition. From the earliest days of DDD, long before international calling (IDDD) was in place, or even thought about, USA could call Canada with only ten/ eleven digits and in a few rare cases, only seven digits (in the earliest days, between metropolitan areas and their Canadian counter- part. USA'ers have never had that sort of arrangement with Mexico for example, except (I think years and years ago) a couple towns in Texas and Mexico. I think also there are a couple cases in Europe where this is available. I do know that the Vatican (a separate country code) is a local phone call in Rome. Others with experience in international calling want to comment on this? PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #270 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jun 6 23:19:56 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA09817; Thu, 6 Jun 2002 23:19:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 23:19:56 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206070319.XAA09817@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #271 TELECOM Digest Thu, 6 Jun 2002 23:19:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 271 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Stephen D. Crocker Receives 2002 IEEE Internet Award (Anne Shroeder) Re: Echo With Cell Phones (Robert Dover) Re: Telecom IDDD Question (Alan Burkitt-Gray) Re: Telecom IDDD Question (PaulCoxwell@aol.com) Re: Telecom IDDD Question (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router (Eric De Mund) Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router (Ted Klugman) Re: Question on NEC/MAT Software (Daryl Jones) MCI Watch: The Complaints Keep Rolling In (Randy Clarke) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Anne Shroeder Subject: Stephen D. Crocker Receives 2002 IEEE Internet Award Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 15:03:46 -0400 Reply-To: lance@isoc.org PISCATAWAY, NJ, 5 June, 2002-The IEEE has named Stephen D. Crocker, chief executive officer of Shinkuro, Inc. in Betheda, Md., as recipient of the 2002 IEEE Internet Award. The award recognizes Crocker for his leadership in the creation of key Internet protocols. It will be presented on 19 June, at INET 2002, in Arlington, Va. In the formative days of the Internet and its predecessor, the ARPANET, Crocker led the development of crucial technologies, processes and organizations that continue to support the Internet today. At the University of California at Los Angeles, Crocker and his team developed protocols for the ARPANET such as the Network Control Protocol. NCP laid the groundwork for today's Transmission Control Protocol. Crocker also founded and led the Network Working Group (NWG), which has evolved to become the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). In organizing the notes from the first few meetings of NWG, Crocker was anxious to expand the community and invite further discussion and responses, and thus named the series Requests for Comments. RFCs remain a mainstay of Internet protocol publishing today, and have played a big part in creating the environment of open and evolving standards of the Internet. "The Internet Society is honored that INET 2002 was chosen as the venue to present this year's prestigious IEEE Internet Award," said Lynn St. Amour, president and CEO of the Internet Society. "Dr. Stephen Crocker is highly regarded throughout the international Internet community and we're pleased that his contributions will be recognized at INET 2002 in front of his peers." Crocker's many contributions to the Internet also include extensive work organizing the standards process of the IETF, where he has served as area director of security and on the Internet Architecture Board. Crocker previously worked for the University of Southern California Information Sciences Institute in Marina del Rey, the Aerospace Corporation in El Segundo, Calif., and at Trusted Information Systems, Inc., in Glenwood, Md. In 1994, he co-founded CyberCash of Reston, Va., and served as its senior vice president for development and chief technology officer. He also has started other ventures including Steve Crocker Associates in Bethesda, Md.; Executive DSL in Bethesda, Md.; and Longitude Systems in Chantilly, Va. He has served on the Council of Visitors at the Marine Biological Laboratory, as part of the National Research Council Study of Information Systems Trustworthiness and currently chairs the ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee and the ISOC 2002 Jonathan B. Postel Service Award Committee. The author of numerous papers, Crocker also holds patents in relation to his security and electronic commerce work. He received his bachelor's degree in mathematics and doctoral degree in computer science, both from UCLA, he and studied artificial intelligence at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. About IEEE The IEEE is the world's largest technical professional society with more than 377,000 members in approximately 150 countries. Through its members, the IEEE is a leading authority on areas ranging from aerospace, computers and telecommunications to biomedicine, electric power and consumer electronics. Additional information is available at http://www.ieee.org. About ISOC The Internet Society http://www.isoc.org/ is a non-profit, non-governmental, open membership organization whose worldwide individual and organization members make up a veritable "who's who" of the Internet industry. It provides leadership in technical and operational standards, policy issues, and education. ISOC is the organizational home of the International Engineering Task Force, the Internet Architecture Board, the Internet Engineering Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force - the standards setting and research arms of the Internet community. For information about INET 2002 please visit http://www.inet2002.org. Contact: Contact: Marsha Longshore +1 732 562 6824 m.longshore@ieee.org ------------------------------ From: Robert Dover Subject: Re: Echo With Cell Phones Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 17:16:30 -0500 Organization: Nortel Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote ... >>> Friends of mine just got a set of three Verizon cell phones (one for >>> each family member) and they tell me that they only get echo when they >>> call my landline. Is this possible? I thought echo-cancellation was >>> on the calling side. >> This is probably due to a poor hybrid on your phone that allows >> received audio to be turned around and sent back to the caller. I've found that this can also happen due to the surroundings of the cellphone caller. When either my wife or I make a call from our garage (where the signal is pretty bad), our caller's complain of echo. YMMV. ------------------------------ From: Burkitt-Gray Alan Subject: Re: Telecom IDDD Question Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 09:50:58 +0100 > which countries have international calling agreements in place that make > using the international dialing codes unnecessary" said Adam Moore. > Vatican (a separate country code) is a local phone call in Rome" said PAT. Again, I don't know about international agreements, but callers in the Irish Republic dial numbers in Northern Ireland (legally part of the UK, but let's not get into that) with an Irish Republic area code, 048, rather than via 0044 28. (N Ireland subscribers have eight digits and are all one UK area code, 028). It doesn't work the other way -- Northern Irish callers use 00353 etc to call Irish Republic numbers, but they pay normal local and long distance tariffs instead of international rates. Callers in Geneva, Switzerland, used to be able to call neighbouring areas in France with a Swiss area code -- but I suspect that doesn't exist since the French changed their numbering system -- just as Monaco used to have French numbers until the French numbering system changed. As Monaco numbers look identical -- eight digits, all starting with a 9 -- to nearby French numbers making calls can be confusing. The Vatican case is a bit different. The Vatican does have its own country code, +379, but has never activated it. It still uses Rome numbers, and is part of the normal Italian phone system. Alan Burkitt-Gray Editor, Global Telecoms Business Euromoney Institutional Investor plc, Nestor House, Playhouse Yard, London EC4V 5EX, UK tel +44 20 7779 8518 fax +44 20 7779 8492 e-mail aburkitt@euromoneyplc.com ------------------------------ From: PaulCoxwell@aol.com Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 08:43:48 EDT Subject: Re: Telecom IDDD Question Hello Pat, I've been receiving the digest and reading the back issues for a couple of months now, and finding it really interesting. (I used to work for British Telecom here in England.) I thought it about time I contributed. > From: Adam Moore > Subject: Telecom IDDD Question > I'm trying to find information on which countries have international > calling agreements in place that make using the international dialing > codes unnecessary. Example: US-Canada calls do not require country > codes. Do you have this information on your website? Or, do you know > where I may find it? I have searched some of your website, but have > not found anything yet. For many years Liechtenstein was operated as an area code within the Swiss system, and a similar arrangement existed for tiny Andorra under the French network. There has been cross-border dialing between the U.K. & the Republic of Ireland for many years, although we don't have a U.S./Canadian-style shared numbering plan. Several codes were allocated in the British network to reach the Irish Republic, e.g. 0001 for Dublin. Subscribers in the Irish Republic could dial any number in mainland Britain with 03 and could directly reach Northern Ireland with 080 . All of these codes have been withdrawn, and most calls now have to be dialed as 00353 ... or 0044 ... but the Irish area code 048 has been allocated to directly reach Northern Ireland, which is now all one area code (028 in the U.K. network). Intercept recordings are still in place on the 080 code in Ireland. Calls from N.I. to the Republic and vice versa are charged at normal national rates instead of international. Also, although the Channel Islands of Jersey & Guernsey are British territory, technically they are not part of the U.K. and and could be considered as separate countries. They are under two area codes in the U.K. system (01534 and 01481, originally allocated as 0JE4 and 0GU1). Regards, Paul Coxwell ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 21:23:48 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Telecom IDDD Question Adam Moore wrote: > I'm trying to find information on which countries have international > calling agreements in place that make using the international dialing > codes unnecessary. Example: US-Canada calls do not require country > codes. Do you have this information on your website? Or, do you know > where I may find it? I have searched some of your website, but have > not found anything yet. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Regards USA-Canada, I dunno if there is > any agreement in place between the telecom authorities in both > countries or if it just is the way it is because of attrition. Actually, the US and Canada (uniquely) SHARE the country code 1 (one). From any other country you also have to dial 1 as the country code to get the number in the US and Canada. The history you cited (and which I snipped) explains why the US and Canada, also known as "the North American Numbering Plan" decided to share their country code. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 00:20:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Eric De Mund Subject: Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? Reply-to: Eric De Mund Organization: Ixian Systems, Inc. Gene, > I'm pretty sure Siemens still sells a SOHO BB router that has a > serial port for dialup modem "fallback". I'm pretty sure one of the > Linksys routers had it, or it might have been Netgear... > (I know this doesn't help you much, but I've been thinking about it > because I'm in the opposite situation: still on dialup, but cable > modem may become available in July. I'd like to set up the router > now, and when the cable modem is available, get a "seamless" > switchover ...) This is precisely what I did with the SMC Barricade broadband router (then model SMC7004BR, now model SMC7004ABR) at my girlfriend's house. On the LAN side, the switchover was perfectly unnoticed. On the WAN side, in order to connect to her cable Internet provider, I had to instruct the unit to connect to the ISP via "Dynamic IP Address: Obtain an IP address from ISP automatically", whereas before it was connecting via "Dial-up Network: To surf the Internet via PSTN/ISDN". At my home, I've got mine set to "PPP over Ethernet: Some ISPs require the use of PPPoE to connect to their services" in order to connect to my DSL provider. I've been using this little box for two years now, and it's the only one I recommend to clients and install at friend's houses. Here's what it has over the competition: * WAN (10BaseT) as well as serial port (for POTS dialing) on the back * has UNIX print server capability (i.e. has a parallel port, too, on the back), which works fine for Windows hosts * SMC web site is not a chore to navigate, and firmware updates appear there regularly * technical support is actually pretty good (they're competent, and responsive; they shipped me a new unit in exchange for my old one when they couldn't debug my old one over the phone) Check pricewatch.com where these units occasionally appear in the $55-60 range. From a satisfied customer, unaffiliated with SMC or its subsidiaries, Eric De Mund | Ixian Systems, Inc. | 53 49 B2 23 AF 6C 20 81 http://www.ixian.com/ead/ | Mountain View, CA | ED DD 4C 81 AA C9 D1 A5 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 14:37:56 GMT From: Ted Klugman Subject: Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? Organization: Klugman Enterprises On Wed, 05 Jun 2002 02:51:09 GMT, joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote: > I currently have a DSL connection, which connects to a home network > via a Linksys wireless router. It's a very nice setup for me. > However, for a couple of months, I'm going to have to go back to a > dial-up connection. > Does anyone know of a way of connecting the linksys router to a > dial-up connection? I suppose this would involve a dialup to Ethernet > converter ...? I'll assume that the "uplink" port of your Linksys router is still Ethernet. If that's the case, get your hands on a crummy older PC with a modem and an Ethernet card, and set it up with a suitable OS (W2K comes to mind ... XP should too ... dunno about 98 or ME) that has Internet Connection Sharing. There are also software products out there that do the sharing for you. Actually, I don't know if they're still out there -- but they used to be. When MicroSloth integrates "features" into their new OS's, the pioneering products that those "features" are based on start to disappear from the market. A few years ago, I used SyGate to share out my dialup connection from an NT4 machine. YMMV. ------------------------------ From: Daryl Jones Subject: Re: Question on NEC MAT Software Date: 7 Jun 2002 02:28:42 GMT Organization: Internet Software Consortium There is a software package called Aimworx that does what you describe. It doesn't do it very well, in my opinion, but it is advertised to work with the 2400 and 2000 series products. It includes a call accounting system with an Oracle database. See http://www.aimworx.com/ for details. Peter J. Aikins wrote: > Does anyone know if there is a third party software platform that > will provide administration access across multiple NEC PABX models > (e.g. IVS, IMS, ICS etc.)? > I'm getting the shits with NEC persisting with the policy of a > seperate MAT package for each model! I mean, it's like Nortel > insisting that you use a differect terminal emulator for an Opt11 and > Opt61! ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: MCI Watch: The Complaints Keep Rolling In Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 16:44:20 -0500 Here is a message from Randy Clarke complaining about MCI service. So, what else is old news? > From: Randy Clarke [iamrandy2@hotmail.com] > RE: MCI Small Business Inbound 800 Account - over two hours on phone > trying to fix MCI billing problem Just spent over two hours on the phone for the 3rd time to get an internal MCI billing problem fixed. ie. in October 2001 my credit card paid account stopped getting paid. MCI called and I updated the info to a card that expires many years out. Since then I get regular statements with the billing activity and payment info on them, The "Due Date" is "--------" and the "Amount Enclosed" is "--------", and included on the payment stub are two lines that read: "Do not remit total amount due. Total amount due has been billed to Credit Card." So I do not send any payment. I noticed that there was a "Previous Balance" and wondered why? I called, and as above indicates, this month I spent over 2 hours on the phone with them only to find out that the 2 previous times I had spent hours on the phone with them to fix this, were to no avail. they want me to go through the same 'credit card activation' yet again. During this last call I spoke with several people, 'ALL' of them immediately go on the defensive, only to be shot down when they read the info in my account which clearly states that I have been through this twice before. I also asked for the phone number to the MCI Legal department and was given one, I called, IT HAD BEEN DISCONNECTED!. So I called MCI back and asked again for the number, was given another one and, I called, you guessed it, IT HAD BEEN DISCONNECTED! The numbers had not only been disconnected but they did not have any forwarding info either. It appears to me that there is a willful attempt for MCI to buffer the customers from the legal dept. I would guess that it is because they REALLY do have some MAJOR billing problems. Ask yourself, DO YOU WANT TO CONTUNUE AS A CUSTOMER OF MCI?, paying the higher prices caused by their apparent inability to do business efficiently? I do not think I will continue. At this point I was willing to: A. Have them credit my account for $ 80.00/hr that my time is worth on the phone, of course, I was told, they can not do that. B. Have them write off the balance and start fresh to see if they can do this right. Of course, I was told, they can not write off the balance, so this was not done either. My question to all of you reading this is: Has anyone else that has an account with MCI and they wish it to be paid by credit card, have this or similar problems? Please advise me by return E-Mail as "I" believe, if there are enough of us, we have a pretty good class action case against them for billing harassment or the like. Thanks, Randy Clarke [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh sure, Randy, a lot of us have had accounts with MCI and had to cancel them in disgust and frustration, unable to get anywhere with them. And don't even consider suing them; they get sued every day of the week by somebody or another; it is like water off a duck's back as the saying goes. Suits mean nothing to them, customer relations mean even less. Remember Randy, the company began with fraud. MCI filed a fraudulent petition with the Illinois Commerce Commission to get permission to start microwave communications service to 'a small group of customers between Chicago and St. Louis' in 1968. In the early 1970's, they passed bad checks to Illinois Bell and AT&T, and only when IBT was in the process of starting to cut them off entirely (in those days it all went through the local telco) did MCI make good with cashier's checks. Oh, Randy, we know **all about MCI** and how rotten their business practices are. Sure customer 'service' buffers calls to keep the executives and lawyers from getting calls direct from angry customers. I've been getting a lot of MCI complaints lately and if you want my personal opinion, I say RUN FOR YOUR LIFE NOW FROM THOSE PEOPLE. It would not surprise me to see them go belly up sometime soon, their business practices and wholesale fraud finally catching up with them. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #271 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jun 7 02:10:59 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA12137; Fri, 7 Jun 2002 02:10:59 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 02:10:59 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206070610.CAA12137@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #272 TELECOM Digest Fri, 7 Jun 2002 02:11:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 272 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Competition? (Fred Goldstein) Re: Competition? (Bruce Larrabee) Re: Competition? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? (Christopher Wolf) Re: Telecom IDDD Question (Bob Goudreau) Re: Telecom IDDD Question (John R. Levine) Your Recent Suggestion (Suggestions - ringtone.net) I Want a Satellite Dish on the Roof!! (Tom Betz) Last Laugh! was Re: Looking For Audio Samples of Messages (Dave Phelps) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 22:48:35 -0400 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: Competition? On Wed, 05 Jun 2002 18:07:34 -0700 John Higdon said, > That is an excellent observation. Until local telecom competitors > actually install and maintain their own plants, all we will have is a > situation with a single provider furnishing all telecom service, but > with a middle man inserted to siphon off revenue. While this may feed > some extra mouths, it does not do much for the consumer. Not entirely true, depending on the meaning of "plant" above. There are multiple models of competitive telecom service. One is "resale", wherein the "CLEC" is really just a commissioned sales agent for the ILEC service. This is just competition for the business office, not the network. It was, AFAIK, cooked up by ILECs as a substitute for real competition. Fortunately, it is not getting traction. The other extreme is when the competitor owns its entire network, with only interconnection to the incumbent. That certainly has its advantages, but it is also hard to finance. Competitive fiber optic builds in dense urban cores and suburban industrial parks are, perhaps, reasonable, although too many were built at once, in the same places, in the late 1990s, causing many to tank. > The way the wholesale pricing is set up, there is little incentive for > these retail telecom outfit to ever turn up plant. After all, they are > paying wholesale rates that are below cost (and below the cost of > maintaining their own facilities). Why spend money needlessly? In between resale and fully-separate are two other models, which both depend to some extent on the ILEC's wholesale network. One is for the CLEC to own its own switching facilities, and create its own services, while renting loops and interoffice facilities (which are needed to get to the loops). In some cases the CLEC can also buy capacity on the competitive fiber, but Jane Householder can in general only be reached on a copper loop. So for Jane to benefit from competition, the CLEC needs to rent the loop. Such a strategy is sometimes called Smart Build. This goes right to the core of the Telecom Act's unbundling requirements. A UNE-Loop CLEC might eventually be able to build some of its own transmission facilities (wireless, perhaps, or fiber where warranted). But those are extremely capital-intensive, so leasing loops, and using non-ILEC inside plant (switches et al, which are, today, dirt cheap by historic standards) is a very good way to get some meaningful competition going. (Disclaimer/plug: I consult to CLECs for a living, and tend to favor this approach. I've done some serious financial modeling for Smart Build CLECs, so I know how to follow the money.) The other common model is called UNE Platform. Again, the Telecom Act either suggests or requires this, depending on which side you're on. UNE-P makes use of ILEC switches as well as loops. So the network is, physically, the ILEC's. But the switch and loop are purchased separately, to the CLEC's spec, and priced at wholesale without regard to the ILEC retail tariff. The FCC's pricing rule, a complex and rather loose formula called TELRIC, is supposed to provide the ILECs with their incremental cost plus a modest profit. It is *not* below cost. It may be below historic cost (the ILECs were historically quite inefficient, since as rate-of-return regulated monopolies, they had incentives to spend freely) but not below what it should cost today. And for the most part it only applies to available facilities; the ILEC generally can't be asked to build new plant for wholesale use. UNE-P isn't quite what many of us think of as facilities-based competition, though it is legally (the "facilities" are in essence outsourced to the ILEC, but, unlike resale, the CLEC takes responsibility for the service as a whole). UNE-P has however two serious benefits. One is that it provides a market entry path: The CLEC can lease the ILEC switch today and install its own later. (Note that a CLEC usually can't put a real switch in the ILEC CO; they have to put a remote mux in the ILEC CO and run digital facilities to their own switch elsewhere.) Two is that the availability of UNE-P, as a cost-based (TELRIC) offering, caps how much an ILEC can get away with charging at retail. If their retail markup is too high, then a CLEC will come along, order UNE-P, and undercut the ILEC price. In other words, it's a way to force cost-based pricing upon the ILECs, after a century of fatuous monopoly pricing. If there were no UNEs, then most local telephone competition wouldn't exist. Cable companies do own their own facilities, and would probably compete, but that's about it. Everyone else would be cut off from reaching non-huge customers, and we'd have the usual higher price, worse service that comes from a lack of competition. ------------------------------ From: larb0@aol.com (LARB0) Date: 06 Jun 2002 12:08:31 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Competition? The other side of the equation is that it's unlikely that anyone will ever install an overlay loop network. The only competition will come from competing technologies which leaves those that want wireline service "high and dry" competitive-wise. There is incentive to rent a local loop from the ILEC and then back haul to a competitive wire center. This offers a choice to the consumer (features and rates) as well as offering diverse carrier/wire center services for those interested. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Competition? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 19:32:06 GMT >> The circle is close to complete. In a few years, customers will have >> exactly what they had 20 years ago, but instead of paying wholesale >> for everything they'll be paying retail. Progress indeed ... > That is an excellent observation. Until local telecom competitors > actually install and maintain their own plants, all we will have is a > situation with a single provider furnishing all telecom service, but > with a middle man inserted to siphon off revenue. While this may feed > some extra mouths, it does not do much for the consumer. I have yet to see a corporation spend money lobbying to help the consumer. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: None, that is, except for MCI, which as all of us who watched them back in the 1970's know, were always looking out for the best interest of their customers. As they would say, and almost get into verbal fights with potential customers over, "why do you want to pay the high price of service from AT&T when our new service is so much cheaper." Of course we know they did not actually *pay AT&T or Illinois Bell for services rendered until they almost got cut off a few times. As Charles Brown, then the chairman of AT&T once pointed out, "If AT&T did not pay its bills and specialized only in the high traffic phone corridor of the east coast, and never handled any repair work, then I could afford to give a great discount on the cost of phone service also." In the next issue of this Digest (later Friday) I have an *explosive* report on MCI's financial shenanigans as told by a former accounting supervisor for the firm who is now in prison for fraud ... not all of it his, although he wound up taking the rap for it from his supervisors and others at MCI, who pressured him to cook the books during the British Telecom purchase a few years ago. Its a story of the same calibre as the Archer Daniels Midland fiasco. Watch the Digest Friday afternoon for the full-issue report. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 22:51:09 -0500 From: Christopher Wolf Subject: Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? Eric De Mund wrote: Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? >> I'd like to set up the router >> now, and when the cable modem is available, get a "seamless" >> switchover ...) > This is precisely what I did with the SMC Barricade broadband router (then > model SMC7004BR, now model SMC7004ABR) at my ... > I've been using this little box for two years now, and it's the only one I > recommend to clients and install at friend's houses. Here's what it has > over the competition: > * WAN (10BaseT) as well as serial port (for POTS dialing) on the back SMC7004BR has them on the front, but I don't think it's available any longer. Front is the wrong place for them. > * has UNIX print server capability (i.e. has a parallel port, too, on the > back), which works fine for Windows hosts Not that it works in the SMC7004BR, in my experience. According to SMC, it has only been tested with a few printers. I've found many of them, especially my Epson models, overflow the print buffer and crash the SMC unit for anything other than text. One of SMC's later suggested fixes was to install the Epson print manager and make some changes to the print driver, but I was not been able to find it for Windows 2000, and so I broke down and bought a separate D-Link wireless print server, which has worked flawlessly from the moment it turned on. > * technical support is actually pretty good (they're competent, and > responsive; they shipped me a new unit in exchange for my old one when > they couldn't debug my old one over the phone) Yes, they did the same for me the first time I needed to replace the unit. The second time they told me to take it back to the store where I got it. Also, the dialup networking support on this SMC unit is not compatible with MSChap2 authentication, so if your ISP uses that, you should avoid this unit. -W ------------------------------ From: Bob Goudreau Subject: Re: Telecom IDDD Question Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 00:23:20 -0400 Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > Actually, the US and Canada (uniquely) SHARE the country code 1 > (one). From any other country you also have to dial 1 as the country > code to get the number in the US and Canada. > The history you cited (and which I snipped) explains why the US and > Canada, > also known as "the North American Numbering Plan" decided to share their > country code. The NANP is not unique, and it's not even limited to the US and Canada. Other multi-national numbering plans exist. The USSR used to be unique for having the only single-nation single-digit country code (+7), but now +7 is shared by Russia and Kazakstan. (The other 13 former Soviet republics all got separate country codes; for some reason, Kazakstan hasn't done this yet, though it might eventually.) Other folks have already mentioned how various European micro-states (Andorra, Liechtenstein, San Marino, Vatican City, Monaco) used to be integrated into the numbering plans of their larger neighbors. They all have their own country codes now, though the Vatican hasn't actually enabled +379 and is still reachable only via Italy's +39. The North American Numbering Plan is not limited to just the US and Canada. It also includes 17 other nations/colonies in the Caribbean and Atlantic. It even extends way out into the Pacific, thanks to the US state of Hawaii and the US territories of Guam and the Northern Marianas Islands. (The only US territory not in the NANP, American Samoa, still has its own separate +684 country code, which will someday supposedly be replaced with the +1 684 area code when A.S. joins the NANP.) Bob Goudreau Cary, NC ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jun 2002 22:42:37 -0400 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Telecom IDDD Question Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Regards USA-Canada, I dunno if there is > any agreement in place between the telecom authorities in both > countries If nothing else, the Canadians get their new area codes from NANPA, so there must be some sort of agreement there. Ditto all of those little countries and territories formerly in area code 809. > I think also there are a couple cases in Europe where this is > available. I do know that the Vatican (a separate country code) is a > local phone call in Rome. Others with experience in international > calling want to comment on this? PAT] You've been able to dial Monaco as +33 4 9x xx xx xx, integrated with the dialing plan for that part of France. They now have their own country code +377, so you call then as +377 9x xx xx xx. But I think you can still call them using the French numbers. This is of more than passing interest because calls to +377 cost two or three times as much as calls to +33 9. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 20:36:05 -0700 From: Suggestions - ringtone.net Subject: Your Recent Suggestion Thank you for your recent suggestion. We aim to add as many of our customer suggestions as possible. You may which to subscribe to our free ringtone update list to see if your ringtone suggestion has been added. ************************************************************************** Please do not use this e-mail address for general correspondence. Please click "Contact Us" on the left hand side of the homepage and then choose the most suitable address for your query. ************************************************************************** Regards, Suggestions - ringtone.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What a clever way to send spam. Claim that someone 'wrote in with a suggestion' (I did not do any such thing) and offer an answer to an unasked question. Do people actually spend money downloading ringtones? You mean the twenty-some tones in the Nokia 5165 are not enough to choose from and you want a few more? At 99 cents each, its really a ripoff. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: I Want a Satellite Dish on the Roof ($#&%#&$& Verizon) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 21:13:13 UTC Organization: Some I'm sure anyone in a small multi-location business who has had to deal with the arrant incompetence of an ILEC like Verizon (5 weeks to get three new business phone lines installed in a new office, then they install them IN THE BUILDING ACROSS THE STREET FROM WHERE THEY WERE ORDERED FOR, and a week later they've missed four appointments to move them to the right building) has dreamed, as I have, of putting a satellite dish on the roof and bypassing the copper entirely. Voice, data, everything. MegaCorps do it all the time. My question is, how close are small businesses (spending less than 10K/mo on their phone/DSL bills for 4 or 5 locations) to being able to do it now, and do it reliably in the northeast US? I'd sure love to be able to go to the CFO and say, "We could save a grand a month and bypass Verizon entirely." ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Last Laugh! was Re: Looking For Audio Samples Messages Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 00:28:38 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com A chance to use Avaya's business policy! It will cost $100,000 US for licensing, and you'll have to pay $500,000 per year for a maintenance agreement. The maintenance agreement covers the audio tape. If the audio tape fails, I will provide a new one free of charge while under the maintenance agreement. However, only I may install the tape in your tape player. If an unauthorized person installs the tape in your tape player, the warranty will be null and void. My time is billable at $1000/hr. Installing the tape in the tape player is estimated to take approximately 4 hours. As the end user, after fulfilling the 1 month training requirement and successfully completing a 1000 question exam verifying proficiency, you will be allowed to press the play, stop, and rewind buttons . The warranty will be void if you eject the tape at any time. Only I am authorized to eject the tape from the tape player. If you terminate the maintenance contract, you will still be able to listen to said recordings, but I will remotely disable your ability to copy them. For a small one-time fee of $832,234 plus the annual maintenance amount due ($500,000) you may reinitiate your annual maintenance contract. All US currency please. Thank you for doing business with me. I value your business. In article , sharmi@avaya.com says: > I am employed at Avaya, a telecommunications company. For my work I > need audio samples of recorded network or branded messages which you > hear from outbound calls. A recorded message could be an announcement > saying > this phone number doesn't exist, > the circuit is busy, try again later, > or a cell phone message saying This is AT&T. The person you have > called is not in the area of network;. > If you know of a source for these audio samples - either the messages > themselves or someone who might know from how I can acquire samples, I > would highly appreciate if you please assist me in my search. > > Thank you very much for your valuable time. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dave, that is really rich. Is that really how their contract reads more or less? Unreal. Don't forget to read the next issue of the Digest early Friday afternoon in most places. The MCI story will be a very good tale you won't want to miss. It will get an entire issue. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #272 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jun 7 13:01:52 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA20595; Fri, 7 Jun 2002 13:01:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 13:01:52 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206071701.NAA20595@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #273 TELECOM Digest Fri, 7 Jun 2002 13:00:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 273 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson MCI Story: "I was Wrong. But so Were They" (Marcus Jervis) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marcus Jervis Subject: MCI Story: "I Was Wrong; But so Were They" Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 04:11:52 +0000 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I feel so vindicated today! What I have been saying for years, i.e. "MCI is a bunch of thieves and con artists" (quite literally, not just a figure of speech) is starting to be recognized in other 'more respected' sources such as Forbes Magazine. Our special report today was prepared by Marcus Jervis, who scanned and edited Mr. Weinberg's article for the June 10 issue of Forbes. Thank you very much, Marcus! And thank you, Forbes for permission to share it here. After all, when a company begins its corporate existence (back in 1968 more or less) with an act of fraud, filing a fraudulent petition with a government agency to get a license to do business, then stiffs its own vendors and suppliers (Illinois Bell and AT&T) by refusing to pay for services rendered until the vendors literally start squeezing and have begun to cut off service, and outright lies to its customers telling them 'our rates are lower, why would you want to pay more to AT&T for service', then I wonder why they should be so surprised when *their* wholesale customers stiff them in huge numbers and amounts. I will just let Marcus and Mr. Weinberg tell the story. You may want to print this out for archiving and later reference. PAT] ================= Aggressive Accounting Ring of Thieves Neil Weinberg, 06.10.02 Forbes Magazine MCI introduced Walter Pavlo to a world of armed thugs, duffel bags stuffed with cash and phony accounting. Now, sitting in a South Carolina prison, he points a finger back at his former employer. Walter Pavlo has plenty of time these days to walk the track inside South Carolina's secluded Edgefield prison. He takes a daily stroll with Mark Whitacre, the Archer Daniels Midland whistle-blower who is serving a ten-and-a-half-year sentence for fraud. Surrounded by drug convicts, camp fences and rolling woodlands, they chat about their pasts and draw parallels to the scandals swirling around big corporations now -- at Enron, at Arthur Andersen, in telecom. Pavlo, blond and still boyish at 39, committed his crimes at MCI as the telecom business roared in the mid-1990s. He is in the 15th month of a 41-month sentence for obstruction of justice, money laundering and mail fraud. An unremarkable rank-and-filer in a 25-person billing department, he says he cooked the books, under pressure from higher-ups, to help bolster MCI's growth. Pavlo employed an array of tricks -- taught to him, he says, at MCI -- to hide hundreds of millions of dollars in aging bad debts and clearly uncollectable receivables owed by a raft of upstart telecom resellers. In the process, he used the same sleight of hand to skim $6 million on the sly for himself and a couple of partners; for that he is doing soft time. The resellers stoked growth at a time when MCI, lit up by the halo of the Internet frenzy, was prettying itself up for a sale to someone bolder. The company, with Walter Pavlo's copious assistance, granted easy credit to dozens of fly-by-nights looking to lease its lines and resell service to businesses and consumers. It blithely let just about anyone, from raw rookies to pornographers and astrological touts, run up tens of millions of dollars in bills. Then, Pavlo says, MCI kept the receivables on its books long after any real hope of collecting had vanished -- with the resellers themselves, in some cases. Banks, eager for high interest and fees, financed it all. It was his job, he says, to hold these losses to a minimum, even if doing so required deceptive means. His actions benefited MCI. The company filed a proxy with the Securities & Exchange Commission recommending a $20 billion buyout by British Telecom in 1997, just days after management knew it had fraud on its hands, according to a brief filed by a group of banks that sued MCI in 1997. That deal collapsed, and MCI then accepted a $41 billion offer from WorldCom months later. MCI denied the banks' allegations and has claimed it was duped by its own employees. At MCI only Pavlo and James B. Wilkie, a senior manager, have been punished (along with a third partner, an outsider named Harold R. B. Mann). For five years Pavlo has wondered when someone might take a hard look at the four levels above him, from his boss up to the chief financial officer -- Douglas Maine, who later became chief financial officer at IBM and now runs its online arm -- and above him to MCI chief executive Bert C. Roberts, who now is chairman of WorldCom. And so when Pavlo learned one day in March, as he sat reading in the prison library, that the SEC is investigating whether there were any accounting misdeeds at WorldCom, he had one sentiment: "It's about time." He believes the remnants of his stunts are buried in a $685 million pretax charge for bad receivables that WorldCom took in October 2000. The company blamed the big charge ($405 million after tax benefits) on a handful of customers' going bankrupt in the previous quarter. Pavlo argues that the charge was, rather, a way to use the industry downturn to mask the writeoff of receivables that had been rotting for years on the books of MCI and WorldCom, artificially boosting profits. "This story is bigger than Walt Pavlo heisting money from MCI and going to jail," says Walt Pavlo. "This is about corruption of telecom, with lots of games. I didn't come to MCI knowing how to hide accounts receivable." Pavlo is a convicted felon and an accomplished liar. But his claims have some supporters. A shareholder lawsuit, dismissed in April and now under appeal, makes the same claim about the October 2000 writeoff. The SEC seems to harbor similar suspicions, and in March it asked WorldCom to list the carriers included in the big charge, how much each owed and how old their debts were. WorldCom says the charge was proper but declines to comment about the SEC's inquiry or events at MCI. Pavlo seemed an unlikely candidate for scandal. He grew up mostly near Sistersville, W. Va. and Savannah, Ga., with two younger brothers. His father describes Walter Jr. as a hard worker who started at quarterback in high school one season, more out of grit than athletic ability. Pavlo earned an industrial engineering degree at West Virginia University and an M.B.A. at Mercer in 1991. After working at Goodyear Aerospace, where he met his wife, Rhoda, he joined MCI in 1992 at age 29. He was assigned to head a four-person group in the sleepy carrier finance department in Atlanta, which handled about $240 million a month in billings in 1993. MCI and the entire telecom business were on the cusp of big change. After rising more than thirtyfold in 20 years, MCI's stock lost ground in 1994 and 1995. A year later deregulation promised to upend old monopolies and raze barriers to new competition, and soon MCI was in play. The smell of fast money was in the air. A raft of new resellers began buying contracts to repackage MCI capacity as cut-rate long-distance, prepaid phone cards and caller-paid 900 numbers. For MCI and other big carriers it was a godsend. Consumer long distance was getting cutthroat. Margins on big corporate accounts were thinning. Resellers were another story. Most started small and paid rates with gross margins of 50% or more. Some doubled or tripled billings in a month. The torrid growth set off a tug-of-war inside MCI: The sales side pursued resellers with alacrity, but the finance side worried about the resellers' ability to pay their bills. "Everyone who dealt with MCI considered them feudal and schizophrenic," says the chief of one prepaid-card service. By 1995 Pavlo had risen to senior manager and the carrier finance unit had grown to 120 employees. It was handling $650 million in collections a month. About 10% of sales, but a far larger slice of profits, came from resellers. At 32, Pavlo was the department's "target man," charged with handling high-risk accounts, collecting receivables and coming up with creative ways to dispose of them. It was a job Pavlo performed well, Ralph McCumber, his boss until the spring of 1996, stated in a deposition taken in the banks' 1997 lawsuit charging MCI with fraud. But the job was taking a heavy toll on Pavlo. MCI signed up resellers by the dozen and let bad billings mount. When Pavlo went out into the field to dun the debtors, he found a wild and woolly world. One prepaid calling card outfit, Caribbean Telephone & Telegraph in Bloomfield Hills, Mich., signed on in early 1995. By midyear CT&T owed MCI $30 million, Pavlo says. The small firm's debt swelled faster than MCI could even track it; MCI took 60 days to get a bill out and waited another 15 days before it came due. Pavlo visited CT&T's office in lower Manhattan, seeking payment, but owner James Franklin insisted he couldn't afford to pay. Really? Pavlo says he spotted duffel bags of cash, armed guards and money-counting machines. Pavlo returned to Atlanta empty-handed and convinced that CT&T's pleas of poverty were a bit exaggerated. By February 1996 MCI had cut off service to CT&T, which had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Franklin blamed CT&T's problems on slow payments from its own customers. At the Las Vegas office of one prepaid-card shop, Hi-Rim, a colleague of Pavlo's showed up to demand payment -- and a Hi-Rim official threatened to go get his gun, the colleague says. Another reseller, Tel-Central, had a bit of star power: It was run by Dennis D. McLain, a 30-game winner as a Detroit Tigers pitcher who later was convicted of money laundering, theft and mail fraud. By early 1996 Tel-Central owed MCI up to $30 million and had been cut off. McLain was indicted in 1998 along with John A. (Junior) Gotti in a phone-card scam, but the charges were dropped in 1999. McLain is now doing time for stealing $3 million from Peet Packing's pension fund. Big carriers added to the problems by locking resellers into "ramp-up" contracts that charged them set prices for an increasing number of minutes. Many soon found rivals retailing service at prices below what they had paid wholesale. For resellers, the choice was simple: Either keep collecting from their customers, stop paying MCI and pocket wads of cash -- or pay MCI and go bankrupt. The uncollected bills got so bad that managers at MCI, WorldCom, Sprint and elsewhere discussed setting up a database to track offenders. Pavlo was feeling the strain of it all. He was coming to work at 5 a.m. and staying late. He traveled constantly. Yet the more he worked, the worse the finances got. Until 1995 his group's bad debt had run $10 million or so a year, well within range of the unit's 2% ceiling. Accounts more than 90 days past due remained in the 5% to 7% target range. But 1995 bad debt came in at $90 million, and 90-days-late accounts had ballooned. Pavlo sent his superiors a memo on Jan. 4, 1996, warning of $88 million, and possibly more, in reseller receivables that MCI was unlikely to collect, the plaintiff banks allege. Accounting rules urge firms to write down such assets as soon as they realize they will not collect. But that means adding to bad debt reserves or posting a special loss, hurting earnings. The banks alleged that James Folk, vice president in charge of revenue operations, revealed the threat to Don Lynch, a senior vice president reporting to Chief Financial Officer Douglas Maine. Pavlo says he got word back via Steven Rubio, an accounting senior manager: Whatever the numbers said, the 1995 carrier bad debt charge would be $15 million. "We can't let this revenue get away. It's not in the plan," Pavlo says he was told. Folk, who has since left MCI, now lives in Olney, Md., Lynch is a telecom consultant in Fairfax, Va., Maine runs IBM.com and Rubio now is WorldCom's assistant controller. All four declined to comment. Pavlo says he, Rubio and other MCI financial planners started meeting monthly to discuss the extent of the problem and how to make it go away. By early 1996 they had found an ingenious way to keep a creaky unpaid bill off the past-due ledger: Turn it into a promissory note. MCI's carrier finance group did this on a large scale for the first time in early 1996, decreeing that CT&T owed $100 million on a promissory note. Recognizing that Hi-Rim was also going to welch, MCI disconnected it in March of 1996, wrote up a promissory note for at least $35 million and carried the balance into 1997, according to the deposition testimony in the banks' lawsuit, taken from James Wanserski, director of finance for credit and collections and Pavlo's boss from March 1996 onward. Wanserski, who now works for Arthur Andersen in Atlanta, declined comment. Pavlo says MCI had to have known the promissory notes were next to worthless but nonetheless told auditors it expected to collect 75% of face value. Even the promissory gimmick, however, couldn't keep pace with MCI's rising balance of bills 90 days late. So Pavlo and colleagues resorted to another trick: misapplying so-called "unapplied cash," money customers sent in without specifying the bill it was intended for. At the end of each month a member of the carrier division went around asking, "Who needs money?" Typically, $1 million to $2 million was doled out to cover older accounts, according to Pavlo and two other former members of the department. Another tactic: postdating invoices. "Accounting was real loose," says a former financial analyst in the department. "We'd move money around to keep over-90s down and managers off our backs." "Placeholder credits" were another tool. The carrier finance department used them to credit a customer for up to several million dollars in payments as if the money had already been received, when it hadn't yet arrived at MCI. Sometimes the money behind a placeholder never showed up. In one case, Hi-Rim said it was sending a payment via FedEx. Pavlo's group credited its account and tracked the payment's progress. When the envelope was opened, says the former analyst, it was empty. Placeholder credits apparently became common at MCI. "Competition among business divisions" over which one had the "youngest" receivables "has stimulated the posting of memo entries in advance of actuals," Folk, the revenue operations chief, wrote in a 1997 e-mail quoted in a lawsuit later filed by an MCI partner. "In time this practice became more the rule than the exception." Folk admitted in a deposition that this had led to "fudging" the age of receivables on MCI's books. What was in it for employees? "They get to keep their jobs." Pavlo was stuck: He knew customers were taking in piles of cash yet refusing to pay their bills; he says his MCI bosses knew of the chicanery but refused to write off the receivable. Increasingly, he feared for his job and fretted about falling into legal jeopardy. He was drinking heavily -- and growing resentful. Even if MCI sold out at a premium, Pavlo wasn't going to get rich like top managers. He earned $70,000 and had vested options worth less than his salary. "I'm getting instructions from other parts of MCI that aren't in writing, like 'Make the bad debt $15 million,' but I'm the only one with my name all over this stuff," he says. "I started to feel I was going to be made into a scapegoat." In early 1996 Pavlo complained to a pal and customer, Harold Mann of Iris Enterprises, a caller-paid 900 service that handled phone sex, a lottery for fishing licenses in North Dakota and fundraising for racist David Duke. Mann soon became a central player (and codefendant) in MCI's reseller scandal, along with James Wilkie, Pavlo's buddy and senior manager in MCI's carrier finance unit. Mann introduced Pavlo to Mark Benveniste, president of Manatee Capital, an Atlanta firm set up in 1994 to factor, or collect, debts, for caller-paid phone services, including Mann's Denmark Dial. Why not move up the food chain, acting, in effect, as a factor for MCI? Benveniste proposed that Manatee could deliver MCI's receivables in days instead of months by collecting from resellers' clients directly. The only catch was that factoring reseller receivables was risky. Benveniste told Pavlo the only way he could get bank financing was for MCI to cover any collections shortfalls. Why not? Pavlo figured. MCI was out the money anyway. In March 1996 Pavlo met with Benveniste and several executives of National Bank of Canada at the swank Georgia Club in Atlanta. He told the bankers why MCI liked the factoring deal and said he was willing to sign a guarantee. After the meeting a loan officer called MCI's switchboard to make sure Pavlo worked there, according to court documents. That, it turned out, was the sum of due diligence for what turned out to be $45 million in revolving credit set up for Manatee by National Bank of Canada, NationsBank (now part of Bank of America) and CIT Group -- the banks that ended up suing MCI in the fallout in 1997. Never mind that Pavlo had the power to authorize credits of only $50,000 at most, and that his superiors were unaware of the guarantee. "It's absurd, but that was the level of greed at the table," Pavlo says. Pavlo figured his superiors in finance would dislike the Manatee idea, so he pitched it to Dan Dennis, head of the $7 billion (1996 revenue) carrier division, who loved it, he says. "Walt, you've cornered the market. You control the cash. This product is ingenious," is how Pavlo recalls Dennis responding. At Dennis' urging, Pavlov says he gave the program a name: Rapid Advance. Dennis, who has left MCI and now lives in Michigan, says he doesn't recall discussing such a program with Pavlo. But Rapid Advance soon became big stuff in Dennis' division. In April 1996 MCI began using Rapid Advance to collect from delinquent resellers and lure new customers. It cranked out Rapid Advance banners, stopwatches and CD-ROMs. The sales force had Pavlo pitching it at its meetings. He was a star. Little did MCI management know that Pavlo was working a side deal with Mann. Not long after Rapid Advance was up and running, Pavlo was griping to Mann over drinks at Taco Mac in Atlanta. He cited one reseller, Robert Hilby of Telemedia Networks, who owed MCI $2 million and, Pavlo believed, had no intention of paying. Pavlo said he would love to rip off Hilby right back. Mann said he know how to make Hilby pay -- and to pocket some cash in the process, according to Pavlo and Mann. Mann contacted Hilby and offered to have his own factoring firm, Orion Management Services, pay off Telemedia's MCI debt in exchange for a $200,000 upfront commission, 25% of Telemedia and a promise to pay back Orion over five years. Hilby took the offer, Pavlo says. He got a call from Hilby telling him of the Orion deal. Pavlo acted surprised and agreed. He wrote to Hilby, congratulating him for paying up. Then Pavlo and Mann flew first class to the Cayman Islands to party and deposit their $200,000. Pavlo put his account in the name of Parnell Investments, after the street he had once lived on in Savannah. They checked in to the Coral Stone Club and celebrated with Cristal champagne and Cuban cigars. "I felt on top of the world sitting in the middle of Seven Mile Beach," Pavlo says. Orion never paid MCI. Instead, Pavlo used tricks he had learned on the job, like diverting unapplied cash, to strike Telemedia's debt from MCI's books. Hilby could not be reached for comment, but in a deposition in the banks' suit against MCI, Hilby said he warned the carrier as early as October 1996 that he suspected a "conspiracy to defraud" MCI and its resellers. All told, Pavlo, Mann, Wilkie and at least one other cohort signed on seven resellers with Orion. That included Tel-Central, Denny McLain's old outfit. They figured that by owning a piece of the resellers and forcing them into Manatee-style factoring deals, they could keep some money flowing to MCI and still skim off a nifty slice. Orion also skimmed money from four Manatee customers by making bogus claims against them and diverting payments as they came in, Pavlo says. For a while, Pavlo says, he felt "bulletproof." Orion was bringing in tens of thousands of dollars a week and paying his wife $100,000 a year (though she held a full-time job elsewhere). Pavlo was wearing custom-tailored suits, tooling around in limos and flying to the Caymans regularly. Orion even bought the little West Virginia steel business where his father worked. He knew his actions were wrong. "Was it legal? No. Was it unethical? Absolutely," he says. "I know that now. But at the time you find yourself in a situation like this and somehow justify it." In August 1996 Pavlo visited Atlanta's exclusive Chateau Elan to brief senior MCI execs in town for the Summer Olympics. Pavlo says he reported that MCI held $170 million in doubtful reseller accounts. Wanserski, who also attended the meeting, said in a deposition later that senior management discussed the debts of CT&T and the likelihood that writeoffs could soar. "We just can't let this happen," Don Lynch, the senior vice president, responded in a conference call to the Atlanta group, Pavlo says. Pavlo left the meeting angry. The accounting games continued. Two months later, in October 1996, Wanserski flew to Washington D.C. to brief Chief Financial Officer Doug Maine on carrier bad debt. Maine declines to comment on the result. The following month, British Telecom announced plans to buy MCI for $20 billion in the largest cross-border deal ever. If it went through, many senior MCI managers would reap overnight riches. It was then, Pavlo says, that his boss, Wanserski, took him into his office and told him: "You have to get us through this purchase." But Pavlo was slipping. As the numbers mounted, it was becoming increasingly tough to disguise Orion's theft on MCI's books. Pavlo was gobbling Prozac and drinking a half-bottle of scotch a night. In January 1997 a carrier division analyst noticed that part of a $41.5 million payment WorldCom had made for using MCI's network had been posted elsewhere. At first the analyst thought it was just another "covering of agings." But it was too big. Pavlo had shifted $5 million to Denny McLain's Tel-Central in a desperate bid to cover his theft. Wanserski sent an e-mail to Pavlo, who was at the Four Seasons at Rancho Mirage, Calif., and demanded a call at 4:30 local time the following morning, Pavlo says. He stayed up all night drinking and popping antidepressants. Wanserski wanted him back in the office immediately. Pavlo said there was nothing to talk about. Pavlo never returned to the MCI office. An investigation soon uncovered his role. According to a brief filed by the banks, by March 3, 1997 Wanserski and Folk knew MCI had fraud on its hands. Saying nothing, MCI filed a proxy four days later, recommending the BT merger. Shortly afterwards James Folk, the boss of Pavlo's superior as vice president of revenue operations, discussed the events leading up to the fraud in an internal e-mail. "The second half of 1995 saw big growth in the carrier segment, which brought in unethical and shady companies," Folk wrote, according to a deposition he gave the following year in a breach-of-contract lawsuit that Manatee filed against MCI. The banks, still counting on Pavlo's MCI guarantee, kept pushing Manatee to lend more. Unaware that Pavlo had been fired, they hiked Manatee's credit limit to $30 million in March and to $45 million two months later. The legal wrangling began in the fall of 1997 when, seven months after it uncovered Pavlo's scam, MCI reported it to the banks. Out at least $28 million, they sued MCI for racketeering, fraud and breach of contract. The suit, in the U.S. District Court in Atlanta, charged MCI with using Rapid Advance to keep overstated assets on its books, avoid writeoffs and "conceal misconduct, including the alteration and falsification of MCI's financial books and records." Manatee owner Jack T. Hammer sued MCI for breach of contract. MCI countersued the banks and Manatee for negligent misrepresentation, fraud and civil conspiracy. MCI claimed that Pavlo, Mann, Wilkie and Benveniste used Orion to divert funds from its resellers to accounts they controlled in the Caymans and then doctored MCI's accounts to hide the theft. Shortly thereafter, a grand jury began looking into the fraud charges against Pavlo and his co-conspirators. Wilkie turned himself in to federal prosecutors in 1998 and received jail time. The maze of suits and countersuits was so complicated it took another two years to get to court. By then WorldCom owned MCI. It agreed in April 2000, on the second day of trial in the banks' case, to pay them $8 million. Manatee owner Jack Hammer received $1 million, though former president Benveniste is still fighting fraud charges in court and has pleaded not guilty. After Pavlo was found out in early 1997, he was constantly looking over his shoulder, fearing he was being followed by the feds. Finally, in the summer of 2000, he walked into the FBI office in Atlanta to cut a deal. He entered a guilty plea in October 2000 -- the same month WorldCom announced the $685 million write-off now under SEC scrutiny. Pavlo entered prison in March of last year to serve 41 months but hopes to reduce it by 10 months by completing an alcohol treatment program. Harold Mann will begin a 54-month sentence this summer. James Wanserski, Pavlo's ex-boss, stepped down when the scandal broke in October 1997. He was paid his $138,752 salary, plus a $50,000 incentive for cooperating in MCI's defense and for not disparaging the firm. The day after the agreement expired in 1998, he joined WorldCom's auditor, Andersen, in Atlanta. The drama continues. Pavlo and Mann insist they have disgorged their entire ill-gotten gain -- there's no stash on some island. The shareholder suit filed against WorldCom last year was dismissed by a judge in March but is on appeal. Along with the SEC investigation, it may or may not prove Pavlo to be a legitimate, whistle-blowing crook -- just like Mark Whitacre of ADM. "I started out a company man but abandoned that to act selfishly, as I believed others were doing. I was wrong," Pavlo says. "But so were they." ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #273 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jun 9 00:02:51 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA14967; Sun, 9 Jun 2002 00:02:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 00:02:51 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206090402.AAA14967@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #274 TELECOM Digest Sat, 8 Jun 2002 23:59:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 274 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson MCI: Unrelenting Pressure From Management Fostered Abuses (Marcus Jervis) MCI: "We're Going to 'Right-Size' the Business (Marcus Jervis) MCI: Old News: Bernie Ebbers (Marcus Jervis) Re: MCI Watch: The Complaints Keep Rolling In (John Higdon) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marcus Jervis Subject: MCI: Unrelenting Pressure From Management Fostered Abuses Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 04:21:04 +0000 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We began on Friday with a report on the business practices of MCI, and their borderline fraud. We continue that discussion in today's issue. Thanks again are due to Marcus Jervis for scanning it all in and the Wall Street Journal for allowing reprints and others involved. PAT] May 16, 2002 Pressure to Meet Expectations Fostered Abuses at WorldCom By YOCHI J. DREAZEN Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL COOKED BOOKS On Feb. 4, WorldCom Inc. senior vice president Deborah Surrette sent an e-mail telling the company's employees that some of their colleagues had been scamming the company by double-booking accounts. "My staff has discovered several situations where new accounts have been created in different or same billing platforms for existing customers," her e-mail said. "Commissions," she added would "not be paid on the movement of existing services ... or creation of new accounts with no added net revenue." The jig was up for the WorldCom sales representatives who had been boosting their sales figures by moving existing accounts from one billing system to another -- including three star employees in WorldCom's Pentagon City office in Arlington, Va., who were fired recently after bilking the company out of $3 million in false commissions. But for WorldCom, the problems were just beginning. A month later, the Securities and Exchange Commission launched a probe into the long-distance and data-services company, sending its share price plummeting. The company's outspoken chief executive, Bernard Ebbers, resigned under pressure last month. WorldCom stock, which hit a high of $64.50 in 1999, stood at $1.29, up five cents, in 4 p.m. trading Wednesday on the Nasdaq Stock Market. WorldCom, whose debt has been reduced to junk status, said Wednesday it would draw down a $2.65 billion credit line while negotiating terms for a larger line. The double-booked sales are just one part of the SEC investigation, and the money involved is small change for WorldCom, which had revenue of $35.18 billion in 2001. Still, the sales abuses illustrate how the company's struggles to meet Wall Street's optimistic expectations while integrating its $37 billion purchase of the former MCI Communications Corp. led to an aggressive corporate culture typified by salespeople eager to make their numbers by any means necessary. "It was really a numbers game with WorldCom," says former employee Hank Larkins, who ran the company's human-resources operations in Ohio. "And people would do anything they could to make those numbers." Current and former WorldCom employees say the problems began with WorldCom's 1998 acquisition of MCI. Following that deal, Mr. Ebbers and other WorldCom executives surprised many employees by maintaining both companies' ordering and billing systems: the IXPlus system that had been used by WorldCom and the F&E system that had been used by MCI. That opened the door to what current and former employees describe as a widespread pattern of sales abuses. "It was the Wild, Wild West, with no sheriff and no rules," says a veteran sales representative in the Pentagon City office. Numerous sales representatives soon exploited the overlapping sales platforms so that they could shift existing accounts from one system to another but collect commissions as if they were making new sales, according to employees. Salespeople would transfer accounts from one system to another or combine existing accounts from multiple systems into one new account, the salespeople say. No new money was coming in, but the systems treated the entries as new sales, allowing the employees to ramp up commissions. Former employees in the company's Nashville office say a sales representative there got almost $25,000 in commissions by shifting an account from system to system. The double-booking "was going on everywhere," says Neil Potter, formerly a manager in WorldCom's Cincinnati office. WorldCom officials say any double-bookings were the work of a few rogue salespeople and had no impact on the company's stated revenue, which is computed separately from its commissions. The officials also say that the fired Virginia employees, identified after an internal company probe reported by The Wall Street Journal, returned all of the money they had improperly received. "As previously reported, WorldCom had about a dozen sales employees who gamed our sales-commission system," spokesman Brad Burns said in a statement. "This issue had absolutely nothing to do with revenue. It had absolutely nothing to do with integrating networks, such as our billing systems. It was due to a flaw in the commissions-approval process which was corrected months ago." One factor that contributed to employees' temptation to cheat was unrelenting pressure from management, employees say. On Jan. 8, 2001, Kevin McGann, a regional vice president, fired off an e-mail to the Pentagon City office's top managers after a disappointing batch of sales numbers. "Enough is enough of this disgraceful trend," he wrote. "Please write up everyone that missed their forecast and let them know further failure to accurately forecast [their numbers] will result in further disciplinary action up to termination from the company." That afternoon, sales manager Peter Collier, the former executive that WorldCom says masterminded the cheating in Pentagon City, sent a blistering e-mail reminding his team that the company's future depended on making its numbers on Wall Street. "If every rep missed their forecast by just 15% ... we as a company would be DONE! ... For no reason can we miss our forecast," he wrote. His lawyer didn't return phone calls seeking comment. Several employees say they tried to alert upper management to the sales abuses. In February 2000, Mr. Larkins sent a memo detailing the problem to his supervisor in Chicago. She forwarded the e-mail to other executives, but higher-ups told her to drop the matter because it wasn't a human-resources issue, Mr. Larkins recalls. "Nobody wanted to hear about it," he says. ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: MCI: "We're going to 'right-size' the business" Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 04:27:17 +0000 WorldCom May Cut up to 20% Of Work Force in Restructuring By SHAWN YOUNG Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL WorldCom Inc. said it plans to get out of the wireless business, and people familiar with the phone company said it also plans to cut the work force by as much as 20% and trim another $1 billion in capital spending. As part of its continuing restructuring plan, WorldCom will try to sell the wireless business and won't cut off its two million customers. WorldCom doesn't own a wireless network and resells wireless service it buys from others. Some of those other wireless carriers could be interested in buying parts of WorldCom's wireless operation, such as its customers and sales operation, people familiar with the matter said. The nation's No. 2 long-distance carrier, based in Clinton, Miss., is scrambling to respond to a series of setbacks that has included cutting its revenue forecast for 2002 by at least $1 billion, the dismissal of its founder and former chief executive and a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation into its finances. The company also has had its debt downgraded to "junk status." Its new chief executive, John Sidgmore, has said he hopes to have a restructuring plan outlined this month. WorldCom's wireless business has annual revenue of about $1 billion, but resale is a difficult strategy in telecommunications. Mr. Sidgmore recently said the wireless business was bleeding cash. The company had already started laying off some of the unit's 2,200 employees. WorldCom said it expects to make a decision soon about exactly how it will exit from the business. Wireless is a sideline for the company, whose hopes of becoming a major wireless player were dashed two years ago when antitrust officials shot down its plan to buy Sprint Corp. Since then, the wireless business has been somewhat adrift within WorldCom and has drawn many complaints from customers about billing problems and poor customer service. In other restructuring moves, the company, which had most recently cut its capital spending budget for the year to $4.5 billion, could cut back further to about $3.5 billion, cutting jobs in engineering and network services accordingly, said people with knowledge of the situation. None of the moves the company seems poised to make are surprising, analysts said. WorldCom has been saying it is looking for ways to cut expenses, reduce debt and shrink its work force. "We're going to 'right-size' the business," said WorldCom spokesman Brad Burns, "but it would be premature to speculate on the details." WorldCom has about 80,000 employees after cutting 12,700 in the past two years, Mr. Burns said. The coming round of layoffs was reported by USA Today. "The challenge is always whether you can cut costs and maintain service levels," Morgan Stanley analyst Simon Flannery said. In a conference call before he was ousted, former Chief Executive Bernard Ebbers said capital spending of about $2 billion was the bare minimum necessary to "keep the lights on." WorldCom executives concede customers have been alarmed by the company's financial woes. Analysts said the company will have to make cuts carefully so it won't scare away jittery customers who are worried that cutbacks could compromise the quality of WorldCom's service. WorldCom Decides to Eliminate Its MCI Group Tracking Stock 05/22/02 WorldCom Will Tap Its Credit Line, Indicating Possible Loan Troubles 05/16/02 Ebbers Resigns From Top Spots at Former High-Flyer WorldCom 04/30/02 ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: Old News: Bernie Ebbers Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 04:35:33 +0000 FROM THE ARCHIVES: February 8, 2002 WorldCom CEO Owes $339.7 Million For Loans He Took Out to Buy Stock By SHAWN YOUNG and DEBORAH SOLOMON Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL WorldCom Net Income Falls 64%; Telecom Plans $15 Billion Charge WorldCom CEO's Loans Come Due as Company's Share Price Implodes 02/01/02 Bernard J. Ebbers, the brash chief executive of WorldCom Inc., used to trot out a chart every time he addressed a crowd showing how even a small investment in his fast-growing long-distance telephone and Internet empire had skyrocketed in value. Now, with WorldCom's stock plunging, Mr. Ebbers owes his company $339.7 million to cover loans he took out to buy his own shares. His debt to the company he built from scratch is so big that it exceeds the $258 million fourth-quarter profit the Clinton, Miss.-based WorldCom reported Thursday. On Thursday, Mr. Ebbers said that WorldCom had stepped in to cover a loan of $198.7 million that he owed to Bank of America and the company itself. The company has also extended him a credit line of $165 million, $141 million of which he has used. The loan is payable on demand and bears interest at the company's going rate for borrowing; his shares in WorldCom are his collateral. Mr. Ebbers can't sell his stock without the company's permission. It's a shocking turn of events for Mr. Ebbers, a former bull market cult hero whose nervy series of more than 60 acquisitions catapulted WorldCom from an obscure reseller of long-distance calls into a New Economy powerhouse. Mr. Ebbers assured investors that he will sell his own assets to pay off the debt instead of shedding some of the 27 million WorldCom shares he owns. "I have assets that are more than sufficient to cover the debt and those are for sale now," the 60-year-old Mr. Ebbers said in a conference call Thursday. Mr. Ebbers declined requests to comment further. Mr. Ebbers's predicament highlights a common conundrum for chief executives, who are typically praised for owning big stakes in their companies because it aligns their interests with those of shareholders. Yet if they buy too aggressively on credit and their shares decline, they are faced with an ugly choice. They can sell shares, which can flood the market and undermine investor confidence or they can turn to their companies for help. But these recent events are particularly striking because Mr. Ebbers seemed to enjoy pinching pennies. During the bull market, when his competitors routinely wined and dined the Wall Street crowd with lavish buffets, Mr. Ebbers would whip through company presentations before noon. He would send investors home without lunch, quipping that the company was fattening their bottom lines, not their waistlines. Mr. Ebbers's arrangement with WorldCom struck some experts as bold, especially at a time when corporate governance issues are at the forefront of investors minds in the wake of the scandal at Enron Corp. Indeed, corporate governance experts are widely critical of companies that shield their top executives from the blows that rain on ordinary shareholders when a company falters. Many individual investors who bought stocks on credit were ruined when their investments cratered. "When a one-time billionaire has problems meeting margin calls you have to scratch your head and wonder just how much judgment and financial acumen does he have," said Henry Hu, a law professor and corporate governance expert at the University of Texas. The changing fortune of WorldCom and Mr. Ebbers has been a big topic around Jackson, Miss., where the company got its start. "It's mind-boggling because he had so much money," said Jerry Kountouris, co-owner of the Mayflower Cafe, just three blocks down from WorldCom's original headquarters. He added that people in Jackson still have a lot of faith in Mr. Ebbers. Mr. Ebbers got into his current debt situation because of WorldCom's falling stock price. It had made him a billionaire when it hit a high of $64.50 in June 1999. Thursday, despite the lackluster earnings report, the stock closed at $7.52, up 83 cents, or 12%, because of relief that Mr. Ebbers was not selling shares and his blunt reassurances that the company's finances are sound. Some lauded Mr. Ebbers's commitment to his company. "He has always been a big believer in the company he runs, and he puts his money where his mouth is," says Richard Klugman, an analyst with Jefferies & Co. "You have got to respect that." Other investors are questioning why WorldCom is covering personal loans for its chief executive. "Any investor is going to look askance at a company that covers the debt, especially if that debt is later forgiven," says Brian Hayward, a portfolio manager at Invesco. Although there is no indication that WorldCom will forgive the debt, many companies have done so for their top officers in the past. Allen Holder, a resident of Jackson, Miss., says he sold the last of his 800 WorldCom shares last week for about $8,000. "I should have dumped the whole thing a year ago," he says. Still, he says he thinks it is worth it for the company to support Mr. Ebbers at this time. "He's the guy that makes the company run," says Mr. Holder. Ebbers Resigns From Top Spots At Former High-Flyer WorldCom By JOHN PORRETTO Associated Press CLINTON, Miss. -- Bernard J. Ebbers, who built WorldCom Inc. into a global telecommunications giant but then saw its fortunes and stock price crumble amid fierce industry competition and questions about the company's finances, has resigned as chief executive and president. WorldCom said Tuesday that vice chairman John Sidgmore would succeed Ebbers in both positions. Bert Roberts remains chairman. WORLDCOM'S WOES WorldCom, a darling of Wall Street a few years ago, has seen investors turn against it in recent months amid concerns about the company's $28 billion in debt and an ongoing Securities and Exchange Commission investigation into loan and accounting practices. Its long-distance business, the nation's second largest after AT&T Corp., has also come under pressure from industrywide price discounting. WorldCom's stock, which has lost some 80% of its value this year, closed Monday at $2.35, down 92 cents, on the Nasdaq Stock Market. It traded at a high of $64.50 in June 1999. "We are an exceptional company and a global leader with few peers," Mr. Sidgmore said in a prepared statement. "While our industry has been buffeted by the economic downturn in recent months, WorldCom is well positioned to capitalize on an economic upturn." Last Thursday, WorldCom's first-quarter earnings report showed profits for the company's core businesses plunged 66% as corporate clients reduced spending. In March, two WorldCom stockholders sued the company's board over $375 million in loans that the company has made to Mr. Ebbers. Mr. Ebbers has said he has enough personal assets to cover the loans. In Tuesday's statement, company officials praised Mr. Ebbers for creating one of the largest communications providers in the world. "Thanks to Bernie, WorldCom is an industry leader with the most valuable customers, assets and employees in the communications industry today," Mr. Roberts said. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 23:28:53 -0700 Subject: Re: MCI Watch: The Complaints Keep Rolling In From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.271.9@telecom-digest.org, Patrick Townson wrote: > Sure customer 'service' buffers calls to keep the executives and > lawyers from getting calls direct from angry customers. I've been > getting a lot of MCI complaints lately and if you want my personal > opinion, I say RUN FOR YOUR LIFE NOW FROM THOSE PEOPLE. It would not > surprise me to see them go belly up sometime soon, their business > practices and wholesale fraud finally catching up with them. MCI's borderline fraudulent practices have been a way of life since the company began as you point out. My sad story: Back in the nineties, we designed and built a billing center for some folks in exchange for having them do our billing for us. They used MCI (brought in on multiple T1s) as the carrier. Unfortunately, these folks did our billing all right but didn't bother to send the money on to us. But that's another story. The point is that due to the falling out, we never learned what crooks MCI happened to be. So we set up our own billing system and, you guessed it, went with MCI Vision, delivered on multiple T1s. We had a number of custom requirements, but were assured that each and every thing we wanted would be provided without delay. To make a long story short, month after month went by without the very necessary features that we required. Furthermore, MCI would tack on mysterious $500 and $1000 surcharges for unknown "services" and "enhancements". In the meantime, we were contacted by West Coast Telecommunications who offered to actually provide what we wanted. They installed the circuits (at no charge) and demonstrated that they worked as required. So, five months after signing up with MCI, we told them to take a hike. Again, to shorten the story, we were billed by MCI for a solid year after we discontinued the service. When we simply didn't pay, we were put on collection. They messed up our D&B rating. It was the long distance company from hell. Mind you, this was for MCI Vision, their top of the line service that was collecting about $5K/month from us. MCI finally went away, but then a couple of years later, bills started showing up again, showing that old defunct account number. I had our attorney send the accounts receivable a rather stern letter, which I assume was responsible for having the bills stop after only a couple of months. It goes without saying that we would never again use MCI for any purpose whatsoever, but judging from all the comments from associates, friends, and what has been posted all over the net, here and elsewhere, we were hardly alone. That company deserves to have no one's business ever at any time. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 How has Clear Channel messed with your life today? ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #274 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jun 9 01:03:20 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA16552; Sun, 9 Jun 2002 01:03:20 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 01:03:20 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206090503.BAA16552@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #275 TELECOM Digest Sun, 9 Jun 2002 01:01:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 275 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson ITU-T SS7 and ANSI SS7 Network Differences (Umesh Bhavsar) Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: NXX 178 (Carl Moore) Re: Consumer VoIP (John Kitchen) Are There Any Cordless Phones/Answerers That Can Be Silenced? (Shaffer) Examples of BAD Phone-Based User Interfaces Wanted (R.M. Schumacher) IS-41 Basic Question (jupiterean) Telecom Marketing Help Request (otgrig) 25 Cent Verizon Payphones Return to NYC (Daniel Salomon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Ed Ellers) Re: Last Laugh! was Re: Looking For Audio Samples Messages (Ed Ellers) Re: Telecom IDDD Question (Ed Ellers) Re: Telecom IDDD Question (Alan Burkitt-Gray) Re: Competition? (John Higdon) The MCI Series of Articles (TELECOM Digest Editor) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: umeshu7@yahoo.com (Umesh Bhavsar) Subject: ITU-T SS7 and ANSI SS7 Network Differences Date: 7 Jun 2002 10:15:02 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ In US there is a separate SS7 network consisting of STPs. Hence the 64kbit/s ss7 link is never on the same T1 as the actual bearer trunks. The T1s for SS7 and trunks are kept separate. I am not clear if this is how it works in Europe. Is the ss7 link on the same E1 as the trunks? Also is there a separate SS7 network based on STPs in Europe? Thanks, Umesh ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Dialup to Ethernet via Linksys Router? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 17:54:03 GMT >> This is precisely what I did with the SMC Barricade broadband >> router (then model SMC7004BR, now model SMC7004ABR) at my ... >> I've been using this little box for two years now, and it's the >> only one I recommend to clients and install at friend's houses. >> Here's what it has over the competition: > [...] >> * technical support is actually pretty good (they're competent, and >> responsive; they shipped me a new unit in exchange for my old one when >> they couldn't debug my old one over the phone) I'll second this. Someone recommended this router to me, and I wanted to look into a bit, so I called tech support. Though I had to wait 90 minutes (!) the first time, both times I called I got someone who, spoke fluent English, was nice, and was knowledgeable. Pretty rare these days. > Also, the dialup networking support on this SMC unit is not compatible > with MSChap2 authentication, so if your ISP uses that, you should > avoid this unit. Here's the catch. The dial-up support is very rudimentary. The ISP I want to use this with might require scripting. (They DON'T KNOW at the ISP! *sigh*) When I dial-up the ISP with a terminal server, I get a login prompt, then a password prompt, then I press "1" to initiate PPP. But the login prompt might appear only after failing to get the proper PPP initiation. Anyway, I've ordered one of these (the wireless version); we'll see what happens. (Also, I *might* be able to put the login-id, password, and "1" all in the dial-up string, with the right amout of commas for delays. Joel ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 14:53:20 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: NXX 178 "NXX" would not be right for 178, since N is any single digit EXCEPT 0 or 1 X is any single digit (including 0 and 1) ------------------------------ From: johnfkitchen@yahoo.com (John Kitchen) Subject: Re: Consumer VoIP Date: 7 Jun 2002 13:13:25 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ In my opinion, it's not perfect, but pretty darn good. See my post of today in comp.dcom.voice-over-ip in reply to the post by "Tee" with subject "Anyone else using a phone2phone VoIP provider?" ------------------------------ From: Jim Shaffer, Jr. Subject: Are There Any Cordless Phones/Answerers That Can Be Silenced? Organization: Rational Irrationalists Reply-To: jmshaffer@alltel.net Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 19:48:39 -0400 I'm looking for a cordless phone / digital answerer combination that can be silenced. By that I mean that not only can I turn off the ringer, but I can also turn off the speaker on the base unit so that I don't hear incoming calls at all if I don't want to. I haven't been able to find any such thing so far. I've seen some that allow retrieval of messages from the handset, but they still have a speaker in the base, and I've seen none where the volume can be set to zero. Does anyone manufacture a system that can do this? ------------------------------ From: bob_schumacher@hotmail.com (R.M. Schumacher) Subject: Examples of BAD Phone-Based User Interfaces Wanted Date: 7 Jun 2002 18:15:31 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I'm doing an informal search for examples of REALLY bad/annoying/frustrating voice menus (aka phone menus or telephone interfaces or ...). Any "good" candidates? If so, post or send email to me with the name of company and the phone number so I can listen. I'll post the (WOW) Worst Of the Worst list when after I get critical mass. Thanks. If you're ambitious and want to tell me *why* you think it's bad I'd love to know. /bob I'd be interested in REALLY good ones too (if any such examples exist ;) ) ------------------------------ From: jupiterean Subject: IS-41 Basic Question Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 12:32:55 -0500 (I'm a newbie in this area so please bear with me) Is IS-41 still in use? I searched the TIA website but couldn't find it. Has it been superseded by something else? Many thanks, J ------------------------------ From: otgrig@operamail.com (otgrig) Subject: Telecom Marketing Help Request Date: 8 Jun 2002 10:48:14 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi everybody there, I am an MBA student and got as assignment a marketing research in telecom products (cellphones, PDAs etc). Some help about how to contact marketing departments of telecom companies would be very welcome. If there is some specialised newsgroup , pls advise . otgrig Alternative e-mail address hotgrig@hotmail.com ------------------------------ From: danielksalomon@my-deja.com (Daniel Salomon) Subject: 25 Cent Verizon Payphones Return to NYC Date: 8 Jun 2002 14:21:27 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Verizon has decided to lower the cost of local pay phone calls back to 25 cents, from 50 cents, at many locations in New York City. It seems they realized that the way to handle increased competition is not to raise prices. Phones at airports and hotels will remain at 50 cents. See http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/07/nyregion/07VERI.html . I've had fairly good luck finding and using competitor's 25 cent phones in NYC, so presumably Verizon realized that they were pricing themselves out of the market. Dan ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 02:20:35 -0400 Jay Hennigan wrote: > You should know better than that. :-) Part 15 intentional radiators > (such as "speedpass" pay-at-the-pump interrogators) must accept any > interference they receive, including that which causes undesired > operation. That still doesn't mean that an unintentional radiator is allowed to exceed Part 15 limits. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Last Laugh! was Re: Looking For Audio Samples Messages Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 03:20:50 -0400 > TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dave, that is really rich. Is that > really how their contract reads more or less? Unreal. I've forgotten which minicomputer vendor it was, but one such company was trying to harass independent repair providers with copyright infringement suits, saying that when the technician booted up the system in the course of repairing it, he was making an unauthorized copy (in RAM) of the OS -- only the owner of the machine, who was licensed to use the OS, was allowed to do that. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Telecom IDDD Question Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 03:29:03 -0400 wrote: > There has been cross-border dialing between the U.K. & the Republic > of Ireland for many years, although we don't have a > U.S./Canadian-style shared numbering plan. > Several codes were allocated in the British network to reach the Irish > Republic, e.g. 0001 for Dublin. Subscribers in the Irish Republic could > dial any number in mainland Britain with 03 and could > directly reach Northern Ireland with 080 . That sounds like the hack that used to be used to allow direct dialing to parts of Mexico from areas in the U.S. that didn't have true IDDD yet -- two NPAs (706 and 905, IIRC) were reserved for that purpose, but dialing +1 706 XXX XXXX or +1 905 XXX XXXX from outside the NANP wouldn't work since the numbers were not within the NANP. The practice was finally stopped a few years ago, long after IDDD became widely available, to free up those NPAs for expansion. ------------------------------ From: Burkitt-Gray Alan Subject: Re: Telecom IDDD Question Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 09:48:29 +0100 johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote: > You've been able to dial Monaco as +33 4 9x xx xx xx, integrated > with the dialing plan for that part of France. They now have their > own country code +377, so you call then as +377 9x xx xx xx. But I > think you can still call them using the French numbers. This is of > more than passing interest because calls to +377 cost two or three > times as much as calls to +33 9. No, you can't -- at least not from the UK. Even from across the road (literally) in France you have to dial an international call to Monaco numbers. Or when using a mobile phone inside Monaco -- as the French GSM operators cover the principality, so all mobile-to-fixed or fixed-to-mobile calls in Monaco are automatically international. Alan Burkitt-Gray Editor, Global Telecoms Business Euromoney Institutional Investor plc, Nestor House, Playhouse Yard, London EC4V 5EX, UK tel +44 20 7779 8518 fax +44 20 7779 8492 e-mail aburkitt@euromoneyplc.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 09:16:01 -0700 Subject: Re: Competition? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.272.1@telecom-digest.org, Fred Goldstein wrote: > Not entirely true, depending on the meaning of "plant" above. There > are multiple models of competitive telecom service. One is "resale", > wherein the "CLEC" is really just a commissioned sales agent for the > ILEC service. This is just competition for the business office, not > the network. It was, AFAIK, cooked up by ILECs as a substitute for > real competition. Fortunately, it is not getting traction. I'm familiar with the other models. I have CLEC facilities-based service that is delivered last mile via SBC (the ILEC). That isn't at issue; we have had that available for years. My reference was strictly to the 100% resale of ILEC telephone service by CLEC wannabees who have absolutely no money invested in telecom gear. This type of resale recently got a boost in California when the CPUC declared new, rock-bottom "wholesale rates" that the ILECs had to charge the resale folks. These rates are essentially below cost and provide zero incentive for the instant CLECs to ever invest in their own plant. The facilities-based CLECs are not really happy about this, either. After all, they spent considerable money to furnish the equipment on which they now provide service. They watch as MCI, AT&T and others move right in with no investment whatsoever. (AT&T has no facilities-based local service in my city because it has been squabbling with the city government for the past ten years regarding the upgrade of its ancient cable plant.) John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 00:00:00 EDT From: Patrick Townson Subject: The MCI Series of Articles After those two special issues devoted to MCI's corporate misbehavior, I wanted to get back to the backlog of regular (non-MCI) stuff, so this second issue of the weekend devoted to 'regular' mail. I cannot imagine the MCI complaints will let up anytime soon, so sometime Monday as I work on the Digest next, I'll see if there are any more MCI complaints and run them if there are. My thanks to the publications named for allowing those items to be used, and to Marcus for doing the scanning work on them. Have a nice weekend! PAT ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #275 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jun 10 21:04:27 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA17112; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 21:04:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 21:04:27 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206110104.VAA17112@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #276 TELECOM Digest Mon, 10 Jun 2002 21:05:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 276 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #336, June 10, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) MCI: Worldcom Over-Booking Scandal (Marcus Jervis) MCI: Capacity Swaps at Qwest: How They Worked (Marcus Jervis) MCI: More on Capacity Swaps (Marcus Jervis) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 10:06:42 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #336, June 10, 2002 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 336: June 10, 2002 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** AT&T CANADA http://www.attcanada.com ** BELL CANADA http://www.bell.ca ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Telus Offers Buyouts to Employees ** Nortel Raises US$1.5 Billion ** More Responses to Price Caps Decision ** BCI to Sell Remaining Assets ** Bell Intros Managed IP Telephony ** Alcatel Closing Quebec Optical Plant ** Microcell Appeals Nasdaq Delisting ** Moody's Reduces AT&T Canada Ratings ** Buy Airtime on Cellphone by Debit Card ** E&Y to Supervise Teleglobe Sale ** Ottawa Seeks Comment on Spectrum Policy ** Amtelecom Ordered to Issue Rebates ** TeraGo Offers Broadband in Mississauga ** Conferencing Company Goes Public ** Sears Closing Three Call Centres ** Cygnal Buys IP Network Designer ** Angus Analyzes the IP-PBX Revolution ============================================================ TELUS OFFERS BUYOUTS TO EMPLOYEES: Telus is offering early retirement and "voluntary departure" packages to 11,000 unionized employees in Alberta and B.C. The telco has not announced how many it hopes will take the offer, which expires in October. NORTEL RAISES US$1.5 BILLION: Nortel Networks has raised US$1.49 billion, almost twice its original target, through the sale of shares and equity units. MORE RESPONSES TO PRICE CAPS DECISION: ** Telus estimates that the CRTC price caps decision (see Telecom Update #334a, 335) will reduce its 2002 EBITDA by $45 million, and by $75 million a year in future. Further analysis and follow-up regulatory decisions may change this estimate. ** Primus Canada says the cost reductions ordered in the decision will raise its 2002 EBITDA to over $60 million -- at the high end of Primus' previously announced range. BCI TO SELL REMAINING ASSETS: Bell Canada International has agreed to sell its largest remaining holding, a 42% stake in Brazilian wireless carrier Telecom Americas, for US$366 million. BCI is now seeking approval for a plan to sell its remaining assets and distribute the proceeds. BELL INTROS MANAGED IP TELEPHONY: Bell Canada has begun offering a suite of Managed IP Telephony services that it says "manages all the voice and data communications needs of large enterprises." The service is based on Cisco's AVVID product line. ALCATEL CLOSING QUEBEC OPTICAL PLANT: Alcatel Optronics will close its Gatineau, Quebec, manufacturing plant and eliminate 120 jobs as part of a 25% reduction in its international work force of 1,800. Some Optronics research will continue in Kanata. MICROCELL APPEALS NASDAQ DELISTING: Microcell has requested a review of Nasdaq's ruling that its market capitalization is too low for listing on the Nasdaq Small Cap Market. Microcell's delisting has been suspended pending the appeal. MOODY'S REDUCES AT&T CANADA RATINGS: Moody's Investors Service has cut the rating of AT&T Canada's senior unsecured debt four notches, to the second-lowest "junk" status. BUY AIRTIME ON CELLPHONE BY DEBIT CARD: Bell Mobility prepaid wireless customers can now pay for airtime from their cellphones, and have the payment debited from their accounts through Interac. The service uses the Skypay network, a joint venture of Bell Mobility and SaskTel. E&Y TO SUPERVISE TELEGLOBE SALE: The Ontario Superior Court has appointed Ernst & Young as monitor to "conduct, supervise and direct" the sale of Teleglobe's long distance business. The sale must be completed by July 2. ** Teleglobe's creditors have dropped their demand that a court-appointed administrator be placed in charge of the company. OTTAWA SEEKS COMMENT ON SPECTRUM POLICY: Industry Canada has updated its 1992 Spectrum Policy Framework, and has invited comment on future changes. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/sf05662e.html AMTELECOM ORDERED TO ISSUE REBATES: CRTC Telecom Order 2002- 230 directs Amtelecom to issue refunds, with interest, to residential customers for rate increases of $2.90/month collected since January 1. The CRTC had allowed independent telcos with rates below $22.75 to increase rates, but Amtelecom's lowest rate was already $25.10. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2002/o2002-230.htm TERAGO OFFERS BROADBAND IN MISSISSAUGA: TeraGo Networks now offers broadband data and Internet services in Mississauga, using fixed wireless in the 5.8 GHz spectrum band. (See Telecom Update #331) CONFERENCING COMPANY GOES PUBLIC: Broadband Collaborative Solutions, a Richmond Hill firm that provides desktop conferencing services, is going through a reverse takeover, and hopes to raise $2 million in an offering that closes June 18. SEARS CLOSING THREE CALL CENTRES: Sears Canada is closing call centres in Kitchener, Toronto, and Ottawa, displacing 320 employees. The calling load will shift to other Canadian facilities. CYGNAL BUYS IP NETWORK DESIGNER: Oshawa-based Cygnal Technologies has agreed to buy Edaptivity.com, a Hamilton-based designer of IP networks, for $2.25 million. Cygnal has 550 employees in Canada. ** Cygnal has added Siemon structured cabling systems to its product line. ANGUS ANALYZES THE IP-PBX REVOLUTION: While supplies last, new subscribers to Telemanagement will receive "The IP-PBX Revolution," an anthology of feature articles on the new generation of integrated voice-data systems. Included in this limited-edited collection: ** Case studies from early adopters of IP-based voice-data systems. ** Reports and evaluations of next-gen phone systems. ** Debates on where (and whether) the new systems make sense today. ** Guidelines on preparing your data networks for voice. To reserve your free copy, and the next 10 information-packed issues of Telemanagement, phone 800-263-4415 ext 500 or go to http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: MCI: Worldcom Over-Booking Scandal Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 18:18:57 +0000 This article is nearly four months old now, but gives some interesting background on a recent story posted to Telecom Digest. February 14, 2002 WorldCom Suspends Executives In Order Over-Booking Scandal By YOCHI J. DREAZEN Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL WorldCom Inc. has suspended three star employees that it says will soon be fired or asked to resign, and frozen the commissions of at least 12 salespeople as it conducts a broad internal investigation into an order-booking scandal that boosted sales commissions in three of its branch offices. The investigation comes at an awkward time for the Clinton, Miss., company, whose stock has plummeted from a high of $64.50 in June 1999 to a low of $7.03 earlier this month. The shares have inched upward in recent days after Chief Executive Officer Bernard Ebbers bluntly assured investors the company's finances were sound. "We stand by our accounting," he said on a conference call with analysts last week. The probe, which focuses on three of the company's branch offices, has found that two managers improperly boosted their sales teams' commissions -- which were used to calculate their own pay -- while one sales representative knowingly boosted her own commission, according to WorldCom General Counsel Michael Salsbury. In all three cases, the employees took credit for sales that already had been accounted for by other divisions of the telecommunications company. Because WorldCom's revenue and sales commissions are calculated using different systems, the probe should have no effect on the company's earnings, according to Mr. Salsbury. "You're talking about a few bad apples here who figured out how to game the system and break our rules," Mr. Salsbury said. "But this has nothing to do with our financial reporting." The existence of the internal investigation hasn't previously been disclosed. It has led to the suspension of two sales executives, including one of its top revenue producers last year and another of the company's highest-ranked salespeople. Lawyers for the employees are negotiating the terms of their departures from WorldCom, and WorldCom officials said they haven't decided whether to fire the employees outright or give them the chance to resign. The three employees were escorted out of the company's Pentagon City office in Arlington, Va., last month and their computers have been seized by WorldCom investigators, according to the company. The employees have all been interviewed by Mr. Salsbury, who is leading the investigation. In addition, as many as a dozen salespeople in the company's Pentagon City office have had their commissions frozen as investigators try to determine why the employees have been receiving payments for sales that were actually made by other divisions of the company. The employees have received notices saying that the payments were "suspended pending a review by Internal Audit with an estimated completion within 30 days," according to a document reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. WorldCom officials believe the employees may have booked as much as $4 million in illegitimate sales commissions. The investigation has spread to the company's Baltimore and Chicago offices, where some sales representatives also have had their accounts frozen, according to the company. WorldCom investigators still are interviewing employees in both offices, and further suspensions, terminations or resignations are possible. In a staff meeting last month, John Johnson, the company's director of sales for the Mid-Atlantic region, told employees the investigation was a "major scandal" that ultimately could affect dozens of other salespeople, according to participants. Mr. Johnson didn't return calls seeking comment, and the company said it doesn't know the full scope of the scandal. The epicenter of the probe is the company's Pentagon City office. Investigators have focused on the work of one man, Peter J. Collier, a charismatic and hard-charging executive who was one of the company's highest revenue producers last year, according to company sales documents. Mr. Collier was the only executive whose entire sales team earned elite President's Club honors at a Las Vegas ceremony in November for being among the top 10% of the company's salespeople. WorldCom officials say many of Mr. Collier's team wouldn't have earned those honors without the improper sales commissions that he steered to their accounts, though the company says that most of the employees didn't know that what he was doing broke company law. Mr. Collier, 32, was among the three people suspended last month who ultimately will be fired or asked to resign. The others were Roger Davis, like Mr. Collier an executive in the company's major accounts division, and Aimee McDuffie, a highly ranked saleswoman who also is a close friend of Mr. Collier's wife and young daughter. All three employees failed to return repeated calls for comment. Whitney Ellerman, a Washington lawyer representing Messrs. Collier and Davis, declined to comment. John Scalia, a lawyer for Ms. McDuffie said she "vigorously denies any wrongdoing whatsoever and denies any charges of such." People familiar with the situation say Mr. Collier routinely added sales that had been made by other divisions of the company -- like its national or global sales teams, which deal with much bigger corporations -- into the accounts of his salespeople, in essence counting the same orders twice and allowing his sales team to receive commissions they didn't deserve. The commission sheet of one salesman, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, shows that he was receiving a commission on a deal with Korea Telecom -- a company that would be the exclusive responsibility of WorldCom's global or emerging-markets teams. The sales representative later acknowledged to company investigators that he had never dealt with Korea Telecom. Other of Mr. Collier's sales representatives received commissions from deals with companies such as Merrill Lynch, Wells Fargo and AOL Time Warner, all of which were sales that had been booked by WorldCom's global or national sales teams. WorldCom investigators believe Messrs. Collier and Davis took advantage of a quirk in the company's accounting system that treated data or voice lines that stretched from the U.S. to another country as two separate circuits. The men figured out a way of booking the U.S. side of such accounts as a separate sale, even though the sale actually had been made by another division of the company. Messrs. Collier and Davis then transferred those fictitious sales to the accounts of their salespeople. In e-mails, Mr. Collier told his salespeople to consider the extra money to be bonuses for their hard work, but apparently never told them where the money was from or why their commission sheets listed companies they had never dealt with. In a message sent at 12:58 a.m. this past March 29 exhorting salespeople to push for more sales, for example, Mr. Collier wrote that "I make you money, and you people decide to s me." He threatened to remove the extra bookings, saying that "anyone not at 200% to plan [legitimately] has all revenue put in their windows by me removed." In another e-mail, Mr. Collier noted these "bonuses" could well arouse the company's suspicion: "It is apparent to the powers that be, that things are odd, where people don't book the business but they are receiving the billing for it." Mr. Collier's concerns about being caught proved to be justified. Early last month three of his salespeople were summoned from their offices on the second floor of WorldCom's Pentagon City building and asked to come upstairs to the office's human resources section, on the tower's eighth floor. Under questioning by Dean Taggart, an audit specialist who flew in from Mississippi, and Stephen Martin, the company's Washington associate counsel, the representatives conceded they were receiving commissions for deals they hadn't closed, according to people familiar with those discussions. The company confronted Messrs. Collier and Davis and asked them to confirm the actions, but the men refused, according to people familiar with the matter. The next time his former salespeople saw Mr. Collier was when he was being escorted out of the building by a stocky security guard with a shaved head and a blue business suit. -- Deborah Solomon contributed to this article. ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: MCI: Capacity Swaps at Qwest: How they worked Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 18:31:42 +0000 This article has an interesting detail on how capacity swaps at Qwest and Global Crossing worked. Carriers often swap capacity where they must fill a need. If a carrier lacks capacity in one area, they might do a deal with another carrier who needs some of their excess capacity and trade traffic on each other's network. But get this: They figured out a way to do it purely as a revenue enhancer, where there was no actual need. Believe it or not, Qwest actually booked the sale side of the swap as sales revenue (immediately, and not over the life of the contract!), then booked the purchase side of the swap as a capital expense, not an operating expense, meaning they could book it without a corresponding operating expense. "Cool!", thought Qwest management. "Not so cool", says the SEC. Note that this article is almost three months old. March 12, 2002 Qwest, WorldCom Face Scrutiny From SEC on Accounting Practices By DEBORAH SOLOMON and SHAWN YOUNG Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL After months of investor questions over accounting practices, two once-highflying telecommunications companies, Qwest Communications International Inc. and WorldCom Inc., said the Securities and Exchange Commission has launched inquiries into their accounting. Qwest said early Monday that the SEC is conducting an "informal inquiry" into how the Denver-based company booked revenue for 2000 and 2001. Late in the day, WorldCom, based in Clinton, Miss., said it, too, had received a query from the SEC. Both companies said they have done nothing wrong and are cooperating fully with the SEC's requests for documents. The inquiries come on the heels of the Enron scandals and the bankruptcy filing by another former market favorite in the telecom world, Global Crossing Ltd., of Hamilton, Bermuda. Global Crossing's accounting, which has raised broader questions about industry accounting practices, is now the subject of investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the SEC. With the latest inquiries, the SEC is now scrutinizing accounting practices at some of the biggest players in the industry, which boasted some of the highest stock prices during the heady days of the telecom boom. Qwest, WorldCom and Global Crossing had combined stock-market valuations of more than $230 billion at their peaks. WorldCom and Qwest now have a combined market capitalization of $43 billion. Other former market stars, such as 360Networks Inc., have also been drawn into the mix as the SEC has looked to them for information on transactions they did with Global Crossing. It is a stark reversal for the telecom industry, where even top players are grappling with declining credit ratings, tumbling stock prices and faltering demand for their products. It isn't known how far the inquiry will spread. Officials at Verizon Communications Inc., BellSouth Corp., SBC Communications Inc., AT&T Corp., Sprint Corp. and Williams Communications Group Inc. said they hadn't received any SEC inquiries. A spokesman for Level 3 Communications Inc. declined to comment. WorldCom said the SEC has asked for information about a broad range of items. These include: disputed bills and the sales commissions attached to them; a charge the company took in 2000 related to wholesale customers; key merger-related accounting policies; loans the company made to Chief Executive Bernard Ebbers; the company's tracking of Wall Street earnings expectations; any other federal or state investigations; and the integration of WorldCom's computers with those of the former MCI Communications Corp., which WorldCom acquired. Some of the matters covered by the SEC request have been the subject of a WorldCom internal probe focusing on whether salespeople routinely double-booked sales in an effort to boost their own commissions. The internal audit, reported by The Wall Street Journal last month, already has led to the departures of three star employees, including two sales managers and one of its highest-grossing sales representatives, who WorldCom says claimed as much as $4 million in unauthorized commissions for sales that already had been booked by other divisions of the company. Now, the SEC has asked WorldCom for any documents since January 1999 relating to "complaints by customers about overbilling," "disputed sales commissions," "inflated sales commissions" and "overbooking of sales." Mr. Ebbers, in an interview with CNBC, said he hadn't anticipated the inquiry. He said he doesn't think there are accounting issues that shareholders ought to be concerned about. "I would be the first to tell them if I thought there were issues." Meanwhile, at Qwest, CEO Joseph P. Nacchio described the company's capacity sales as "smart business moves." He said the SEC's request wasn't "overly surprising" given the recent focus on accounting. He described the atmosphere since the collapse of Enron Corp. as "corporate McCarthyism." Qwest said the SEC inquiry includes how Qwest booked revenue from sales of fiber-optic capacity -- particularly sales to companies from which Qwest also bought capacity. These so-called capacity swaps accounted for $664 million of Qwest's $15 billion in revenue for the first nine months of 2001, according to SEC filings. Global Crossing also engaged in several swaps that are under investigation, since they may have had the effect of inflating revenue. According to Qwest, the agency also is looking into more than $750 million in equipment sales it made to customers, such as KMC Telecom Holdings Inc. and Calpoint LLC, that were providing services or that received equity financing from Qwest. It also is looking into changes Qwest made to its telephone-directory publishing schedule, the company said. The equipment sales and publishing changes increased Qwest's revenue by hundreds of millions of dollars for 2000 and 2001, according to SEC filings. If the SEC finds Qwest inflated its revenue, analysts said, the agency could force Qwest to restate its financial results. That would be bad news for Qwest, which has a financial covenant in its $4 billion credit facility requiring it to keep its debt at a certain ratio to its cash flow. Qwest already is close to triggering the covenant, and a restatement -- which would also affect cash flow -- would put it over the limit, analysts said. That could force Qwest to repay the $4 billion to two banks, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and Bank of America Corp. However, a Qwest spokesman said the company is working to "amend certain covenants." With the swaps, Qwest's revenue during the first nine months of 2001 increased 8% to $15 billion from $13.9 billion a year earlier. Without these sales, however, revenue grew less than 3% to $14.4 billion. Qwest hasn't yet released information for the full year. Qwest said its $1.5 billion bond offering scheduled for Tuesday won't be affected by the SEC inquiry. Mr. Nacchio said the money generated by capacity sales, equipment sales and directory changes doesn't relate to a material amount of revenue. For 2000 and 2001, Qwest said fiber-optic sales accounted for 2.8% and 5.1% of revenue, respectively, while equipment sales accounted for 0.1% and 0.9% and publishing changes accounted for 0.2% in both years. Qwest's revenue was $16.6 billion for 2000 and $19.7 billion for 2001. A spokeswoman for the SEC declined to comment on the Qwest inquiry. She couldn't be reached to comment on the WorldCom inquiry. Among the SEC's main concerns is the way Qwest accounted for its capacity sales. Like many in the telecom industry, Qwest sold capacity on its fiber-optic network to carriers from which it also purchased capacity. In some cases, the amount of the sale and purchase were almost identical. But unlike Global Crossing and most other players in the industry, Qwest booked revenue from these sales upfront. Even Global Crossing wasn't as aggressive -- it booked the sale upfront as so-called cash revenue but only booked revenue over the life of the contract. Qwest's purchase was booked as a capital expense, meaning the company could book the revenue without recognizing a corresponding operating expense. Qwest said it was able to book revenue upfront because it followed guidelines that allowed it to account for the transactions as "sales-type" leases and take the revenue in one lump sum. Those guidelines included such things as selling a specific asset for a specified period of time and transferring title of the asset to the buyer. Shares of Qwest fell 25 cents to $9.46 in New York Stock Exchange composite trading as of 4 p.m. Monday. Shares of WorldCom, which were at $9.01, down 18 cents in Nasdaq Stock Market trading at 4 p.m., fell 6.88% to $8.39 in after-hours trading. -- Yochi J. Dreazen contributed to this article. ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: MCI: More on Capacity Swaps Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 18:35:56 +0000 (An old article, but interesting detail on capacity swaps in Asia) March 12, 2002 Swaps for Accounting Purposes Were Used by Many Asian Firms By PHILLIP DAY and CONNIE LING Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL At the end of almost every quarter, a senior executive at an Asian bandwidth provider says, other companies would approach him and offer something he didn't want in exchange for something he is pretty sure they didn't need -- capacity on each other's networks. "It's almost always three to four days before the end of the quarter. It's just laughable," the executive says. What these companies were after is what he calls "artificial revenue," a way to boost the results at a time when impressing investors has become particularly difficult. These "capacity swaps," as they are known, give companies the opportunity to record revenue from the swaps in the quarter they are made while deferring the expense of buying capacity over a number of years. As the bottom fell out of the Asian bandwidth-supply industry last year, these swaps gained in popularity -- and many of them have had little business purpose beyond boosting published accounts, according to numerous individuals in the telecommunications industry. In the wake of the bankruptcy of bandwidth carrier Global Crossing Ltd., these types of deals have come under increasing scrutiny. The Bermuda company is being investigated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation over allegations it used swaps to artificially inflate results. In addition, its 59%-owned subsidiary, Asia Global Crossing Ltd., which also recorded swaps on its books, recently hired an outside lawyer to look at "issues raised by these allegations." Real Temptation The swapping of bandwidth capacity between providers has a legitimate basis. "It's not as if the idea for capacity swaps is wrong," says Jim Holmes, principal at telecom consultancy Ovum Pty Ltd. in Sydney. Companies need to buy capacity in places where they don't have cable or to give themselves a fallback in case of interruption on their network. But with the gloom that has pervaded the industry since the end of the high-tech bubble, Mr. Holmes says companies in Asia face a real temptation to abuse the swaps, either by aggressive accounting or swapping for capacity that neither side really needs, in order to boost revenue. "Everyone is this industry fully understands how these [swaps] can be manipulated," he says. "Everyone knows that these are tools that might be available to the desperate." Accounting treatment of such swaps in the U.S. and many other jurisdictions, including parts of Asia, falls into a gray area. Asia Global Crossing appears to have entered into this unclear territory. No one has publicly accused the company of the sorts of wrongdoing that Global Crossing is being investigated for. But the company did say the allegations against its parent raise the question of whether Asia Global Crossing's financial reporting "created a misleading impression of sales activity." Prior to 2001, Asia Global Crossing treated the bulk of its sales as what it called "sales-type leases." Asia Global Crossing and other providers, together with their auditors, concluded that classifying sales that way meant they could book revenues at the time of the sale, rather than defraying the revenues over the life of a contract. For 2000, the company says $138 million of its $167 million in revenue resulted from such deals, though it didn't specify how much of that was from capacity swaps. An Asia Global Crossing spokeswoman says the company changed the accounting method in 2001 because "we wanted to make sure we were complying with accounting standards in the U.S. and questions had been raised about sales-type leases." Last year, Asia Global Crossing began giving equal treatment to the revenue and expenses made in capacity swaps, deferring the full result of both over the life of the contract. When the company reported partial unaudited results for 2001, it said it had $536 million in what it called either "reciprocal transactions" or three-way swaps it did in conjunction with Global Crossing and other companies. The company says it booked $14.3 million in revenue from the reciprocal transactions and deals involving Global Crossing in 2001, out of a total $121.5 million it reported in revenue for the year. Increasing Scrutiny Other types of companies have also run into controversy over how to account for these types of deals. Before it was purchased by Singapore Telecommunications Ltd., Australia's Cable & Wireless Optus ran into trouble with the Australian securities regulator over an accounting decision concerning sales of capacity on its mobile telephone network. Optus booked a 28 million Australian dollar ($14.6 million) profit up front from one such capacity sale in 1999, but the regulator argued the company should have amortized the gain over the life of the contract. Accounting moves like the one Optus made -- which it said five Australian and international accounting firms had agreed was legitimate -- are under increasing scrutiny since the collapse of Enron and the bankruptcy filing of Global Crossing. Last month, the New Zealand Securities Commission and its Australian counterpart announced they were looking into interim results reported by Telecom Corp. of New Zealand after the company reported earnings significantly better than many analysts had expected. Telecom Corp. denied any wrongdoing. Analysts who questioned the company's results touched off that investigation. But elsewhere in the Asian-Pacific region, analysts haven't been very aggressive in questioning capacity swaps. The senior executive at an Asian provider who has been approached time and again to be the counterparty on such dubious swaps says it isn't that analysts don't know about the practice. "The analysts have known about the swap stuff for at least six to nine months," he says. "They have known what is going on, and they have chosen to turn a blind eye to it." An employee at one bank says his bank came under pressure from providers not to highlight some of the problems, at the risk of losing investment-banking business. A regional telecom analyst at a European investment bank acknowledges talk of suspect swaps. "There were probably some dodgy swaps there, but can we prove it? Probably not. So we shut up about it." ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #276 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jun 10 22:41:43 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA19212; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 22:41:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 22:41:43 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206110241.WAA19212@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #277 TELECOM Digest Mon, 10 Jun 2002 22:40:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 277 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson MCI: Capacity Swaps Inflated Revenue, Cost Money at Global (M. Jervis) MCI: Ebbers' Downfall (Marcus Jervis) Re: MCI Watch: The Complaints Keep Rolling In (Steven Lichter) Help With MCI Customer Service Problem (LNH) Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Another E-mail Spammer with a Toll Free Number (Steven Lichter) Getting a Lock on Broadband (Monty Solomon) Re: 25 Cent Verizon Payphones Return to NYC (Gene Berkowitz) Re: 25 Cent Verizon Payphones Return to NYC (Marcus Didius Falco) AT&T (Ian) Re: Surfing On the Computers at Work? How Safe Are You? (kadokev@tribune) Central Office Tours? (Bill Bradford) Re: Telecom Marketing Help Request (E.M. Handler) Re: Telecom IDDD Question (E.M. Handler) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marcus Jervis Subject: MCI: Capacity Swaps Inflated Revenue, Cost Money at Global Crossing Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 18:39:08 +0000 February 19, 2002 Global Crossing's Capacity Swaps Were of Little Value, Study Says By DENNIS K. BERMAN Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL Many of Global Crossing's capacity deals didn't make economic sense, according to people familiar with an internal study. Last summer, top engineers at Global Crossing Ltd. set out to review the fiber-capacity assets the telecom company had acquired via "swap" transactions with other telecom companies. The three-month study, commissioned by Carl Grivner, then the senior operations executive at the company, found that the vast majority of the company's purchases were of limited to no value to the company, according to two former Global Crossing officials familiar with the report. One former official says he was left "aghast" by the findings, which looked at the cost of integrating the newly acquired telecom capacity into Global Crossing's sprawling world-wide network. According to these two former officials, less than 20% of the swapped assets could be added to the company's existing network in a cost-efficient manner. In certain deals, the acquired assets were hundreds of miles from the closest Global Crossing facilities, making connection a costly matter, one of the former officials says. In some cases, telecommunications engineers were consulted before such deals were signed, they say; in others, they were left out of the process, often because the deals were cut in the last minutes of a quarter. Company spokesman Daniel Coulter said that he "wouldn't comment on reports from sources who say they're providing information from proprietary internal company documents." Global Crossing, based in Bermuda, has come under scrutiny by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, after public allegations from former finance executive Roy Olofson surfaced late last month. Mr. Olofson alleges that Global Crossing executives used questionable swap transactions to falsely inflate revenue. Mr. Olofson's allegations also raise the issue of whether Global Crossing abused standard accounting rules when booking long-term lease transactions with other telecommunications companies. In these transactions, informally known as "swaps," Global Crossing and another carrier, such as Qwest Communications International Inc., each signed contracts to take long-term control over parts of one another's networks. Such transactions have proved attractive across the industry, because accounting rules allow carriers to book an incoming contract as a large chunk of revenue, and then book the outgoing contract as a capital expense, which many companies don't include in nonstandard operating results. In many cases, the two companies would send each other the same amount of cash, thus creating an appearance of revenue while the company's overall cash position remained static, Mr. Olofson alleges. Global Crossing began disclosing the value of its overall swap transactions in the first quarter of 2001. In the three months ended March 31, the company committed $625 million to its own customers, who had in turn promised to spend $500 million with Global Crossing. In the second quarter, Global Crossing said it bought $358 million in capacity from its customers while taking in $345 million from them. Second-quarter transactions linked to swaps accounted for nearly 20% of what the company calls "cash revenue," meaning the full amount of revenue in a quarter without deferrals for amortization. Chief Financial Officer Daniel Cohrs has previously said that all of the company's transactions were properly accounted for and served a clear business purpose. Typically, network-builders buy redundant capacity to ensure their networks run without error. In addition, during 2000 and 2001, many telecom companies, including Global Crossing, built and purchased vast amounts of new capacity in expectation that the telecom market would rapidly expand. The huge pick-up in demand never materialized and Global Crossing filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last month. One of the former officials says that the study was presented to Joseph Perrone, the company's executive vice president of finance, in late September 2001. Though it is unclear how the company chose to respond to the report, the level of swap transactions declined significantly in the third quarter ended Sept. 30, compared with the first two quarters of 2001. In the third quarter, the company got commitments from clients for $177 million of capacity while it made $190 million in cash commitments for capacity to clients. The company is slated to report its fourth-quarter results Feb. 26. Inside Global Crossing, the study also highlighted a disconnect between the company's engineering personnel and salespeople. The engineers were upset that the capital spending on the "swapped" assets began crimping the budgets for other, preplanned construction, the two former officials said. The review also found that some of the swap commitments were for capacity that had yet to be defined by location or time of delivery, they added. Separately, Mr. Coulter said Global Crossing was reviewing whether to disclose information about a contract between it and withit.com, a communications-technology company controlled by Mr. Perrone's son, Joseph Perrone Jr. Last year, Global Crossing struck a deal with Chicago-based withit.com, in which the company would provide Global Crossing Internet broadcasting software used by financial traders. Though no financial details have yet been disclosed, Mr. Coulter said the company may do so in its annual SEC filing. Mr. Coulter also stressed that there was nothing improper about the arrangement. "Our business with withit.com and Joe Perrone Jr. is completely unrelated to the fact that Joe Perrone Sr. is an executive with Global Crossing." ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: MCI: Ebbers' Downfall Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 18:46:27 +0000 May 1, 2002 Ebbers's Downfall Came in the Form Of $366 Million in WorldCom Loans By DEBORAH SOLOMON and REBECCA BLUMENSTEIN Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL The key stumble that eventually landed Bernard J. Ebbers on the unemployment line was the $366 million in personal loans he was granted by WorldCom Inc., according to company officials. As controversy about the loans magnified, Mr. Ebbers -- who resigned as chief executive officer of WorldCom on Monday -- grew increasingly distracted about the situation and how to pay back the hefty debt, these people said. The board, embarrassed by the loans, felt heavy pressure to do something. The loans -- the largest a publicly traded company has given to an officer in recent memory -- are also one of the top items that the Securities and Exchange Commission is looking into in its current investigation of WorldCom's accounting practices. Mr. Ebbers "had trouble figuring out how to take care of it [the loans] and still be CEO of the company," said John Sidgmore, who succeeds Mr. Ebbers as CEO. "He has a lot of things to take care of personally." And Mr. Ebbers's troubles may not end with his resignation. He could face personal ramifications if the SEC determines that his disclosure about the loans -- and about his personal financial situation at the time they were granted -- was lacking in any way, according to securities experts. Mr. Ebbers got into trouble in the late 1990s by taking out bank loans for his private investments and putting up his then-stellar WorldCom stock for collateral. Bank of America Corp., which had lent Mr. Ebbers money for his investments backed by WorldCom stock, threatened him in late 2000 with a margin call, which could have forced him to sell shares to pay back the loan. To avoid hurting WorldCom's stock with a big sale of shares, WorldCom's board told him to take a separate loan from the company. The company guaranteed the Bank of America loan and, after the stock fell, lent him hundreds of millions to repay his debts. James Cox, a law professor at Duke University, said one thing that the SEC may look at it is how solvent Mr. Ebbers was at the time the WorldCom loans were granted, and if he adequately disclosed his financial situation to the board. "If his solvency is dependent on the performance of WorldCom stock, then to the extent that WorldCom goes in the tank, that introduces a high likelihood of nonpayment," said Mr. Cox. Indeed, Mr. Sidgmore said, at the time the board approved the loans, WorldCom's stock was around $24, and "there really didn't seem to be much chance that the stock was going to go down to where the stock is going now," to less than $3. Mr. Ebbers also had "plenty of collateral," he said. But as the stock dropped, the loans became riskier and Mr. Ebbers's assets became harder to sell. "Those are not assets that you can run out to the bank and sell," Mr. Sidgmore said. WorldCom said Mr. Ebbers will still be required to pay back the loans, but will have five years to do so. WorldCom is charging Mr. Ebbers 2.15% annually on his loans. Mr. Ebbers has said he will sell personal assets to pay off his loans. Among the assets he has are a yacht-building business, a 164,000-acre ranch in British Columbia, a soybean farm in Louisiana and a stake in a refrigerated-trucking company. He also still owns about 17 million shares in WorldCom, with a current value of $41.5 million. People familiar with the situation say Mr. Ebbers has grown upset with the criticism he has received over the WorldCom loans. If he had paid his debt by selling shares -- which were trading in the mid-20s at the time he faced a margin call -- he wouldn't have needed the loans and wouldn't be in hock to WorldCom for $366 million. But the WorldCom board blocked Mr. Ebbers from covering his margin call by selling shares. Still, Mr. Ebbers said recently that he hadn't wanted to sell the shares to cover his debts, because he thought they were undervalued at the time. Mr. Ebbers declined to comment on the loans Tusday. While Mr. Ebbers has taken the fall, corporate-governance experts said the board should also be held accountable for the loans. Nell Minow, editor of the Corporate Library, a Web site focused on corporate governance in Washington, said the board's role is to "deploy all the assets of the company in a manner that will provide the optimal return to shareholders" -- something a loan with a 2.15% interest rate doesn't do. ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: MCI Watch: The Complaints Keep Rolling In Date: 9 Jun 2002 18:01:46 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ John Higdon wrote in message news: ... > In article telecom20.271.9@telecom-digest.org was written: > Again, to shorten the story, we were billed by MCI for a solid year > after we discontinued the service. When we simply didn't pay, we were > put on collection. They messed up our D&B rating. It was the long > distance company from hell. Mind you, this was for MCI Vision, their > top of the line service that was collecting about $5K/month from us. About six months ago I started getting MCI billing on my daughters telephone, what is really strange is the line is blocked for anything but local calling. It also has a block to prevent the LD Carrier from being changed. PacBell shows it is still Sprint as are my other lines. It is not even the primary billing number. No charges have been made other then the month services charges and taxes. They have stated that they got a written authorizon for the change, but can't show it to me and PacBell never changed the PIC. MCI finally took the charges off; no 'we are sorry', or anything else. The only good spammer is a dead one! Have you hunted one down today? (c) I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Roast In Hell Company. ------------------------------ From: amadeusrabbit@hotmail.com (LNH) Subject: Help With MCI Customer Service Problem Date: 10 Jun 2002 17:26:04 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I gather that I'm not the only one having problems with MCI customer service. Here's the gist: first MCI got my address so wrong that I wasn't even receiving bills from them. Yes, I had to call them and correct my address so I could even receive my bills. (Yes, I shouldn't have called.) Of course, they never admitted their mistake and blamed me for not paying on time. Now they've "misplaced" two of my payments and are threatening to shut off my phone service. DOES ANYONE HAVE A PHONE NUMBER, ADDRESS OR E-MAIL WHERE I CAN CONTACT A PERSON WITH A BRAIN WHO CAN RESOLVE THIS PROBLEM? Any assistance would be much appreciated. Lisa [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A quick answer is no. You should have never gotten involved with them to start with, but since you did, now you need to repair the damage as quickly as possible. I would say get off their long distance as soon as you can. Choose some other effecient carrier for your calls, so that you won't some day wind up with no service at all. Maybe one of our readers can suggest a good alternative. Get your telco to default your new choice of LD carrier as one plus. *Once that has been done* then write a letter to MCI and address it to 'anyone with brains' and explain your problem once last time, warning against any further contact or harassment. They'll no doubt pass the letter around in their office until it reaches someone who knows what to do. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 03:47:06 GMT > CO. I'm not aware of any services on my line that would cause this. On my phone (Verizon in NYC), call-forwarding causes the phone to half-ring before the call is forwarded. Joel ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 10 Jun 2002 03:52:42 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Another E-mail Spammer with a Toll Free Number TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > Will all your efforts ever get rid of them? Probably not ... like > cockroaches, if there was a nuclear explosion as part of a world war, > I suspect roaches would survive it all; and spammers also. PAT] You could be right. Most of thoe numbers go to mail boxes and may not cost much at all. But some have gone to a real person and they are not happy when they are answering bunches of calls from people who got e-mail bombed or readers of The Digest. Got some time today and am home for a while. I went looking around the net, never realy did that much in the past; but came on to Google and found their 20 plus years of newsgroup Archives. Went looking though those and did a search with my name and came up with posting that I made to this group 10 plus years ago. I caused a few Fire Storms back in those days, really got GTE flammed up a couple of times on those fire updates when I left a GTE Internal phone number on one. Got told about that one, they never forget things like that. Spams back then were easy to trace and stop, today it is much harder and they are alot worse today then they were then, most were just porno and a few chain letters, today it is really bad and even large coporations are into it, they use others to do their bidding. I keep hearing from Chase Bank, who still claim my address has been removed. They can't hit this one as it is blocked unless they address in the Q. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 00:38:40 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Getting a Lock on Broadband The Media Borg: Getting a lock on broadband How the FCC is paving the way for a few big companies to control everyone's high-speed Internet access. Editor's note: Fifth in a series on the consolidation of power and ownership in the media landscape. - - - - - - - - - - - - By Jeffrey Benner June 7, 2002 | The Federal Communications Commission is quietly handing over control of the broadband Internet to a handful of massive corporations. In March, the FCC ruled that cable companies do not have to open their networks to competing Internet service providers, or ISPs. A FCC proposal to extend the same exemption to DSL service is pending. If approved, the proposal will allow local phone companies, now down to four "Baby Bells," to deny other DSL providers access to local phone networks. Currently, all DSL providers are guaranteed access to phone networks under the FCC's interpretation of federal telecommunications law. Telecommunications, cable, and media companies (increasingly one and the same) and their allies in Congress have campaigned for years to deregulate most aspects of the telecom industry. Under the current administration, and the leadership of FCC chairman Michael Powell, those efforts have finally begun to pay off. http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/06/07/broadband/index.html ------------------------------ From: Gene Berkowitz Subject: Re: 25 Cent Verizon Payphones Return to NYC Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 12:26:21 -0400 Reply-To: geneb@ma.ultranet.com In article , danielksalomon@my- deja.com says ... > Verizon has decided to lower the cost of local pay phone calls back to > 25 cents, from 50 cents, at many locations in New York City. It seems > they realized that the way to handle increased competition is not to > raise prices. Phones at airports and hotels will remain at 50 cents. > See http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/07/nyregion/07VERI.html . > I've had fairly good luck finding and using competitor's 25 cent > phones in NYC, so presumably Verizon realized that they were pricing > themselves out of the market. Their pricing model was actually 50 cents for an unlimited time call, vs. 25 cents for a 3-minute call + 25 cents each add'l 3 minutes. For a "limited" resource like a working pay phone, unlimited use seems to be begging for "abuse" ... Gene ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 01:31:44 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: 25 Cent Verizon Payphones Return to NYC > danielksalomon@my-deja.com (Daniel Salomon) wrote: > Verizon has decided to lower the cost of local pay phone calls back to > 25 cents, from 50 cents, at many locations in New York City. It seems > they realized that the way to handle increased competition is not to > raise prices. Phones at airports and hotels will remain at 50 cents. > See http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/07/nyregion/07VERI.html . > I've had fairly good luck finding and using competitor's 25 cent > phones in NYC, so presumably Verizon realized that they were pricing > themselves out of the market. The real competition to pay phones is the cell phone. Pay phones are mostly used by business people (according to surveys cited in rate hearings back when rates were regulated). Thus, in areas where most of the users are business people they have to cut rates to get any business at all. (The "excess minutes" charge on a Verizon cell phone contract is only 40 cents, so they have to get cheaper than that. Even roaming is only 65 cents or less, so many business people won't bother looking for a pay phone to save a couple of cents.) They keep the higher rates at airports and other locations where they can do most of their business with tourists, who may not have phones, or may be more price sensitive about roaming charges. They probably keep the higher prices in areas where most users are poor people who don't have cell phones. Another interesting thing about this news is that Verizon, and other telephone companies, had, for years, argued that a pay phone costs about 30 cents or more per call (at the calling rates -- and costs -- prevalent 10 to 20 years ago, that is, before cell phones). For that matter, the FCC estimated the cost per call at 28 cents, when setting compensation for calls to 800 numbers. Now, cutting the rate to 25 cents suggests that the cost must actually be lower than they had claimed, or else they would simply remove the phones. Hmmmm. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: ian@jardine.net (Ian) Subject: AT&T Date: 10 Jun 2002 13:08:24 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I have been an AT&T customer for 20+ years. Some years ago they offerd me a package of services "Personal Network" for $9.95 per month. This includes 1) 7 cents per minute LD 2) International calling 3) A 1-800 number at 10 Cents per minutes 4) Calling cards at 10 Cents per minute Today I called AT&T to attempt to make one small change. I am being charged 36 Cents per minute for calls to Singapore whereas the usual rates are 16 Cents. I asked for a change to be made to bring this in line. I am told that even such a small change would invalidate my whole "Personal Network" Plan which is no longer marketed and that the sum of all my services would now exceed the $9.95 per month I am paying. Is this progress? I asked for an exception to be made, given that I have been a consistent good customer for 20+ years and am told that there can be no exceptions. I can only conclude that customer service and loyalty is not a part of the AT&T Corporate manifest these days. Is this why their business is in decline? I have asked to speak to a senior manager and have been given her "first name", but she is unavailable and "will call me back with 38 hours". I asked for a direct number so I don't have to try to call back thru about the 5 levels I have spoken to so far, but I am refused this courtesy. Sounds like they really can't be bothered, but I pay a good amount to AT&T each month and have done for years and years. Boy can this company use a dose of treat your customers with respect! Any suggestions? Anyone? ------------------------------ From: kadokev@chicagotribune.com Subject: Re: Surfing On the Computers at Work? Just How Safe Are You? Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 20:51:51 UTC Organization: The author does not speak for this organization. In article , wrote: > Do you surf the internet and send E-mail at work? Your work PC will be > full of evidence. A person abusing "their" work computer for activity where "evidence" would be an issue, is going to be sorely disappointed if they believe they are protected by installing software that claims to eliminate this evidence. > This is perfectly legal and it is happening now! Your job could be at > risk, what would happen to you if you lost your job? An employer finding "Evidence Eliminator" installed on a company PC, or evidence that such a program had been used, will become suspicious (if they weren't already). The employer will use other means to collect evidence, assuming they do not summarily terminate the suspect employee. > [... > What more needs to be done than that? I should put this formula here > for everyone to copy. PAT] Nearly all employers (and many ISPs) employ a "caching proxy" between users and the Internet. The cache can be "transparent", so users do not suspect HTTP requests are being directed through the proxy server. Every web request through the proxy is logged by the ISP/employer. If the site visited is "secure" (HTTPS/SSL/TLS), the provider will _not_ see the actual traffic, even with a sniffer -- They see your source IP, the destination IP, the session duration, and number of bytes transferred. For _all_ sites (including "secure" sites) your web browser keeps the history of URLs visited, cached content, and cookies. This is the "evidence" that is purportedly "eliminated" by such software. Kevin Kadow ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:08:37 -0500 From: Bill Bradford Subject: Central Office Tours? Anybody know if telcos (SWBT, in Austin TX in particular) give central office tours anymore? About a year or so ago, I noticed a bit building going up not far from where I get my groceries and get prescriptions filled (intersection of N. Lamar and Braker). It looked like a colo facility (my first guess), with LARGE generators, large underground fuel tanks, not many windows, loading dock, etc. There are NO labels/insignia on the building at all, that I can see from the road or a quick turn-around in their parking lot. However, when I recently ran some checks to find out where the CO for my telephone (and in 2 days, DSL-replacing-cablemodem) service was located, the address of my CO (11409 N. Lamar) matches up with where this building is located. I've even got satelite photos of the location (although the pictures were taken before the building was put up; they just show an empty lot). In any case, anybody know if SBC/SWBell does central office tours for interested parties / telco geeks anymore, or has that all been stopped because of "possible terrorist threats", etc? Thanks. Bill (Keep up the good work, Pat - I first started reading the Digest almost FIFTEEN YEARS AGO, at the age of 15...) Bill Bradford mrbill@mrbill.net Austin, TX [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah Bill, I see you are one of our newer readers then. (wink). There are still a handful of the charter subscribers with us also. Those are the guys who got Volume 1, Issue 1 in August, 1981. You 'merely' started reading TD in the days when GTE had whatever they called it. It was the 'home' edition of their business switched data network (Telenet). They carried this Digest as one of their features for their customers. I think that's where I first met you when you were 15. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: E.M. Handler From: E.M. Handler Subject: Re: Telecom Marketing Help Request Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 00:21:29 GMT I am not sure what you are specifically looking for, but perhaps this link could be helpful to you: http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm otgrig wrote in message news:telecom20.275.8@telecom-digest.org ... > Hi everybody there, > I am an MBA student and got as assignment a marketing research in > telecom products (cellphones, PDAs etc). Some help about how to > contact marketing departments of telecom companies would be very > welcome. If there is some specialised newsgroup , pls advise . ------------------------------ Reply-To: E.M. Handler From: E.M. Handler Subject: Re: Telecom IDDD Question Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 00:24:11 GMT Thank you Paul. Very interesting reading. http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm PaulCoxwell@aol.com> wrote in message news:telecom20.271.4@telecom-digest.org: > Hello Pat, > I've been receiving the digest and reading the back issues for a > couple of months now, and finding it really interesting. (I used to > work for British Telecom here in England.) I thought it about time I > contributed. >> From: Adam Moore >> Subject: Telecom IDDD Question >> I'm trying to find information on which countries have international >> calling agreements in place that make using the international dialing >> codes unnecessary. Example: US-Canada calls do not require country >> codes. Do you have this information on your website? Or, do you know >> where I may find it? I have searched some of your website, but have >> not found anything yet. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #277 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jun 11 22:16:10 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA07510; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 22:16:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 22:16:10 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206120216.WAA07510@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #278 TELECOM Digest Tue, 11 Jun 2002 22:12:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 278 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Telecom IDDD Question (PaulCoxwell@aol.com) Loop Current??? (Nukie Poo) Re: Are There Any Cordless Phones/Answerers That Can Be (Sellcom Tech) Re: Are There Any Cordless Phones/Answerers That Can Be (Claude J Ortega) Virtual Line? (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Computer Telephony Integration and IP Telephony and Call Center (Epstein) AS5300's For Sale (Al Niven) "AT&T" Jingle on Second Line (Robert Switzer) Re: AT&T (J on the phone) Re: AT&T (Joseph Singer) Re: AT&T (Tom Brown) Re: AT&T (Jim Van Nuland) Re: AT&T (John R. Levine) Look up ANSI-41 (Jack) Re: Central Office Tours? (Tom Brown) SBC Collections (Wes) Re: Looking for a Needle in a Haystack! Help! (E.M. Handler) Re: Last Laugh! was Re: Looking For Audio Samples Messages (Dave Phelps) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: PaulCoxwell@aol.com Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 08:18:19 EDT Subject: Re: Telecom IDDD Question Ed Ellers wrote on Re: Telecom IDDD Question >> Several codes were allocated in the British network to reach the Irish >> Republic, e.g. 0001 for Dublin. Subscribers in the Irish Republic could >> dial any number in mainland Britain with 03 and could >> directly reach Northern Ireland with 080 . > That sounds like the hack that used to be used to allow direct dialing > to parts of Mexico from areas in the U.S. that didn't have true IDDD > yet -- two NPAs (706 and 905, IIRC) were reserved for that purpose, > but dialing +1 706 XXX XXXX or +1 905 XXX XXXX from outside the NANP > wouldn't work since the numbers were not within the NANP. e According to the NANP code lists I have, 903 was also used to reach Mexican border towns before this was transferred to 706 in about 1980. On the U.K./Irish hack, interestingly the 80 level STD trunks out of the Irish Republic were not barred from incoming IDDD calls, e.g. from mainland Britain it was possible to call Belfast in Northern Ireland with 00 353 80 1232 + . Dialing that now still goes to an Irish Republic intercept telling callers to dial the new code 048 in place of 080 1232. I don't know if the new 48 trunk level is barred from all incoming IDDD in Ireland; it's impossible to test from here in England as +353 48 is barred by the U.K. equipment. I checked some of my old notes and found that three countries in Eastern Africa had a shared numbering plan: STD codes starting 01, 02, 03 were Kenya, 04 Uganda, and 05, 06 Tanzania, although for incoming IDDD the three had separate country codes. I'm not sure if it was possible to dial in on the "wrong" country code. According to the World Numbering Plan website, the systems are now separate, although they have each implemented standard short-cut access codes: 005 Kenya, 006 Uganda, 007 Tanzania. (Normal IDDD prefix is now 000). ------------------------------ From: Nukie Poo Subject: Loop Current??? Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 15:47:38 GMT Quick question: I have an elderly friend whose answering machine doesn't let go of the line in the middle of recording a message if he picks up the line. It's POTS, single line, four separate phones and one Sony digital answering machine. When it first happened I replaced the answering machine with no change . The problem's intermittent, but annoying. Could loop current problems cause this? His installation has worked for 10 years with no problems and this just started out of the blue. What should I check next? TIA Paul ------------------------------ Reply-To: Sellcom Tech Support From: Sellcom Tech Support Subject: Re: Are There Any Cordless Phones/Answerers That Can Be Silenced? Organization: http://www.sellcom.biz Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 00:50:46 GMT Jim Shaffer "Jr." wrote in message news:telecom20.275.5@telecom-digest.org: > I'm looking for a cordless phone / digital answerer combination that > can be silenced. By that I mean that not only can I turn off the > ringer, but I can also turn off the speaker on the base unit so that I > don't hear incoming calls at all if I don't want to. I haven't been > able to find any such thing so far. I've seen some that allow > retrieval of messages from the handset, but they still have a speaker > in the base, and I've seen none where the volume can be set to zero. > Does anyone manufacture a system that can do this? Our Panasonic KX-TG2000B and 4000B systems have the option to turn off "call monitoring" as an answering machine feature. Steve from SELLCOM http://www.sellcom.biz Discount multihandset cordless phones Panasonic Siemens EnGenius and more Authorized Twinhead notebooks Okidata printers Watchguard firewalls ------------------------------ From: Claude J Ortega Subject: Re: Are There Any Cordless Phones/Answerers That Can Be Silenced? Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 05:12:17 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In article , jmshaffer@alltel.net says... > I'm looking for a cordless phone / digital answerer combination that > can be silenced. By that I mean that not only can I turn off the > ringer, but I can also turn off the speaker on the base unit so that I > don't hear incoming calls at all if I don't want to. I haven't been > able to find any such thing so far. I've seen some that allow > retrieval of messages from the handset, but they still have a speaker > in the base, and I've seen none where the volume can be set to zero. > Does anyone manufacture a system that can do this? The Siemens Model 4015 will do what you want. http://www.icm.siemens.com Their customer service has been very good, so far. Claude ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 00:49:57 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Virtual Line? This has got to be easy... I used to work out of my house. I had a business line installed there, 630-832-xxxx (Elmhurst, IL CO). Several years later, I bought an existing storefront, changed the name, and merged the businesses. The new business is in a different CO: 630-691-xxxx (Lombard, IL -- the territories are adjacent). My business has existing customers, and so does the store, so I wanted to keep both numbers and have them ring at the store. When I found out how much it would cost to actually have the 630-832 number terminate in (630-691) I was amazed, I can tell you... Fortunately, the solution was simple: "Alternate Answering" and "Busy Line Transfer" on the 832 number, with the destination set to the second line in the store's hunt group. The phone rings once at home and bounces to the store. Works great; been using it for 2.5 years. Costs about $1.50/mo plus usage for the forwarded calls. I'd already been using this for 3 years or so to bounce calls to my cell, so all I had to do was change the ring count and forwarding number. Soon my lease here will run out. I've reestablished the retail biz under the new name and can change locations now without losing too many customers. Within the next six months or so, I'll likely be moving to cheaper digs which just happen to be served out of the Elmhurst CO. When I do, it's straightforward to move the 832 number to the new location; just DC it at home, cancel the forwarding, and hook it up at the new digs. But what do I do with 691? I won't have a physical presence in that CO's territory any more. Can I just deadhead the 691 number in the CO? What do I call that service when I put in the change order? Then I'd set up the same forwarding scheme I'm currently using in the other direction. Otherwise, I suppose I could find someone trustworthy with a Lombard presence, have the 691 line moved there and just never hook anything up to the demarc. Or even leave it where it is and pay the landlord a couple bucks a month for the privilege. Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com ------------------------------ From: owen.epstein@3gsoftphone.com (OWEN P. EPSTEIN) Subject: Computer Telephony Integration and IP Telephony and Call Center Date: 10 Jun 2002 19:42:37 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ 3GSOFTPHONE SYSTEMS http://www.3gsoftphone.com CISCO Router Installation and Management for Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Call Flow Design, Call Flow Development, Call Flow Implementation for IRS Project Managed and Implemented Genesys 5.0 Outbound Suite for Cable and Wireless FTS 2000/FTS2001 project management for government clients including T1, PRI, Span recommendations and management Certified Genesys Engineer, from Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories ------------------------------ From: Al Niven Subject: AS5300's For Sale Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 02:51:41 GMT Organization: Road Runner - NYC voip 48 2T 11K USD voip 60 2E 12K USD voip 96 4T 16K USD voip 120 4E 19K USD All in stock and available now http://www.fone123.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:12:21 -0400 From: Robert Switzer Organization: OPENet Subject: "AT&T" Jingle on Second Line I use AT&T as my home long distance carrier on both my primary and second lines. The primary line is the typical listed number with no added features. The second line is the typical unlisted second line. When making a call out of the local area on my second line, I always get the prerecorded "AT&T" jingle (as when using an AT&T calling card) before the call connects. This *never* happens on the primary line. Any ideas why there is a difference in behaviour between the 2 lines. I had them connected at the same time (10 years ago), but don't know if this behavior always happened. Robert S. ------------------------------ From: 617@volcanomail.com (J on the phone) Subject: Re: AT&T Date: 11 Jun 2002 02:25:32 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Ian, Unfortunately, you are dealing with the realities of technology. Rate plans for long distance carriers are simply computerized templates which handle the incoming data (calls) and bill accordingly, automatically. Making what might seem to be a minor change in pricing would necessitate a great deal of software revision to an old rate package. It simply would be cost prohibitive to do. AT&T customer service is not trying to "be tough" with you. They are simply trying to work with you within the restraints of the billing system. The plan you are on is old. That means some rates will be good and some (international calling for example) will be lousy. Moving to a new plan will get you some better rates, but you may lose some things you liked about the old plan. Users spend hours debating the relative merits of different wireless plans, old and new. The same can be true of long distance plans. Simply put, old plans are better in some ways, as are new plans. You need to decide which is best for you, overall, if you simply want to stay with a "plan". However, you have many other options. First, loyalty to a corporate giant in this day in age is not something that carries a great deal of weight unless you are a large customer. Your plan definition indicates this is not the case. Why not shop around? There are many plans out there to choose from, offered by a myriad of long distance providers. Alternately, if you really like your "Personal Network" plan other than the single high rate to Singapore, why not use a dial around service -- either a 101-type service or someone like OneSuite.com (I believe their rate to Singapore is 6.9 cents a minute). That way, you keep what you like and avoid what bothers you. Again, it would cost AT&T much more to adjust their rate program than they could earn from your business in another 20 years. They are just trying to find the best way to make the most money for what they invest, just like you. If they aren't the best for you, find out who is. I'm not a shill for AT&T, they get only about 6-7% of my long distance business on a annual basis. In many areas, you can do better. Twenty years ago, they were "The Phone Company". They are a small fraction of that now. Take advantage of the competition. If you can do better, do it! Good luck. John ------------------------------ From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: AT&T Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:08:01 -0700 Organization: Drizzle Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On 10 Jun 2002 13:08:24 -0700, ian@jardine.net (Ian) wrote: > I have been an AT&T customer for 20+ years. > Any suggestions? Anyone? Find someone else to do your long distance and toll-free service. There are now many bargains to be had. AT&T is no longer the only game in town. Many carriers will give you long distance for 5 cents or less per minute billed in partial minutes rather than the custom of AT&T, Sprint and MCI who charge in full minute increments. They will also do it without charging you a monthly fee for the privilege of using their service or have a monthly minimum that you have to bill. Personal replies most likely will not be read. Please reply in the newsgroup ------------------------------ From: kibri@eudoramail.com (Tom Brown) Subject: Re: AT&T Date: 11 Jun 2002 09:11:17 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ ian@jardine.net (Ian) wrote in message news:: > I have been an AT&T customer for 20+ years. > Some years ago they offerd me a package of services "Personal Network" > for $9.95 per month. This includes > 1) 7 cents per minute LD > 2) International calling > 3) A 1-800 number at 10 Cents per minutes > 4) Calling cards at 10 Cents per minute > Today I called AT&T to attempt to make one small change. I am being > charged 36 Cents per minute for calls to Singapore whereas the usual > rates are 16 Cents. I asked for a change to be made to bring this in > line. > I am told that even such a small change would invalidate my whole > "Personal Network" Plan which is no longer marketed and that the sum > of all my services would now exceed the $9.95 per month I am paying. > Is this progress? > I asked for an exception to be made, given that I have been a > consistent good customer for 20+ years and am told that there can be > no exceptions. (Snip) I have been an ATT customer for 30 years. I even kept them when I briefly worked for MCI (we were so screwed up at MCI I did not want their service, nor in the end their job). AT&T is hardly worth the effort. With the net I seldom make any long distance calls, yet I still get a bill each month with a credit balance on it (I purposely overpaid to avoid the hassle of a bill for 30 cents). When Pac Bell offers LD service I am going to dump AT&T, they have lost my confidence. I am also tired of having the service agreements I have had with them voided evert time they change things (this has happened at least five times). ATT is not your father's ATT, and is not worth the effort. I don't know if SBC LD will be a better deal, but at least one less bill to deal with. If I need to call LD, I use my cell phone, it is already paid for and covered. Sorry to hear of your problems, but they are not unique. ATT does not care about long time customers and it will eventually kill them off. I know they have heard your and my gripes and those of other customers for years, they are losing money and do not care. On the other hand I formerly had phone bills of $175 a month in the 1970's, and 1980's, the dynamics have changed. As I said in another post to this group, I prefered the telco's before MCI's changes to the industry. I don't think anyone has benefited from this in the long run. Tom (Please No Spam) ------------------------------ From: Jim Van Nuland Subject: Re: AT&T Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 07:39:41 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Silicon Valley Public Access Link Ian wrote: > I have been an AT&T customer for 20+ years. > Some years ago they offerd me a package of services "Personal Network" > for $9.95 per month. This includes > 1) 7 cents per minute LD > 2) International calling > 3) A 1-800 number at 10 Cents per minutes > 4) Calling cards at 10 Cents per minute I use a prepaid card that gives me 4.2 cents/minute 24/7 anywhere in the USA. I don't make international calls; the card supports them, but the rates are not stated on the card. The card is from Sprint, and was purchased at Price Club, about $20 USD for 480 minutes. AT&T lied to me and I have no trust in them. I got slammed with a $4.95 / month "calling plan", that stated "we have analyzed your calling pattern and determined that this is the best deal for you.". The line is use for incoming / announce only, and had NO outgoing calls. So phooy to them. Jim Van Nuland, San Jose (California) Astronomical Association ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jun 2002 23:04:43 -0400 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: AT&T Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > for $9.95 per month. This includes > 1) 7 cents per minute LD > 2) International calling > 3) A 1-800 number at 10 Cents per minutes > 4) Calling cards at 10 Cents per minute > Today I called AT&T to attempt to make one small change. I am being > charged 36 Cents per minute for calls to Singapore whereas the usual > rates are 16 Cents. I asked for a change to be made to bring this in > line. > Any suggestions? Anyone? Time to switch to a company that wants your business. ECG, for example, charges me 4.9 cpm LD both incoming and outgoing, 49 cents/month per 800 number, and $4.95/mo, waived if your total bill is over $10. Calls to Singapore cost 7.1 cents. There are other carriers with similar rates. ECG's calling card is pricey, so I use Cognidial's instead, which is 6.9 cpm anywhere in the US with no per call charge (other than a payphone charge) and no minimum usage. Oh, and ECG's underlying carrier is not MCI. It's Qwest, whose long distance seems OK for now. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Adams, John (Jack) Subject: Look Up ANSI-41 Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:40:41 -0400 You bet it is. It is no longer an "interim" standard (is), but is now a full ANSI standard. It is quite prevalent throughout the TDMA networks North America. > (I'm a newbie in this area so please bear with me) > Is IS-41 still in use? I searched the TIA website but couldn't find > it. Has it been superseded by something else? Many thanks, J ------------------------------ From: kibri@eudoramail.com (Tom Brown) Subject: Re: Central Office Tours? Date: 11 Jun 2002 08:58:33 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Bill Bradford wrote in message news:: > Anybody know if telcos (SWBT, in Austin TX in particular) give central > office tours anymore? (Snip) I am pleased to tell folks that the Pacific Bell (er, SBC Pacific Bell, Sorry) building on New Montgomery Street in San Francisco (near BART Station) has a nice free museum run by the Pioneers which is open Tuesday, Wednesday and Thrusday with volunteer pioneer docents. I believe the hours are 10 am to something like 2 PM. They have nice displays in what was the former museum area and I believe the treasurers office. It has been totally redone from what it was 20 years ago, with fewer and better exhibits and some rare equipment. Mostly consumer stuff. I went in as I recalled a card dialer phone on display (no longer there). Most business stuff is not covered, mostly home phones and a few old switchboards and overall company history and photos. There is currently (not permanent) a display down the street at the Patelco credit union (more odd consumer stuff). An example would be a noteworthy phone with a clock in the cork board (somewhat odd). The displays are free and well worth the visit. I understand that the displays were just redone professionaly a year or two ago for the museum, the credit union display is temporary and in a glass case in the lobby of the CU. Like a few people I am trying to prserve the past by collecting old WE stuff (I take junkers and make a good example of a given unit). If you were going to dimp stuff, rather than see it go to waste, drop me a note I might be able to put it somewhere. People need to preserve the heritage of the phone companies. So few people know of the neat stuff that existed. I rather prefer the telco's the way they were, than how they are. Tom (Please no spam) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was a great telephony museum in Chicago in the lobby of the headquarters building at 225 West Randolph Street for many years. I understand Illinois Bell/Ameritech got real greedy several years ago and closed it down. I guess all the exhibits were scattered to the wind; I don't know where any of it is now. Maybe someone in Chicago with Ameritech could tell us about it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: wesliea@hotmail.com (Wes) Subject: SBC Collections Date: 11 Jun 2002 12:20:38 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Anyone know info about SBC Collections? Do they use an internal agency or contract externally? Any other info regarding this matter will be appreciated! Thank you. ------------------------------ Reply-To: E.M. Handler From: E.M. Handler Subject: Re: Looking for a Needle in a Haystack! Help! Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 23:08:58 GMT This link to an E-Book might be useful to you: http://www.access-networking.com/cut_the_cost.htm Kim Fuller wrote in message news:telecom20.259.4@telecom-digest.org: > Hello! > I am trying to locate some info on a class someone I work with is > interested in possibly having some employees attend. He is not sure of > the name exactly, but it's something like "Telephone 101" and it's a > one-day course in Sacramento. You may or may not be able to assist me, > but when I came across your website, I thought it was worth a try. I do > not know who hosts the training or really anything else. I would > appreciate any information you could provide that would point me in > the right direction. Thank you! > Kim Fuller > Administrative Assistant > The Rye Telephone Co ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Last Laugh! was Re: Looking For Audio Samples Messages Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 00:20:50 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to message: tippenring@deadspam.com says: > Is that really how their contract reads more or less? I can't say for sure. I can only go by what I've heard other Avaya shops say, but that is generally what I've heard. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #278 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jun 12 17:45:23 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA25182; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 17:45:23 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 17:45:23 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206122145.RAA25182@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #279 TELECOM Digest Wed, 12 Jun 2002 16:45:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 279 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Punish Spam? (D. Patrick Ryan, P.Eng.) Re: Virtual Line? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Virtual Line? (Carl Navarro) Re: Virtual Line? (danco@pebble.org) Re: Virtual Line? (BV124@aol.com) Re: Virtual Line? (David Hassid) Re: Virtual Line? (Carl Zwanzig) Surplus TIE Phone System (Eric) Re: ITU-T SS7 and ANSI SS7 Network Differences (Don't email me) Re: AT&T (Ian) Help Needed Defending Against Hackers (KarennMunford@cs.com) "AT&T" Jingle on Second Line (BV124@aol.com) SMS (Chagan) SBC Ameritech Announces $26 Million Savings For Michigan Customers (Jack) 2 Tinkerers Say They've Found a Cheap Way to Broadband (Monty Solomon) Re: Central Office Tours? (Ed Ellers) Cable - Leased Access Rates (Author) Last Laugh! "Plans" (was Re: AT&T) (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: From: D. Patrick Ryan, P.Eng. Subject: Punish Spam? Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 11:09:51 -0600 Hi there, I'm extremely frustrated by the amount of FAX spam I've been getting lately (SpamKiller has allowed me to more or less get a handle on the e-mail spam). I've been following the letter of the law, requesting removal from lists and reporting those that don't. Doesn't do squat. Some of these silly bastards put 1-800 numbers on their ads. I'd like to punish them. Are you aware of any auto-dialer programs that would dial, play a message, and hang up - continously? I figure costing them for 1-800 calls is about the same as them using my ink and paper for faxes ... D. Patrick Ryan, P.Eng. - Graham Ryan Consulting Ltd. 710, 237 - 8 Ave. SE Calgary, AB T2G 5C3 Phone: (403) 290-1150 Fax: 290-0659 Cell: 651-8340 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Continue following the letter of the law. An auto-dialer program which called them repeatedly, played a message then disconected is illegal harassment in the USA at least; I don't know what the law says in Canada. I cannot recommend that you violate the law in any way. However, we are due for another issue of our Business Directory any time now, and places you have dealt with could be included in it. Many Digest readers like to let their fingers do the walking, as the Yellow Pages say, and shop these advertisers. Note the frequent messages from people here (usually those messages appear toward the back of each issue; frequently in the 'Last Laugh!' area. You may see a message included by our readers saying something like 'you know the drill by now' or 'you know what needs to be done.' Maybe Steve or one of the readers who sends in these entries on a regular basis can get in touch with you and answer any questions you may have about using the Directory in a resourceful way. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Virtual Line? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 12:19:42 GMT > When I do, it's straightforward to move the 832 number to the new > location; just DC it at home, cancel the forwarding, and hook it up at > the new digs. But what do I do with 691? I won't have a physical > presence in that CO's territory any more. Can I just deadhead the 691 > number in the CO? What do I call that service when I put in the > change order? Then I'd set up the same forwarding scheme I'm > currently using in the other direction. When I left Boston, I did this, but only for a year. The local phone company there has a service that will forward the number for up to a year after you leave, and then play a "number has changed" notice thereafter (for 6 months?). It's not expensive. But look out. When I did this, I had an AT&T calling card attached to the old number. When I left Boston, the local telco told AT&T that my line was disconnected, and AT&T changed my rates on the calling card from preferred ($.10/min) to "no plan" (roughly $1/min, plus setup). Int'l rates went up even more. I got a $700 phone bill. AT&T told me only the local telco could correct the error. The local telco told me they weren't asking for any money, just billing it, and only AT&T could fix the error. In the end I had to pay the $700 in order to get new phone service. A month later a second bill arrived, for $900, which I didn't pay. I got harassing notices from AT&T for about a year and then they gave up. Joel ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Virtual Line? Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 12:48:05 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online -- Northeast Ohio On Tue, 11 Jun 2002 00:49:57 -0500, Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote: > This has got to be easy... > When I do, it's straightforward to move the 832 number to the new > location; just DC it at home, cancel the forwarding, and hook it up at > the new digs. But what do I do with 691? I won't have a physical > presence in that CO's territory any more. Can I just deadhead the 691 > number in the CO? What do I call that service when I put in the > change order? Then I'd set up the same forwarding scheme I'm > currently using in the other direction. You have about two choices that don't require dropping a line somewhere. Changed number intercept, where you drop the number and let the telco intercept it with the new number, or Remote Call Forwarding where you keep the number and forward it to your new number. Intercept is less expensive, but it makes your customers dial the new number. Also, the intercept has a finite lifespan, depending on the whims of reassignment. (side note, when my father passed away the intercept stayed on his line for about three years in Chicago.) RCF should cost you about $8.50 or so a month plus the usage for the forwarding. I don't know if your former IBT will charge per-minute rates or just termination rates for the forwarding. HTH Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: danco@pebble.org Subject: Re: Virtual Line? Organization: Pebble in the Sky Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 02:47:53 GMT In article , Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote: > Otherwise, I suppose I could find someone trustworthy with a Lombard > presence, have the 691 line moved there and just never hook anything up > to the demarc. Or even leave it where it is and pay the landlord a > couple bucks a month for the privilege. I've done both. #1) sounds like "remote call forwarding", a virtual forwarded number in another office that you can change the forwarding on by remote control, and #2) sounds like adding a physical line at a "friend's location" (i.e., home), call forwarding it, and paying his monthly bill. When I did #2, my friend also got the side benefit of being able to use the line for outbound calls at the same time as I was using it for inbound calls. With residential service here, that meant unmeasured service as well. In fact, he could nail the line up 24/7 outbound, and I could nail it up 24/7 inbound forwarded to another location in an adjacent billing center. All for a single $18 monthly fee and no usage charges. This was very useful back in the days of Fidonet before cable modems and always on Internet connections. Dan ------------------------------ From: BV124@aol.com Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 23:24:55 EDT Subject: Re: Virtual Line? Won't the local company do a "Permanent Call Forward" for you from the Lombard # to the Elmhurst #? I think they do it in the CO, so the line doesn't really terminate on any premises, just in the CO. ------------------------------ From: David Hassid Subject: Re: Virtual Line? Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 05:24:10 GMT > Or even leave it where it is and pay the landlord a couple bucks a month > for the privilege. I went through this when I pulled out 20 or so POTS lines and put in a few voice T1s. I don't remember what the service was called, but Verizon gave me POTS forwarding without it ringing once at the first location -- and without there even being a line at the first location. The lines were hosted only at the phone company and when someone called that number it would instantly forward to my new number (which happens to be an 800 number). IIRC the service costs $12 a month plus $2 per "channel". With one channel you can have one call forwarded at a time. With 8 channels, you can have 8 simultaneous calls forwarded at the same time. In the future, I would strongly suggest using 800 numbers. They are very cheap, and you own them. Once you get an 800 number and your customers start using them it will never change, You can move across the country, change phone companies, whatever, your customers will still use the same number. Hassid Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote in message news:telecom20.278.5@telecom-digest.org... > I used to work out of my house. I had a business line installed > there, 630-832-xxxx (Elmhurst, IL CO). Several years later, I bought > an existing storefront, changed the name, and merged the businesses. > The new business is in a different CO: 630-691-xxxx (Lombard, IL -- > the territories are adjacent). My business has existing customers, > and so does the store, so I wanted to keep both numbers and have them > ring at the store. > Soon my lease here will run out. I've reestablished the retail biz > under the new name and can change locations now without losing too > many customers. Within the next six months or so, I'll likely be moving > to cheaper digs which just happen to be served out of the Elmhurst CO. ------------------------------ From: zbang@Radix.Net (Carl Zwanzig) Subject: Re: Virtual Line? Date: 12 Jun 2002 17:57:52 GMT Organization: RadixNet Internet Services Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote: > When I do, it's straightforward to move the 832 number to the new > location; just DC it at home, cancel the forwarding, and hook it up at > the new digs. But what do I do with 691? I won't have a physical > presence in that CO's territory any more. Can I just deadhead the 691 > number in the CO? What do I call that service when I put in the > change order? Then I'd set up the same forwarding scheme I'm > currently using in the other direction. In some areas you can get a "remote call forward", which is simply a switch-provisioned forward with no physical presence. You pay a monthly and message units/toll charges. I've even seen this used to jump between LATAs (Baltimore metro to DC metro, using some of the extended nxx's). > Otherwise, I suppose I could find someone trustworthy with a Lombard > presence, have the 691 line moved there and just never hook anything up > to the demarc. Or even leave it where it is and pay the landlord a > couple bucks a month for the privilege. Done that, too. The only problem is that sometimes the forward would "fall off" the line, and I'd have to ask the person hosting the line to reenter it. RCF's seldom, if ever, fail. Another option is to get a cheap in-state toll-free number, terminated on your regular line. z! ------------------------------ From: erccc@ureach.com (Eric) Subject: Surplus TIE Phone System Date: 12 Jun 2002 11:32:41 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I have a 12-phone system with computer, monitor, cables. Phones are made by Nitsuko America, Shelton Ct 203-926-5400, 20 lines, labeling "MFG CODE 66151995, type "88261B, TIE/ONYX-DTS STD 30B-HF" My contractor-neighbor got this from a remodel job. Does anyone have use for any part of this system? Is it worth $200? Of course it would be 100% money-back guaranteed. I'm not in business, just want it to go to some use. Thanks, Eric ------------------------------ From: nomailp@netscape.net (Don't email me) Subject: Re: ITU-T SS7 and ANSI SS7 Network Differences Date: 12 Jun 2002 07:20:40 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ umeshu7@yahoo.com (Umesh Bhavsar) wrote in message news:: > In US there is a separate SS7 network consisting of STPs. Hence the > 64kbit/s ss7 link is never on the same T1 as the actual bearer trunks. > The T1s for SS7 and trunks are kept separate. I am not clear if this > is how it works in Europe. Is the ss7 link on the same E1 as the > trunks? Also is there a separate SS7 network based on STPs in Europe? The use of STP's is universal. ETSI vs ANSI C7 ... ansi supports many more features than etsi. You don't need an STP (either etsi or ansi) for signaling links. If two class 5 switches are connected together they can use "F" links between them. Protocals are definatly different between ETSI and ANSI. There are two versions of ETSI as well (V1 & V2) this is a common protocal between countries in Europe. The countries also typically have their own national vatiants of C7 to support their own in-country features. Hope this helps. http://www.telcosupport.net ------------------------------ From: ian@jardine.net (Ian) Subject: Re: AT&T Date: 12 Jun 2002 08:22:34 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I want to thank everyone who has responded to me and given me such valuable input. Yes the time to move from AT&T is now. What's interesting to me is that corporate America no longer values loyalty on behalf of either employess or their customers. IMHO this attitiude has gone so far that it does actively downgrades many corporate performances. I worked for a large corporation for 21 years and before I left I engaged in a heated discussion with another executive. His final words about our employees were. "Don't they (employees) realize they don't have careers, they have jobs?". Well I told him "No, many of our employees believe they have careers and they have loyalty and as far as possible we need to recognise this and reward it. So long as it doesn't interfere with our company's prospects or future business". I lost the discussion and the churn rate at this corporation continues. Well similarly with end customers. Corporations should value loyalty and give service especially when the end customer has a variety of options. AT&T is no longer the only game in town and they are certainly not the cheapest. But they do have a substantial and STILL very loyal customer base. Such as myself, who would rather have stayed a customer in return for reasonable treatment. To use, as justification, a systems problem, that does not allow for tweaking a package is a blind alley, IMHO. Such systems are designed with considerable amount of time and effort. What this tells me is that in such a process the customer's needs did not enter into the equation as a necessary variable. Today when "price" is "King" and "service" is buried, AT&T and other such firms which do not value their customers, yet wish to remain in a service business, will doubtless suffer enormous further loss of clients going forward. And likely increasingly from their hardcore base clients. Pretty darn sad that their Executives apparently don't care and their BoDs are looking in the opposite direction. Probably at missteps in the Cable business etc ... and ignoring a base business. Me, I am a previously steadfast loyal customer of AT&T who has turned the corner and there will be no going back to AT&T. Oh Yes. The suggestions and advice I have been given on this board has been also given to friends who are customers of AT&T. Small events do snowball, don't they ... Thanks again. ------------------------------ From: KarennMunford@cs.com Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 23:04:37 EDT Subject: Seeking Defenses From Hacker Hello. I found out about your site through one of my friends in the Police Department today. I am having alot of problems with people hacking in to my computer. I was just wondering what all could be done on this site as far as email or anything like that. My friend told me that I would remain anonymous at all times if I were to use this site. Could you please tell me more about this site and how it works? Thank You, Karen from Alabama [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Only rarely does anyone ever actually 'catch a hacker' to make him pay for damages caused, etc. It makes far better sense to make sure your system, your network, etc is fully protected with a good quality firewall, and good virus protection, then you more or less let the rest of the net take care of itself the same way. To help you, it would be a good idea for you to begin by describing completely your system, network, etc. I am sure some of our experts will then respond with suggestions, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: BV124@aol.com Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 23:21:18 EDT Subject: "AT&T" Jingle on Second Line In Los Angeles (SBC-Pac Tel) I have AT&T and get the "jingle" on the primary (billing number) line, but NOT on the secondary line. Although both bill lines LD through AT&T. Go figure. ------------------------------ From: chaganm@yahoo.com (Chagan) Subject: SMS Date: 12 Jun 2002 06:08:37 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, I'm trying to find an SMS to email converter or an SMS gateway that will convert SMS to email. Any pointers as to where to start looking would be most appreciated. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Jack Subject: SBC Ameritech Announces $26 Million Savings For Michigan Customers Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 23:45:37 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com DETROIT--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 11, 2002-- Majority of Michigan customers will be converted to unlimited local service; prices reduced by up to 30 percent SBC Ameritech (NYSE:SBC) announced today that it will be making sweeping changes to its existing residential customer call packages, converting more than 75 percent of its residential customers to unlimited local service and dramatically lowering rates for other customers on the unlimited local plan. In addition, the company will offer unlimited local toll for the first time in its history, adding the service to more than 100,000 customers' packages with no change in price. "Customers don't have to lift a finger. We are automatically providing greater value and flexibility to their services. For many others, we are just simply lowering their price," Steve Dimmitt, vice president of marketing for SBC Ameritech. "We've seen unprecedented demand for unlimited local and local toll services and we are responding quickly to meet our customers' needs. These aren't short- term, quick-grab promotions; this is to demonstrate we value our existing customers and want them to know it." More than 2.2 million SBC Ameritech customers will benefit from the following changes, resulting in prices reduced by up to 30 percent and a total of more than $26 million in savings annually: -- Unlimited local service will be given to customers on Call Plan 400, Economy Solution(SM) and Sensible Solution(SM) - Michigan's most popular calling packages. -- Unlimited local toll/zone calling will be provided to all customers on the Complete Solution(SM) package and 2-Line Complete Solution(SM) package. -- SBC has slashed the price of its stand-alone unlimited local calling offer from $21 to about $14. Full story at: http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/f_headline.cgi?day0/221620400&ticker=sbc These changes are supposed to take place on June 17 for existing Ameritech customers. I don't think anyone here in Michigan quite knows what to make of this - it seems to be such atypical behavior for Ameritech. After I put this out on the MI-Telecom mailing list, one person sent me an e-mail that said, "That thunking sound you hear is my jaw hitting the floor. The silence afterward is my waiting for the other shoe to drop." It is interesting to me that Ameritech is offering a plan that offers "Unlimited local toll/zone calling" for $49.95 per month. Compare this to MCI's "Neighborhood Complete" program at the same advertised price. The MCI plan offers unlimited calling anywhere in the United States, while Ameritech's only offers unlimited calling within your home LATA (wonder if that will change if Ameritech gets permission to carry long distance calls?). But, on the MCI plan, you get charged extra for calls to Internet Service Providers, whereas on the Ameritech plan there is probably no such restriction. As part of that deal, MCI gives you Voicemail, which Ameritech doesn't, but Ameritech gives you Line-Backer, which MCI doesn't. Both plans give you Caller ID and a few other "custom calling" features. And neither company has exactly a sterling reputation with regard to customer service and lack of billing errors. So, there is no clear-cut winner here, but this puts Ameritech back in the running - particularly for Detroit area customers who probably pay nearly $50 a month as is, and who can divest themselves of the hated toll and zone call charges by opting for the unlimited local toll/zone calling plan. Some of the CLEC's operating in Ameritech territory mirrored Ameritech's 400 call limit on some of their plans; I wonder if they will also drop the limit, and/or try to match Ameritech's offering of unlimited "local toll" (intraLATA) calls. And, I wonder if Ameritech will do anything similar in their other states (I'll bet the folks in Wisconsin would like to be free of the miserable per-call charge that Ameritech instituted there several years ago, if that charge hasn't been dumped by now). I just find this an interesting, albeit somewhat perplexing move on Ameritech's part! Jack (My From: e-mail address disappears like ice dumped into a lava flow once the spammers get hold of it!) Resources for Michigan Telephone Users page: http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 01:24:37 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 2 Tinkerers Say They've Found a Cheap Way to Broadband June 10, 2002 2 Tinkerers Say They've Found a Cheap Way to Broadband By JOHN MARKOFF CUPERTINO, Calif., June 7 - Anyone looking for the next big thing in Silicon Valley should stop here at Layne Holt's garage. Mr. Holt and his business partner, John Furrier, both software engineers, have started a company with a shoestring budget and an ambitious target: the cable and phone companies that currently hold a near-monopoly on high-speed access for the "last mile" between the Internet and the home. At the core of their plan is the inexpensive wireless data standard known as Wi-Fi or 802.11b, which is already shaking up the communications industry, threatening to undermine the business plans of cellular phone companies by offering a much cheaper method for mobile access to the Internet. The pair's company, known as Etherlinx, has taken the 802.11b standard and used it to build a system that can transmit Internet data up to 20 miles at high speeds - enough to blanket entire urban regions and make cable or D.S.L. connections obsolete. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/10/technology/10WIRE.html ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Central Office Tours? Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 01:49:35 -0400 Bill Bradford wrote: > In any case, anybody know if SBC/SWBell does central office tours for > interested parties / telco geeks anymore, or has that all been stopped > because of "possible terrorist threats", etc? I tend to suspect the latter. (One of my favorite childhood memories was getting to see part of the JUniper office in downtown Louisville, in the early 1970s. I say "part of" because some NXXs were served by a crossbar switch and the rest by SxS equipment, and I only saw the SxS area, as well as one of the battery banks, the Audichron playback system used for the time-of-day number, and one of the operator rooms with old cord boards. The SxS gear was replaced by a 1A ESS just a few years later; the crossbar switch was cut over some years later.) ------------------------------ From: jm04469@yahoo.com (Author) Subject: Cable - Leased Access Rates Date: 12 Jun 2002 03:44:09 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I am doing a college research paper on the cable TV industry and looking for information on the rates that are charged for leased access in the following metros: Boston Atlanta Miami New York Baltimore Washington DC Philadelphia Dallas If anyone can point me to free (please no links to companies that charge) links, it would be greatly appreciated. ------------------------------ Subject: Last Laugh! "Plans" (was Re: AT&T) Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 12:27:59 GMT > and some (international calling for example) will be lousy. Moving to > a new plan will get you some better rates, but you may lose some > things you liked about the old plan. Users spend hours debating the > relative merits of different wireless plans, old and new. The same can > be true of long distance plans. Simply put, old plans are better in > some ways, as are new plans. You need to decide which is best for you, > overall, if you simply want to stay with a "plan". And this is an enormous problem. Remember the original motivation for breaking up the phone company and for competition? "It's good for the consumer." What would be good for the consumer is a single corporation that charged the lowest possible rate for each call. What's next? "Mailing plans" from the post office? (--"Hi. I'd like to sign up for local mail delivery." --"Well, where do you send most of your mail? Where do you get mail from? Do you send mail internationally? What about across state lines? Do you send a lot of local mail? Do you send express mail? Is quality important to you? We can offer you lower MCI rates but we'll mangle your mail sometimes. Is that okay? We can offer you pre-paid plans with use-'em-or-lose-'em stamps; that's our best deal. You don't need a plan, but without one, each letter you send will cost $1.96 plus applicable taxes. Would it help if I ask these questions using acronyms like LATA that you probably don't understand?...") Joel ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #279 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jun 13 17:54:12 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA13452; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 17:54:12 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 17:54:12 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206132154.RAA13452@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #280 TELECOM Digest Thu, 13 Jun 2002 17:55:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 280 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Expanding Without Managing (NY Times) (Marcus Didius Falco) Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? (Hafaka) Telephone Error Message (Richie Kennedy) Re: Loop Current (W Levant) Re: Virtual Line (W Levant) Re: AT&T (Herb Stein) Re: "AT&T" Jingle on Second Line (Larry & Wanda Finch) Detecting Forwarded Calls? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: 2 Tinkerers Say They've Found Cheap Way to Broadband (Jack Hamilton) Re: Cable - Leased Access Rates (Ed Ellers) Re: SBC Ameritech Announces $26 M Savings For Michigan Customers (Jack) ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (administrator) Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? (Sid S.) Dial Tone Difference Between Europe and North America (NETco2@aol.com) Easy Receive (Mike Easter) Re: Last Laugh! "Plans" (was Re: AT&T) (Barry Margolin) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 16:07:05 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Expanding Without Managing (NY Times) http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/12/opinion/12SONN.html http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/12/opinion/12SONN.html?pagewanted=3Dprint&pos= ition=3Dtop New York Times, Late Edition - Final ED, COL 02, P 29 Wednesday June 12 2002 Expanding Without Managing June 12, 2002 Expanding Without Managing By JEFFREY SONNENFELD NEW HAVEN Looking at the group of troubled corporate leaders Dennis Kozlowski of Tyco, Ken Lay of Enron, Bernie Ebbers of WorldCom, Gary Winnick of Global Crossing and John Rigas of Adelphia it is easy to conclude that flaws in board governance or shady accounting practices are behind their problems. This diagnosis overlooks the commonality in the approach of these corporate executives: All of them are "serial acquirers" of other companies. Proud of his leadership model, Mr. Kozlowski once even offered a "C.E.O. Academy" to help new chief executives follow his path. These executives saw their jobs first and foremost as expanding corporate holdings, rather than managing their companies to produce better products and services. And because their focus was on immediate financial results, they also tended to see regulators as adversaries and accounting rules as inconvenient barriers to fulfilling their schemes. It is not surprising that opaque financial reports are a common denominator with these chief executives. Nor is it surprising that those reports withered under scrutiny. Tyco, for example, moved its headquarters to Bermuda as a tax dodge, though it operated out of Exeter, N.H. While Mr. Kozlowski pushed his stock publicly, he and his finance chief made more than half a billion dollars in profits by selling stock the company granted them. When analysts pushed for answers on how Tyco accounted for its acquisitions, questions about asset manipulation were met with vague responses. Mesmerizing Wall Street with a dazzling number of deals makes an absence of long-term management vision easy to hide. Virtually every strategic corporate pronouncement from Tyco was reversed in short order from a flip-flop over breaking up the firm to flip-flops over whether a major business unit, CIT, a financial services firm, would be sold to an investment bank or sold to the public. In another example, Mr. Ebbers of WorldCom cared more about snaring new companies and less about making all his acquisitions work together. These serial acquirers did not build businesses around core competencies but were scavengers for good deals, a strategy that rarely pays off in the long run. (A study done for The Wall Street Journal by Thomson Financial found that in the current weak economy the stocks of the top 50 acquirers have fallen three times as much as the Dow Jones industrial average.) Tyco, originally a government-supported laser research lab, became a purchasing platform for Mr. Kozlowski. In three years, Tyco acquired 700 companies, creating a pileup of businesses that includes valve makers, health care product makers, security system services, medical device and diaper makers, electronics and telecommunications equipment manufacturers, and businesses involved in financial services and office leasing. This huge portfolio does not reinforce common distribution channels or share technologies. Yet "Deal-a-Day Dennis," as Mr. Kozlowski was proud to be known, was celebrated for Tyco's 20 percent annual growth rate until the last six months, in which the stock has fallen by 81 percent, losing over $80 billion of value. The flawed strategic logic of these serial acquirers repeats the failures of their predecessors from the 1970's. Shaky corporate shells like I.T.T. under Harold Geneen, Gulf and Western under Charles Bluhdorn and American Can, headed by Gerald Tsai, were broken up as distressed properties in the 1980's. I.T.T., a phone company, had become a base for hotels, bakeries and industrial equipment. Gulf and Western, an auto parts seller, became a shell for buying sugar refineries, steel mills and film studios. American Can, an old-line packaging company, moved into retail, stocks and insurance. The weakness in both the new serial acquirers and the failed acquirers of earlier decades is that managers did not understand the businesses they got into. They assumed that they could allocate the financial resources better than existing external financial markets could. The academic research on diversified firms is unambiguous. They generally do not beat the market. The executives could not possibly remain knowledgeable about the changing technological and market requirements for such disparate businesses. It has been reported that Gary Winnick of Global Crossing, for example, so little understood his telecom businesses that he relied on a Salomon Smith Barney telecom analyst, Jack Grubman, to guide financial and strategic moves. The serial acquirers were successful briefly in that the very complexity of their businesses made it hard to hold them immediately accountable. No single financial analyst can track this sort of dizzying array of companies and industries. Rapid growth without clearly defined enterprises makes it hard to judge the performance of these chief executives by conventional yardsticks. Rather than having to demonstrate skill in creating new products, providing better services or motivating employees, these executives are usually judged by investors and analysts only by the swelling size of their empires. The lack of accountability also translates into a lack of successors. Few executives of this type are interested in building enterprises that could in time be led by others, so they generally don't nurture successors, and the boards of these companies are rarely independent enough to insist that they do. For many, there is also difficulty drawing the line between corporate decisions and their private interests. At Adelphia, for example, John Rigas transferred control of corporate assets to his family, and family entities borrowed billions of dollars from the company. Perhaps because they go unchallenged, executives of this kind tend to believe that leadership is an intrinsic, unearned quality. New survey data from the Yale School of Management and the Gallup Organization found that out of 130 prominent chief executives surveyed, 26 percent believe that "great leaders are born and not made." Who are these leaders anointed with greatness at birth? They are the serial acquirers. Those who believe that great leaders are born have tended to invest less in their existing businesses through expanding factories, developing new products and the like, and were far more likely to prefer growth through acquisitions (some of them are considering making more than 20 acquisitions in the coming year). Those who believed that great leadership is developed through experience were less likely to be serial acquirers. Executives who build their businesses primarily on acquisitions are perhaps most susceptible to another pitfall: They tend to fly solo. Their near total control in setting strategic plans for their companies makes it difficult for subordinates or the board to critique the direction of the company. And yet, acquirers generally lack a strategic logic that can survive market changes; as a result their empires of hy pe can be undone very swiftly by market= discipline. None of this is really new. The fall of the most recent corporate acquirers provides spectacular reminders of lessons we've seen decade after decade. Jeffrey Sonnenfeld is an associate dean at the Yale School of Management and author of "The Hero's Farewell." Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: hafaka@yahoo.com (Hafaka) Subject: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? Date: 12 Jun 2002 14:06:44 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I understand that in the US even if I'm calling a number in my area code, it might not necessarily be a local call (for example, if I'm in the 713 area code and I'm calling another 713, it might be a long distance call). My question -- is there a web site where I can input my phone number and the number I wish to call in order to find out if it's a local call? And if not -- how can you tell if the call you're about to make is local? Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Richie Kennedy Subject: Telephone Error Message Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 23:04:36 -0000 Organization: route56.com I seem to be having this problem at work, where one of my jobs is to keep the telephones in line. One of our users has recently gotten error messages when she dials a specific number for a pager (Verizon Wireless, I believe). It's the standard "your call cannot be completed as dialed" message, followed by a "099T" The user can dial the pager from outside the building, but gets this message inside. I called SBC and ATT, they're not sure. VZW would help unless they have the name of the person who owns the pager (which is something I don't know, and don't need to know) Any suggestions? Richie Kennedy route56@route56.com · www.route56.com "Hello my friend we meet again" ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 20:15:15 EDT Subject: Re: Loop Current Try reversing the line polarity going to the jack where the answering machine is connected. This worked once for me, but be careful if the telephone itself is plugged in *through* the answering machine; some older touch-tone phones won't dial out on a line with reversed polarity. Bill ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 20:15:15 EDT Subject: Re: Virtual Line Around here (Pennsylvania) they have "remote call forwarding" that works exactly the way you want it. Unfortunately, changing the ring count or the forwarding destination requires (unless they've changed it lately) a call to the business office, and involves several days of waiting and a service charge. I like your "pay the landlord a few bucks" idea better. Bill ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: AT&T Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 00:41:43 GMT Ian wrote in message news:telecom20.279.10@telecom-digest.org: > I want to thank everyone who has responded to me and given me such > valuable input. Yes the time to move from AT&T is now. What's > interesting to me is that corporate America no longer values loyalty > on behalf of either employess or their customers. IMHO this attitiude > has gone so far that it does actively downgrades many corporate > performances. I worked for a large corporation for 21 years and before > I left I engaged in a heated discussion with another executive. His > final words about our employees were. "Don't they (employees) realize > they don't have careers, they have jobs?". > Well I told him "No, many of our employees believe they have careers > and they have loyalty and as far as possible we need to recognise this > and reward it. So long as it doesn't interfere with our company's > prospects or future business". I lost the discussion and the churn > rate at this corporation continues. Well similarly with end > customers. Corporations should value loyalty and give service > especially when the end customer has a variety of options. That indeed a sad commentary on the state of current corporate attitude. And AT&T is not alone. > AT&T is no longer the only game in town and they are certainly not the > cheapest. But they do have a substantial and STILL very loyal customer > base. Such as myself, who would rather have stayed a customer in > return for reasonable treatment. To use, as justification, a systems > problem, that does not allow for tweaking a package is a blind alley, > IMHO. Such systems are designed with considerable amount of time and > effort. What this tells me is that in such a process the customer's > needs did not enter into the equation as a necessary variable. Today > when "price" is "King" and "service" is buried, AT&T and other such > firms which do not value their customers, yet wish to remain in a > service business, will doubtless suffer enormous further loss of > clients going forward. And likely increasingly from their hardcore > base clients. Pretty darn sad that their Executives apparently don't > care and their BoDs are looking in the opposite direction. Probably at > missteps in the Cable business etc ... and ignoring a base business. I spent 28+ years in the (former) Bell System). AT&T was the only game in town. They still act like it. It's a shame. > Me, I am a previously steadfast loyal customer of AT&T who has turned > the corner and there will be no going back to AT&T. Oh Yes. The > suggestions and advice I have been given on this board has been also > given to friends who are customers of AT&T. Small events do > snowball, don't they ... > Thanks again. I currently have SBC for whatever they offer on my home phone, including LD. But with a cell phone with "free" long distance, so who cares. I eat the air time anyway talking across the street. Anybody remember the Twilight Zone episode about the train commuter that got off at Willoby (sp)? There have been simpler times. Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 ------------------------------ From: Larry & Wanda Finch Subject: Re: "AT&T" Jingle on Second Line Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 00:52:03 GMT Robert Switzer wrote: > I use AT&T as my home long distance carrier on both my primary and > second lines. The primary line is the typical listed number with no > added features. The second line is the typical unlisted second line. > When making a call out of the local area on my second line, I always > get the prerecorded "AT&T" jingle (as when using an AT&T calling card) > before the call connects. This *never* happens on the primary line. > Any ideas why there is a difference in behaviour between the 2 lines. > I had them connected at the same time (10 years ago), but don't know > if this behavior always happened. The "branding" signal is added on a line by line basis. You can call AT&T and have them add it to the primary line or remove it from the second line, whichever is your preference. I like it, because I know immediately when I've been slammed. Larry Finch N 40 53' 47" W 74 03' 56" ------------------------------ Subject: Detecting Forwarded Calls? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 02:32:30 GMT My cell-phone (Ericsson T-28, with Voicestream GSM service) has a wonderful feature whereby it displays "forwarded" when it gets a call that was forwarded from my home number. But how does the phone know? Joel ------------------------------ From: Jack Hamilton Subject: Re: 2 Tinkerers Say They've Found a Cheap Way to Broadband Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 22:15:10 -0700 Organization: Copyright (c) 2002 by Jack Hamilton. Reproduction without attribution and archiving without permission are not allowed. Reply-To: jfh@acm.org Monty Solomon wrote: > June 10, 2002 > 2 Tinkerers Say They've Found a Cheap Way to Broadband > By JOHN MARKOFF There's a similar article, about a different inventor, in the current San Francisco Bay Guardian: http://www.sfbg.com/36/37/cover_wireless.html I don't know how long this link will be valid. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Cable - Leased Access Rates Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 01:30:44 -0400 Author wrote: > I am doing a college research paper on the cable TV industry and looking > for information on the rates that are charged for leased access in the > following metros: I usually don't tear the heads off people who ask dumb questions, but wouldn't it make sense to contact the cable operators in those areas and just ask them what they charge? ------------------------------ From: Jack Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Announces $26 M Savings For Michigan Customers Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 14:24:42 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On Tue, 11 Jun 2002 23:45:37 -0400, Jack wrote: > DETROIT--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 11, 2002-- > Majority of Michigan customers will be converted to unlimited local > service; prices reduced by up to 30 percent > SBC Ameritech (NYSE:SBC) announced today that it will be making > sweeping changes to its existing residential customer call packages, > converting more than 75 percent of its residential customers to > unlimited local service and dramatically lowering rates for other > customers on the unlimited local plan. Boy, do I feel dumb. It took a day or two for the light to dawn, but I think I've finally figured it out. First, though, here is what WOOD-TV's consumer reporter had to say (from the station's web site, at http://www.woodtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=818275&nav=0Rcd9ZuK ): [Begin quote:] The offer sounds great, but is there more to it than being competitive with TDS Metrocom, AT&T and MCI? We've discovered Ameritech is looking forward to entering the long distance market by year's end. TDS Metrocom's Gleason says that's really why Ameritech is offering unlimited local service, "They are now being forced to be competitive in order to get into the long-distance market," she says. "They've been in the long-distance market in other states, but not this one." Before long distance becomes a reality for Ameritech, it must get a recommendation from the Michigan Public Service Commission and final approval from the Federal Communication Commission. By lowering rates and offering unlimited local tolls for the first time in company history, Ameritech believes it is one step closer to gaining long distance approval. [End quote.] The "buzz" surrounding this story is that Ameritech HAD to do this because there is SO MUCH COMPETITION. This is exactly what Ameritech has been trying to convince state and federal regulators of for years. Right now they are about 3/4 of the way through a 24-month plan that (they hope) would gain them approval to offer long distance service in Michigan. So maybe this event, complete with press hoopla, was designed to convince the press and the public that there really is active competition for the local service market in Michigan. The only problem is that when you look at the numbers, Ameritech hasn't really lost that much of its residential market to competition yet (although the number of Ameritech defectors is definitely growing). And the Michigan Public Service Commission is keeping a file of recent Ameritech actions that they consider anticompetitive. So even if Ameritech manages to convince the public, it's going to be a lot harder sell to the regulators, who need only pull out the record of Ameritech's actions over the past couple of years. And of course, what I wonder is what happens the day AFTER Ameritech gets approval to offer long distance in Michigan. Do they suddenly go back to making life miserable for competitors (some would probably say they've never really stopped)? Do they decide to withdraw the new pricing plans they just announced? One reason I see cause for concern is that I live in an area of Michigan served by Verizon (formerly GTE). GTE was granted approval to offer long distance in Michigan a few years ago, and somehow that approval was automatically continued post-merger. Guess how much local service competition there is in the Michigan Verizon exchanges right now? I would say that well under 1% of Verizon customers are served by competitive carriers (resellers, actually). Most news articles on the subject, if they mention Verizon at all, note that Verizon still has 100% of the customers in their service area. And nobody seems to want to explain why AT&T, MCI, TDS Metrocom, and other local service providers that offer service in Ameritech Michigan exchanges, seem reluctant to enter the Verizon exchanges (even though AT&T and MCI, at least, compete with Verizon in other states). So in the Verizon exchanges there is no competition, and of course, no plans offering local service, custom calling features, and unlimited intraLATA calling for $50 a month. Makes you wonder what Ameritech might do once they gain approval. What has happened in other SBC states once long distance approval has been granted? Jack As sugar dissolves in a hot beverage, so my From: e-mail address dissolves once the spammers find it! Resources for Michigan Telephone Users page: http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 19:37:38 +0100 From: Subject: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available NEW DOMAIN NAMES: ".USA " and ".US States" now available YOU CAN HAVE A DOMAIN NAME LIKE: "www . yourname . USA " or "www . yourname . NY" or "www . yourname . TEXAS" (or any US state) SEARCH FOR THESE NEW DOMAIN NAMES AT: http://www.dotworlds.net ------------------------------ From: nysharan@yahoo.com (Sid S.) Subject: Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? Date: 13 Jun 2002 12:42:28 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ On the same note: What is required to start a Calling Card Business? What are the important components of the entire business? (Calls will be terminated outside the U.S.) Thanks a lot, Sid ------------------------------ From: NETco2@aol.com Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 16:19:57 EDT Subject: Dial Tone Difference Between Europe and North America We have a customer who has our voice mail system, but their customers in Europe cannot access their voice mail because of differences in dial tone between U.S. and Europe. Is there a fix for this? Thanks, Jane Webb ------------------------------ Reply-To: Mike Easter From: Mike Easter Subject: Easy Receive Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 20:22:21 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - West What is the easiest and most economical way for me to achieve the equivalent of Brother's Easy Receive on a computer? Currently I have a cheap little sheetfed heat stylus Brother fax machine in tandem with a digital answering machine which function adequately for my very modest occasional fax and answering machine needs, but I would like to change what I have in the fax department. If I configure the Brother to do so, it is capable of "snooping" on the line when any extension has gone offhook to answer a call. If it detects sending faxtones, it can fax receive. Thus, it can also answer faxes if the answering machine [which is plugged into it] and pick up and kill the TAD if fax tones send it into receive. Brother calls this Easy Receive. I currently have that feature disabled. I use a lan, hub + cable modem for my internet. I have 3 modems, el cheapo internal data/fax/voice MSP 5900U v90 which ATI3 sez HSP MicroModem and ATI4 sez DataFax Voice Speakerphone & at+fclass 0,1,8; an external ATT DataPort 14.4/fax at+fclass 0,1,2; and another external noname datafax 14.4 which also says at+fclass 0,1,2. I use those and sometimes the Brother for tinkering with fax graphics experiments, as I have two phone lines. As far as I can tell, these modems and the software I've experimented, Windows old Messaging, Ring Central and one other I forget, cannot handle the "snooping" or proper loop current drop detection, which I don't know much about, but which seems to knock a fax receiving modem off when an extension which answered the call is hung up. I only want the computer faxmodem to answer if it is "picking up" fax sending tones by snooping on the line when some other extension has gone offhook and I don't want to have to go offhook with the computer manually. And, I want the computer to go back onhook properly after the fax has been received. What is the easiest and most economical way for me to achieve similar to Easy Receive on the computer? I don't need or want any voice mail functionality. Will I need a different/ another/ modem? Is there a cheap one? I have no other need for a "decent" modem because of the cable modem for internet. Posted in comp.dcom.telecom and comp.dcom.modems. Mike Easter ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Last Laugh! "Plans" (was Re: AT&T) Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 22:03:41 GMT In article , Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: > What's next? "Mailing plans" from the post office? They already have them. Bulk mailers get different rates than the rest of us. And package delivery services (UPS, FedEx, etc.) probably also have different plans. Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net Genuity, Woburn, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me; I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #280 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jun 14 20:25:45 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA04107; Fri, 14 Jun 2002 20:25:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 20:25:45 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206150025.UAA04107@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #281 TELECOM Digest Fri, 14 Jun 2002 20:26:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 281 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (John R. Levine) Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (Kenneth P. Stox) Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (The Poster) Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (jsw@ivgate.omahug.org) [FRAUD ALERT] Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (Robert Bonomi) Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? (Joseph Singer) Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? (Jerry Mendes) Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? (Rich Greenberg) Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? (NOSPAM) Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? (Dave Garland) Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? (Pete Weiss) Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? (Phil Smiley) Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? (J on the phone) Re: Telephone Error Message (VP) Re: Telephone Error Message (Wlevant@aol.com) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (KB7M) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 13 Jun 2002 20:22:33 -0400 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA This is a scam. The only people who can use these domains are the 0.000000001% of the net who use their name servers. Take a look at new.net who tried to do the same thing, and even made deals with some large ISPs including Earthlink, Netzero, and Prodigy to add their names to the ISPs servers. How many people do you know with new.net domains like .tech or .kids? Well, these guys are a large step down from new.net. Caveat Suckor. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies" Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "Just how much hay did we buy?" asked Tom, balefully. In article you write: > NEW DOMAIN NAMES: ".USA " and ".US States" now available > YOU CAN HAVE A DOMAIN NAME LIKE: > "www . yourname . USA " > "www . yourname . NY" > "www . yourname . TEXAS" > (or any US state) > SEARCH FOR THESE NEW DOMAIN NAMES AT: http://www.dotworlds.net ------------------------------ From: Kenneth P. Stox Subject: Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 21:38:16 -0500 director@dotworlds.net wrote: > NEW DOMAIN NAMES: ".USA " and ".US States" now available > YOU CAN HAVE A DOMAIN NAME LIKE: > "www . yourname . USA " > "www . yourname . NY" > "www . yourname . TEXAS" > (or any US state) > SEARCH FOR THESE NEW DOMAIN NAMES AT: http://www.dotworlds.net Of course, someone should mention that these domains will not work with most ISP's, as these are not official TLD's. ------------------------------ From: The Poster Subject: Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 09:57:41 -0500 Another misleading posting. There are NO ICANN sanctioned .USA domains. Period. Nor are there any .. domains. The only legitimate .USA is the one operated by ADNS (www.adns.net). I use the term "legitimate" because ADNS was the first to claim that TLD from IANA and although ICANN doesnt have it listed, it is visible in the Inclusive Namespace which is used by between 5% and 30% of the internet users worldwide. (These are from various guestimates, some scientific and some not so scientific). Only ADNS operates the original and authentic .USA. No one else. The US Federal Trade Commission closed down one operation (dotusa.com) for failing to notify its potential customers that its .USA was not ICANN sanctioned and therefore not universally visible. ADNS takes great pains to inform its users that we are NOT ICANN sanctioned and that we are NOT visible to the entire internet due to an accident of history (that most OS's with BIND, the DNS server software comes with a root-server file pointing to the USG/ICANN root servers) It does not appear that DOTWORLDS has operational GTLD servers for their domains. ADNS has been fully operational since 1995 with GTLD servers which are fully backed up by UltraDNS. ADNS is listed in both the Open Root Server Consortium network (www.open-rsc.org) and PACROOT (www.pacroot.net) as well as several other root server networks. DOTWORLDS does not appear to be listed in any RSNs, nor would their .USA be able to be listed since it is a collider and the existing root server networks recoginze ADNS as the legitimate claimant for .USA. ADNS is working hard to promote the Inclusive Namespace and is involved in developing the industry. ADNS is involved with the Top Level Domain Association, a trade organization of TLD holders (www.tlda.net). ADNS has also created a shared registry system called The Inclusive Namespace Registry System (INRS) and will deploy it in production at the end of this month with several registries and registrars. Do not be fooled by people making claims that do not include disclaimers as to visibility. Also realize that DOTWORLDS is guilty of creating a collision in the namespace by creating their own version of .USA. They were informed that .USA was taken already and have ignored requests to cease and desist from operating a colliding TLD that has been in service since September 1995. Thank you for your attention to this matter. > SEARCH FOR THESE NEW DOMAIN NAMES AT: http://www.dotworlds.net ------------------------------ From: jsw@ivgate.omahug.org Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 13:25:19 CDT Subject: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available > NEW DOMAIN NAMES: ".USA " and ".US States" now available Yeah, right !! Unless you and everybody who connects to you plays some DNS games, these will not work. Alternic and a few others have been tried previously and never caught on. ------------------------------ Subject: [FRAUD ALERT] Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available From: robert@bonomi.invalid Reply-To: bonomi@agresource.com Organization: Not Much Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 21:54:11 GMT Just in case anybody *thought* about believing this cr*p -- Yes, you can 'register' these names through these folks. *BUT*, practically *nobody* will be able to reach anything using any of those addresses. These 'top-level' domains have *NOT* been approved by the 'cabal' that really runs things (ICANN -- see their web-page on new "top-level" domains at It _is_ a fraud. Register under the two-letter abbreviation for California, and the rest of the world will look for you in the Canada name-servers -- Which will *NOT* know anything about you. Try the two- letter abbreviation for Illinois, and you collide with Israel. And there's no 'goy' in that. The Feds closed down somebody a few months ago, for running *exactly* this same scam. Selling 'registrations' for unworkable domains. PAT -- I thought you would have known better than to publish something like this, at least not without checking. UNLESS it included a sarcastic/cynical comment making it clear that it _was_ fraudulent. > (or any US state) > SEARCH FOR THESE NEW DOMAIN NAMES AT: http://www.dotworlds.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Bob, I *did* check into this a bit and it did seem rather peculiar to me also. Not to say it was totally impossible, just a bit peculiar and rather unlikely. I put it here knowing by this time the next day (like now) I would have lots of messages from experts on the topic and it would recieve a lot of publicity from better sources than myself. The trouble is Bob, I have seen that particular message in at least a half-dozen well trafficed newsgroups and I am sure most readers (of those newsgroups) did not give it a tenth of the attention that you (and many others here) did. I am sure many folks have sent dotworlds.com their hard earned money and are wondering why no one is coming to see their web sites, etc. By putting it here, I assured that a half dozen (at least) of you guys would bitch and moan about it and a few thousand (at least) others here would read it and chatter about it elsewhere. Ergo, my mission accomplished; continuing to spread the word about the scams on the net. Thank you and the other guys for helping out and playing along. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 17:57:56 -0700 Organization: Drizzle Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On 12 Jun 2002 14:06:44 -0700, hafaka@yahoo.com (Hafaka) wrote: > I understand that in the US even if I'm calling a number in my area > code, it might not necessarily be a local call (for example, if I'm in > the 713 area code and I'm calling another 713, it might be a long > distance call). > My question -- is there a web site where I can input my phone number > and the number I wish to call in order to find out if it's a local > call? And if not -- how can you tell if the call you're about to make > is local? Houston has "toll alerting" so that all local calls are dialed as 10 digits i.e. area code plus number. If you dial a number as 10 digits and it's a toll call you will get a recording instructing you to dial 1 before the call. Personal replies most likely will not be read. Please reply in the newsgroup ------------------------------ From: Jerry Mendes Subject: Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 23:13:49 -0000 Organization: DataComm Insights hafaka@yahoo.com (Hafaka) wrote in news:telecom20.280.2@telecom-digest.org: > I understand that in the US even if I'm calling a number in my area > code, it might not necessarily be a local call (for example, if I'm in > the 713 area code and I'm calling another 713, it might be a long > distance call). > My question -- is there a web site where I can input my phone number > and the number I wish to call in order to find out if it's a local > call? And if not -- how can you tell if the call you're about to make > is local? I'm not sure if there's a Web site that will tell you, but you can always call the "0" Operator (the local Ameritech operator) and give the area code and prefix of the number you're calling. The operator will immediately be able to give you the correct answer. This used to be easier, until the RBOCs installed computer-voice operators to handle many routine requests ... just don't push any buttons after the initial 0, so it will default to a live operator. Jerry Mendes, Principal Consultant Voice: (415) 381-5500 DataComm Insights FAX: (415) 381-5502 150 Seminary Drive Email: mendes@nospam.datacomm- insights.com Mill Valley, California 94941 http://www.datacomm- insights.com ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? Date: 13 Jun 2002 19:47:03 -0400 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , Hafaka wrote: > I understand that in the US even if I'm calling a number in my area > code, it might not necessarily be a local call (for example, if I'm in > the 713 area code and I'm calling another 713, it might be a long > distance call). > My question -- is there a web site where I can input my phone number > and the number I wish to call in order to find out if it's a local > call? And if not -- how can you tell if the call you're about to make > is local? Depends on the state you are in. If you are in a "toll-alerting" state, a local call requires 7 or 10 digits. No leading "1". A toll call requires a leading "1" and usually 10 digits following the 1. Some "toll-alerting" states permit the leading "1" on local calls, others reject calls with the leading "1" that don't require it. If you are not in a "toll-alerting" state, you have to ask telco or look in the front of the phone book to find out. Rich Greenberg Work: Rich.Greenberg atsign worldspan.com +1 770-563-6656 N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign panix.com +1 770-321-6507 Eastern time zone. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT), Red & Shasta(Husky,(RIP)) Owner:Chinook-L Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/ Asst Owner:Sibernet-L ------------------------------ From: NOSPAM Subject: Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 03:55:16 GMT The information that you are requesting can be found @ http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? Organization: Wizard Information Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 00:20:19 -0500 It was a dark and stormy night when hafaka@yahoo.com (Hafaka) wrote: > how can you tell if the call you're about to make > is local? In some states, a call that is not local won't go through without dialing a "1" first. Periodically there are heated debates here in TELECOM Digest about whether that is a good or bad idea. Often your local telephone directory will have a list of exchanges (and/or area codes) that are local. There are some localities where the rules are so complex that the question is almost meaningless, such as where even (some or all) local calls may incur a charge depending on the distance, or suburb, maybe (or maybe not) on top of a fixed per-call charge (which might be after you'd used up a preset number of "free" calls). Perhaps (or perhaps not) discounted for time of day. When I lived in Chicago, that was the situation there. You pretty much just had to take the telco's word for it on what you owed. Best bet, call your local telephone service's business office and ask them. ------------------------------ From: pete-weiss@psu.edu (Pete Weiss) Subject: Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 07:42:13 -0400 Organization: Penn State University -- Office of Administrative Systems On 12 Jun 2002 14:06:44 -0700, hafaka@yahoo.com (Hafaka) wrote: > I understand that in the US even if I'm calling a number in my area > code, it might not necessarily be a local call (for example, if I'm in > the 713 area code and I'm calling another 713, it might be a long > distance call). Area Codes and toll charging are independent. Any db will probably be inherently flawed unless it can be very very specific. If you are calling from a POTS, cellular (specific dialing plans, taking into account previously made calls during the monthly billing period), or LNPed phone could make all the difference. Also, some calls might be measured (time) and some flat (per call). Good Luck. Pete ------------------------------ From: Phil Smiley Subject: Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 14:59:23 GMT Contact your phone company to get a list of the codes that are local ... all else is LD. ------------------------------ From: 617@volcanomail.com (J on the phone) Subject: Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? Date: 14 Jun 2002 13:38:56 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Don't know of any website that will let you check that out, though it would be very useful. The best source is the easiest. Dial "0" and ask the operator. Giving that information is one of the few things for which your phone company will not charge you. Every phone company is required to furnish rate information to its customers at no charge. Just dial the operator and ask him/her if it's a local call to the specific area code and prefix. ------------------------------ From: VP Subject: Re: Telephone Error Message Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 19:10:10 -0400 Have SBC check the originating number for the possibility it is marked for "ANI7" In a 5ESS on the 1.6 view there is a field for ANI7 it should be marked "N". In a Siemens EWSD the parameter is ANIDIG=7 which would need to be removed. I don't know DMS translations, so I can't offer the specific fix, but if you're served out of a DMS switch, a DMS tech will know where to look for ANI7. I've encountered this type of trouble and paging companies that won't accept calls from coin, coinless, hotel/motel or inmate phones will block calls with ANI7. I removed the feature from the line and all became well again! Hope this helps ... Victor Richie Kennedy wrote about Telephone Error Message: > I seem to be having this problem at work, where one of my jobs is > to keep the telephones in line. One of our users has recently gotten > error messages when she dials a specific number for a pager (Verizon > Wireless, I believe). It's the standard "your call cannot be > completed as dialed" message, followed by a "099T" > The user can dial the pager from outside the building, but gets this > message inside. I called SBC and ATT, they're not sure. VZW > would not help unless they have the name of the person who owns the > pager (which is something I don't know, and don't need to know). > Any suggestions? ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 23:01:35 EDT Subject: Re: Telephone Error Message > One of our users has recently gotten error messages when she dials a > specific number for a pager (Verizon Wireless, I believe). > Any suggestions? Yes. It sounds like either your system's routing table is sending the call out on a trunk group that can't complete a call to that destination (such as, sending it out on an out WATS that can't complete local calls) or else the number dialed is being mishandled in the translation table (e.g., a 1- is being added or deleted from what the user actually dials, or (if you still have 7 digit dialing) the system is sending out ten digits and the trunk is only expecting 7. Bill ------------------------------ From: KB7M Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 15:58:43 -0600 "Norm" wrote in message news:telecom20.270.7@telecom-digest.org: > Why all these Korean spams tho? They make no sense (obviously). I thought I had just gotten unlucky enough to be on someone's list. I get probably a dozen or more of these a day. While I do speak more than one language, Korean is not one of the ones that I can speak or read. Is there a way to filter (using outlook express) based on text encoding? I would love to dump anything Korean (and a few other languages) into the bit bucket. If this cannot be done in Outlook Express, are there any SMTP mail/news readers that can do this? I could probably be persuaded to switch. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #281 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Jun 15 23:56:54 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA23023; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 23:56:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 23:56:54 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206160356.XAA23023@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #282 TELECOM Digest Sat, 15 Jun 2002 23:55:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 282 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Detecting Forwarded Calls? (NOSPAM) Re: Surplus TIE Phone System (NOSPAM) Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing (CS) Re: Cable - Leased Access Rates (Author) RBOC Long Distance (LARB0) New Radio Station (New Yorker) Re: AT&T (John David Galt) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (John R. Levine) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (Bill Horne) PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (pendrive@buyercorp.biz) Re: [FRAUD ALERT] Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (Linc Madison) Re: [FRAUD ALERT] Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (H. Peter Anvin) Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (Phil Earnhardt) Re: Competition? (Syd Barrett) Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? (Jack) Re: Last Laugh! "Plans" (was Re: AT&T) (robert@bonomi.invalid) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NOSPAM Subject: Re: Detecting Forwarded Calls? Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 03:54:20 GMT Packet of data that contains the network routing information. Here's another useful link: Here's a link for more details: http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote in message news:telecom20.280.8@telecom-digest.org: > My cell-phone (Ericsson T-28, with Voicestream GSM service) has a > wonderful feature whereby it displays "forwarded" when it gets a call > that was forwarded from my home number. > But how does the phone know? ------------------------------ From: NOSPAM Subject: Re: Surplus TIE Phone System Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 03:59:03 GMT Probably not worth $200.00 Visit http://www.nativesun1.com/ as they handle a lot of TIE. Also try http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm Eric wrote in message news:telecom20.279.8@telecom-digest.org: > I have a 12-phone system with computer, monitor, cables. Phones are > made by Nitsuko America, Shelton Ct 203-926-5400, 20 lines, labeling > "MFG CODE 66151995, type "88261B, TIE/ONYX-DTS STD 30B-HF" > My contractor-neighbor got this from a remodel job. Does anyone have > use for any part of this system? Is it worth $200? Of course it would > be 100% money-back guaranteed. I'm not in business, just want it to go > to some use. ------------------------------ From: google@fasttrackmonkey.com (CS) Subject: Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing Date: 14 Jun 2002 00:10:42 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ pete-weiss@psu.edu (Pete Weiss) wrote in message news:: > On Wed, 15 May 2002 13:24:11 -0400, Steve Michelson > wrote: >> Find out what the deactivation code for call forwarding is, and dial >> it. See if that fixes the problem. > If this fixes the problem, then the subscriber would never have > successfully received any calls that were more than 1/2 ring long. Just an update ... Three trouble tickets later (all closed without notification) I've still got the rings. Tried a few different phones. They all register the ring; some longer some shorter. Called again today and they are sending someone out tomorrow. Why? I don't know. I don't have call forwarding on my line. Another note that I did not include originally is that when I moved in, the previous tenant did not cancel service (but was delinquent, no LD no regional calls - had to fax a copy of my lease to get my order put through) and the phone worked fine. No "phantom rings". The day that they cut it over to my number this started and has continued ever since. Thanks for all the input. It looks like I'll have to be the squeaky wheel and start with the "President's Office" then go to the PUC. This shouldn't be so hard. CS ------------------------------ From: jm04469@yahoo.com (Author) Subject: Re: Cable - Leased Access Rates Date: 14 Jun 2002 03:09:28 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ If the cable companies provided the information freely of course it would be quicker. But you should also avoid posting dumb answers. ------------------------------ From: larb0@aol.com (LARB0) Date: 14 Jun 2002 12:00:10 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: RBOC Long Distance Since the RBOCs have no interstate network of their own, they'll need to buy capacity from an IXC. Who are they using at the present time? Is there a single source I can use to find out? Bruce Larrabee ------------------------------ From: New Yorker Subject: New Radio Station Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 16:45:49 -0400 Hi, I have a very generic question and I wonder if you can point me in the right direction. I have ideas. I have funds. I want to create a Radio Station on AM (later on FM) and would like to know where I can get info on that. Where to begin? Is there any source on the internet or in books on how to do it? Thank you, Slava newyorker1970@hotmail.com New York City [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You'd be better off asking in my other Digest, called 'rec.radio.broadcasting' (Airwaves Digest). If you are in New York City, I sincerely doubt there are *any* frequencies available on FM or AM ... I know that in Chicago, my former home, a company wanted to begin an FM station, and they wound up purchasing one of the two classical music outlets (WNIB at 97.1). Actually what they did was buy the right to be on the frequency and they bought the transmitter. They 'only' had to pay $165 million for it. But as you said, you have the funds available. Sonia Florian, the lady who owned and operated WNIB for more than 40 years, from sometime in the 1950's left with a profit of about $160 million; not bad for what you had spent 40 plus years of your life doing. But her two full time announcers (who had likewise been with her for about 40 years) and her listeners who had been with the station for 25-30 years depending, were rather annoyed with Sonia when she sold out. None of them could understand why Sonia would sell out ... I guess the $165 million was quite a lure. But if you want an FM station in a big city these days, that's the way you do business. Now, you can purchase an LPFM station for considerably less, (low power) but maybe those of you who know the big city routine these days can tell me is there *any* frequency space available for those in New York City? I would suggest, New Yorker, that you go to one or more of the rec.radio* newgroups to post this question and get the bad news in person. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John David Galt Subject: Re: AT&T Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 14:29:43 -0700 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Herb Stein wrote: > I spent 28+ years in the (former) Bell System). AT&T was the only > game in town. They still act like it. It's a shame. If only they still acted like it. Back in "Ma Bell" days, operators were nice about things like refunding misdialed calls; calls to customer service were answered by human beings; and they never telemarketed. Nowadays, I would really love to find a phone company with any of the above three features. Even if it cost twice as much. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jun 2002 20:21:44 -0400 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> Why all these Korean spams tho? They make no sense (obviously). Korea spent a lot of money wiring up schools to the Internet, but forgot to budget any money for competent people to set up and run the networks. For this and other reasons, incredible amounts of spam gush out of the country, both relayed from the U.S. and of Korean origin, much in Korean. > I would love to dump anything Korean (and a few other > languages) into the bit bucket. I have a blocking list called korea.services.net that mail system owners can use to block or tag anything coming from Korean networks with a spam problem (nearly all of them.) John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Bill Horne Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? Organization: William Warren Consulting Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 01:27:59 GMT KB7M wrote in message news:telecom20.281.16@telecom-digest.org: > "Norm" wrote in message > news:telecom20.270.7@telecom-digest.org: >> Why all these Korean spams tho? They make no sense (obviously). > I thought I had just gotten unlucky enough to be on someone's list. I > get probably a dozen or more of these a day. While I do speak more > than one language, Korean is not one of the ones that I can speak or > read. Is there a way to filter (using outlook express) based on text > encoding? I would love to dump anything Korean (and a few other > languages) into the bit bucket. If this cannot be done in Outlook > Express, are there any SMTP mail/news readers that can do this? I > could probably be persuaded to switch. They're not "Korean" spams: they're from the US, but they're routed through open relays in Korea in order to hide the spammers home base. Since many ISPs are blackholing the entire Korean IP space, it's only a matter of time before they clean up their act -- which will mean the spammers have to find another country to route through. The best thing you can do is learn to use the antispam tools at http://www.samspade.org and http://www.spamcop.net, and complain to the ISPs where the spams are first injected. More to the point, complain to the upstream providers of the ISPs that harbor the sites advertised in the spams, and support spam prevention efforts like SPEWS. (http://www.spews.org). Last, but not least, write (in LONGHAND! It's important!!) to your elected representatives and tell them you don't like spam and ask what they're doing to stop it. HTH. Bill Horne ------------------------------ From: pendrive@buyercorp.biz Reply-To: Subject: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 20:11:26 +1200 Buyercorp is proud to introduce the Pen Drive, the world's first USB Hard Drive that is about the size of your thumb. Requiring no cables, power supplies, or batteries you will be able to transfer data to and from any computer at high speeds via the USB port. The Pen Drive is an innovation that finally does take care of today's data transferring and storing needs. Pen Drive uses durable solid state storage with no moving parts thus making it shock resistant able to withstand the bumps and grinds of everyday use. This useful tool will allow people working in the computer field, corporate executives and students to carry vital data, and move data seamlessly from computer to computer thus increasing productivity. As we were able to go direct to the manufacturer, we are able to bring you these drives at the lowest prices (with a special introductory pricing starting at $20). Capacities shipping currently are 16Mb, 32MB, 64MB, 128MB and 256MB modules. To find out more, please go to: http://www.buyercorp.biz [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About the size of my thumb?? Only $20 ?? I'm *almost* tempted to send them $20 to see what I get in return, but somehow I get the feeling that deals like this which are too good to be true usually aren't. Does anyone feel rich enough today to try them out and let all of us know the results? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: [FRAUD ALERT] Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 02:13:40 -0700 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , wrote: > Just in case anybody *thought* about believing this cr*p -- > Yes, you can 'register' these names through these folks. > *BUT*, practically *nobody* will be able to reach anything using any > of those addresses. These 'top-level' domains have *NOT* been > approved by the 'cabal' that really runs things (ICANN -- see their > web-page on new "top-level" domains at Oh, but anyone will be able to reach the new domains ... IF they download and install the special new software. > It _is_ a fraud. Register under the two-letter abbreviation for > California, and the rest of the world will look for you in the Canada > name-servers -- Which will *NOT* know anything about you. Try the > two- letter abbreviation for Illinois, and you collide with Israel. > And there's no 'goy' in that. Actually, for that reason, only half of the two-letter state abbreviations are available, since KY = Cayman Islands, MS = Montserrat, MT = Malta, NC = New Caledonia, SD = Sudan, etc. That leaves AK CT FL HI IA KS ME MI ND NH NJ NM NV NY OH OK OR RI TX UT VT WA WI WV WY for the U.S. states. > The Feds closed down somebody a few months ago, for running *exactly* > this same scam. Selling 'registrations' for unworkable domains. Of course, there are several reasons to be suspicious right on the web site for the scam. They switched the logos for the states of Ohio and Washington, and have numerous typos, such as "Were do I host my web site" in the FAQ. Another itty-bitty little clue is that you can still register such domains as microsoft.wa and yahoo.california. If this were a real deal, do you believe for an instant that those names would still be open to the first person who plunks down $15.00? I found no mention of any ability to compel release of a domain name that infringes someone else's trademark. It seems the only trademarks they're concerned about are their own -- the name "dotworlds" is unavailable in all 76 of their supposed TLDs. Just for the sake of completeness, here are the state abbreviations that clash with two-letter national domains: AL Albania AR Argentina AZ Azerbaijan CA Canada CO Colombia DE Germany GA Gabon ID Indonesia IL Israel IN India KY Cayman Islands LA Laos MA Morocco MD Moldova MN Mongolia MO Macao MS Montserrat MT Malta NC New Caledonia NE Niger PA Panama SC Seychelles SD Sudan TN Tunisia VA Vatican City The two-letter postal abbreviations for several US territories are already in use as ICANN-approved TLDs: PR = Puerto Rico, VI = U.S. Virgin Islands, MP = Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, GU = Guam, PW = Palau, etc. For example, is the official site of the Puerto Rico territorial government (in Spanish). There are also conflicts with some of the Canadian postal abbrev's, should anyone try to expand this scam in that direction: NF Norfolk Island NU Niue SK Slovakia YT Mayotte. Naturally, whenever a country or territory requests a new two-letter abbreviation through the ISO (whence the existing ccTLDs, except for UK for the United Kingdom, which is GB in the ISO listing), they won't be bothered about conflicts with two-letter U.S. state abbrev's, and so one of those 25 could disappear at any moment. For example, Croatia got the abbreviation HR (for Hrvatska, the Croatian name for Croatia); if they had instead wanted CT, they would have conflicted with Connecticut. Even though I know quite well that .ca is Canada, it still took me a long time to get over looking at the domain "sfu.ca" and thinking that it had to have something to do with San Francisco or California. (It's actually Simon Fraser University in greater Vancouver, BC.) www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: H. Peter Anvin Subject: Re: [FRAUD ALERT] Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available Date: 15 Jun 2002 11:15:40 -0700 Organization: Transmeta Corporation, Santa Clara CA > It _is_ a fraud. Register under the two-letter abbreviation for > California, and the rest of the world will look for you in the Canada > name-servers -- Which will *NOT* know anything about you. Try the > two- letter abbreviation for Illinois, and you collide with Israel. > And there's no 'goy' in that. That being said, the domains .ca.us and .il.us *do* exist, and in fact have been having registrations for a very long time (I used to run a system called viking.chi.il.us almost 10 years ago.) The .us domain we recently given out to a commercial entity to exploit -- Jon Postel must be spinning in his grave. -hpa at work, in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 10:06:43 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com On Thu, 13 Jun 2002 19:37:38 +0100, wrote: > YOU CAN HAVE A DOMAIN NAME LIKE: > "www . yourname . USA " > or > "www . yourname . NY" > or > "www . yourname . TEXAS" > (or any US state) > SEARCH FOR THESE NEW DOMAIN NAMES AT: http://www.dotworlds.net The fact that these guys didn't even use a one of their own so-called domains to promote themselves should have been the red flag. After all, who could possibly resist buying countless services from a site like www.dotworlds.TEXAS ? (Of course, I only used TEXAS because the spammer did.) phil ------------------------------ From: Syd Barrett Subject: Re: Competition? Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 21:21:52 GMT Fred Goldstein wrote in message news:telecom20.272.1@telecom-digest.org: > On Wed, 05 Jun 2002 18:07:34 -0700 John Higdon > said, > Not entirely true, depending on the meaning of "plant" above. There > are multiple models of competitive telecom service. One is "resale", > wherein the "CLEC" is really just a commissioned sales agent for the > ILEC service. This is just competition for the business office, not > the network. It was, AFAIK, cooked up by ILECs as a substitute for > real competition. Fortunately, it is not getting traction. Why doesn't the US try the modified resale plan where there is a facilities holding company that *only* owns the pipes, and sells to *all* telcos (ILEC and CLEC) alike at the *same* wholesale rates? This to me seems the most practical plan. You get an even playing-field for all LEC's as well as the elimination of redundant network buildout. Although I think that wired and wireless redundancy is something worth exploring. Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.370 / Virus Database: 205 - Release Date: 6/6/2002 ------------------------------ From: Jack Subject: Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 18:31:36 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On 12 Jun 2002 14:06:44 -0700, hafaka@yahoo.com (Hafaka) wrote: > I understand that in the US even if I'm calling a number in my area > code, it might not necessarily be a local call (for example, if I'm in > the 713 area code and I'm calling another 713, it might be a long > distance call). > My question -- is there a web site where I can input my phone number > and the number I wish to call in order to find out if it's a local > call? And if not -- how can you tell if the call you're about to make > is local? Unfortunately, that is one of the problems with the U.S. telephone system. There's no easy answer, the answer varies from location to location and from telephone company to telephone company, and in some areas, it depends on your calling plan. I'll use Michigan as an example, just to show how convoluted things can get. Until maybe 10-15 years ago, the phone companies all published a chart in the local phone directory showing which exchanges were a local call from any of the exchanges covered by that directory. To their credit, Verizon still does this. However, Ameritech discontinued this practice, and from where I sit it looks as though they have done everything they possibly can to cause confusion about what's local and what is toll. Historically, Michigan was always a toll-alerting state - that is, if you dialed a call without dialing a "1" first, and the call was toll, you'd reach a recording. However, dialing a call with 1+area code+number would usually go through (depending on the phone company and how the switch was programmed) - I guess they assumed that if you were willing to dial it as a toll call, you wouldn't be upset if it turned out to be local. The problem with that is that if you dial a carrier access code (101XXXX) first, the switch will generally hand it off to your long distance carrier and you'll get charged for it, even if it is a local call. Back in November or thereabouts, Ameritech just unilaterally decided to require all calls that cross area code boundaries to be dialed using 1+area code+number, regardless of whether the call is local or toll. Only Ameritech pulled this stunt - Verizon did not. So now those who live adjacent to an area code boundary and who place calls across that boundary have no reliable way to tell in advance whether the call will be considered local or toll. This may be especially true if the call terminates at a CLEC exchange. There have been a few reported instances where Ameritech was not properly completing calls to adjacent CLEC exchanges as local calls. The ONLY way to get that sort of thing fixed is to report it to the Michigan Public Service Commission - when that happens it usually gets fixed within a day, but Ameritech's repair service either doesn't seem to know how to process that kind of call, or maybe they just cannot believe that a customer might actually know what should or should not be a local call, or that one of their switches could possibly be incorrectly programmed. Now, SBC/Ameritech does have a "Local Call Lookup" web site where you can supposedly go to find out what your local calling areas is. The only problem is that they don't seem to put a high priority on keeping it accurate. When local calling was expanded in Michigan last fall, it took them weeks to get the enlarged calling areas on that site. When the local calling area for Mackinac Island (think of the movie, "Somewhere in Time") was enlarged back in February, it again to them several weeks to show it on that site - and when they did, it showed a local calling area much larger than what Mackinac Island actually had (I think they had put in the data for the local calling area of St. Ignace, instead of Mackinac Island). It took maybe about another month for that to get fixed. And another thing about the Local Call Lookup - if you put in a non-Ameritech exchange (and in particular, a Verizon exchange in Michigan), it will in some cases try to display the local calling area anyway, but in that case the accuracy is really not a given. In most such cases, it shows last year's non-expanded calling areas. But if you are an SBC/Ameritech customer, it's *probably* accurate for your exchange, provided you don't mind data that may be a month or two old. It can be accessed at: http://www.ameritech.com/content/0,3086,185,00.html Unfortunately, Verizon doesn't have a similar site, but since they still publish the local calling area in the phone books, it's not really a problem. Then there is always the local calling area chart that I put together, that lists all the Michigan exchanges and what I believe to be their local calling areas. Where phone company tariffs are available online, I could ascertain the local calling areas (this is assuming that you can trust phone company tariff sheets, and I've even found errors in those, including one independent phone company that included an exchange boundary map in one of their tariffs for the wrong exchange entirely!). So the calling areas for Ameritech, Verizon, CenturyTel, and some of the other independent company exchanges should be accurate. But I don't guarantee 100% accuracy, especially with regard to the small independents that don't put their tariffs online. That chart is at: http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/local/ The Merit network has a Local Calling Area Searchbase that is also supposed to be valid for all Michigan exchanges. It is pretty accurate, although I happen to know that it doesn't include the full calling areas for some of the Barry County Telephone Company exchanges (my chart didn't either until a couple of weeks ago - BCTC expanded their local calling areas without raising their rates, thus they did not have to file an application with the Michigan Public Service Commission, so nobody realized they had done it, except perhaps their customers!) Now where things get really interesting is if you buy into the just-introduced calling plan from Ameritech that includes unlimited local calling within your LATA. The way I look at this is that Ameritech has not really increased the size of the local calling area - they have simply come up with a toll calling plan that allows unlimited toll and zone calling within the caller's LATA (and they could take it away any time if they wanted to). Besides trying to make the point to regulators that competition was so intense that they had to offer such a plan to remain competitive, another reason this plan was probably offered was partially in response to MCI's "Neighborhood Complete" plan, which I suspect was generating a lot of interest in the Detroit metro area especially (Detroit customers probably have one of the smallest local calling areas in the country if you compare it to major cities in non-Ameritech states). Ameritech can't offer long distance yet, so for now they can only offer unlimited intraLATA calling, which is what they're just now starting to do. The cost is still about $50 a month, which is similar to MCI's "neighborhood Complete" plan. The question for residential high-volume intraLATA callers is, do you prefer to deal with Ameritech or MCI (I know what the answer would be for a lot of folks in this group, but for the average person who's not had much past experience with MCI, it may be a different story). Anyway, in my view it should not be so complicated for a customer to tell whether a call is being charged at toll rates or not. I think that whoever sets standards for phone tones ought to come up with a short tone that every long distance carrier would be required to place on the line as soon as the audio channel to the customer is opened (before ringing of the called party starts). I would suggest sort of a distinctive "hi-lo" tone (a 1/4 or 1/2 second high-pitched tone followed by a 1/4 or 1/2 second lower pitched tone) for all standard toll calls. If the call is to a toll-free number, the second tone should be omitted. If the call is to an "extra charge" toll number (900 or 976, for example), the tones should be double length (or triple length if 1/4 second tones are used) and repeated twice. We know that toll carriers can place audio signals like this on the line when a call is handed to them (just as they now play a tone for, and accept billing codes), so all that would be needed is a universal standard toll alert that has to be played prior to any toll call. The trouble is, probably nobody would really appreciate this except telephone customers, and customers seem to be left out of the loop when changes to the design of the phone system are contemplated! Jack Resources for Michigan Telephone Users page: http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/ ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Last Laugh! "Plans" (was Re: AT&T) From: robert@bonomi.invalid Organization: Not Much Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 22:02:25 GMT In article , Barry Margolin wrote: > In article , Dr. Joel M. Hoffman > wrote: >> What's next? "Mailing plans" from the post office? > They already have them. Bulk mailers get different rates than the > rest of us. _Many_ different rates, in fact. Depending on how much of the 'sorting' work the mailer will do -themselves-, before delivering the mail to the P.O. There are at least a dozen different rates for bulk mail, depending on how 'easy' it is to handle. The P.O. also gives preferential rates for mailing _newspapers_, based mostly on county-line boundaries. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #282 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jun 16 23:44:22 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA07606; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:44:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:44:22 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206170344.XAA07606@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #283 TELECOM Digest Sun, 16 Jun 2002 23:45:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 283 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (Keith H.) Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (aes) Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (Robert Casey) Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (Richard D G Cox) Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (John R. Levine) Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (Carl Navarro) So What Was Calling Me Anyway? (Thomas A. Horsley) Recent News Headlines 6/16/02 (Monty Solomon) Software For Direct Translation of Telephonic Mode to Binary (athy) Re: AT&T (Pete Weiss) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (John Hines) Re: [FRAUD ALERT] Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (Hudson Leighton) Re: New Radio Station (s falke) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Keith H. Subject: Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 17:31:09 -0400 Organization: we don't need no steenkin organization pendrive@buyercorp.biz wrote: > To find out more, please go to: http://www.buyercorp.biz > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About the size of my thumb?? Only > $20 ?? I'm *almost* tempted to send them $20 to see what I get in > return, but somehow I get the feeling that deals like this which are > too good to be true usually aren't. Does anyone feel rich enough > today to try them out and let all of us know the results? PAT] It does sound a bit fishy ... Just for grins, I typed in www.pendrive.com, it exists. The domain owner lists as: Phison Electronics Corporation (PENDRIVE-DOM) Rm 813, Bldg 53, 195-88 Chung Hsing Rd Sec 4 Chutung, Hsinchu,, Taiwan R.O.C 310 TW Domain Name: PENDRIVE.COM Dunno if they are the manufacturer; their buy online link goes to pendriveshop.de, all in German of course. Typing in www.pendriveshop.com brings up an English page. Their prices are a bit steep compared to the alleged prices at buyercorp.biz starting at $58US for the 16mb flash drive all the way up to almost $1400 for a 1GB version. http://www.pendriveshop.com/reseller.htm lists a 10 GBP discount if you become an official reseller. Hmm, buying a 16mb pendrive at the reseller discount price of 30 GBP comes to $44.32 USD. Plus it looks like these are sold only in Europe so I'm sure shipping costs are big. The last and BIG RED FLAG that waves in front of me is the fact the only way to purchase from this buyercorp.biz is through PayPal. If it turns out to be a ripoff, the chances of getting your money back from PayPal (in my personal experience) are about the same as gluing together the shredded money found in novelty pens to get a complete $100 dollar bill. keith ------------------------------ From: aes Subject: Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 16:46:33 -0700 Organization: Stanford University In article , pendrive@buyercorp.biz wrote: > Buyercorp is proud to introduce the Pen Drive, the world's > first USB Hard Drive that is about the size of your thumb. Requiring > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About the size of my thumb?? Only > $20 ?? I'm *almost* tempted to send them $20 to see what I get in > return, but somehow I get the feeling that deals like this which are > too good to be true usually aren't. Does anyone feel rich enough > today to try them out and let all of us know the results? PAT] Already did so. Gadgets of this sort have appeared on the market from a number of companies recently. Although this one calls itself a "drive", that's metaphorical. All that's in them -- all that's needed -- is a little "flash memory" chip (solid-state memory chip), the same as what are in the little cards that go in most digital cameras (e.g., SmartMedia, CompactFlash, or Memory Stick), stuck on the end of a USB connector. They're cheap, very handy, and work just fine (assuming they're properly manufactured). I've acquired a couple of them, along with a comparable-sized unit that has no built-in memory but that accepts and reads and writes to the same oversize postage stamp sized SmartMedia card that goes in my digital camera. All seem to work fine. They're very handy for backing up work done on the road, or for transferring data between almost any Mac or PC with a USB port and a recent vintage operating system. At $20 this is probably only an 8 MB unit. Move up into the $50 range and up and you can get 128 MB, even 256 MB. ------------------------------ From: Robert Casey Subject: Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:49:08 -0400 Organization: wa2ise > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About the size of my thumb?? Only > $20 ?? I'm *almost* tempted to send them $20 to see what I get in > return, but somehow I get the feeling that deals like this which are > too good to be true usually aren't. Does anyone feel rich enough > today to try them out and let all of us know the results? PAT] It's probably a battery backed up RAM module with USB support circuitry. Wonder how long the battery would last. The $20 one is the 16mB one, of course the bigger ones cost more. :-) Could be useful if you are still using a sneakernet system. The phone company's got your number! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What is a 'sneakernet system'? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 11:10:20 +0100 From: Richard D G Cox Subject: Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited On 15 Jun 2002 23:56:54 EDT, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > About the size of my thumb?? Only $20?? I'm *almost* tempted to send > them $20 to see what I get in return, but somehow I get the feeling that > deals like this which are too good to be true usually aren't. Does > anyone feel rich enough today to try them out and let all of us know > the results? PAT] We've been using Pendrives for some time and they ARE about the size of my thumb (I don't know how big Pat's thumb is, but if if's average-thumb-size then that too ...) And as mine sits in a little socket next my keyboard, I can unplug it and take it -- and all my sensitive data on it -- whenever I leave the computer. I can also plug it in to anyone else's computer (provided they have USB) and instantly access all my data without needing to install any hardware or (in most cases) software on that machine. Truly a great invention! Prices quoted by your spammer are about what I would expect -- they match the prices paid here on the basis that we are all now used to, of $1=>1 DM. However the more useful PenDrives are those with larger capacity, and unfortunately the prices are almost pro-rata to the capacity. I would gladly buy at those prices from ANYONE except www.buyercorp.biz ! ====================================================================== "Under no circumstances will I ever purchase anything offered to me as the result - directly or indirectly - of any unsolicited email message. ====================================================================== Richard Cox Mandarin Technology Ltd, PENARTH, Wales [Remove the official prefix when replying] ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jun 2002 01:01:46 -0400 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About the size of my thumb?? Only > $20 ?? Sure. It's 16MB of flash RAM and a USB interface in a spiffy looking case. Those of us with digital cameras have been using compactflash, which is about the size of a matchbook and also is flash ram with an interface that makes it look like a disk. A 16MB compactflash costs about $20, although you can't plug it into your USB port without an adapter that costs another $30. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 14:20:39 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online -- Northeast Ohio On Thu, 13 Jun 2002 20:11:26 +1200, pendrive@buyercorp.biz wrote: > Buyercorp is proud to introduce the Pen Drive, the world's > first USB Hard Drive that is about the size of your thumb. Requiring > no cables, power supplies, or batteries you will be able to transfer > data to and from any computer at high speeds via the USB port. The Pen > Drive is an innovation that finally does take care of today's data > transferring and storing needs. > Pen Drive uses durable solid state storage with no moving parts thus > making it shock resistant able to withstand the bumps and grinds of > everyday use. > This useful tool will allow people working in the computer field, > corporate executives and students to carry vital data, and move data > seamlessly from computer to computer thus increasing productivity. > As we were able to go direct to the manufacturer, we are able to bring > you these drives at the lowest prices (with a special introductory > pricing starting at $20). Capacities shipping currently are 16Mb, 32MB, > 64MB, 128MB and 256MB modules. > To find out more, please go to: http://www.buyercorp.biz > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About the size of my thumb?? Only > $20 ?? I'm *almost* tempted to send them $20 to see what I get in > return, but somehow I get the feeling that deals like this which are > too good to be true usually aren't. Does anyone feel rich enough > today to try them out and let all of us know the results? PAT] Yippee! Spam fluff. I have had a "thumb drive" for about 2 years and I think I paid maybe $30 from Tiger Software for it. It needs drivers. My small storage drive of choice today is my little card reader. It is a tiny box about the size of a credit card and maybe 1/2 inch thick that reads both Compact Flash and Smart media. It plugs into the USB port and I have not had a problem with Win98,ME, or 2000 finding it immediately as a USB storage device. I think I have about $23 in the drive and maybe $20 in the 32 MB media (thank you Staples). Carl Navaro ------------------------------ Subject: So What Was Calling Me Anyway? From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 12:42:06 GMT One day last week, my phone would ring about once an hour, I'd say "Hello", and them immediately a recorded message would come on and say "I'm sorry, I dialed your number in error" and hang up. Personally, I find it hard to believe a machine could be sorry, but what I really wonder is what kind of machine it was? Does someone make a fax machine which says this when it gets a voice instead of fax tones? But if it is that smart, why don't they make it smart enough to stop re-trying the number while they are at it? Or is this something an overbooked predictive dialer does when it has completed the call, but finds it has no actual humans availabe to annoy me? Once, when the phone rang at its scheduled time, I picked it up and said nothing, just listened, and got absolute silence back until it finally went "click" after several seconds. It did stop after a day (if it hadn't stopped, I'd be asking about any available technology to target ballistic missles at the other end of a phone connection :-). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 03:08:41 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Recent News Headlines 6/16/02 Sprint slashes revenues forecast Lower target a sign that telecom industry is still struggling By Jesse Drucker THE WALL STREET JOURNAL June 14 - Sprint Corp. lowered its full-year revenue forecast for its traditional phone and Internet business and said net customer additions to its Sprint PCS wireless division would fall as much as 15% below the company's previous estimates, in yet another sign that the telecommunications meltdown is deepening. http://www.msnbc.com/news/766922.asp The end of the revolution "Ruling the Root" documents the sorry tale of how the Internet was brought to heel. By Andrew Leonard June 14, 2002 | In the annals of the Internet, few topics seem as boring, arcane and inscrutable as the domain name system. Yet, in Milton L. Mueller's hands, the story of how the Net came to be administered is riveting, illuminating, depressing and enraging. In effortless, lucid prose Mueller documents and explains precisely how "Internet governance" has evolved from the enlightened despotism of a technological elite into a tool of special interests intent on protecting and expanding the control of intellectual property online. It is a sad story, in the end, this "taming of the Net." In "Ruling the Root," Mueller, with all the precision and economy of a masterful prosecuting attorney, demolishes the techno-libertarian myth of the Internet as a new space for human interaction that is uncontrollable and inherently independent. Despite the widespread belief that the Net is so decentralized and distributed as to be able to elude governments and even nuclear devastation, there is a central point of control -- the so-called "root." http://salon.com/tech/books/2002/06/14/root/index.html Microsoft cable-TV foray is costly By Rebecca Buckman THE WALL STREET JOURNAL REDMOND, Wash., June 14 - The cable-television executives had a dream, and Bill Gates seemed ready to make it come true. IT WAS A SUNNY AFTERNOON in May 1997, and a group of cable chieftains had descended on Microsoft Corp.'s campus here to discuss the future with Chairman Gates. The executives - heavy-hitters such as Brian Roberts, then chief executive of Comcast Corp., and John Malone, then CEO of Tele-Communications Inc. - dearly wanted to build high-speed cable networks and pipe new types of entertainment and Internet services into consumers' TV sets. But they needed cash and technology to do it. (MSNBC is a Microsoft-NBC joint venture.) Mr. Gates spun them an enticing vision. He said Microsoft would help build digital-TV set-top boxes and software to deliver potentially lucrative services such as Web shopping and interactive sports. In Mr. Gates, the executives saw a savvy partner who could provide the drive and the funds for such projects at a time when the cost of upgrading cable networks was seen as potentially prohibitive. At dinner, Comcast's Mr. Roberts joked, " 'Hey, Bill, you can solve the problem,' " recalls Craig Mundie, a Microsoft official who attended. " 'Why don't you buy 10% of the cable industry?' " Mr. Gates began to do something close to that. The Redmond meeting marked the start of an investment campaign in which Microsoft would plow close to $10 billion into cable TV. http://www.msnbc.com/news/766979.asp ------------------------------ From: netathy@netscape.net (athy) Subject: Software For Direct Translation of Telephonic Mode to Binary Date: 16 Jun 2002 18:39:48 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I have a black box which produces data (at times I control) which goes out over a dedicated telephone line. I get a bad print-out, but I want to capture the data & convert it to binary for computer searching. It seems likely that a splitter or Y connection in the phone line would not alter the out-going data. Will that work, and what software can I use to translate the data so captured? ------------------------------ From: pete-weiss@psu.edu (Pete Weiss) Subject: Re: AT&T Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 08:36:00 -0400 Organization: Penn State University -- Office of Administrative Systems On Fri, 14 Jun 2002 14:29:43 -0700, John David Galt > If only they still acted like it. Back in "Ma Bell" days, operators > were nice about things like refunding misdialed calls; calls to > customer service were answered by human beings; and they never > telemarketed. > Nowadays, I would really love to find a phone company with any of the > above three features. Even if it cost twice as much. Well as far as refunding for misdialed called, just find yourself a really cheap LD plan and forget about trying to get a refund on 2.9 CPM --- hopefully your time is worth more than that ;-) Pete ------------------------------ From: John Hines Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 08:01:29 -0500 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: john@jhines.org KB7M wrote: > I thought I had just gotten unlucky enough to be on someone's list. I > get probably a dozen or more of these a day. While I do speak more > than one language, Korean is not one of the ones that I can speak or > read. Is there a way to filter (using outlook express) based on text > encoding? I would love to dump anything Korean (and a few other > languages) into the bit bucket. If this cannot be done in Outlook > Express, are there any SMTP mail/news readers that can do this? I > could probably be persuaded to switch. Eudora can look for the charset identifier in the mail headers, and filter based on that. ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: [FRAUD ALERT] Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 23:00:40 -0500 Organization: MRRP In article , Telecom@LincMad.com wrote: > Even though I know quite well that .ca is Canada, it still took me a > long time to get over looking at the domain "sfu.ca" and thinking that > it had to have something to do with San Francisco or California. (It's > actually Simon Fraser University in greater Vancouver, BC.) > www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com > Linc Madison * San Francisco, California I am am sorry, but I have to do it (it is late and it's been a long day) :-) What about fu.ck, sh.it, sna.fu (ducking for cover) Hudson http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ From: s falke Subject: Re: New Radio Station Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 04:46:21 GMT NY-- Search on 'Clear Channel.' They will soon own it 100%, along with an interesting site: fcc.gov. s falke "New Yorker" wrote in message news:telecom20.282.6@telecom-digest.org... > Hi, I have a very generic question and I wonder if you can point me in > the right direction. I have ideas. I have funds. I want to create a > Radio Station on AM (later on FM) and would like to know where I can > get info on that. Where to begin? Is there any source on the > internet or in books on how to do it? > Slava > newyorker1970@hotmail.com > New York City ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #283 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jun 17 16:18:27 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA20521; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:18:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:18:27 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206172018.QAA20521@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #284 TELECOM Digest Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:17:34 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 284 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #337, June 17, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (Borjan Petersson) Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (Hudson Leighton) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (Linc Madison) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (Denis Mcmahon) Re: Pendrive (USB Flash Drive) (David B. Horvath, CCP) Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (Henry E Schaffer) Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? (Stanley Cline) Re: RBOC Long Distance (John Higdon) Re: Competition? (Dave Phelps) Re: Competition? (Joey Lindstrom) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:34:56 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #337, June 17, 2002 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 337: June 17, 2002 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** AT&T CANADA http://www.attcanada.com ** BELL CANADA http://www.bell.ca ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** AT&T Canada to Discuss Restructuring ** BCE Says Price Caps Won't Hurt EBITDA Growth ** MTS: Price Cap Impact Under $15 Million ** 211 Service Starts in Toronto ** Telus Releases Buyout Details ** Look Offers Business High-Speed Access ** BCE Weighs Buyback of SBC Stake in Bell ** Cableco Buys Gateway Facilities ** Wireless Groups Unite ** Lucent, Nokia Reduce Sales Forecasts ** Aliant Chooses New Voice Mail Platform ** 3Com Matches Norstar Phones With IP PBX ** Telus Provides IT Service to Alberta Doctors ** Bell Sues Videotron Over Subscriber Count ** Restructuring Adds to Certicom Loss ** Clarification -- Bell Mobility Prepaid ** Planning for IP Telephony ============================================================ AT&T CANADA TO DISCUSS RESTRUCTURING: AT&T Canada says it will open negotiations with debtholders in the next few weeks aimed at a "consensual restructuring" of $4.5 billion in debt. (See Telecom Update #332, 335) BCE SAYS PRICE CAPS WON'T HURT EBITDA GROWTH: BCE expects to maintain EBITDA growth at 6%-8%, despite the new price cap regime and a slowdown in data revenue growth. ** Under the new rules, Bell Canada and Aliant will put about $250 million a year into a deferral account, out of which they will be compensated for reduced revenues from competitors, the cost of upgrades to residential service, and other programs benefiting consumers. ** Bell is reducing capital spending by $300 million in 2002, and is on track to cut operating costs by $500 million. No layoffs are planned. MTS: PRICE CAP IMPACT UNDER $15 MILLION: Manitoba Telecom Services says the new price cap regime will reduce its EBITDA by $10 million-$15 million a year, though this estimate may be reduced following further analysis and clarification. MTS expects EBITDA to grow 3% this year, and has reduced capital spending by $22 million. 211 SERVICE STARTS IN TORONTO: Callers in the 416/647 area codes can now dial "211" (or click on http://www.211toronto.ca) for one-stop access to community health/social information and referral services. The service is a joint initiative of the United Way of Greater Toronto, Community Information Toronto, the city, and the federal government. (See Telecom Update #295) TELUS RELEASES BUYOUT DETAILS: Telus has released details on its voluntary buyout offer to 11,000 unionized employees. 1,900 employees who are over 55 and have at least 10 years experience are being offered 12 months' salary, plus $500 for each year of service to a maximum of $15,000. 9,100 other employees are being offered 18 months' salary plus $1,000 for each year of service to a maximum of $20,000. ** The Telecommunications Workers Union, which represents 17,000 Telus employees, says there is "no legitimate reason to downsize the workforce," and that the company's buyout plan will "cause a serious decrease in the quality of service provided to customers." Telus denies the charge. LOOK OFFERS BUSINESS HIGH-SPEED ACCESS: Look Communications has reentered the market for business Internet service, offering wireless access at 1.5 Mbps and 750 Kbps in Montreal and Greater Toronto. BCE WEIGHS BUYBACK OF SBC STAKE IN BELL: Chairman Richard Currie says that BCE's June 19 Board meeting will consider a proposal to exercise a call option this year to buy back SBC Communications' 20% stake in Bell Canada. CABLECO BUYS GATEWAY FACILITIES: Persona Communications (formerly Regional Cablesystems) has agreed to buy Gateway Telephone's fibre link between Sudbury and North Bay and other properties for $550,000. WIRELESS GROUPS UNITE: Over 200 wireless carriers, handset makers, and software companies have joined a new standards organization that will consolidate the activities of several wireless groups. Among other things, the Open Mobile Alliance will work on interoperability of multimedia messaging and standards for location-based services. http://www.openmobilealliance.org/index.html LUCENT, NOKIA REDUCE SALES FORECASTS: ** Lucent Technologies expects April-June sales to be 10%-15% lower than the $3.52 billion recorded in the previous quarter. ** Nokia says second quarter sales will be 6.9 billion to 7.2 billion euros, 2%-6% below last year's level. Nokia says the results will show its world market share has increased to 38%. ALIANT CHOOSES NEW VOICE MAIL PLATFORM: Aliant plans to move its network-based voice mail services away from 10-year-old Lucent (formerly Octel) equipment over the next three years. The first step, to be implemented this year, will move Aliant Mobility voice mail users to a system developed by Vancouver- based Voice Mobility International. 3COM MATCHES NORSTAR PHONES WITH IP PBX: 3Com is introducing a $3,000, 16-port card from Citel Technologies that connects Nortel Norstar phones to 3Com IP-based PBXs. TELUS PROVIDES IT SERVICE TO ALBERTA DOCTORS: In response to a request by the Alberta Medical Association and Alberta Health and Wellness, Telus has launched "e.Health Solutions," a service for private-practice physicians which combines DSL connectivity, desktop hardware, and software and data storage for medical records, scheduling, and billing. BELL SUES VIDEOTRON OVER SUBSCRIBER COUNT: Bell Globemedia is suing Videotron for $1.4 million, claiming that the cableco is avoiding fees for Globemedia programming by undercounting its subscribers. Earlier, Videotron sued Globemedia's Netstar unit for $13.4 million, claiming Netstar gave preferential prices to Bell ExpressVu. (See Telecom Update #327) RESTRUCTURING ADDS TO CERTICOM LOSS: Mississauga-based Certicom, which makes wireless data security software, reports revenue of US$12.3 million and an operating loss of $23.2 million for the year ended April 30. Adding in restructuring and other one-time charges, the loss was $96 million. CLARIFICATION -- BELL MOBILITY PREPAID: The report on Bell Mobility in Telecom Update #336 should have read: ** BUY AIRTIME ON CELLPHONE WITH NO CREDIT CARD: Bell Mobility prepaid wireless customers can now pay for airtime from their cellphones and have the payment debited automatically from a bank account. The service uses the Skypay network, a joint venture of Bell Mobility and SaskTel. PLANNING FOR IP TELEPHONY: "The IP PBX Revolution," a limited-edition anthology of Telemanagement feature articles on the new generation of voice-data communications systems, is not for sale at any price. But while supplies last it will be included with every introductory risk-free subscription to Telemanagement. ** Download full information at: http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-IP_PBX_Bonus.pdf PDF File: 208 KB. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: Orjan Petersson Subject: Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:23:25 +0200 Organization: Guest of ProXad - France > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What is a 'sneakernet system'? PAT] From the jargon file (www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/sneakernet.html) sneakernet /snee'ker-net/ n. Term used (generally with ironic intent) for transfer of electronic information by physically carrying tape, disks, or some other media from one machine to another. "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with magtape, or a 747 filled with CD-ROMs." Also called `Tennis-Net', `Armpit-Net', `Floppy-Net' or `Shoenet'; in the 1990s, `Nike network' after a well-known sneaker brand. Orjan ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 09:02:24 -0500 Organization: MRRP > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What is a 'sneakernet system'? PAT] Put the disk in the drive, copy the files, remove disk, put on your sneakers (with or without socks), walk down the hall, insert disk in drive, copy files. Sneakernet (r)(c) Otherwise know as how did we move data before there were networks. I will also mention Papertapenet (r)(c), start the papertape punch toss the end over the partition, and feed it into a papertape reader and hope nothing tangles. Hudson http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, *I* did all that back in the middle to late 1960's when most office places were not yet (or were just barely starting to be) computerized. I had one job which involved huge stacks (several thousand) paper cards which had to be punched then fed through an IBM 'gang punch' machine to get still more holes put in them. Then I gave the stack of punched cards to another guy who 'verified' the work I had done on the batch. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 02:44:26 -0700 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , Bill Horne wrote: >> "Norm" wrote in message >> news:telecom20.270.7@telecom-digest.org: >>> Why all these Korean spams tho? They make no sense (obviously). > They're not "Korean" spams: they're from the US, but they're routed > through open relays in Korea in order to hide the spammers home > base. Since many ISPs are blackholing the entire Korean IP space, it's > only a matter of time before they clean up their act -- which will mean > the spammers have to find another country to route through. No, actually, they *ARE* Korean spams, in the Korean language and character set, originating from Korea, advertising Korean products (including every imaginable form of pornography, computer equipment, and consumer electronics) with telephone numbers shown as dialed within Korea and prices listed in Korean currency. I did get a lot of relay spam through Korea, but it is now considerably outweighed by spam of genuine Korean origin. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: Denis Mcmahon Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 15:38:21 +0100 Reply-To: denisrt@pickaxe.net KB7M wrote: > Norm wrote in message > news:telecom20.270.7@telecom-digest.org: >> Why all these Korean spams tho? They make no sense (obviously). > I thought I had just gotten unlucky enough to be on someone's list. I > get probably a dozen or more of these a day. While I do speak more > than one language, Korean is not one of the ones that I can speak or > read. Is there a way to filter (using outlook express) based on text > encoding? I would love to dump anything Korean (and a few other > languages) into the bit bucket. If this cannot be done in Outlook > Express, are there any SMTP mail/news readers that can do this? I > could probably be persuaded to switch. 1) get hamster, use it as a filter between your isp and outlook, it can do clever things like filtering on 8 bit chars in subject lines. 2) get agent and use it instead of express. Rgds, Denis McMahon / +44 7802 468949 / denis@pickaxe.net sulfnbk is not a virus, see the symantec virus encyclopaedia! Now restocking killfile, new entrants welcome: trolls, spam, xpost cascades, OT ads, top posters & terminally clueless! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mary Ann Ladd, sysadmin for LCS-MIT provided the following as a filter-rule to use with ELM filters/mailing systems such as what I use here on the Digest: #Any non-ascii stuff gets thrown to the side. if subject ~= /[^a-zA-Z0-9 ;:"'.&,?!\[\]()]/ then save "u/ptownson/bounced" PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 09:52:48 -0400 From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) Subject: Re: Pendrive (USB Flash Drive) On Thu, 13 Jun 2002 20:11:26 +1200, pendrive@buyercorp.biz SPAMmed TELECOM-L with: > Buyercorp is proud to introduce the Pen Drive, the world's > first USB Hard Drive that is about the size of your thumb. Requiring > no cables, power supplies, or batteries you will be able to transfer > data to and from any computer at high speeds via the USB port. The Pen > Drive is an innovation that finally does take care of today's data > transferring and storing needs. And PAT responded: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About the size of my thumb?? Only > $20 ?? I'm *almost* tempted to send them $20 to see what I get in > return, but somehow I get the feeling that deals like this which are > too good to be true usually aren't. Does anyone feel rich enough > today to try them out and let all of us know the results? PAT] IBM sells a product called "Disk on Key" (go to http://www.ibm.com/search?v=11&lang=en&cc=us&q=19K4513 for a list of their pages with information on it or http://commerce.www.ibm.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce/ProductDisplay?prrfnbr=1915869 &cntrfnbr=197329&prmenbr=34784&cntry=840&lang=en_US for details on the 8 Mb version). They also have a 32 and 128 Mb versions. I was given 8 Mb version as a gift (priced at $39.95; everything from IBM costs more). I have stopped using floppies! I have a series of files to which I want to access no matter which system I'm on (laptop, desktop at work, desktop at home) -- files like phone numbers, email addresses, my resume :-). I absolutely love it. And I've told the gift giver that... My only complaint is that USB ports are on the back of machines, so I had to get a USB extension cord so I wouldn't be climbing on my desk at work plugging-in/unplugging the thing every day. I've seen this type of thing sold other places. Do we really want to deal with a SPAMMER??? David B. Horvath, CCP Consultant, Author, International Lecturer, Adjunct Professor Board Member: ICCP Educational Foundation, ICCP Test Council, and Philadelphia Association of Systems Administrators ------------------------------ From: hes@hes01.unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E Schaffer) Subject: Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 01:15:20 UTC Organization: North Carolina State University In article , wrote: > NEW DOMAIN NAMES: ".USA " and ".US States" now available Can you really have a domain name with an embedded space? (By the way, "now available" seems to me "November 2002." henry schaffer hes@ncsu.edu ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? Date: 16 Jun 2002 05:18:08 GMT Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org In article , Hafaka wrote: > My question -- is there a web site where I can input my phone number > and the number I wish to call in order to find out if it's a local > call? And if not -- how can you tell if the call you're about to make I'm not aware of any public web sites other than Ameritech's (mentioned in another post) for specific areas, but there are companies (CCMI, Valucom) that compile and sell this sort of data. That said, third party data is often quite incomplete or inaccurate (the company I work for uses one of these products, and it is missing many small independent telco rate centers entirely, sometimes shows two-way EAS as one-way EAS, etc.) Often I land up going straight to telco tariffs (for the RBOCs, ALLTEL, and others who have them online, anyway) and using that in conjunction with NANPA data files to determine local calling. Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:58:44 -0700 Subject: Re: RBOC Long Distance From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.282.5@telecom-digest.org, LARB0 wrote: > Since the RBOCs have no interstate network of their own, they'll need > to buy capacity from an IXC. Who are they using at the present time? > Is there a single source I can use to find out? RBOCs own extensive long distance networks. They have just been prohibited from selling across LATA lines. When they are allowed to compete in the long distance market, they will have all the capacity they need. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Competition? Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 10:20:24 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com I've had that same thought myself. It would be similar to what happened with cell towers where rather than a single cell company owning a tower, it is owned by a tower management company. I like the facilities holding company idea. The only problem I see is real estate in the CO's will be a problem, just as it is now. I'm sure that in my serving CO, the ILEC occupies 80% of the space. What do you do when another 5 CLEC's wants space too? Right now, in my area, the CLEC's just rent all facilites from the ILEC, or they have a CO switch elsewhere and run T1's or more likely DS-3's to the local CO to break out and distribute to individual customers. In article , sydbarrett74%REMOVE% THIS%@hotmail.com says... > Why doesn't the US try the modified resale plan where there is a > facilities holding company that *only* owns the pipes, and sells to > *all* telcos (ILEC and CLEC) alike at the *same* wholesale rates? > This to me seems the most practical plan. You get an even > playing-field for all LEC's as well as the elimination of redundant > network buildout. Although I think that wired and wireless redundancy > is something worth exploring. > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.370 / Virus Database: 205 - Release Date: 6/6/2002 Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 09:33:31 -0600 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Re: Competition Syd Barrett wrote: > Why doesn't the US try the modified resale plan where there is a > facilities holding company that *only* owns the pipes, and sells to > *all* telcos (ILEC and CLEC) alike at the *same* wholesale rates? > This to me seems the most practical plan. You get an even > playing-field for all LEC's as well as the elimination of redundant > network buildout. Although I think that wired and wireless redundancy > is something worth exploring. I've been telling people this is the way to go for six years, ever since coming back from a trip to the UK and reading extensively on the subject of the then-pending spinoff of the country's rail network to a single company, "RailTrack". The idea was that RailTrack would continue as a regulated monopoly, but rail SERVICE would be privatized and deregulated. Any operator could buy locomotives and carriages and stick 'em on the tracks and offer service between any two points -- each such operator would have to pay RailTrack for access to the tracks, switches, stations, etc. Assuming this model worked (and I couldn't see any reason why it shouldn't), why not apply it to the phone companies as well? The problem, though, is that the last I heard, it WAS NOT working. I seem to recall reading a couple of months back that RailTrack had gone bankrupt. Now, I don't know the details of just how they managed to do that (when their "profit" was guaranteed), but they did. If anyone here can fill in these details, it would probably help this discussion: the factors that led to RailTrack's downfall could very likely also apply to a single telephone pipe owner. But if those factors could be overcome/avoided, or did not apply to the telephone market, then yes: I'm in full agreement with you, this is something that hasn't been tried and, I think, SHOULD have been the model used from the very beginning of telephone deregulation. Joey Lindstrom ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #284 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jun 18 23:15:03 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA12058; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 23:15:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 23:15:03 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206190315.XAA12058@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #285 TELECOM Digest Tue, 18 Jun 2002 23:15:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 285 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Competition? (John Higdon) Re: Competition? (Anthony E. Seigman) Railtrack (was Re: Competition) (Steve Hayes) Re: Railtrack (was Re: Competition) (Burkitt-Gray Alan) Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (Web Lion) Re: So What Was Calling Me Anyway? (Gail M. Hall) Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (Hudson Leighton) Telezapper? (AgentX) Re: AT&T (Dave) PartnerPlus Paging Jack - Hookable to Single Horn? (Jeff Ritter) Suggestions for Paging Carrier in Chgo? (pieterek@spamcop.net) Worldwide Dialing Rules (Ryan Hope) Warning of Scam "Do Not Call" (Carl Moore) Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? (Wes Leatherock) Re: [FRAUD ALERT] Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (John David Galt) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 17:02:51 -0700 Subject: Re: Competition? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.284.10@telecom-digest.org, Dave Phelps wrote: > I like the facilities holding company idea. The only problem I see is > real estate in the CO's will be a problem, just as it is now. I'm sure > that in my serving CO, the ILEC occupies 80% of the space. What do you > do when another 5 CLEC's wants space too? Right now, in my area, the > CLEC's just rent all facilites from the ILEC, or they have a CO switch > elsewhere and run T1's or more likely DS-3's to the local CO to break > out and distribute to individual customers. The reason this has not and will not happen involves the RBOC desire, or rather passion to also be the service and content provider as well as a transport network. Indeed, that is where the money is. The problem is that the content and service providers have what sells and the RBOCs have what they need to sell it. The RBOCs are not just about to sit back, charging some cost-based facilities rental fee to companies that are getting rich pushing product over their wires. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: aes Subject: Re: Competition? Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:12:43 -0700 Organization: Stanford University In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > discussion: the factors that led to RailTrack's downfall could very > likely also apply to a single telephone pipe owner. But if those > factors could be overcome/avoided, or did not apply to the telephone > market, then yes: I'm in full agreement with you, this is something One of the (probably unsolvable) problems with the RailTrack model, for rail tracks anyway, is that tracks need to be carefully (and expensively) maintained, much more so than wires. When a phone or network cable fails you lose your email and web surfing, maybe even some money, but for the most part you don't get maimed, mangled or killed. When a train derails because of a badly maintained track (or signalling apparatus associated with the track), trains crash or derail and people die -- as has been happening with distressing frequency in the UK since privatization. While hard on passengers, this is of course a godsend for newspaper -- immense headlines about the crashes -- and for attorneys, since the system has been carefully designed so that the different parties involved in maintaining the track, providing the trains, and running the trains can all blame the crash on each others, leading to endless fingerpointing and lawsuits. (It probably was designed this way with this in mind.) ------------------------------ From: Steve Hayes Subject: Railtrack (was Re: Competition) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 10:38:55 +0100 In Telecom Digest V20 #284, Joey Lindstrom asked about the failure of the UK railway company Railtrack. This was in the context of whether a similar infrastructure holding company would be applicable in the telecoms field and whether Railtrack's failure suggested that it wouldn't work. Here is my interpretation of the Railtrack fiasco. I have strong political views which of course colour my version but I hope it will cast light on what went wrong. Before about 1996, the railways in Britain were operated by British Rail. This was a publicly owned company which maintained the tracks and ran the trains. People used to moan about BR but it now looks like a paragon of efficiency. The Conservative Party was in government but was expected to lose the 1997 election - as it did. In a fit of political spite and dogma and against all advice from anyone who knew anything about railways, they moved to break up and privatise BR. They set up one company (Railtrack) responsible for the tracks while a number of other potentially competing companies would run the trains. In practice, there is very little competition and therefore very little benefit in the competing train companies while the advantages of the old monolithic system (connecting trains were held when a train ran late, staff could advise on the best connecting train, not just the ones run by their company, etc.) were lost. However, the question is about Railtrack. Railtrack was brought down by circumstances, inefficiency and bad luck. The circumstances were that successive governments had cut back investment in the railways for decades so there was already a big backlog of maintenance and improvements outstanding when Railtrack started. The inefficiency resulted from the huge armies of lawyers and accountants needed to establish and administer the contracts between Railtrack, the train operating companies and all the companies that they contracted out the maintenance work to. Also, Railtrack had to find money for profits to keep their shareholders happy. That didn't leave much to pay the actual workers to maintain the tracks. A lot of experienced staff were faced with being transferred to private contractors with reduced pay and conditions or were simply laid off. If they were replaced at all, it was with inexperienced and poorly trained people. Meanwhile, the accountants decided to balance the books by postponing the already overdue maintenance jobs. Now for the bad luck. There were three very bad train crashes. One was caused by a poorly placed signal which Railtrack had been told to move but didn't. The second was caused by a rail which should have been replaced but wasn't. The third appears to have been caused by faulty maintenance though sabotage can't be ruled out. All three crashes were in the London area so they got the maximum of publicity. In the case of the broken rail, hundreds of similar rails were identified and an expensive program was needed to replace them all. Until that was done, most trains had to run very slowly and Railtrack had to compensate the train operating companies and their passengers for the delays. The government looked at this mess they had inherited and also saw that the costs for new lines to be built by Railtrack were spiralling out of control. They decided to stop pouring subsidies into this black hole. This finally forced Railtrack into bankruptcy. Is this relevant to telecoms? I don't know that it is. I think the one lesson that does apply is that privatisation and competition are not a panacea. Big monolithic organisations with monopolies can get inefficient and arrogant and it's tempting to break them up (the old Bell System was a prime example). Competition can force out the featherbedding and allow customers more choice in what they really want but it also introduces a lot of extra costs (marketing, accounting, etc.) and inefficiencies (unnecessary duplication, planning uncertainties, etc.). Competing suppliers must pay more for their financing. Workers typically lose pay and security. Customers have to work harder to choose which supplier to use. The service may be less reliable and some suppliers may go out of business leaving customers stranded. The situation needs to be looked at in detail to decide whether breaking up the monopoly will actually make things better and also whether there might not be other ways (e.g. more appropriate regulation) to do the same thing. The trouble here in the UK (and, I suspect, most places) is that the people who exert the influence are the lawyers and accountants. Even if they aren't consciously motivated by the prospect of juicy contracts, in their world everything looks like a contract or a set of books and they don't seem to understand what the real-world consequences of their recommendations are likely to be. Steve Hayes South Wales, UK ------------------------------ From: Burkitt-Gray Alan Subject: Re: Railtrack (was Re: Competition) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 12:25:59 +0100 Joey Lindstrom asked about Railtrack: "I seem to recall reading a couple of months back that RailTrack had gone bankrupt. Now, I don't know the details of just how they managed to do that (when their "profit" was guaranteed), but they did. If anyone here can fill in these details, it would probably help this discussion: the factors that led to RailTrack's downfall could very likely also apply to a single telephone pipe owner." Joey -- it didn't go bankrupt, but was put into administration (a bit, though not much, like chapter 11 in the US), by the Government, which had finally run out of sympathy with Railtrack's general incompetence. You explained the model fairly accurately, except that it's not a totally free market for train operators. They need a franchise from the rail regulator to operate services over specific routes or regions. It's essential that trains operate to a timetable and run to certain service levels so that customers can rely on getting to work. But there were two real problems with the previous British Government's (that is, the John Major administration's) model of privatising the railways, which the telecoms industry should learn from. Incidentally, Major privatised the system literally in the months running up to the 1997 election, which he knew he'd lose, so the whole project was put together in a rush to get it out of the public sector, and to make it too late for Tony Blair to reverse the process. First problem, the investors who bought Railtrack saw it as a property company -- hey, lots of city centre sites that could be turned into profitable offices (sorry about the station underneath) -- and forgot that a safe network needs lots of continuous investment in replacing track and signals -- and the Margaret Thatcher and john Major governments had anyway been anti-public transport so had not allowed Railtrack's public-sector predecessor to invest anything like enough. There has to be some incentive for a telecoms facilities holding company to maintain and improve the infrastructure, and to do so in a way that matches the wishes of the operators and the customers, even though the facilities company isn't face-to-face with the end users so doesn't have a good market picture. Second problem: there was complete disintegration of responsibility. What had been one, even though inefficient, organisation, British Rail, with a single corporate spirit was replaced by Railtrack and literally dozens of train operators (and several rolling stock owners, which leased their trains to the train operators); and Railtrack outsourced its maintenance to dozens more construction companies. So communications became a nightmare. A local train which used to wait two minutes because an incoming mainline service was late because the driver knew that there were passengers who needed to connect now goes off bang on time leaving passengers stranded -- because they're run by two different companies and the station staff might be employed by a third and the company running the signalling, that knows where all the trains are, is run by a fourth. And Railtrack would schedule maintenance according to the needs of its own contractors, not to meet the needs of the customers of the train operating companies. So in the telecoms industry there's a similar danger of buck-passing: it would be too easy for a customer-facing operator to blame any breakdown on the facilities company; and the facilities company would have to work pretty hard to ensure it met the needs of its customers' end customers. So go with care, is what I say. Alan Burkitt-Gray Editor, Global Telecoms Business Euromoney Institutional Investor plc, Nestor House, Playhouse Yard, London EC4V 5EX, UK tel +44 20 7779 8518 fax +44 20 7779 8492 e-mail aburkitt@euromoneyplc.com www.globaltelecomsbusiness.com > Assuming this model worked (and I couldn't see any reason why > it shouldn't), why not apply it to the phone companies as well? > The problem, though, is that the last I heard, it WAS NOT > working. I seem to recall reading a couple of months back > that RailTrack had gone bankrupt. Now, I don't know the > details of just how they managed to do that (when their > "profit" was guaranteed), but they did. If anyone here can > fill in these details, it would probably help this > discussion: the factors that led to RailTrack's downfall > could very likely also apply to a single telephone pipe > owner. But if those factors could be overcome/avoided, or > did not apply to the telephone market, then yes: I'm in full > agreement with you, this is something that hasn't been tried > and, I think, SHOULD have been the model used from the very > beginning of telephone deregulation. > Joey Lindstrom ------------------------------ From: Web Lion Subject: Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:00:06 -0500 Thats exactly what DOTUSA.COM did. Remember, they were the ones that were shut down by the FTC recently. Their claim was that they didn't have name servers for their tld, but that they would be going online in about a year. Problem is, if you charge something to your credit card, you have 60 days to dispute the charges. By telling folks that "we will be online within a year", you could placate people and hopefully they wouldnt dispute the charges until it was too late to have them removed. Neither DOTUSA.COM nor this new group have gtld nameservers for their tlds, nor are they listed in any root server network, ICANN-supported or otherwise. "Henry E Schaffer" wrote in message news:telecom20.284.7@telecom-digest.org: > In article , > wrote: >> NEW DOMAIN NAMES: ".USA " and ".US States" now available > Can you really have a domain name with an embedded space? > (By the way, "now available" seems to me "November 2002." ------------------------------ From: Gail M. Hall Subject: Re: So What Was Calling Me Anyway? Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:48:35 -0400 Reply-To: gmhall@apk.net On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 12:42:06 GMT, in comp.dcom.telecom, you (tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley)) wrote: > One day last week, my phone would ring about once an hour, I'd say > "Hello", and them immediately a recorded message would come on and say > "I'm sorry, I dialed your number in error" and hang up. > Personally, I find it hard to believe a machine could be sorry, but > what I really wonder is what kind of machine it was? This would certainly trigger my paranoid tendencies! I would first wonder if burglars have gone high-tech and have an automated "watch" for determining when you are not at home. > Does someone make a fax machine which says this when it gets a voice > instead of fax tones? But if it is that smart, why don't they make it > smart enough to stop re-trying the number while they are at it? Good question! That's why I think this is a case of mischief. > Or is this something an overbooked predictive dialer does when it has > completed the call, but finds it has no actual humans availabe to > annoy me? I've never had any call me and be that polite! Most of them just go dead when I answer the phone. > Once, when the phone rang at its scheduled time, I picked it up and > said nothing, just listened, and got absolute silence back until it > finally went "click" after several seconds. So it does "listen" for some response. > It did stop after a day (if it hadn't stopped, I'd be asking about any > available technology to target ballistic missles at the other end of a > phone connection :-). Maybe your theory about a "smart" fax machine is a possibility. A 24-hour "watch" period might be reasonabale if someone puts a fax machine on at night but answers that line in the daytime. The "smart-fax" software could then add the time you have your fax machine on auto-answer. If it hears a "live" voice answer the phone, it "knows" that a live person is there and provides the message. When you don't say anything, it doesn't "know" a live person is there and no message is necessary. I still suspect a fax-spammer first, though. But, OTOH, it might be one of those opt-in fax services where people ask to be on a fax list but don't always notify the fax-message distributor when their fax number changes. In the US we are gearing up for election campaigns, and such a "smart" fax program might be a good way to cull last year's list of fax numbers. Also related to "wrong" numbers, I have another question. I wonder how often people give out "wrong numbers" when giving information to vendors. I found a message on my voice mail (no caller info available for caller ID) informing me that I should return some videotapes to some BlockBuster store. I have never rented tapes from any BlockBuster store. This time I just deleted the message and didn't call the store since the store didn't have the courtesy of putting their number in the callerID information so I could just give the "call" command. Afterwards, I thought maybe I should have called them back at the number in the message and let them know they called the wrong number. If my phone number gets entered into the BlockBuster database as being a video thief, making this person's act a form of identity theft, I might be in bigger trouble. I would hope that before the store got serious about charging me for a crime or fraud, they would check the address and signature of the person "renting" the tapes against information about me from the phone company. Right now I have my voice mail OGM set to give the phone number only, not my name. I thought that if I had the message give out my name, any miscreants could then put together two pieces of information, whereas this way they have only my number which apparently they already had because that's what they called. I'd be interested in opinions about what outgoing message you all feel is safest but still helpful to legit callers. Gail from Ohio USA ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 21:43:16 -0500 Organization: MRRP In article , Orjan Petersson wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What is a 'sneakernet system'? PAT] > From the jargon file > (www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/sneakernet.html) > sneakernet /snee'ker-net/ n. Term used (generally with ironic intent) > for transfer of electronic information by physically carrying tape, > disks, or some other media from one machine to another. "Never > underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with magtape, or > a 747 filled with CD-ROMs." Also called `Tennis-Net', `Armpit-Net', > `Floppy-Net' or `Shoenet'; in the 1990s, `Nike network' after a > well-known sneaker brand. What is the fastest way to get 500meg to San Diego if all you have is a 56K modem? FedEx!! Hudson http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ From: AgentX Subject: TeleZapper? Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 22:40:46 -0400 Is it possible for such a device to work and if so how? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What happens is some telemarketers are in such a hurry to make a sale and get off the line, they (or their equipment) disconnects at the first audible sound of a vacant (not in service) line. Ordinarily, these would be the three tones at the start of the connection, the three which precede the recorded announcement that the line is not in service. The machinery the telemarketers use hang up instantly when it hears those tones. That is the theory. (Dialing numbers at random, hear the bee-boo-beep, disconnect and move to to another sucker.) The best person to tell you other specifics and help you with this would be Mike Sandman, who sells these devices through his company. You can reach him at mike@sandman.com ... *eventually* the telemarketers will get wise to this and spend another two or three seconds on the line to listen for a human voice, which will mark the end of the telezapper device. Ask Mike for more details. PAT] ------------------------------ From: nipper1999@aol.com (Dave) Subject: Re: AT&T Date: 18 Jun 2002 02:09:38 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ You can cut the $9.95 to ZERO and save money on all of your calls. Try this plan: 1) 3.9 cents LD 2) Singapore 12 cents a minute 3) 800 number at 3.9 cents (you can probably transfer the one you have) 4) Calling cards at 10 cents (you can get better than this at http://go.to/FreeCallingCard but cards can be included in this plan) Monthly fee: $0 if you use AutoPay or spend $20 ($1.99 otherwise) You can view all of the details and sign up online at: http://cognigen.net/capsule/?savemoneynow ian@jardine.net (Ian) wrote in message news:... > I have been an AT&T customer for 20+ years. > Some years ago they offerd me a package of services "Personal Network" > for $9.95 per month. This includes > 1) 7 cents per minute LD > 2) International calling > 3) A 1-800 number at 10 Cents per minutes > 4) Calling cards at 10 Cents per minute > Today I called AT&T to attempt to make one small change. I am being > charged 36 Cents per minute for calls to Singapore whereas the usual > rates are 16 Cents. I asked for a change to be made to bring this in > line. > I am told that even such a small change would invalidate my whole > "Personal Network" Plan which is no longer marketed and that the sum > of all my services would now exceed the $9.95 per month I am paying. > Is this progress? > I asked for an exception to be made, given that I have been a > consistent good customer for 20+ years and am told that there can be > no exceptions. > I can only conclude that customer service and loyalty is not a part of > the AT&T Corporate manifest these days. Is this why their business is > in decline? > I have asked to speak to a senior manager and have been given her > "first name", but she is unavailable and "will call me back with 38 > hours". I asked for a direct number so I don't have to try to call > back thru about the 5 levels I have spoken to so far, but I am refused > this courtesy. Sounds like they really can't be bothered, but I pay a > good amount to AT&T each month and have done for years and years. Boy > can this company use a dose of treat your customers with respect! > Any suggestions? Anyone? ------------------------------ From: sc00bz@hotmail.com (Jeff Ritter) Subject: PartnerPlus Paging Jack - Hookable to Single Horn? Date: 18 Jun 2002 06:59:56 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I have a small warehouse area that needs a paging speaker/horn. Don't need any additional paging zones in the forseeable future. Can someone tell me what the specs are for the PAGE jack on the processor module of a PartnerPlus phone system? We'd like to hook this up to a one watt horn/speaker ... can this be done directly off of the page jack without going thru a paging module, like a PagePac? Bonus question: Can we use the following horn (which we already have): MPI-38 (3-6v 1.6 Amp)? http://www.sentrol.com/products/PRD_Det_about.asp?PID=MPI38&ListID=35 If so, how ... need an amp or can if be direct hooked? If not, what kind of horn/amp/etc. would work, least cost? Thanks, huge! ------------------------------ From: pieterek@spamcop.net Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 10:36:27 -0500 Subject: Suggestions For Paging Carrier in Chgo? Does anyone have any suggestions for a *good* paging carrier in the Chicago area? Metrocall just filed Chapter 11, which explains why I had such problems getting my service changed when I recently moved from Denver back to Chicago. (Trust me, you *don't* want to know!) Even though I have a great number, I'm willing to sacrifice that for better customer service and, hopefully, better rates for numeric paging ... Eagerly awaiting my secured claim, Claire Pieterek pieterek@spamcop.net ------------------------------ From: RyanHope@mail.alum.rpi.edu (Ryan Hope) Subject: Worldwide Dialing Rules Date: 18 Jun 2002 12:18:49 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Is there place that I could get a list of dialing rules for everywhere in the world? I've done a fair amout of reasearch, and believe the answer to be no. But just to be thorough, I thought I'd try asking here as well. From my research, I believe each country would have at least the following information: - the country code (to call the country from another country) - the international prefix (to dial out of the country) - the long distance code (to dial between regions/cities) if one is needed - the length of the "area code" - when the "area code" should be used I think the first three are pretty standard (and pretty static?). I saw a post from a guy at Microsoft from a few years ago detailing the rules, at least as they where at the time of his post. But I have been able to find much less about dialing rules within a country. As an example, I want to call a number in Terini, Italy 0744 690 921. If I am in Terini and don't need to dial an "area code", what part of it is the area code? Let's assume it's 0744. Do I always need to dial 0744 when I'm not in that "area code"? Do I always need to dial the 690 921 part regardless of where I am? Or are there locations where just 921 will suffice. (I used to live in Germany, and vaguely remember that you could dial with something like 4 digits, 7 digits, or 10 digits depending on where you are calling from/to) As an added bonus, this info would also include "area code" specific dialing instructions. This would be used to hanldle cases like 10 digit dialing in the US. The rule would be something like "only dial the area code if you are dialing outside the current area code, or if the area code is 215, 610, 267, 484, etc". Thanks in advance for any help you could provide. Ryan Hope Arris Systems, Inc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 16:04:02 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Warning of Scam "Do Not Call" There is now a warning that you should NOT give out personal information to callers who claim they can help put you on a telemarketer "Do Not Call" list. Some victims have been tricked into giving out numbers for Social Security and telephone calling cards. Announcement from Verizon said that joining "Do Not Call" does not require you to confirm personal information. (Sigh, recently I saw some email messages which claim to have anti-virus tools but which themselves turn out to have viruses.) ------------------------------ From: wesrock@aol.com (Wes Leatherock) Date: 18 Jun 2002 20:47:17 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Local/Long Distance Calls - How Can You Tell? > I understand that in the US even if I'm calling a number in my area > code, it might not necessarily be a local call (for example, if I'm in > the 713 area code and I'm calling another 713, it might be a long > distance call). And if it's a 281 area code, it may be a local call. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: John David Galt Subject: Re: [FRAUD ALERT] Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 14:42:34 -0700 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society H. Peter Anvin wrote: > That being said, the domains .ca.us and .il.us *do* exist, and in fact > have been having registrations for a very long time (I used to run a > system called viking.chi.il.us almost 10 years ago.) The .us domain > we recently given out to a commercial entity to exploit -- Jon Postel > must be spinning in his grave. The commercial entity is now selling .us domain names without the city and state that had to be included when Postel ran things. However, they aren't charging me anything for mine, so I'm in no hurry to change it. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #285 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jun 19 13:21:35 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA22145; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 13:21:35 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 13:21:35 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206191721.NAA22145@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #286 TELECOM Digest Wed, 19 Jun 2002 13:20:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 286 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson INET 2002 Conference Opens Today (Anne Shroeder) Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (Linc Madison) Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (Joseph Singer) Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (Ryan Hope) Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (Alan Burkitt-Gray) Re: Competition (Wes Leatherock) Re: Railtrack (was Re: Competition) (Anthony E. Siegman) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Anne Shroeder Subject: INET 2002 Conference opens today Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 09:37:39 -0400 Reply-To: lance@isoc.org FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 19 June 2002 INET 2002 Conference Opens Today in Washington, DC-area The Internet Society's 10th Annual INET Conference Kicks-Off Week of Provocative Speakers and Debates, Award Presentations, News Announcements, Internet-Related Side Meetings, and more! Washington, DC, -The INET 2002 conference, the 10th annual meeting of the Internet Society (ISOC), opens today in Arlington, Virginia, at the Crystal Gateway Marriott. In addition to 40+ conference sessions, INET 2002 features a number of provocative plenary sessions, award presentations, exciting news announcements, Internet-related side meetings, and informal Birds-of-a-Feather discussions. This year, the IPv6 Forum's IPv6 Technology Deployment Summit is being held with INET. From June 18-21, the most innovative and influential leaders from the global Internet community will gather to debate and discuss the technologies and policies that are shaping our collective future. It's not too late to join in the discussion - INET 2002 welcomes walk-up registrations. Please visit: http://www.inet2002.org for complete program information. INET 2002 kicked off the week yesterday with a full day of in-depth tutorials, with topics ranging from Internet security and privacy, to "e-readiness" among developing countries. The following three days will consist of more than 40 conference sessions, punctuated with a number of plenary panel discussions featuring some of the Internet industry's key influencers, such as: Google CEO Eric Schmidt, Stanford professor and author Larry Lessig, Former FCC Chairman Reed Hundt, and "Internet Fathers" Vint Cerf and Robert Kahn. In addition, two prestigious awards will be presented at the INET 2002 opening night reception on June 19. Attendees will toast two leaders of the Internet community during the presentation of the Internet Society's Jonathan B. Postel Service Award and the 2002 IEEE's Internet Award. Members of the press attending INET 2002 will hear exciting news announced at several of the scheduled press conferences. On Wednesday, June 19 at 10:30 a.m., in the hotel's Madison room, the Internet Society will announce a major new initiative. Later that day, at 3:30 p.m., press will receive a special welcome from the INET 2002 conference co-chairs, and have a chance to explore this year's theme, "Internet Crossroads: Where Technology and Policy Intersect," in a Q & A with INET 2002 plenary speakers (and topic experts!) Vint Cerf, Robert Kahn, and Larry Lessig. Several Internet-related organizations have chosen to co-locate their meetings with INET 2002, giving INET attendees the opportunity to see what associated groups are actively doing in the Internet community. The Global Internet Project will hold a special workshop on June 18 called, "Spam: Can it be Stopped?" Also, the Electronic Privacy Information Center will host a one day public symposium on the Public Voice in Internet Policy on June 22. For more information, please visit: http://www.inet2002.org/inet-other.html. INET 2002 is put on with assistance from the following sponsors: Principal sponsors: IBM, Hewlett-Packard and the Markle Foundation. Sustaining sponsors: America Online, State of Geneva Switzerland, Sun. Contributing sponsors: AMS, Cisco Systems, Compaq, DISA, Ericsson, Hitachi, Intel, Intelsat, Microsoft, Nokia, Oracle, and The Washington Post. Media sponsors: O'Reilly Emerging Technology Conference, O'Reilly Open Source Conference, WAMU 88.5 FM and InfoWorld. NGO and Non-Profit Sponsors: The Development Gateway, the Academy for Educational Development, FAO, Georgia Institute of Technology, infoDev, Mitretek Systems, University of Tartu. Donor: Verisign. Endorsers: Information Society Technologies (IST), ETSI and WCA International. Working journalists and industry analysts can receive complementary registration by contacting Melissa Byrd at (508) 650-4020, ext. 224, or mbyrd@foretec.com. For more information about INET 2002, please visit http://www.inet2002.org. About ISOC The Internet Society is a non-profit, non-governmental, open membership organization based in Reston, Virginia, whose worldwide individual and organization members make up a veritable "who's who" of the Internet industry. It provides leadership in technical and operational standards, policy issues, and education. ISOC hosts two annual Internet conferences , trains people from all over the world in networking technologies, conducts workshops for educators, and electronically publishes an award-winning magazine, "E-On The Internet." ISOC is the organizational home of the International Engineering Task Force, the Internet Architecture Board, the Internet Engineering Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force - the standards setting and research arms of the Internet community. These organizations operate in an environment of bottom-up consensus building made possible through the participation of thousands of people from throughout the world. About Foretec Seminars Foretec Seminars, formed in 1997 as a subsidiary of the Corporation for National Research Initiatives (CNRI), manages and provides meeting planning and technical support for technology-related conferences. Foretec Seminars most recently managed the Internet Society's 12th Annual INET Conference, INET 2002. Foretec is also responsible for various functions of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Secretariat, including arranging IETF meetings. Other recent events include the Tenth International Python Conference (2002), the Global IPv6 Summit in Canada (2001), and the Ninth International World Wide Web Conference in Amsterdam (2000). http://www.foretec.com. # # # Contact: For additional information: Melissa Byrd Foretec Seminars, Inc. (508) 650-4020 x224 mbyrd@foretec.com *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@www.isoc.org with UNSUBSCRIBE press in the body. [Leave the subject blank.] Please read our Terms of Use Agreement for all discussion lists: http://www.isoc.org/members/discuss/tou.shtml *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 01:43:57 -0700 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , Ryan Hope wrote: > As an example, I want to call a number in Terini, Italy 0744 690 921. > If I am in Terini and don't need to dial an "area code", what part of > it is the area code? Let's assume it's 0744. Do I always need to > dial 0744 when I'm not in that "area code"? Do I always need to dial > the 690 921 part regardless of where I am? Or are there locations > where just 921 will suffice. Poor choice of example. If you are in Italy, you must always dial the entire national number including the area code. Likewise for a number of other countries, including France, Norway, and Denmark. > As an added bonus, this info would also include "area code" specific > dialing instructions. This would be used to hanldle cases like 10 > digit dialing in the US. The rule would be something like "only dial > the area code if you are dialing outside the current area code, or if > the area code is 215, 610, 267, 484, etc". It's much worse than that, though. Let's say that you're in area code 214, for example. There are likely to be some numbers in 214, 972, 469, 903, 940, 817, 682, and soon 369 that you MUST dial as ONLY 10 digits. On the other hand, there are some numbers in each of those area codes that you MUST dial as 1+10D. The 214 area code (Dallas TX) is the only one I know of that was once entirely local, but now has toll calls, thanks to the reassignment of some 214 prefixes in the exurbs since the 214/972 split was retroactively converted to an overlay. The answer for the United States is for all the state PUCs to get their acts together and follow the national recommendation that all calls be permitted as 1+10D, irrespective of area code and toll status. Many have tried, but no one has yet come up with a cogent argument against that scheme. It does nothing to dilute toll alerting in areas that have that protection. It simply allows a uniform national standard dialing rule for "I want this call to just go through and I don't care whether or not a toll charge applies." At least 99.9% of the switching equipment in this country can seamlessly handle non-billing (or message unit billing, or whatever) of local calls dialed with the extraneous 1+ prefix. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 08:48:07 -0700 Organization: Drizzle Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On 18 Jun 2002 12:18:49 -0700, RyanHope@mail.alum.rpi.edu (Ryan Hope) wrote: > Is there place that I could get a list of dialing rules for everywhere > in the world? I've done a fair amout of reasearch, and believe the > answer to be no. But just to be thorough, I thought I'd try asking > here as well. I don't believe there is. Maybe someone should compile something like this. Maybe Mark's up to it :) > From my research, I believe each country would have at least the > following information: > - the country code (to call the country from another country) > - the international prefix (to dial out of the country) > - the long distance code (to dial between regions/cities) if one is needed > - the length of the "area code" > - when the "area code" should be used That is the case for some countries in that in their local directory it will list both other countries' country codes, but also put in the directory what the country code is for the country you are in. That doesn't seem to be the case in Canada or the US as I've never seen that information in a directory in either country. I have seen that information in European countries and also in Israel. The international dialing prefix is sometimes found in a separate international dialing guide that some countries have or had at one time. I know that France had a fairly complete guide that would show you the codes necessary to dial from France and also the codes necessary to dial. I have seen a web page: http://www.wtng.info/ that has world numbering and what prefix is used to make international calls. As far as other dialing procedures those are usually listed in the front pages of the various directories and will indicate whether you should use an area code. > As an added bonus, this info would also include "area code" specific > dialing instructions. This would be used to hanldle cases like 10 > digit dialing in the US. The rule would be something like "only dial > the area code if you are dialing outside the current area code, or if > the area code is 215, 610, 267, 484, etc". As far as the US you can't make a general statement that this is *the* way to do it. Local calls can be either 7, 10 or 11 digits depending on what the local area has been setup for. 11 digits often will work for every number with the knowlege that an 11 digit number often may be a toll call. This is not universal though as many places only allow 7 digits (Tucson, AZ as an example) or mandate that you use 10 digits (Vancouver, BC Canada.) or 11 digits (New York, NY) to call other burroughs and soon to include Manhattan itself for mandated 11 digit dialing.) Personal replies most likely will not be read. Please reply in the newsgroup ------------------------------ From: RyanHope@mail.alum.rpi.edu (Ryan Hope) Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules Date: 19 Jun 2002 07:52:59 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ RyanHope@mail.alum.rpi.edu (Ryan Hope) wrote in message news:: > Is there place that I could get a list of dialing rules for everywhere > in the world? Thanks to a message from Alain Fontaine (who recommended http://kropla.com/dialcode.htm), I found a site that has almost exactly what I'm looking for. The site www.numberingplans.com offers free and paid services for downloading databases full of all sorts of good numbering plan info. Now, if I could just understand what all the info means... :) Thanks, Ryan Hope ------------------------------ From: Alan Burkitt-Gray Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 11:34:15 +0100 Ryan Hope asked: > Is there place that I could get a list of dialing rules > for everywhere in the world? I've done a fair amout of reasearch, and > believe the answer to be no." http://www.wtng.info/ is a pretty good starting point. It's kept fairly well up to date. But there are no simple rules, especially in the last few years as more and more countries have addressed the shortage of numbering by insisting that everyone dial the whole number including the area code. Usually though, they've made this a general rule, applying to the whole country, rather than as the NANPA region has done, which appears to be have different rules in each city, to the confusion of travellers. Italy's a case in point. For the past few years, you have always to dial the whole number even when it's local and you have the same area code. Germany's still as confusing as ever, with numbers that can be very short or can go on for ever, and it never seems clear to foreigners which bit you dial and which you don't. Almost all numbers in the UK are 11 digits including the initial 0 (one or two rural areas still have 10 digits), but area codes can be three digits (020 for London), four (0113 for Leeds, 0121 for Birmingham) or five (01223 for Cambridge), with the local number having eight, seven or six digits respectively. Mobile numbers are also 11 digits starting 077, 078 or 079 (and you always dial all the digits). Mobile phones have tended to confuse people's understanding of the system: here in the UK (I don't know about other countries) you always dial a full national number when you're calling from a mobile (which means every number you dial starts with a 0), so because there are now almost as many mohbile phones and wireline phones people have got into the habit of always dialling the area code even when making a local call from a wireline phone. The system used to tell you to redial without the code: now it just accepts the call (and charges it as a local call if that is what it is). But why would you need to know? I would guess the key thing to know is which countries/areas will accept *any* internal call where *all* the digits are dialled (as in the UK) -- where that is the case, individual city-by-city rules are irrelevant. You might well find that most countries will accept all-digit calls -- maybe even Germany. Alan Burkitt-Gray Editor, Global Telecoms Business Euromoney Institutional Investor plc, Nestor House, Playhouse Yard, London EC4V 5EX, UK tel +44 20 7779 8518 fax +44 20 7779 8492 e-mail aburkitt@euromoneyplc.com www.globaltelecomsbusiness.com ------------------------------ Date: 18 Jun 2002 20:28:09 +0000 From: Wes Leatherock Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Competition Joey Lindstrom wrote: [ about the railtrak model for British railroads and its applicability to telephone plant ] > Assuming this model worked (and I couldn't see any reason why it > shouldn't), why not apply it to the phone companies as well? > The problem, though, is that the last I heard, it WAS NOT working. I > seem to recall reading a couple of months back that RailTrack had gone > bankrupt. Now, I don't know the details of just how they managed to > do that (when their "profit" was guaranteed), but they did. If anyone > here can fill in these details, it would probably help this > discussion: the factors that led to RailTrack's downfall could very > likely also apply to a single telephone pipe owner. But if those > factors could be overcome/avoided, or did not apply to the telephone > market, then yes: I'm in full agreement with you, this is something > that hasn't been tried and, I think, SHOULD have been the model used > from the very beginning of telephone deregulation. It has been an unmitigated disaster. Not only did Railtrak go bankrupt, the government has, in effect, had to take it over. There have been a number of fatal train wrecks, many blamed on Railtrak's failure to maintain the railroad properly, and in any event they had little or no incentive to maintain or extend their lines. Rail service in Britain, once extolled as great, is now among the world's most reviled. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: aes Subject: Re: Railtrack (was Re: Competition) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 21:25:33 -0700 Organization: Stanford University In article , Steve Hayes wrote: > In Telecom Digest V20 #284, Joey Lindstrom asked . . . whether a > similar infrastructure holding company would be applicable in the > telecoms field ... > Here is my interpretation of the Railtrack fiasco. I have strong > political views which of course colour my version Not much coloured at all IMHO. > Railtrack was brought down by circumstances, inefficiency and bad > luck. and most of all the basic stupidity of the underlying concept. > Now for the bad luck. There were three very bad train crashes. *Not* "bad luck" at all! -- rather the *expected* result of a system that divided and diffused the basic responsibilities of running the system in a safe (as well as efficient) manner; that created economic incentives to be unsafe (by cutting staff, cutting maintenance, cutting the quality of the work force); and that then allowed everyone involved to pass the buck (or is it the pound) and pass the blame to everyone else but themselves. The crashes were predictable. > Is this relevant to telecoms? I don't know that it is. Not for the safety part, anyway. > Steve Hayes > South Wales, UK ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #286 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jun 19 13:48:05 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA23163; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 13:48:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 13:48:05 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206191748.NAA23163@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #287 TELECOM Digest Wed, 19 Jun 2002 13:48:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 287 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson ISOC Bids on .ORG Registry (Internet Society) Re: So What Was Calling Me Anyway? (Joseph Singer) Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (PaulCoxwell@aol.com) Re: PartnerPlus Paging Jack - Hookable to Single Horn? (Carl Navarro) Re: Warning of Scam "Do Not Call" (Phil McKerracher) Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (73115.1041@compuserve.com) Notebaert Takes on Qwest (Monty Solomon) Tracking Your Cellular Phone Minutes (Monty Solomon) Re: Want to Buy Lucent Excel E1 Cards & Switches Selling Cisco (Anton) Re: Cell Phone Discards Causing New Pollution Problems (Carl Moore) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Internet Society Subject: ISOC Bids on .ORG Registry Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 10:37:10 -0400 Reply-To: lance@isoc.org The Internet Society Seeks to Make .ORG a Global Home for Non-Commercial Organizations; Announces Bid to Succeed VeriSign GRS as Registry Operator for .ORG Washington, DC, 19 June, 2002-Today, the Internet Society (ISOC) announced that it has submitted a bid to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to succeed VeriSign Global Registry Services, Inc. (NASDAQ: VRSN) as the registry operator for the .ORG top-level domain (TLD). ICANN is currently seeking a new registry operator to assume control of the .ORG registry when its current agreement with VeriSign expires on December 31, 2002.] If ISOC's proposal is accepted by ICANN, ISOC will form a not-for-profit corporation, Public Interest Registry (PIR), which will operate as a fully separate corporation solely controlled by ISOC. ISOC has entered into an agreement with Afilias Limited, a global registry services provider, to provide PIR with a full range of back-end registry services if it is awarded the .ORG registry. "ISOC's mission is to expand the Internet 'for the benefit of all the people of the world,' and as such, it is in a unique position to enable .ORG to flourish as a truly global home dedicated to serving the unique interests of non-commercial organizations on the Internet," according to ISOC CEO Lynn St. Amour. "ISOC is a strong contender because it has a global constituency that provides deep understanding of the policy and management issues facing .ORG. Additionally, ISOC has earned the respect of the Internet and non-commercial communities, assuring that policy and strategy for the .ORG domain will be effectively managed." ISOC's global outreach enables it to work cooperatively with many other global organizations, such as UNESCO, and the Center for Democracy and Technology, to create consensus around critical policy and standards issues. This network will enhance not only the voice of non-commercial entities within .ORG, but will enhance .ORG itself by creating an optimized domain for noncommercial interests. "As an inclusive, effective and diverse global body, ISOC, through PIR, is ideally suited to provide the organizational direction needed for .ORG to reach its full potential," said David Maher, ISOC Vice President for Public Affairs. Afilias is the registry operator for .INFO, currently manages more than 850,000 names, and has spearheaded the use of the new Extensive Provisioning Protocol (EPP) standard for registry operations. "I have no doubt that PIR and Afilias can deliver 'best in class' registry services that will enhance the stability of the Internet, deliver affordable services with a high degree of service responsiveness and reliability, and enable .ORG to tap its global potential," said Afilias President and CEO Hal Lubsen. ICANN is expected to announce the registry successor in August of 2002. For additional information about ISOC's bid see http://www.isoc.org/dotorg About ISOC The Internet Society is a not-for-profit membership organization founded in 1991 to be the international focal point for global cooperation and coordination in the development of the Internet and has offices in Washington DC and Geneva. Through its current initiatives in support of education and training, Internet standards and protocol, and public policy, ISOC has played a critical role in ensuring that the Internet has developed in a stable and open manner. For 10 years ISOC has run international network training programs for developing countries which have played a vital role in setting up the Internet connections and networks in virtually every country that has connected to the Internet. For additional information, please see www.isoc.org About Afilias Afilias, a fully integrated global provider of domain name registry services, maintains international headquarters in Dublin, Ireland, a sales office in London, sales and operational facilities in Toronto, and administrative offices in the U.S. near Philadelphia, PA. Afilias provides a full range of registry services leveraging proven technology that is fast, reliable and secure. Afilias was formed in September of 2000 and was the first new gTLD operator selected by ICANN in November of 2000 to launch a new registry system using a thick registry model based on the new EPP (extensible provisioning protocol) standard. For more information please visit www.afilias.info Note to editors: A digital replay of today's press conference detailing this announcement will be available for seven days beginning at 1:00 pm Eastern/ 17:00 GMT: United States dial-in number: +1-800-839-6713, International dial-in number: +1-402-220-2306; Confirmation#: 5139593 # # # Contacts: At ISOC Julie Williams Tel:+1-703-326-9880x103 Cell: +1-703-402-6715 Email: jwilliams@isoc.org At Afilias Heather Carle Tel: +1-215-706-5777 Cell: +1-732-277-8125 Email: hcarle@afilias.info ------------------------------ From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: So What Was Calling Me Anyway? Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 08:32:09 -0700 Organization: Drizzle Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:48:35 -0400, Gail M. Hall wrote: > Right now I have my voice mail OGM set to give the phone number only, > not my name. I thought that if I had the message give out my name, > any miscreants could then put together two pieces of information, > whereas this way they have only my number which apparently they > already had because that's what they called. > I'd be interested in opinions about what outgoing message you all feel > is safest but still helpful to legit callers. Personally, I would *not* give out the phone number in the announcement. If someone's just fooling to see what they get when they dial a certain number combination your number will be there. It confirms a certain number. Personally I think an announcement such as: "Hello, this is Gail. I can't take your call at the moment, but please leave your name and number and I will get back to you as soon as I can. Thank you." Moderator VoiceStream forum http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VoiceStream ------------------------------ From: PaulCoxwell@aol.com Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 07:14:40 EDT Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules > Is there place that I could get a list of dialing rules for everywhere > in the world? I've done a fair amout of reasearch, and believe the > answer to be no. But just to be thorough, I thought I'd try asking > here as well. > From my research, I believe each country would have at least the > following information: > - the country code (to call the country from another country) > - the international prefix (to dial out of the country) > - the long distance code (to dial between regions/cities) if one is needed > - the length of the "area code" > - when the "area code" should be used > I think the first three are pretty standard (and pretty static?). I > saw a post from a guy at Microsoft from a few years ago detailing the > rules, at least as they where at the time of his post. But I have > been able to find much less about dialing rules within a country. > As an example, I want to call a number in Terini, Italy 0744 690 921. > If I am in Terini and don't need to dial an "area code", what part of > it is the area code? Let's assume it's 0744. Do I always need to > dial 0744 when I'm not in that "area code"? Do I always need to dial > the 690 921 part regardless of where I am? Or are there locations > where just 921 will suffice. (I used to live in Germany, and vaguely > remember that you could dial with something like 4 digits, 7 digits, > or 10 digits depending on where you are calling from/to) > As an added bonus, this info would also include "area code" specific > dialing instructions. This would be used to hanldle cases like 10 > digit dialing in the US. The rule would be something like "only dial > the area code if you are dialing outside the current area code, or if > the area code is 215, 610, 267, 484, etc". There's a country-by-country list of trunk/IDDD prefixes and general information about numbers at www.phonebooth.interocitor.net/wtng but you're obviously asking for much more than that. The problem is that unlike North America's fixed number format, most of the rest of the world used variable-length numbers and area codes. Only in the last few years have we seen these start to gradually change to fixed-length formats in some countries. Beyond that, it's just a case of knowing the quirks of each individual system, e.g. geographical area codes in Britain at the moment are 02x, 011n, or 01nxx, where x=any digit and n=digit 2-9. If calling from a different area code, the full code+number is dialed. If calling from within the same area, just dial the local number, which will be 8, 7 or 6 digits respectively. The code is generally clear as being separated somehow from the rest of the number, e.g. (01692) 589123 or 01692--589123 or just 01692 589123. I believe there are still some (probably African) countries using SxS switches and a combination of STD and local routing codes, like we used to have in the U.K. Rules for what needs to be dialed under this arrangement are quite complicated. For example, near where I used to live the STD code 0872 was Truro, a fair-sized town. This office acted as a tandem (called a GSC - Group Switching Center) for many dependent minor offices in the surrounding villages. One such was Zelah, which had 3-digit local numbers. The national dialing code for Zelah was listed as 0872-54, which is what most of the country would dial to get there. But from Truro, subscribers just dialed the local routing code 54 plus the 3-digit number. It was common practice for minor dependent offices to reach the GSC by dialing 9. So someone on another minor office that used Truro as its GSC would call Zelah with 954 plus the local number. Thus instructions for calling Zelah 234 could be:- Dial 234, dial 54 234, dial 954 234, or dial 0872-54 234. There are even more complications, because sometimes traffic between two nearby minor exchanges would be great enough to warrant direct trunks. A vacant code would then be used to dial direct, bypassing the GSC, and making the local dialing instructions even more complex. If that wasn't enough, sometimes a local routing code would be used even if the town being dialed had its own STD code, e.g. about 10 miles from Truro was Redruth, STD code 0209. But from Truro, a local routing code 92 was used to get there, bypassing the STD network. (And yes, Zelah subscribers reached Redruth by dialling 992). I've gone into this to point out that for anywhere still using this system the actual digits that need to be dialed can vary considerably, so any comprehensive set of instructions to cover the whole country would be huge. Even on what might appear to be the more simple topic of country codes and international dialing, there are still many kludges between neighboring countries, such as the 048 code to reach Northern Ireland from the Republic of Ireland that I mentioned a short while ago. I think that compiling a full guide to what needs to be dialed in any given set of circumstances from anywhere in the world would be a mammoth task. I don't even want to THINK about the complications if alternate carriers become involved! ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: PartnerPlus Paging Jack - Hookable to Single Horn? Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 02:34:26 -0400 Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America On 18 Jun 2002 06:59:56 -0700, sc00bz@hotmail.com (Jeff Ritter) wrote: > I have a small warehouse area that needs a paging speaker/horn. Don't > need any additional paging zones in the forseeable future. > Can someone tell me what the specs are for the PAGE jack on the > processor module of a PartnerPlus phone system? 600 Ohms IIRC. > We'd like to hook this up to a one watt horn/speaker ... can this be > done directly off of the page jack without going thru a paging module, > like a PagePac? One watt isn't a whole lot of coverage. My single trumpet of choice is a Valcom 1030 or 1080. These show up on eBay from time to time for less than the wholesale. It requires 50ma of 24V DC power per trumpet and gives you 5 watts. So, a trumpet and a power supply will cost you about $60, even if you have to buy the power supply new. > Bonus question: Can we use the following horn (which we already have): > MPI-38 (3-6v 1.6 Amp)? I don't know what that is. > If so, how ... need an amp or can if be direct hooked? If not, what > kind of horn/amp/etc. would work, least cost? Buy a RatShack(tm) RCA phono plug to tinned leads for $2 and you're good to go. Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: Phil McKerracher Subject: Re: Warning of Scam "Do Not Call" Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 11:18:56 +0100 Carl Moore wrote in message news:telecom20.285.13@telecom-digest.org: > There is now a warning that you should NOT give out > personal information to callers who claim they can > help put you on a telemarketer "Do Not Call" list. > Some victims have been tricked into giving out numbers > for Social Security and telephone calling cards. > Announcement from Verizon said that joining "Do Not Call" does not > require you to confirm personal information. > (Sigh, recently I saw some email messages which claim to have > anti-virus tools but which themselves turn out to have viruses.) "Big bugs have small bugs upon their backs to bite 'em. Small bugs have smaller bugs and so ad infinitum..." As the saying goes. Phil McKerracher www.mckerracher.org ------------------------------ From: 73115.1041@compuserve.com Subject: Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 06:33:28 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) wrote: > What is the fastest way to get 500meg to San Diego if all you have is > a 56K modem? FedEx!! We used to have a saying: "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a box of tapes in the back of a stationwagon." And the reference to 'stationwagon' should give you a clue as to how far back that goes! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 23:25:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Notebaert takes on Qwest By Shawn Young THE WALL STREET JOURNAL June 18 - Richard Notebaert, the new head of Qwest Communications International Inc., may be less splashy than his predecessor, Joseph P. Nacchio. But that may be just what the ailing telephone company needs. AN ANXIOUS INVESTMENT community eager to see a turnaround at the telecom company responded well initially to the naming of the unassuming Mr. Notebaert, who is well-known in the staid world of the local-phone business. Although Mr. Nacchio's departure Sunday and Mr. Notebaert's appointment as chairman and chief executive triggered a 20% jump in Qwest's share price Monday, many analysts and investors said the company still faces such fundamental challenges that a quick turnaround either within the company or in its stock is unlikely. Mr. Notebaert's understated style will help him build bridges with employees, suppliers and investors, said Dean Gekas, a principal at State Street Global Advisors, which owns Qwest shares. But he added that Mr. Notebaert "really has his work cut out for him." http://www.msnbc.com/news/768875.asp ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 23:54:49 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Tracking Your Cellular Phone Minutes Providers make money on charging customers who go over By Sherrie Nachman THE WALL STREET JOURNAL June 18 - Cellular phone companies are pretty vocal when it comes to marketing their latest service offering. But they can get pretty quiet when you ask a basic question: How many minutes are left on that monthly plan? IT MAY COME as little surprise, but cellular phone providers get as much as 10% of their revenue -- and an even larger chunk of profit -- from charging customers hefty prices when they go over their limited allotment of monthly minutes, according to Roger Entner, an analyst at Yankee Group. Those overtime minutes can balloon into nasty bills since they cost up to a half-dollar a minute. (That price has been rising, too.) Small wonder cellular phone users get so miserly near the end of their billing cycle - refusing to lend a phone even to friends. http://www.msnbc.com/news/768877.asp ------------------------------ From: Anton Subject: Re: Want to Buy Lucent Excel E1 Cards & Switches Selling Cisco Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 01:50:14 -0500 We have several used Excel 16 port E1 cards as well as complete units. Give Anton a call at 1-850-222-4638 for more information. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 10:24:33 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Cell Phone Discards Causing New Pollution Problems As for batteries: I am frequently in Delaware (and am a former resident there), and I know that Recycle Delaware has (along with "igloos" which can collect glass and plastic bottles, cans, and newspapers) dropoff containers for household batteries, such as those used in pagers. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #287 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jun 20 12:56:41 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA10242; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 12:56:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 12:56:41 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206201656.MAA10242@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #288 TELECOM Digest Thu, 20 Jun 2002 12:57:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 288 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bell is Cut Off as Originator of the Phone (Gordon MacNay) Is a Bell Tolling for Bell Labs? (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (Paul A. Lee) Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (Simon Bennett) Re: TeleZapper? (Clarence Dold) Re: Railtrack (Burkitt-Gray Alan) Re: Consumer VoIP (Paul) Re: Tracking Your Cellular Phone Minutes (Pete Weiss) Re: Software For Direct Translation of Telephonic Mode to Binary (J.Lee) Panasonic KX-TVS100 Serial Port Settings (John Oliver) Phone Numbers of Interest (David B. Horvath, CCP) Calling all NMS Programming Savvy Folks (Alan de Zeeuw) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MacNay, Gordon Subject: Bell is Cut Off as Originator of the Phone Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 09:05:55 -0600 Bell is cut off as originator of the phone U.S. Congress gives honour to Italian immigrant BRANTFORD, Ont. - Stunned officials have been burning up the phone lines after learning that the U.S. Congress has ousted Alexander Graham Bell - the pride of Brantford - as the father of modern mass communications. Bell has long been recognized as the inventor of the telephone, the concept for which he developed at his family's Brantford, Ont. homestead. His revolutionary device was patented in the United States in 1876. But last week, Congress passed a resolution crediting little-known Italian immigrant Antonio Meucci as the phone's rightful originator. Brian Wood, curator of the Bell Homestead Museum in Brantford, was surprised to hear of the resolution. "If this can be proven, then Meucci certainly deserves recognition as contributing to the realm of telephony," Wood said. "But I don't see it as a huge threat. There may be others all over the world who did similar things but didn't get patented or legally known." The Italian newspaper la Repubblica wrote on Monday that justice had finally been served - 113 years after Meucci's death. The newspaper referred to Bell as an impostor, profiteer and a "cunning Scotsman" who usurped Meucci's spot in history, while Meucci died poor and unrecognized. Vito Fossella, a U.S. congressman for Staten Island, N.Y., authored the resolution. "In the past number of years, historical records and scholarly research have concluded that Meucci was the original inventor of the telephone, long before Bell," said Fossella's spokesperson, Craig Donner. "Because of Meucci's role, he should receive recognition for his contribution." The resolution recognizes that Meucci filed a caveat on his early telephone on Dec. 28, 1871, which gave notice of an impending patent. But the Italian inventor couldn't afford the $10 to renew the caveat in 1874. If he had, the resolution says, Alexander Graham Bell would not have been granted his patent two years later. But no matter what, said Wood, Brantford will always be the home of the telephone. "The history behind Bell and what he did here will always be in place. The work Bell did here was very significant. Bell himself claimed that Brantford was where he invented the telephone." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 03:11:53 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: NATURE: Is a Bell Tolling for Bell Labs? * Original: FROM..... Dave Farber ------ Forwarded Message From: David Akin Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 22:29:29 -0400 Subject: FWD: NATURE: Is a bell tolling for Bell Labs? Hi Dave -- Thought many IPers would be interested in this article, from the latest edition of Nature David Akin CTV News The Globe and Mail Is a bell tolling for Bell Labs? PAUL GRANT Dark clouds quickly began to gather over the exceptional finding of superconductivity at 117 K reported last year by Hendrik Schn and collaborators at Bell Laboratories in Murray Hill, New Jersey. Shortly after publication of the paper, I was asked by a reporter aware of my reputation as a sceptical observer of reports of 'unidentified superconducting objects' whether I felt uncomfortable that no one had reproduced any of the Bell Labs's field-effect transistor (FET) superconductivity results. My answer was: "Normally, I would be. But this is Bell Labs, and although these guys were my scientific adversaries for many years, I have the highest respect for their competence, credibility and, indeed, collegiality, and will accept their claims until proven otherwise." Yet it has turned out that several attempts to reproduce not only these results, but also others on more general organic FET configurations, have been unsuccessful, culminating in allegations of duplication of data in several papers ... [Full story at: http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nature/journal/v417/n6891/full/417789a_fs.html ] ------ End of Forwarded Message For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 18:16:50 -0400 Linc Madison wrote: > The answer for the United States is for all the state PUCs to > get their acts together and follow the national recommendation > that all calls be permitted as 1+10D, irrespective of area code > and toll status. Many have tried, but no one has yet come up > with a cogent argument against that scheme. It does nothing to > dilute toll alerting in areas that have that protection. It > simply allows a uniform national standard dialing rule for "I > want this call to just go through and I don't care whether > or not a toll charge applies." AMEN! HALLELUJAH! and THANK YOU! Is there any organized effort to make this happen, or will we remain subject to the politics, whims, and misapprehension of state and municipal regulators? I wonder if the FCC or Congress could be persuaded to take a stand in the interest of interstate commerce? > At least 99.9% of the switching equipment in this country can > seamlessly handle non-billing (or message unit billing, or > whatever) of local calls dialed with the extraneous 1+ prefix. But it seems that a far smaller percentage of the people at telcos and regulatory agencies can do so. I have been told many times that the "reason" for a hodgepodge of 7-digit, 10-digit, and 11-digit dialing requirements is because "otherwise, you would be billed for what should have been a local call". One of the worst examples I have encountered of late is the Memphis, Tennessee, and DeSoto County, Mississippi, metro area. Both BellSouth and the Mississippi PSC claimed that requiring 7- or 10-digit dialing of local calls was necessary to prevent routing the calls to an IXC and billing the subscriber. When I pointed out that '1+10D' dialing of any call is accommodated in such places as California, Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, and Michigan, the reason changed to "the county governments required it due to popular demand". The enduring requirement of an initial '1' as a toll flag -- and ONLY a toll flag -- seems to be prevalent in Southern states. Or is that just my "regional chauvinism"? Does anyone know of a Southern state that allows '1+10D' dialing of local calls? Or a state in another region that adheres to the toll flag '1' "dogma"? Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ Reply-To: Simon Bennett From: Simon Bennett Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 23:56:45 +0100 Ryan, You could try the following websites which contain numbering plans http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/inr/nnp/index.html http://www.numberingplans.com/ http://www.numberplan.org/ These do not contain the exact information you are looking for but would provide a start since the numbering plan is made up of the rules you describe and therefore you can work back to discover the rules. I have have a (fairly) comprehensive list of all the Telecom Regulators' websites if you want ... send me a mail offlist. Does anyone have a list of International Mobile and International Audiotext codes they could share? Regards, Simon Bennett > Is there place that I could get a list of dialing rules for everywhere > in the world? I've done a fair amout of reasearch, and believe the > answer to be no. But just to be thorough, I thought I'd try asking > here as well. > From my research, I believe each country would have at least the > following information: > > - the country code (to call the country from another country) > - the international prefix (to dial out of the country) > - the long distance code (to dial between regions/cities) if one is needed > - the length of the "area code" > - when the "area code" should be used > I think the first three are pretty standard (and pretty static?). I > saw a post from a guy at Microsoft from a few years ago detailing the > rules, at least as they where at the time of his post. But I have > been able to find much less about dialing rules within a country. > As an example, I want to call a number in Terini, Italy 0744 690 921. > If I am in Terini and don't need to dial an "area code", what part of > it is the area code? Let's assume it's 0744. Do I always need to > dial 0744 when I'm not in that "area code"? Do I always need to dial > the 690 921 part regardless of where I am? Or are there locations > where just 921 will suffice. (I used to live in Germany, and vaguely > remember that you could dial with something like 4 digits, 7 digits, > or 10 digits depending on where you are calling from/to) > As an added bonus, this info would also include "area code" specific > dialing instructions. This would be used to hanldle cases like 10 > digit dialing in the US. The rule would be something like "only dial > the area code if you are dialing outside the current area code, or if > the area code is 215, 610, 267, 484, etc". > Ryan Hope > Arris Systems, Inc ------------------------------ From: dold@95.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: TeleZapper? Date: 20 Jun 2002 00:56:08 GMT Organization: Wintercreek Data AgentX wrote: > Is it possible for such a device to work and if so how? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What happens is some telemarketers are ... > mike@sandman.com ... *eventually* the telemarketers will get wise to > this and spend another two or three seconds on the line to listen for > a human voice, which will mark the end of the telezapper device. Ask > Mike for more details. PAT] The dialer that one of my customers uses will likely not be reprogrammed to listen for tones more correctly. It is already pretty poor in that respect. I think it is more likely that the small companies will continue to be fooled, and the big companies will go with hardware supervision on a T1. The T1 Hardware supervision will not be fooled by my Telezapper. I suspect this is already true, as some autodialers do get through, but many hang up immediately. My wife insists that the total volume has dropped dramatically. Clarence A Dold - dold@email.rahul.net - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA. ------------------------------ From: Alan Burkitt-Gray Subject: Re: Railtrack Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 13:31:20 +0100 Wes Leatherock wrote: > [Railtrack] has been an unmitigated disaster. > .... Rail service in Britain, once extolled as great, is now among > the world's most reviled. Well, though I'm opposed to how the former Major government privatised British Rail, as a daily London commuter for nearly 30 years and frequent long-distance traveller I'd have to disagree with Wes's comment. The commuter service in London is dreadful now, but it was dreadful in 1973 when I started using it. And accidents were not unknown in the old BR days -- close to where I live in London there have been four or five major accidents in the past 40 years, with deaths totalling around 200, and all in the pre-privatisation days, (Lewisham, Hither Green, Purley, Clapham Junction, Cannon Street). Recent accidents (Hatfield, Potter's Bar, Ladbroke Grove etc) have been spectacular and can be attributed to mistakes of the system but at least the death toll has been lower, largely due to the design of the coaches, which of course dates back to the BR days. Alan Burkitt-Gray Editor, Global Telecoms Business Euromoney Institutional Investor plc, Nestor House, Playhouse Yard, London EC4V 5EX, UK tel +44 20 7779 8518 fax +44 20 7779 8492 e-mail aburkitt@euromoneyplc.com www.globaltelecomsbusiness.com ------------------------------ From: paul@paulderby.net (Paul) Subject: Re: Consumer VoIP Date: 19 Jun 2002 22:27:55 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ mc@110.net (floydthebarber) wrote in message news:: > Does anyone have any information about Vonage, a company that purports > to offer complete VoIP service over broadband? I've had Vonage service for a couple of months now. It has worked extremely well on an XO/Covad SDSL line and on a Qwest ADSL line. I take the ATA interface box with me on the plane and use it wherever I have broadband access. If I do a lot of network intensive activity I do get some voice clipping, but most of the time the QOS is decent. ------------------------------ From: pete-weiss@psu.edu (Pete Weiss) Subject: Re: Tracking Your Cellular Phone Minutes Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:59:46 -0400 Organization: Penn State University -- Office of Administrative Systems On Tue, 18 Jun 2002 23:54:49 -0400, Monty Solomon wrote: > June 18 - Cellular phone companies are pretty vocal when it comes to > marketing their latest service offering. But they can get pretty > quiet when you ask a basic question: How many minutes are left on > that monthly plan? I'd like to know who is auditing the wireless toll clocks? If the call (from pressing send to end) last 59 second or 60 seconds, and round up occurs, am I really only being charged for one minute? Pete ------------------------------ From: J3r3my L33 Subject: Re: Software For Direct Translation of Telephonic Mode to Binary Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 16:27:33 -0400 Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County What do you mean by "dedicated" line? ISDN ADSL T1 or is it POTS? Some test equipment worth checking out would be the ParaScope 2000 at fetest.com, and the analyzers at gl.com. Cheers, Jeremy athy wrote in message news:telecom20.283.9@telecom-digest.org: > I have a black box which produces data (at times I control) which goes > out over a dedicated telephone line. I get a bad print-out, but I > want to capture the data & convert it to binary for computer > searching. It seems likely that a splitter or Y connection in the > phone line would not alter the out-going data. Will that work, and > what software can I use to translate the data so captured? ------------------------------ From: joliver@john-oliver.net (John Oliver) Subject: Panasonic KX-TVS100 Serial Port Settings Date: 19 Jun 2002 23:45:47 GMT I'm hving trouble establishing communication with a KX-TVS100 I thought 9600 8-N-1 Flow Control: None was the way to go, but I have a vague memory of Panasonic wanting some oddball setting. John Oliver http://www.john-oliver.net/ joliver@john-oliver.net http://www.mrtg-monitoring.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 23:50:59 -0400 From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) Subject: Phone Numbers of Interest The first phone number of interest if you get a lot of SPAM: If you have previously requested to be taken off this list and are still receiving this advertisement, you may call us at 1-(888) 817-9902, or write to: Abuse Control Center, 7657 Winnetka Ave., Suite 245, Canoga Park, CA 91306 [Hmmm, I'll have to look at that SPAM again, if they're sending from California, they're subject to the California anti-spam laws]. ... and ... If you have previously unsubscribed and are still receiving this message, you may email our Abuse Control Center, or call 1-888-763-2497, or write us at: NoSpam, 6484 Coral Way, Miami, FL, 33155 ... and ... SDI-LABS TOLL FREE:1-561-742-5932 [Wait a second, a 561 area code is toll free????] 9835-16 Lake Worth Rd. #227 Lake Worth,FL 33467 To be rcancelled FOR FREE from our email list please click on the following link and and hit send. Your email address will be removed within 24 hours. If you have previously cancelled and are still receiving this message, or need to speak with us regarding this email, you may call our ABUSE CONTROL CENTER immediately Toll Free at 1-888-425-6788 or email [deleted] , You may also write us at nomore 9835-16 Lake Worth Road #227 - Lake Worth, FL 33467 - David [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So let's give them a call and let them know about all the email addresses under our control which need to be removed. Or is this a tricky way to get new email addresses to be spammed? PAT] ------------------------------ From: alan@dezeeuw.ca (Alan de Zeeuw) Subject: Calling all NMS Programming Savvy Folks Date: 20 Jun 2002 07:26:22 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I'm using the NMS stack to play wave files to callers that call in through an AG4000 card. When storing the files locally the messages start playing back immediately. When I store the wave files on a computer separate from the computer hosting the AG4000 the files play back is almost immediate; it is also acceptable when latency of 150 ms is introduced. When I increase the number of callers from one to 368 (ie 4 cards) not much delay is experienced when there is no latency but the delay in starting the wave file playback rises to over 3 minutes when the latency is experienced! Has anyone else experienced this? How'd you get around this? I'm using Windows 2000 on both computers. Thanks in advance for any clues you can provide. Alan alan@dezeeuw.ca ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #288 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jun 21 20:27:26 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA04741; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 20:27:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 20:27:26 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206220027.UAA04741@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #289 TELECOM Digest Fri, 21 Jun 2002 20:27:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 289 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 6/20/2002 ICB HeadsUp Headlines (Judith Oppenheimer) Taxation Without Representation! (Judith Oppenheimer) Re: Panasonic KX-TVS100 Serial Port Settings (John Oliver) Re: Consumer VoIP (Cezanne Huq) Re: Consumer VoIP (intcpu) Internet Society Announces Election of New Board of Trustees (anne@isoc) Re: Tracking Your Cellular Phone Minutes (Joseph Singer) Re: Railtrack (was Re: Competition) (Wes Leatherock) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: 6/20/2002 ICB HeadsUp Headlines Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 22:56:48 -0400 ICB HEADS UP HEADLINES for the period ending June 20, 2002 ____________________________________________________ from http://ICBTollFreeNews.com - Covering the Political, Legal and Marketing Arenas of 800, ENUM and Dot Com. ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ ARTICLE ACCESS CODE LEGEND ICB Toll Free News offers two valuable service options: F = Free - News and Features articles P = Premium - Unlimited Site Access including all Articles and Documents. Registration information is not sold, leased or rented. *** For additional information about topics and stories, keyword search here: http://www.icbtollfree.com/Search.cfm. ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ ICB RECOMMENDS ... "Ruling the Root: Internet Governance and the Taming of Cyberspace" by Milton Mueller, explains how control of the root is being leveraged to control the Internet itself in such key areas as trademark and copyright protection, surveillance of users, content regulation, and regulation of the domain name supply industry. "Buy this book. Buy a few extra copies, and send them to your national government officials responsible for ICANN policy. In addition to a good, concise explanation of the basics of the DNS, it provides the best single history of the politics of the DNS wars to be found between hard covers. Even veterans of the DNS wars will find it useful to explain the bits they missed, and as the key reference work." ... ICANNWatch http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0262134128/qid=1024593481/sr=8-1/icb tollfreene-20 ******** 1-800 AFTA (http://www.1800afta.org) Creating a positive marketing and regulatory environment for service providers of 800 numbers and service, and their business customers. ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ F - RIR'S WANT LESS ICANN, MORE STABILITY Domain names make headlines, but IP number allocation is where the real money is. The Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) historically manage IP number allocation, and now state, "The RIRs have concluded that in the interests of enhanced stability and efficiency, the responsibility for maintaining the IANA Address Registry should be passed to the RIRs... The RIRs view with considerable concern the manner in which ICANN has assumed a critical role in the operation of certain aspects of the address management function, and at the same time, allowed itself to become deeply enmeshed in the complex issues of domain name management to the effective exclusion of all other roles... the RIRs see no value in an ICANN structure that admits the possibility of imposition of arbitrary and potentially capricious policies onto the management of Internet resources." (An internet pundit comments, "Would the last constituent part to run screaming from ICANN please turn out the lights. That would leave the IPC, but they're used to operating in the dark.") CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5707 F - MARKLE ISSUES ICANN REFORM STATEMENT The Markle Foundation, a financial contributor of ICANN since 1999 (ICANN is also listed on the Markle website among its Project Partners) has jumped the sinking ICANN ship. "ICANN, as it has developed, is seriously flawed as a global institution able to make decisions worthy of deference or to safeguard the public interest in an increasingly networked society... Given the inability of ICANN to adequately represent the broad public interest over the course of its initial four years, we believe that a narrowing of its mission and increased governmental oversight of its remaining policy activities must be established." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5706 F - MARKEY: "GLOBAL CONSENSUS ONLY THAT ICANN'S A FAILURE" The Commerce Department, which oversees ICANN, plans to decide in September whether to renew the agreement under which ICANN manages the domain-name system. "Barring significant changes, we'll have to look at alternatives to ICANN," said Rep. John M. Shimkus (R-Ill.), a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Another Commerce Committee member, Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), was more blunt: "Although ICANN is supposed to be a consensus-based organization, the irony is that the only thing it has achieved global consensus on is that it is a failure." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5705 F - INTERNET 800 DIRECTORY'S ONLINE TRAFFIC SOARS Recent studies suggest that as much as 85% of web-based transactions are completed by phone, with toll free calling being the most obvious method. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5703 F - RULING THE ROOT IANA issues ccTLD Redelegation Step-by-Step Overview, and bottom lines it: pay ICANN. Period. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5704 F - ENUM USAGE SCENARIOS In general, all Global Services, including International Freephone, should process in a similar manner. In the case of PSTN-originated calls, that process is in place today and should not be impacted by interworking with IP-based networks. For IP-originated calls, the same general principle holds true. This AT&T Internet Draft offers an interesting read-through. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5701 F - LIST OF .ORG APPLICANTS PUBLISHED ICANNWatch reports that ICANN has published a list of applications for the "reassignment" of .org. ICANN notes that they "have not yet been verified to be complete in all respects or to be in proper form." On first glance, they range, according to ICANNWatch, from the bitterly cynical to the hopelessly naive. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5700 F - AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS COME Fund ICANN -- with the monies held in trust until ICANN has met its obligations and responsibilities. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5702 P - GEOGRAPHIC NUMBER SECURITY MEASURES INADEQUATE FOR NON-GEOGRAPHICS ENUM Toll free and other nongeographic numbers sent back to the drawing board in search of applicable authentication and verification methods. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5699 /=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= advertisement =-=-=-\ Are you a multi-site company with a great toll free vanity number but NO locator service marketng support? mailto:sales@800management.com , subject: Put my number to work! \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=.=/ -- Lost and Stolen Number Retrieval -- ENUM Survival Strategies -- Crisis Resolution -- Vanity Number Issues, Guidance & Navigation -- Tollfree Number Traces -- Representation at SNAC, ENUM & ICANN Forums -- Strategic Leadership + Competitive Intelligence -- Custom Research Reports -- Custom Problem Solving: disputes, litigation support, RespOrg issues, etc. ICB Consultancy -- http://1800TheExpert.com \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=.=/ Looking for the best 800 and long distance rates available today? Choose from multiple programs - Rates as low as 2.9¢ per minute, with no monthly minimums or hidden service charges! Click here: http://WhoSells800.com \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=/ P - LIMITED PROGRESS ON PRIVATIZATION MAKES OUTCOME UNCERTAIN The United States General Accounting Office testified before Congress today, detailing point by point ICANN's aberrant history and poor performance record. The GAO is also none too pleased with the U.S. Department of Commerce's reticent oversight. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5697 P - NEW 800 NXX'S WILL NOT COME EASY The desired numbers are protected, and not portable. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5698 P - THE GOOD NEWS IS A CCTLD REDELEGATION SANS ICANN. The bad news is a ccTLD redelegation sans ICANN - a government takeover. The South African government says that its just responding to ICANN pres' Stuart Lynn's suggestion that the DNS needs more government involvement. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5696 P - EU COUNCIL ISSUES DRAFT FOR COORDINATED POSITION MEMBER STATES, ON ICANN The options of reforming the existing ICANN entity or creating a new entity should both be explored. And clear rules and procedures for accountability of ICANN should be established. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5694 F - GLOBAL ENUM MATRIX POSTED The matrix represents the list of ITU-T E.164 assigned country codes in numerical order along with updated status for request for ENUM delegation. There are more objections than approvals, among them a UK company named TLD Solutions Ltd that tried (and failed) to grab the International Freephone Service country code. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5695 P - ENUM SCENARIOS If the assignee decides to enter his toll-free number in ENUM, this is a bypass of the operator providing the 800 service. Will this be allowed by national regulators or ITU (in case of +800) policy? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5692 P - WIPO REPORT REVEALS UNITED NATIONS INTEREST IN WEB GOVERNANCE UN Legal Counsel says, "We find it remarkable that the governing of the Domain Name System, an essential element of the internet, should be entrusted solely to a private entity operating on a private law basis rather than under the authority of an international representative body ... in the past this would not have been considered an appropriate means of regulating phenomena with such international impact. We urge you to raise these questions with your governments: What is the appropriate forum for internet governance? Should such matters really continue to be entrusted to private law regulation? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5691 F - ISOC TO BID ON .ORG If ISOC "wins" the bid, it will receive $5 million from Verisign, and a business that generates 15 to 18 million in annual registry fees. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5690 F - ICANN EVOLUTION AND REFORM COMMITTEE ISSUES ITS REPORT Ever read "The Football Gags"? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5689 ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ EVERY 3.6 SECONDS SOMEONE DIES FROM HUNGER http://www.hungersite.com/ ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ ABOUT ICB ICB HeadsUp Headlines is sent by request. Subscriptions to ICB HeadsUp Headlines are free to qualified applicants. Visit http://www.icbtollfree.com/reg.cfm?NextURL=Index.cfm to register. To unsubscribe visit http://www.icbtollfree.com/account.cfm and uncheck the Mailing List Subscription box. ___________________________________________________ ADVERTISING For information on advertising in ICB HeadsUp Headlines, mailto:editor@icbtollfree.com, subject: Headlines Advertising ____________________________________________________ Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. ____________________________________________________ Copyright 2002 ICB, Inc. All rights reserved. ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Taxation Without Representation! Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 12:35:30 -0400 Last week the Markle Foundation stated, "ICANN, as it has developed, is seriously flawed as a global institution able to make decisions worthy of deference or to safeguard the public interest in an increasingly networked society..." Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) was more blunt: "Although ICANN is supposed to be a consensus-based organization, the irony is that the only thing it has achieved global consensus on is that it is a failure." The IAB and RIR's are increasingly critical of ICANN (to say the least), and ccTLD's and registrars want funding to be tied to performance.* ICANN's reaction? Tax domain names to fund its operations -- and cease public elections. Directors will now be chosen by an ICANN "nominating committee". And it wants this plan approved at its meeting in Bucharest next week: "It is time to close this debate. ICANN must now move forward with dispatch." http://www.icann.org/committees/evol-reform/blueprint-20jun02.htm Is this a runaway train? Read "Ruling the Root: Internet Governance and the Taming of Cyberspace" by Milton Mueller, which explains how control of the root is being leveraged to control the Internet itself in such key areas as trademark and copyright protection, surveillance of users, content regulation, and regulation of the domain name supply industry. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0262134128/qid=1024593481/sr=8-1/icb tollfreene-20 *For thorough coverage on the ICANN debacle read http://ICANNWatch.org and http://ICBTollFreeNews.com. Judith Oppenheimer http://JudithOppenheimer.com http://ICBTollFreeNews.com 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert Visit 1-800 AFTA, http://www.1800afta.org ------------------------------ From: joliver@john-oliver.net (John Oliver) Subject: Re: Panasonic KX-TVS100 Serial Port Settings Date: 20 Jun 2002 17:45:03 GMT On 19 Jun 2002 23:45:47 GMT, John Oliver wrote: > I'm hving trouble establishing communication with a KX-TVS100 I > thought 9600 8-N-1 Flow Control: None was the way to go, but I have a > vague memory of Panasonic wanting some oddball setting. For the archives ... it's 19200 8-N-1 John Oliver http://www.john-oliver.net/ joliver@john-oliver.net http://www.mrtg-monitoring.com/ ------------------------------ From: deejaycez@aol.com (Cezanne Huq) Subject: Re: Consumer VoIP Date: 20 Jun 2002 15:00:16 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Vonage (http://www.vonage.com.) is as perfect as consumer technology gets. You'll be impressed with the call quality, pricing packages and customer service. They are also offering a 30 day trial so sign up and check it out for yourself. Cezanne mc@110.net (floydthebarber) wrote in message news:: > Does anyone have any information about Vonage, a company that purports > to offer complete VoIP service over broadband? ------------------------------ From: intcpu@surfy.net (intcpu) Subject: Re: Consumer VoIP Date: 21 Jun 2002 08:29:52 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ There a site showing so many INTERNET phone services providers, You can get more at http://iphone.milescape.com paul@paulderby.net (Paul) wrote in message news: : > mc@110.net (floydthebarber) wrote in message > news:: >> Does anyone have any information about Vonage, a company that purports >> to offer complete VoIP service over broadband? > I've had Vonage service for a couple of months now. It has worked > extremely well on an XO/Covad SDSL line and on a Qwest ADSL line. I > take the ATA interface box with me on the plane and use it wherever I > have broadband access. If I do a lot of network intensive activity I > do get some voice clipping, but most of the time the QOS is decent. ------------------------------ From: Internet Society Subject: Internet Society Announces Election of New Board of Trustees Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 11:36:33 -0400 Reply-To: lance@isoc.org INTERNET SOCIETY ANNOUNCES ELECTION OF NEW BOARD OF TRUSTEES Founded by Internet Pioneers, ISOC Celebrates 10 years of advancing the Internet for the benefit of all people throughout the world. Washington, DC, 21 June, 2002-The Internet Society (ISOC) announced yesterday the election of eight new members to its Board of Trustees. The organization, which is celebrating its 10th anniversary, functions as the international focal point for global cooperation and coordination in the development of the Internet. The new board members took office this week, in conjunction with ISOC's 12th Annual INET Conference, held in Washington, D.C. INET is an annual event where technology experts, policy makers and business leaders meet to debate and discuss technologies and policies that will define the future of the Internet. ISOC's board is made up of representatives from industry, the engineering community and the Society's membership. New board members include Philippe Courtot, Chairman and CEO of Qualys, Inc.; Fred Baker, Cisco, Inc.; Erik Huizer, SURFnet ExpertiseCentrum ; Toshio Miki, DoCoMo Communications Laboratories; Glenn Ricart, CenterBeam; Latif Ladid, Ericsson; Osten Franberg, Ericsson; and Veni Markovski, Global Internet Policy Initiative. They will join current board members Brian Carpenter, Rosa Delgado, Barbara Fraser, Christine Maxwell, Wawa Ngenge, Alan Greenberg, Don Heath, Kees Neggers and George Sadowsky. Newly-appointed board member Fred Baker was elected chairman of ISOC's Board of Trustees. Ten years ago ISOC was formed with the primary intent of providing an institutional home for and financial support for the Internet standards process through the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). The Society was to engage in a variety of activities including public policy, conferences, workshops, and other activities that would facilitate developing countries getting on the Internet as well as contribute to its overall stability and openness. It was also to act as a neutral and internationally recognized body, devoted to the support of Internet administrative infrastructure. Plans for ISOC's formation were announced at the INET Conference in June 1991 in Copenhagen and it was officially formed in January 1992. Today, ISOC has fulfilled that role and more. It is the foremost not-for-profit organization focused exclusively on Internet issues. Not only is it the organizational home of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), but also the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) and other Internet-related bodies. ISOC has played a critical role in ensuring that the Internet has developed in a stable and open manner. For the last 10 years it has run international network training programs for developing countries which have played a vital role in setting up the Internet connections and networks in virtually every country that has connected to the Internet. ISOC is taking the next step in this evolution with the recent announcement of its intent to bid for the .ORG registry based on the belief that a thriving non-commercial presence is a key element in developing a strong social and technical infrastructure in all nations. About ISOC The Internet Society is a not-for-profit membership organization founded in 1991 to be the international focal point for global cooperation and coordination in the development of the Internet and has offices in Washington DC and Geneva. Through its current initiatives in support of education and training, Internet standards and protocol, and public policy, ISOC has played a critical role in ensuring that the Internet has developed in a stable and open manner. For 10 years ISOC has run international network training programs for developing countries which have played a vital role in setting up the Internet connections and networks in virtually every country that has connected to the Internet. # # # Contact: Julie Williams Tel:+1-703-326-9880x103 Cell: +1-703-402-6715 Email: jwilliams@isoc.org ------------------------------ From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: Tracking Your Cellular Phone Minutes Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 15:03:40 -0700 Organization: Drizzle Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:59:46 -0400, pete-weiss@psu.edu (Pete Weiss) wrote: > On Tue, 18 Jun 2002 23:54:49 -0400, Monty Solomon > wrote: >> June 18 - Cellular phone companies are pretty vocal when it comes to >> marketing their latest service offering. But they can get pretty >> quiet when you ask a basic question: How many minutes are left on >> that monthly plan? > I'd like to know who is auditing the wireless toll clocks? If the > call (from pressing send to end) last 59 second or 60 seconds, and > round up occurs, am I really only being charged for one minute? I would hazzard a guess that if you reached straight up 60 seconds including the time it took to release the call that you would be charged only for one minute, but I guess it's probably anyone's guess and who are you going to complain to if they say the extra minute. Still it would be nice if VoiceStream billed exactly as Fido in Canada does. It's extremely easy for them to bill to the second with GSM. They just choose not to do it. It's better for them. Personal replies most likely will not be read. Please reply in the newsgroup ------------------------------ From: wesrock@aol.com (Wes Leatherock) Date: 21 Jun 2002 23:01:21 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Railtrack (was Re: Competition) Steve Hayes wrote: [ ... ] > Railtrack was brought down by circumstances, inefficiency and bad > luck. The circumstances were that successive governments had cut back > investment in the railways for decades so there was already a big > backlog of maintenance and improvements outstanding when Railtrack > started. But the situation is not the same in the U.S.A., where the government has never invested in the telephone network and its investment in the railroads has been limited to subsidization of passenger service. Passenger service is a minor part of the railroad service in the U.S.A., except in the "Northeast Corridor," where Amtrak (with government subsidy) owns the track (plant) and charges such high rates to freight railroads as to cause them to avoid it where at all possible, adding more trucks to the roads and highways. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #289 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jun 21 21:59:03 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA06234; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:59:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:59:03 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206220159.VAA06234@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #290 TELECOM Digest Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:59:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 290 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (Mark Brader) Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (Dominic Richens) Re: Bell is Cut Off as Originator of the Phone (Mark Brader) AAL1 Pointers (Milorad Covic) Re: [FRAUD ALERT] Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available (Robert Bonomi) Re: So What Was Calling Me Anyway? (Robert Bonomi) News Headlines of Interest 6/21/02 (Monty Solomon) Book Review: Ruling the Root (Judith Oppenheimer) 800/900 Numbers in Spain (rhallema@xs4all.nl) Two Days Without Service (Andrew Diseker) Another Set of Phone Numbers of Interest (David Horvath) Re: Telezapper (stetch@houston) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 01:07:01 EDT From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) Paul Lee writes: > The enduring requirement of an initial '1' as a toll flag -- and ONLY > a toll flag -- seems to be prevalent in Southern states. Or is that > just my "regional chauvinism"? > Does anyone know of a Southern state that allows '1+10D' dialing of > local calls? Or a state in another region that adheres to the toll > flag '1' "dogma"? States I don't know about, but 1-means-toll is the general rule in Canada. I just tried dialing various local numbers as 1+10D (instead of 10D) here in Toronto, or specifically here in 416-488, and each attempt drew an intercept: "This is a local call. Do not dial 1 or 0 before the number you are calling. This is a recording. [pause and repeat once]" What was interesting was that the intercept always occurred when I'd dialed 7 digits after the 1. I then tried dialing some long-distance numbers as 10D, and sure enough, they got an intercept after 7 digits: "This is a long-distance call. Please dial 1 or 0 as well as the area code for the number you are calling. This is a recording. [p&r1]" Doing the intercept at *that* point sure seems like a holdover from the days when local calls were 7D, the way God intended, and 1+7D was for long-distance calls to what then were distant parts of area code 416. Mark Brader "You can do this in a number of ways. Toronto IBM chose to do all of them... msb@vex.net why do you find that funny?" --D. Taylor My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ From: Dominic Richens Subject: Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 07:49:01 -0400 Organization: Nortel <73115.1041@compuserve.com> wrote: > We used to have a saying: "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a box > of tapes in the back of a stationwagon." > And the reference to 'stationwagon' should give you a clue as to how far > back that goes! Andrew Tannebaum is the source of that, from his "Computer Networking" textbook/bible. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Bell is Cut Off as Originator of the Phone Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 01:10:11 EDT From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) > "In the past number of years, historical records and scholarly > research have concluded that Meucci was the original inventor of the > telephone, long before Bell," said Fossella's spokesperson, Craig > Donner. "Because of Meucci's role, he should receive recognition for > his contribution." > The resolution recognizes that Meucci filed a caveat on his early > telephone on Dec. 28, 1871, which gave notice of an impending > patent. But the Italian inventor couldn't afford the $10 to renew the > caveat in 1874. If he had, the resolution says, Alexander Graham Bell > would not have been granted his patent two years later. In "The Book of Firsts" (1974, Clarkson N. Potter, ISBN 0-517-51577-6), Patrick Robertson says that Meucci built his telephone in 1849, more than 20 years before the caveat, in Havana, and ... # With this instrument he claimed to have been able to converse with # his invalid wife ... on the third floor, from the basement of his # house. ... Though his invention was never demonstrated publicly, # it seems probable from the description in the caveat that it was # capable of transmitting articulate but imperfect speech. According to the same source, the first telephone to be publicly demonstrated was built by Johann Philipp Reis in Germany in 1860, with an improved version following in 1861, when ... # ... verses of songs were transmitted over a 300 ft. line between # the meeting room and the Civic Hospital. Listeners claimed to be # able to recognize the tunes, though it is doubtful whether they # were able to distinguish more than a few of the words. In view # of modern tests made with Reis telephones ... it seems likely that # they were capable of transmitting articulate speech spasmodically. Robertson then describes Bell's telephone as the first "capable of sustained articulate speech". He says it was patented on March 9, 1876 (two WWW sources say March 3 and March 7); the first coherent message, the famous "Come here, Watson, I want you", was transmitted at Boston on March 10, 1876. Mark Brader | "I can direct dial today a man my parents warred with. Toronto | They wanted to kill him, I want to sell software to him." msb@vex.net | -- Brad Templeton My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ From: mcov@intracom.gr (Milorad Covic) Subject: AAL1 Pointers Date: 21 Jun 2002 01:09:26 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ If we have two active time slots (channels) it means that 2 cells will be enough to transfer 1 multiframe for T1 transfer. In that case, what happens with the rest of 6 SN sequence cells (if SN = 0 was the first cell and the pointer was in that cell)? Are they empty,since a structure pointer can come only once in a SN sequence from 0 to 7, or they are filled with the following structures, but the pointer is used once in 8 SN cell sequence as a way to realign to a new structure in the case that too many cells are lost? The same stands for transfer for Nx64 without carrying signaling bits. If N = 3 and we use pointer, do we have only 3 octets in 1 cell, and the rest is empty, or we have a pointer in the first cell for the first 3 octets, and after it again 3 octets of the nex structure, and so on till the next 8 SN cells where we have a new pointer? If an AAL1 cell has a pointer it points at the beginning of a new structure. Does it mean that it points at the end of of the previous one, only? In ITU I.363.1 says (about dummy fill) that pointer CS overhead is generated and pointer is used to point to the start of useful data part. What generates that overhead and how to determine how many bytes will be used for that overhead? Actually, what is the reason for data part not to start from the beginning of a cell? Thanks, Milorad ------------------------------ Subject: Re: [FRAUD ALERT] Re: ".USA" Domain Names Now Available From: robert@bonomi.invalid Organization: Not Much Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:23:13 GMT In article , Hudson Leighton wrote: > In article , > Telecom@LincMad.com wrote: >> Even though I know quite well that .ca is Canada, it still took me a >> long time to get over looking at the domain "sfu.ca" and thinking that >> it had to have something to do with San Francisco or California. (It's >> actually Simon Fraser University in greater Vancouver, BC.) >> www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com >> Linc Madison * San Francisco, California > I am am sorry, but I have to do it (it is late and it's been a long > day) :-) > What about fu.ck, sh.it, sna.fu >(ducking for cover) Oh, heck. There's an educational facility in Chicago, goes by the name of Illinois Institute of Technology. IIT for short. They have the obvious .edu domain-name. For a long time, some of the better-known machines on campus had names like "chickensh", "bullsh", "horsesh", etc. Finally, somebody noticed how the fully-qualified domain names read, and they're all gone. My all-time favorite, tho -- and the one I kick myself for not registering, every time I see it -- is "command.com". While we're at such silliness, "yes.no" is, or at least was, a real domain. I always thought it'd be fun to have username "maybe" on that network. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: So What Was Calling Me Anyway? Organization: Not Much From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:30:32 GMT Chances are that this was a 'boiler-room' telemarketing operation, with a mis-configured "predictive dialer". Where you were answering "before" there was an agent available to handle the call. The low-end systems just hang up on you in that situation. The "better" ones have a recording, and *then* disconnect. In either situation, your phone number gets recycled back into the 'victims to be contacted list', usually with a 'moderate' delay -- supposedly so you won't connect the prior hang-up call with _this_ telemarketer. In article , Thomas A. Horsley wrote: > One day last week, my phone would ring about once an hour, I'd say > "Hello", and them immediately a recorded message would come on and say > "I'm sorry, I dialed your number in error" and hang up. > Personally, I find it hard to believe a machine could be sorry, but > what I really wonder is what kind of machine it was? > Does someone make a fax machine which says this when it gets a voice > instead of fax tones? But if it is that smart, why don't they make it > smart enough to stop re-trying the number while they are at it? > Or is this something an overbooked predictive dialer does when it has > completed the call, but finds it has no actual humans availabe to > annoy me? > Once, when the phone rang at its scheduled time, I picked it up and > said nothing, just listened, and got absolute silence back until it > finally went "click" after several seconds. > It did stop after a day (if it hadn't stopped, I'd be asking about any > available technology to target ballistic missles at the other end of a > phone connection :-). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 00:44:58 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: News Headlines of Interest 6/21/02 Webcasters' Fees Slashed in Half By Brad King 4:00 p.m. June 20, 2002 PDT Webcasters worried that Internet radio would be wiped out by outrageously high royalty rates found little solace on Thursday despite a ruling that slashed a controversial licensing fee in half. The new rates, issued by Librarian of Congress James Billington, require webcasters to pay record labels .07 cents each time a song is streamed live and .02 cents for archived or simulcasted streams. Temporary copies, such as ripped copies of CDs that are used to create the digital streams, will cost companies 8.8 percent of their entire royalty fee. The rates, while lower than previous recommendations, did little to soothe webcasters who continue to claim that such high rates will force fees that can't be recouped. http://www.wired.com/news/mp3/0,1285,53377,00.html Brits Aren't So Thrilled With 3G By Daith hAnluain 11:30 a.m. June 20, 2002 PDT A British survey on consumer attitudes towards 3G caused a shudder in London this week when it revealed that 40 percent of the potential market believed they would never use their phone for 3G services. The telcos, which will end up spending more than 40 billion to launch 3G in Britain, are skeptical about the report. http://www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,53371,00.html Every dial you take ... The FBI is asking for more information about what you do on the phone, and no one is saying no. By Jeffrey Benner June 18, 2002 | On April 11, the Federal Communications Commission ordered the telecom industry to upgrade their systems to meet a list of FBI specifications by June 30. The upgrades give the FBI expanded wiretapping capabilities, including the ability to extract specific information about phone calls without a warrant. The FCC order comes after years of wrangling among the FCC, the FBI, civil liberties groups, and telecom companies over exactly what telecom companies have to do to comply with the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) of 1994. When the FCC issued a nearly identical order three years ago, an industry-advocate alliance fought it to a standstill in the courts. But this time around, the same groups have not so much as issued a press release in protest. "It's awful, the fact no one is willing to challenge this," says Al Gidari, a lawyer who advises telecom firms on compliance with government surveillance issues. "It's a sign of the times after 9/11. No one wants to be perceived as anti-government or anti-law enforcement." CALEA requires telecom companies to be able to provide police and federal agents with two kinds of surveillance: a full wiretap, which reveals the content of a communication, and a more limited tap that provides "call-identifying information." Call-identifying information has traditionally been gathered via two kinds of taps: a "pen register," named after an old-fashioned device that when hooked up to a phone can pick up the numbers dialed, and a "trap and trace," which reveals the number of an incoming call, just like a caller I.D. box. http://salon.com/tech/feature/2002/06/18/wiretap/index.html ------------------------------ Date: 21 Jun 2002 04:18:12 -0000 From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Book Review: Ruling the Root: Internet Governance by M. Mueller BUY THIS BOOK! Ruling the Root: Internet Governance and the Taming of Cyberspace by Milton Mueller (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0262134128/qid=1024593481/sr=8-1/icbtollfree) explains how control of the root is being leveraged to control the Internet itself in such key areas as trademark and copyright protection, surveillance of users, content regulation, and regulation of the domain name supply industry. A very readable book, you will not be bored. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 07:35:27 -0000 From: rhallema Subject: 800/900 Numbers in Spain Can somebody give accurate info about the situation in Spain: Does the Spanish CMT give out these numbers on a per case base or does it go through the operators? Also, what at tariffs in Spain for monthly and traffic costs? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards, rhallema ------------------------------ From: Andrew Diseker Subject: 2 Days Without Service: Line Short or ? Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 20:31:00 -0400 Organization: Lexonia Internet Services, LLC Wednesday morning my phone line went dead. No dial tone, occasional noise, and no off-hook indicator light. Different phones plugged into the wall give the same results. Called Verizon, tech says to unplug phone, wait 5 minutes "for the line to reset", then plug phone in. Line does not "reset." Called Verizon back, support desk person tests the line, and with no phone plugged in support person says test indicates a short on the line. Calls to the number give a busy signal. Two days straight, service tech scheduled, no one shows up. I live in an apartment building, with patch panels in the basement. Visually looking at the patch panel with the line from my apartment, nothing looks tampered with, repaired, or shorted. Line from patch panel goes into Western Electric 21A1 equipment, which connected to other 21A1 boxes, with one patch panel connected to each one. Can't tell from looking at the other panels if anything is new. Where is a likely place for a short to be, since I can't see anything from my apartment to the patch panel? Could a short on another patch panel show up on my line, somehow? There was an electrical storm locally Wednesday morning, but I didn't lose power. Is it possible for a short to be caused at a central office from a power spike that only affects one line? Could the 21A1 box be faulty? I'm just frustrated at not having a line and am trying to figure out how to get someone to listen to me at Verizon, and if I can sound intelligent maybe I can help them locate the problem and *fix* the damned thing! Thank you for any help. Andrew Diseker adiseker@lexonia.net Lexonia Internet Services LLC http://www.lexonia.net Web hosting, dedicated Internet servers, email and domain name services Flexible, affordable rates ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:29:34 -0400 From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) Subject: Another Set of Phone Numbers of Interest Printer Cartridges: > If you have difficulty accessing the website above, please > try contacting us toll-free at 1-800-758-8084 - Thanks! Getting unsubscribed from SPAM: > Your email address was obtained from a purchased > list, Reference # DELETED. If you wish to unsubscribe from this > list, please click here and enter your > name into the remove box. If you have previously > unsubscribed and are still receiving this message, you may email our > Abuse Control Center, > or call 1-888-763-2497, or write us at: NoSpam, 6484 Coral Way, > Miami, FL, 33155". Financial Freedom: > YOUR FINANCIAL PAST DOES NOT > HAVE TO BE YOUR FINANCIAL FUTURE! > CALL ONLY IF YOU ARE SERIOUS! > 1-800-753-7690 (Free, 2 minute message) > DO NOT RESPOND BY EMAIL AND > DON'T GO TO SLEEP WITHOUT LISTENING TO THIS! - David David B. Horvath, CCP Consultant, Author, International Lecturer, Adjunct Professor Board Member: ICCP Educational Foundation, ICCP Test Council, and Philadelphia Association of Systems Administrators ------------------------------ From: Stretch Subject: Re: TeleZapper? Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 01:36:49 GMT Organization: Road Runner - Texas dold@95.usenet.us.com wrote: > The dialer that one of my customers uses will likely not be > reprogrammed to listen for tones more correctly. It is already pretty > poor in that respect. I think it is more likely that the small > companies will continue to be fooled, and the big companies will go > with hardware supervision on a T1. The T1 Hardware supervision will > not be fooled by my Telezapper. I've managed to get down to perhaps three or four telemarketing calls a week, by: Having an unlisted number, Ignoring any call with "out of area", Firmly cutting off telemarketers with "Don't call back. Bye." Being extremely rude to any repeat offenders (bonus points if you can make them quit on the spot!) Pretending to be in a loud argument when they call is also fun. > I suspect this is already true, as some autodialers do get through, > but many hang up immediately. My wife insists that the total volume > has dropped dramatically. Many of them, I think, are trolling for fax machines to spam, or answering machines to leave a long sales pitch on. Consumers have become far less tolerant of telemarketers. Yeah, I know, "it's only their job". All I can do is make it as unpleasant as possible for them. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #290 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jun 25 15:36:20 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA05204; Tue, 25 Jun 2002 15:36:20 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 15:36:20 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206251936.PAA05204@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #291 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Jun 2002 15:30:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 291 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #338, June 24, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) Fwd: The GUARDIAN: RAILTRACK - Network Rail wins deal (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: NATURE: Is a Bell Tolling for Bell Labs? (danco@pebble.org) Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (Joey Lindstrom) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 09:53:12 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #338, June 24, 2002 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 338: June 24, 2002 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** AT&T CANADA http://www.attcanada.com ** BELL CANADA http://www.bell.ca ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** GT May Miss Revenue Target ** Rural Broadband Improvements This Year? ** Aliant Kills VibeVision ** Ottawa Hydro Offers Optical Ethernet ** Call-Net Requests Expedited DNA Review ** Schools Sign Fibre Contract ** No Cellphone Jamming Allowed ** Police Get Jamming Exemption ** Talks Break Down on Pearson Wireless Coverage ** Shaw to Offer Video on Demand ** Internet TV Providers to Need Licence ** Deadline for Teleglobe Bids Extended ** Hosting Market Grows 65% ** Persona Buying Quebec Cable System ** Rogers Non-Compete With AT&T Expires This Week ** Ericsson Grants RIM Licence for Cellular Technology ** New CIRA Board Members Named ** UBS Appoints BCE Veteran as CEO ** When You Need a Second Opinion in Telecom ============================================================ GT MAY MISS REVENUE TARGET: Group Telecom says that its revenues in this quarter will probably not reach the target required by its secured debt facilities. The company has asked its creditors to waive or modify the covenants, but "will have to consider all of its alternatives" if they don't agree. ** Three representatives of Shaw Communications, which owns 28.5% of GT, have resigned from the CLEC's Board. RURAL BROADBAND IMPROVEMENTS THIS YEAR? Speaking about Canada's Agricultural Policy Framework on June 20, Prime Minister Jean Chretien told reporters the federal government now plans to start improving rural broadband Internet access this year, instead of waiting until 2004. ALIANT KILLS VIBEVISION: Aliant Telecom is closing down its VibeVision television service, which used DSL technology from New Brunswick's iMagicTV. Customers will be offered Bell ExpressVu service as a replacement. ** Aliant says it will spend $85 million to expand its DSL- based high-speed Internet service in the four Atlantic provinces, and will use iMagicTV technology to offer video on demand on that network. OTTAWA HYDRO OFFERS OPTICAL ETHERNET: Telecom Ottawa, a subsidiary of Hydro Ottawa, says its city-wide optical Ethernet network is now operational. President Dave Dobbin says the company is "finalizing contracts with its first customers." http://www.telecomottawa.com CALL-NET REQUESTS EXPEDITED DNA REVIEW: Call-Net has requested that questions on what is included in the competitor-Digital Network Access tariff be resolved prior to the telcos' final tariff filings this fall. The Competition Bureau supports the application. The CRTC requests comments on procedure by June 27. SCHOOLS SIGN FIBRE CONTRACT: The Peel District School Board and the Dufferin-Peel Catholic School Board have contracted with the local hydro utility, Enersource, for a fibre network linking schools in Mississauga, Brampton, Caledon, and Orangeville, Ontario. Enersource says the deal is worth $27 million over 20 years. NO CELLPHONE JAMMING ALLOWED: Following a year-long review, Industry Canada has concluded that it will not permit jamming of cellphones and pagers, apart from limited exemptions for security reasons. (See Telecom Update #274) http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/sf05958e.html POLICE GET JAMMING EXEMPTION: Industry Canada has exempted the army and RCMP from rules prohibiting the jamming of radio and cellphone signals during the G8 summit this week, and the Pope's visit in July, "for the purposes of security, safety and international relations." http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/pics/sf/g8riase.pdf http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/pics/sf/poperiase.pdf TALKS BREAK DOWN ON PEARSON WIRELESS COVERAGE: The Greater Toronto Airports Authority warns that cellular coverage in Pearson Airport may be reduced beginning July 1 because lease negotiations with wireless carriers have broken down. ** GTAA says it wants the carriers to pay to improve coverage. The cellcos, several of whose contracts expire June 30, say the GTAA's proposed rental fee increases are excessive; they call for renewed negotiations. SHAW TO OFFER VIDEO ON DEMAND: Shaw Communications plans to offer a video-on-demand service to customers who take both Internet service and digital cable. Service will start in Calgary September 4. (See Telecom Update #312, 320) INTERNET TV PROVIDERS TO NEED LICENCE: Bill C-48, which amends the Copyright Act to require Web-based TV retransmitters to be licensed by the CRTC, passed the House of Commons on June 18. It must still be passed by the Senate before it can become law. http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/government/C-48/C-48_3/C-48_cover-E.html DEADLINE FOR TELEGLOBE BIDS EXTENDED: Ernst & Young, the court-appointed monitor for the sale of Teleglobe assets, has postponed the deadline for bids, from June 24 to July 15. (See Telecom Update #336) HOSTING MARKET GROWS 65%: A new report from the Convergence Consulting Group says that the Canadian Internet hosting market grew 65% in 2001, to $456 million. Leaders in various market segments include IBM, Telus, and WorldCom. http://www.convergenceonline.com PERSONA BUYING QUEBEC CABLE SYSTEM: Persona Communications has agreed to buy Cable-Axion, which provides cable service to 20,000 subscribers in rural Quebec, for $25 million. ROGERS NON-COMPETE WITH AT&T EXPIRES THIS WEEK: When MetroNet (now AT&T Canada) bought Rogers Network Services in 1998, Rogers agreed not to offer non-wireless local telecom service to business customers for four years (see Telecom Update #134). That agreement ends June 30. ERICSSON GRANTS RIM LICENCE FOR CELLULAR TECHNOLOGY: Research In Motion has obtained a licence to use Ericsson GSM, GPRS, EDGE, and CDMA2000 technology in RIM's handheld devices. ** RIM is suing Good Technology, a U.S.-based competitor, for infringing on four RIM patents. NEW CIRA BOARD MEMBERS NAMED: Six new members have joined the 13-member Board of the Canadian Internet Registration Authority: ** Elected by members at large: Denis Tanguay, President, Digital Internet Gaming Services; Mark Jeftovic, President, easyDNS Technologies; Michael Geist, Director of E-Commerce Law, Goodmans LLP. ** Appointed by key organizations: Clyde Beattie, Canadian Association of Internet Providers; Tim Denton, Canadian Internet Registrars Association; Philippa Lawson, Public Interest Advocacy Centre. ** Andrew Bjerring, President of CANARIE, and Jonathan Cohen of the Shapiro Cohen Group of Intellectual Property Practices have completed their CIRA Board terms and retired. UBS APPOINTS BCE VETERAN AS CEO: Gerald McGoey, Chairman and acting CEO of Unique Broadband Systems since a new board was elected in March, has been confirmed as Chief Executive Officer. Until 1997, McGoey was Bell Canada's Chief Corporate Officer and BCE's CFO. WHEN YOU NEED A SECOND OPINION IN TELECOM: Angus Dortmans Associates consults to Canadian organizations that use telecommunications and network services as essential business tools. Our focus is on practical issues and measurable results, delivered on-time and on-budget. ** "Whether reviewing technology decisions or recommending strategies, Angus Dortmans adds value to our telecommunications decisions." -- Janice Aavasalmi, Telecommunications Architect, Inco Ltd. ** Contact Henry Dortmans, 905-686-5050 x300 or dortmans@angustel.ca ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 19:15:00 EDT Subject: Fwd: The GUARDIAN: RAILTRACK - Network Rail Wins Deal Pat: This appeared on another list, and in view of the discussion about whether Great Britain's separating the fixed plant during privatization of their railways, and whether and if it teaches a lesson with respect to similar proposals for telecommunications infrastructure, it may be of interest. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com From: "Gary R. Kazin" Subject: The GUARDIAN: RAILTRACK - Network Rail wins deal Network Rail wins deal 7 Railtrack shareholders told to reject #500m bid 7 Government offers #10bn lifeline Terry Macalister, David Gow and Charlotte Denny Monday June 24, 2002 The Guardian Railtrack is expected to announce today that it has struck a #500m deal to sell Britain's railways to the not-for-profit firm Network Rail, a move which will give shareholders about 250p per share. Shares, which have been suspended since former transport secretary Stephen Byers put the company into administration last autumn, could be relisted on the London stock exchange this morning. To sweeten the deal, Alistair Darling, the new transport secretary, is expected to announce an extra #10bn financial lifeline for Ian McAllister, chairman of Network Rail, to help him meet any cost overruns inherited from Railtrack, including the troubled West Coast main line renewal project. The contingency financing facility will be provided by the strategic rail authority in addition to the #9bn guarantee it is already giving the banks backing Network Rail. Government sources quoted in weekend press reports say they hope the new company will not need to use the extra money. Shareholder representatives are urging investors not to accept the offer. "This is nowhere near the proper value for Railtrack plc," said the Railtrack private shareholders' action group chairman Andrew Chalken. The deal will need to be approved by shareholders at an extraordinary general meeting likely to be held next month. News of the settlement came as the Confederation of British Industry said the government had "shot itself in the foot" and cost the taxpayer an extra #2b by putting Railtrack into administration and introducing a tax on building materials that will hit the rail industry hardest. Up to #1bn will go towards covering an increased risk premium that City investors will require if they are to be lured into new rail infrastructure schemes. A similar amount will be needed to cover extra costs for the construction sector, which has been hit by the introduction in April of a new aggregates tax. Mr Darling must secure an additional #15bn from the Treasury in the new spending round to fund the government's 10-year transport plan, bringing its total amount to #195bn, claims Digby Jones, CBI director general. Costs are being pushed up by bad decisions, skills shortages and delays, argues the CBI. About #12bn of the extra #15bn needed by the government will go towards the railways, which need more money to improve safety following the Hatfield crash. Cost overruns on big projects have also had a substantial impact, and private investors are nervous about the government's intentions following its unexpected move to take Railtrack off the stock exchange last autumn. "There is still an appetite to invest but the risk premium has increased," said Mr Jones talking ahead of today's launch. He estimated that funds from the private sector would cost about 10% more - or up to #1bn - than they would have done before the decision to put Railtrack into administration. As for the increased price of building materials, Mr Jones said: "The government has shot itself in the foot by raising aggregates tax given the biggest user of railway ballast is Railtrack." Gary R. Kazin DL&W Milepost R35.7 Rockaway, New Jersey http://www.geocities.com/gkazin/index.html ------------------------------ From: danco@pebble.org Subject: Re: NATURE: Is a Bell Tolling for Bell Labs? Organization: Pebble in the Sky Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 18:38:25 GMT In article , Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > Thought many IPers would be interested in this article, from the latest > edition of Nature > [Full story at: > http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf....[clipped for brevity] But it'll cost you $15 to obtain the "full story" at that URL. - Dan [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is correct, Dan. Not all material printed on the net is free. Some of us even have the audacity to ask for contributions/donations, etc for our work, which we *used to give* for free until it appeared we were taken as fools by many other users. Some of us still cut things close to the bone, and ask for as little as we can possibly manage, in the (I believe original, intended) spirit of the net. But with the huge (I mean HUGE HUMONGOUS) amount of spam, trash, pornographic, virus-like mail we have to go through just to get to the important stuff, we tend to get hungry and frustrated each day after several hours of battling the mess. If someone wants to charge $15 to read an article and someone else does not want to pay, then what is the problem exactly. I did not spend fifteen dollars to read the item either. Some people did I assume. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 18:02:11 -0600 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules On Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:59:03 -0400 (EDT), Mark Brader wrote: > States I don't know about, but 1-means-toll is the general rule in > Canada. I just tried dialing various local numbers as 1+10D (instead > of 10D) here in Toronto, or specifically here in 416-488, and each > attempt drew an intercept: "This is a local call. Do not dial 1 or 0 > before the number you are calling. This is a recording. [pause and > repeat once]" > What was interesting was that the intercept always occurred when I'd > dialed 7 digits after the 1. I then tried dialing some long-distance > numbers as 10D, and sure enough, they got an intercept after 7 digits: > "This is a long-distance call. Please dial 1 or 0 as well as the area > code for the number you are calling. This is a recording. [p&r1]" Contrast that with my experience here in 403-land (specifically Calgary). I can dial any local number as either 7D, 10D, or 11D (1-403-nxx-xxxx), and the call goes through without any sort of intercept. But attempting to dial a toll call as either 7D or 10D gets an intercept, instructing the caller to prefix the call with 1 or 0. This is how God intended it. :-) It's so simple, even Telus can't screw it up (though they manage to screw everything ELSE up). / From the desk of Joey Lindstrom / / We're in danger of turning into a Beavis and Butthead theme park, a / "Space-Between-Your-Ears Mountain." Within the decade, the odds are / pretty good that we'll all be working for a thirteen-year-old Asian kid / who's from a country that still gives a shit about education. / -- Dennis Miller ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #291 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jun 25 17:05:01 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA06733; Tue, 25 Jun 2002 17:05:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 17:05:01 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206252105.RAA06733@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #292 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Jun 2002 17:05:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 292 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Court Says CLEC Customers Can Sue Baby Bells (John Stahl) Headlines of Interest (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Bell is Cut Off as Originator of the Phone (Henry Cabot Henhouse) A System of Global Common Law (Judith Oppenheimer) Re: Competition? (Syd Barrett) Where to Look For "Bell System Technical Journal" on Line? (Jeff) Siemens PBX (G. Ratcliff) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 15:11:08 -0400 From: John Stahl Subject: Court Says CLEC Customers Can Sue Baby Bells The following article appeared in the June 25, 2002, issue of the email newsletter from Info World: COURT SAYS CLEC CUSTOMERS CAN SUE BABY BELLS Posted June 21, 2002 01:44 Pacific Time WASHINGTON - A recent ruling by a U.S. Court of Appeals in New York has opened the door for residential and business customers frustrated by poor service from startup local phone companies to potentially seek revenge from Baby Bells. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on Thursday vacated a lower court's decision to throw out a case brought by the customer of a competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC) against incumbent phone company Bell Atlantic, now called Verizon Communications. The case has been remanded to the lower court, although Verizon is contemplating taking it to the U.S. Supreme Court. For the full story: http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/06/21/020621hnclecsue.xml This describes a US Court of Appeals ruling regarding a class action law suit by customers of a CLEC (AT&T) who sued the ILEC (Verizon) whose territory the CLEC was attempting to gain a foothold. The suit claimed that the ILEC interfered with a customer's (plaintiff) ability to get service from the CLEC. Seems to be interesting litigation where the end user is trying to sue their supplier's competitor and "owner of the plant to be used/leased by the CLEC", to force the ILEC to let the CLEC offer services. The plaintiff (customer of the CLEC) claimed that the ILEC violated anti-trust laws by restraining the CLEC in that they interfered with the plaintiff's ability to get dependable service from the CLEC. Verizon claimed that the plaintiff (customer) was only "indirectly" harmed by their actions and therefore had no standing against the antitrust laws. The Appeals Court disagreed, asserted that the plaintiff (customer) had a right to sue and sent the case back to the lower court to be heard. If this ruling holds up to any additional court action, it might be a real door-opener to get potential customer's of the CLEC's to be involved legally against the ILEC in whose territory the CLEC is attempting to offer services. This could have more positive influence on the Telecommunications Act of 1966 than any FCC action.. Very interesting development. This will have to be monitored closely. John Stahl Aljon Enterprises Telecommunications and Data Consultant URL: http://home.att.net/~aljon ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 23:11:18 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Headlines of Interest NewsScan Daily, 19 June 2002 ("Above The Fold") CONGRESS PUTS WIRELESS AUCTIONS ON HOLD In what's viewed as a victory for the wireless industry, U.S. lawmakers approved a last-minute proposal to delay indefinitely two wireless spectrum auctions that would have forced carriers to bid on spectrum that may not actually become available until 2007 or later. The spectrum is currently used by broadcasters for television channels 52 to 59 and 60 to 69, but the airwaves are scheduled to be relinquished by 2007, when TV stations transition to digital TV. A clause in the legislation allows broadcasters to hang onto the spectrum even longer if the market penetration for digital TV hasn't hit 85% at that point, however. Meanwhile, the postponement puts the kibosh on broadcaster efforts to exploit the situation by offering to vacate the airwaves earlier in return for hundreds of millions of dollars in extra payments. (Wall Street Journal 19 Jun 2002) http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1024450234796205280.djm,00.html (sub req'd) PRO-ISLAMIC GROUPS ENGAGE IN 'HACKTIVISM' UK security firm mi2g says there's mounting evidence that individual hacker groups with a pro-Islamic agenda are working together to disrupt Web sites in India, Israel and other target countries. "Political motivation is an increasingly rising factor in digital attacks," says mi2g CEO DK Matai. "The primary reason why Web attacks are increasing is political tensions between Israel and Palestine, India and Pakistan, and China and Taiwan." Israel has suffered a barrage of attacks since the beginning of the latest Palestinian uprising in September 2000, and during the recent tensions between India and Pakistan over Kashmir, several groups (including Unix Security Guards, Anti-India Crew and World Fantabulous Defacers) have carried out hundreds of attacks on Indian educational and business Web sites. Despite the increase in attacks, the total number of new viruses has actually been decreasing, says mi2g, following a peak in 1997. However, each new virus is capable of causing more trouble because of the large number of computers that are now networked together. "When one catches a cold the entire global organization catches it," says Matai. (BBC News 19 Jun 2002) http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_2052000/2052320.stm Edupage, June 17, 2002 CAMPUS E-MAIL EXPOSED TO PUBLIC SCRUTINY Many states identify administrators and professors at public colleges as state employees, potentially exposing their letters, documents, and e-mail to public scrutiny under freedom-of-information laws. Some institutions have begun to update policies to safeguard personal e-mail or warn professors to be careful what they write. Open-records laws don't specify clearly whether professors' research notes, lecture notes, or regular mail would qualify as public records, but most states assume that state employees' e-mail messages are public records, even when the law is ambiguous. Employees at private colleges can be exposed as well, although not through open-records laws; a person would need to obtain a court order or a subpoena, requiring involvement in litigation against the college. Chronicle of Higher Education, 17 June 2002 (sub. req'd) http://chronicle.com/free/v48/i41/41a03101.htm NewsScan Daily, 13 June 2002 ("Above The Fold") CELL PHONE INDUSTRY SLUMP Industry analyst Alex Slawsby sums up the problem well: There are "no compelling reasons for me to go ditch my phone and buy a new one." That's why the cell phone industry is working furiously to try to get "3rd generation" (3G) phones ready for market, so that consumers will buy new phones they can use to send e-mail photos, record video, or access text-messaging systems. But that's two years away, and in the meantime the industry is in a slump, and trying to survive by cutting costs and laying off workers (about 20,000 at Ericsson, and twice that many at Motorola). (USA Today 12 Jun 2002) http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2002/06/12/phone-market.htm COMPANIES UNITE IN OPEN MOBILE ALLIANCE Nearly 200 high-tech companies are backing the latest industry attempt to define technical standards for any wireless platform or application in an effort to create compatibility and interoperability among different mobile devices, regardless of the software they use. The Open Mobile Alliance, which includes Motorola, Nokia, Vodafone, NTT DoCoMo and even Microsoft, hopes to succeed where prior endeavors have failed by avoiding the problems caused by choosing one operating system over another as a universal platform. Rather, the goal OMA has set for itself is to develop an open standard for the software code used to create different platforms. The group hopes that the open standard will accelerate the development and adoption of new services such as multimedia messaging, wireless games and other entertainment. Conspicuously absent from the alliance is Palm, whose popular operating system is found on more than half of all handheld computers sold. (Wall Street Journal 13 Jun 2002) http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1023860102191872440.djm,00.html (sub req'd) Edupage, June 19, 2002 TELECOM INDUSTRY HIT BY MORE BAD NEWS A raft of bad news in the past weeks raises more doubts about the current health of the telecommunications industry. Most recently, Qwest Communications International announced the departure of top executive Joseph Nacchio, and fiber-optic carrier XO Communications announced that it would file for bankruptcy protection. That news follows an unexpectedly large decline in sales for Lucent Technologies, a maker of communications equipment, and the lowering of Sprint's debt rating to just above junk status following its announcement that it would sign up fewer wireless customers. Added to the bankruptcy of Global Crossing and continuing concern over large companies like WorldCom, the bad news has prompted analysts to predict ongoing trouble for the industry. New York Times, 18 June 2002 (registration req'd) http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/18/technology/18FONE.html NewsScan Daily, 20 June 2002 ("Above The Fold") ENCRYPTION DEBATE Cambridge University computer scientist Ross Anderson has rekindled the computer encryption debate by expressing fierce skepticism about the motives of the Trusted Computing Platform Alliance (TCPA), an organization formed in 1999 by Compaq, HP, IBM, Microsoft and Intel. Anderson suggests the Alliance simply provides a smokescreen that allows those mainstream computer companies to create a new form of censorship by allowing manufacturers to track and identify information about the computer hardware and operating system software of individual users: "The TCPA appears likely to change the ecology of information goods and services markets so as to favor incumbents, penalize challengers, and slow down the pace of innovation and entrepreneurship." (New York Times 20 Jun 2002) http://partners.nytimes.com/2002/06/20/technology/20CODE.html NewsScan Daily, 21 June 2002 ("Above The Fold") CELL PHONES OUTNUMBER PEOPLE IN TAIWAN The rate of mobile phone ownership in Taiwan is 100.7%, says a new government report, which noted that the number of cell phone users in that country has jumped from 2 million to 22.6 million in just four years. In many Taiwanese households, families have two or three cell phones, and some people carry separate handsets for business communications and for keeping in touch with friends and family. (Ananova 20 Jun 2002) http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_612080.html?menu=news.technology CELL PHONE INDUSTRY SLUMP Re: http://www.newsscan.com/cgi-bin/findit_view?table=newsletter&id=6129 No wonder there's a slump. The high tech experts just don't get it. They keep trying to make (and sell) cell phones which will do more and more, like send e-mail, photos, access computer functions, etc., etc. Don't they realize we don't WANT them? Why don't we want them? -- because (1) nobody tries to do business by phone anymore in these days of telephone menus which make it impossible ever to reach a real, live person; (2) cell phones have become nothing more than teenagers toys, and teenagers already have highly sophisticated computers and other gadgets to do all of the things very well that the "experts" are trying to make cell phones do (but not as well); (3) nobody can read messages, etc. on those tiny cell phone screens (it is hard enough just to read the number of the person calling); (4) it has been well known for many years that humans do not use mechanical or electronic devices very well when each button has multi functions. In short, people just want a phone that works like a phone, and never mind all of the other stuff. If they keep on, these so-called experts are liable to turn hi-tech into hi-tack. (John McNulty) Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: Henry Cabot Henhouse III Subject: Re: Bell is Cut Off as Originator of the Phone Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 07:58:20 GMT This is wrong ... as we all know, Al Gore invented the phone, radio, television, the internet ... ; "Gordon" wrote in message news:telecom20.288.1@telecom-digest.org: > Bell is cut off as originator of the phone > U.S. Congress gives honour to Italian immigrant > BRANTFORD, Ont. - Stunned officials have been burning up the phone > lines after learning that the U.S. Congress has ousted Alexander > Graham Bell - the pride of Brantford - as the father of modern mass > communications. > Bell has long been recognized as the inventor of the telephone, the > concept for which he developed at his family's Brantford, > Ont. homestead. His revolutionary device was patented in the United > States in 1876. But last week, Congress passed a resolution crediting > little-known Italian immigrant Antonio Meucci as the phone's rightful > originator. > Brian Wood, curator of the Bell Homestead Museum in Brantford, was > surprised to hear of the resolution. ------------------------------ Date: 25 Jun 2002 08:44:11 -0000 From: Judith Oppenheimer (editor@icbtollfree.com) Subject: A System of Global Common Law Sign up today for ICB's FREE Email News Headlines: http://www.icbtollfree.com/reg.cfm?NextURL=Index.cfm. Premium ICB News Site Access is also available by subscription. BUY THIS BOOK!> Ruling the Root: Internet Governance and the Taming of Cyberspace by Milton Mueller (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0262134128/qid=1024593481/sr=8-1/icbtollfreene-20) explains how control of the root is being leveraged to control the Internet itself in such key areas as trademark and copyright protection, surveillance of users, content regulation, and regulation of the domain name supply industry. A very readable book, you will not be bored. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/24/technology/24MARK.html FYI, the "arbitration" system discussed, isn't -- arbitration requires consent, whereas if you want a domain name you *must* agree to submit to a challenge proceding. Note the last 3 paragraphs of the article. And BTW, this system is ICANN's baby. J In Fights Over .Com Names, Trademark Owners Usually Win By SUSAN STELLIN Researchers analyzing an arbitration system set up to resolve disputes over Internet addresses have found that decisions made through the system have substantially broadened the rights of trademark holders in cyberspace. The study represents one of the first attempts to examine the circumstances and outcome of more than 3,800 disputes handled by online arbitration procedures established in 1999 by the private corporation that manages the Internet's address system. The goal of the arbitration system, known as the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, was to provide an efficient, low-cost alternative to litigation for trademark holders who were trying to obtain the .com equivalent of their trademarks - in many cases, from speculators hoping to sell those names at a profit to deep-pocketed corporations. Although the researchers concluded that the system had been effective in combating these so-called abusive domain-name registrations, they also found that the system had "tipped the scales too far" in favor of trademark interests. Milton Mueller, an associate professor at Syracuse University who conducted the study, said that in about 80 percent of the disputes examined, the party that filed the complaint, generally a trademark holder, prevailed. In more than half the cases, the party asked to defend a domain name registration did not bother to respond to the complaint and therefore lost the right to the name. "That raises procedural and equity questions about the process," he said. "If lots of domain holders feel intimidated or feel it's too expensive to respond, the whole process becomes simply a way for trademark holders to grab domain names." Although anyone who registers an Internet address must agree to submit to mandatory arbitration if a trademark holder files a complaint claiming its right to the domain, most domain-name holders are unaware of the details of this procedure. For roughly $1,500 to $3,000, a trademark holder can file a complaint to a dispute-resolution provider approved by the organization that manages the address system, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. Upon notice of a complaint, the defendant must submit documentation demonstrating legitimate use of the name. Conversely, the party that filed the complaint must prove three factors: that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; that the defendant has no rights or legitimate interest in the name; and that the name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. The cases are heard by a panelist, often a trademark lawyer, who is appointed by the chosen dispute-resolution provider. One of those providers is the World Intellectual Property Organization, which played a significant role drafting the arbitration procedures. (Defendants can elect to pay a fee of $1,500 or more to have their case heard by three panelists, instead of one.) Dr. Mueller, who has served on the name-dispute panel, said that in studying thousands of cases several disturbing patterns emerged. For instance, "The notion of `confusing similarity' has been expanded to the point where any character string that incorporates the trademark is considered to be confusingly similar," he said, citing as an example Hewlett-Packard complaints based on defendants' using the initials H.P. in their Internet addresses. At the same time, researchers found the arbitration system has narrowed the definition of what qualifies as legitimate or noncommercial use of a trademark. "We've discovered about 80 cases in which the registrant of the name is trying to make a statement about something - not always in a critical way, it might be a fan site, or a site that provides news or information," Dr. Mueller said. "The panelists are giving some very strange rationalizations for taking those names away with alarming frequency." (In cases where the defendant was criticizing or providing commentary about a trademark holder, researchers found, the defendant won less than a third of the time.) Gorstew and Unique Vacations, owners of the Sandals and Beaches resorts, are among the top filers of complaints. The two, which own sandals.com and many other addresses, have filed at least 23 domain name challenges, in many cases against companies that sell Sandals vacations, recovering names like sandalstravel.com and sandalsvacation.com. Concern about the impact of the dispute-resolution system on free speech was one of the factors that led the Markle Foundation, a philanthropy focused on emerging technology, to provide a grant to support Dr. Mueller's research. Markle also gave a grant to support the development of a public database containing details about the first 3,845 cases submitted for arbitration. The two grants totaled $160,000. "This is supposed to be a high-tech dispute-resolution system, but the manner of making the decisions of arbitrators available is as low-tech as one can be in this age," said Ethan Katsch, director of the Center for Information Technology and Dispute Resolution at the University of Massachusetts, who developed the database. He said it would be available by the end of the summer at the Web site of the Cornell Legal Information Institute (www.law.cornell.edu). Dr. Mueller said that he hoped the database addressed another problem the study found: that arbitrators issued inconsistent decisions in similar complaints. "I think the danger is to assume that these sort of crude standards that we've been using for the past two years are appropriate going forward," Dr. Mueller said, noting that despite its faults, the arbitration system is often cited as a model for resolving global disputes involving e-commerce. "It was set up, is administered and is pretty much run by trademark lawyers," he said. "But it is kind of evolving into a system of global common law." Judith Oppenheimer http://JudithOppenheimer.com http://ICBTollFreeNews.com 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert Visit 1-800 AFTA, http://www.1800afta.org ------------------------------ From: Syd Barrett Subject: Re: Competition? Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 18:39:24 GMT John Higdon wrote in message news:telecom20.285.1@telecom-digest.org: > In article telecom20.284.10@telecom-digest.org, Dave Phelps wrote: > The problem is that the content and service providers have what sells > and the RBOCs have what they need to sell it. The RBOCs are not just > about to sit back, charging some cost-based facilities rental fee to > companies that are getting rich pushing product over their wires. That's why there should be some kind of grassroots effort to put a regulatory framework in place. The Telecom Reform Act has been a complete joke: it proves that in the current climate, laissez-faire competition DOES NOT WORK. We need an alternative from the bottom up, and marlarkey like Voices for Choices doesn't count. Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release Date: 6/21/2002 ------------------------------ From: Jeff Subject: Where to Look For "Bell System Technical Journal" on Line? Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 22:38:16 -0400 Organization: Bell Sympatico Hi, everyone: I want to look for some articles (on line) published on "Bell System Technical Journal". Even though I get the following link: "http://216.239.51.100/search?q=cache:KkzD0i-k5UoC:hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/ telecom-archives/TELECOM_Digest_Online/0774.html+BSTJ+on+line&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 " from the search engine, I could not find the Bell System Technical Journal from the link. Could you help me? Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ From: G. Ratcliff Subject: Siemens PBX Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 12:30:35 -0400 Organization: Biogen, Inc. Am looking for a newsgroup for end-users of Siemens HCM 300 pbx's. Am a relative 'newbie' to newsgroups so am unsure of the search process. Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #292 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jun 25 20:19:44 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA09560; Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:19:44 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:19:44 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206260019.UAA09560@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #293 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:20:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 293 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Ameritech to MCI: Stop Slamming Now! (Jack) Qwest/Former Ameritech Head Went Without Landline Phone Service! (Jack) Re: Bell is Cut Off as Originator of the Phone (Randal Hayes) Universities Lose Money To Student Cell Phones (Marcus Didius Falco) Problems With Siemens Gigaset 2420 (Doug Rosenberg) Court Opens Baby Bells to Lawsuits (Monty Solomon) FBI Checking out Americans' Reading Habits / Bookstores (Monty Solomon) Mitel Phone Switch (Zeb Palmer) Re: TeleZapper? (Wes Leatherock) as5350's For Sale New in Box (Al Niven) Last Laugh! Scamming the Scammer: Reversing a 419 Scam (Marcus D. Falco) Another Last Laugh! Example of BAD Phone-Based User Interface (DarkFiber) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack Subject: Ameritech to MCI: Stop Slamming Now! Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:35:40 -0400 Ameritech issued a blistering press release today in which it accused MCI of slamming Ameritech customers. In effect it said that MCI has 48 hours to stop "its deceptive sales and marketing practices, and slamming" (also described as its "illegal behavior") or a formal complaint will be lodged with the Illinois Commerce Commission. Ameritech says that "SBC Ameritech Illinois has received nearly 1,000 complaints about MCI between November 2001 and May 2002. These complaints charge MCI with switching SBC customers to MCI without their authorization, and other deceptive sales and marketing practices." Carrie Hightman, the president, SBC Ameritech Illinois, is quoted as saying, "In the last six months, almost 2,000 customers have turned to us for help with problems they are having with other carriers -- and more than half of those complaints concern MCI", and also, "Customers have reported that MCI representatives claimed MCI had 'merged' with Ameritech or was assuming Ameritech accounts, apparently as a ploy to get the Ameritech customer to switch to MCI." The press release also notes that "The Texas Public Utility Commission last week fined MCI $245,000 for slamming and cramming based on 1,230 complaints levied against MCI before April 1. On March 7, 2002, MCI paid $8.5 million in fines and agreed to change many of its business practices to settle a lawsuit brought against the company by the California attorney general in the wake of extensive consumer complaints about slamming and deceptive sales practices. The same month, the Federal Communications Commission entered eight separate orders finding MCI guilty of slamming; and USA Today reported that MCI was the number one generator of FCC slamming complaints." The full press release may be found here: http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/f_headline.cgi?day0/221762536&ticker=sbc Jack (Temporary e-mail address in the From: line vanishes when touched by spam.) Resources for Michigan Telephone Users page: http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/ ------------------------------ From: Jack Subject: Qwest/Former Ameritech Head Went Without Landline Phone Service! Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 03:57:30 -0400 The Chicago Tribune ran an article that contained what I thought was a rather stunning revelation about Richard Notebaert, the former head of Ameritech and now the head of Qwest: "Notebaert said that last year when he and his wife rented a place in Naperville to live closer to Tellabs, they never bothered to have a phone line installed. They relied upon wireless phones." (Tellabs was Notebaert's place of employment between the time he left Ameritech and his recent employment at Qwest). Now, when the chief executive of a big telephone company admits that he was able to get by without a landline phone line (perhaps once he no longer qualified for free service from Ameritech?), you realize how serious the wireless threat is to the established wireline phone companies! The above quote was near the end of an article about Mr. Notebaert's comments on local service competition, which began this way: Notebaert says local phone competition high here By Jon Van Tribune staff reporter June 24, 2002 About four years ago, when he was selling the idea of Ameritech's takeover by SBC Communications Inc., Richard Notebaert said the deal would promote competition. A beefed-up SBC would charge into 30 markets outside its home territory, causing the dominant carriers based in New York, Atlanta and Denver to come stomping into Chicago in retaliation, Notebaert predicted. That didn't happen. The full story is at: http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-0206240126jun24.story?coll=chi-technology-hed The Chicago Tribune has unfortunately taken a page from the New York Times, and now requires free registration to read certain articles (such as this one). Also, I believe that articles only stay online for free for a limited number of days; after that you have to pay to get them from the archives. Jack (My "From:" e-mail address vanishes once the spammers start abusing it!) Resources for Michigan Telephone Users page: http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:43:49 -0500 From: Randal Hayes Subject: Re: Bell is Cut Off as Originator of the Phone The report here regarding a Congressional Resolution regarding Antonio Meucci being regarded as the inventor of the telephone rather than Alexander Graham Bell is a bit dated. On September 5, 2001 Rep. Eliot L. Engel entered into the Congressional Record an extension of remarks about Meucci's life made by Professor Basillio Catania. On September 25, 2001 Rep. Fosella submitted a resolution honoring the life and achievements of Antonio Meucci. I appreciated the info, as it will fit nicely into a telecom legislative/regulatory primer I'm presenting at an upcoming conference, but it would be a good service to readers for posters to include the date, etc. on such items. Randy Hayes University of Northern Iowa ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 20:00:53 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Universities Lose Money To Student Cell Phones Edupage, June 24, 2002 UNIVERSITIES LOSE MONEY TO STUDENT CELL PHONES In the days of wired phone systems, many universities set up their own telephone switchboards, acting as wholesalers for the student phone market. Universities could run their own phone systems, charging slightly more than they pay but less than local phone companies for landline service to students. With more and more students choosing cell phones over wired services, some universities are losing large amounts of money. In the last two years, for example, the University of California, Santa Barbara, has lost $500,000. Chico State's loss for last year was $400,000. Some predict higher tuition rates to cover the losses. Campuses including American University in Washington, D.C., and the University of Southern Mississippi have opted to eliminate wired phone service and instead equip all students with cell phones and handheld computers. Associated Press, 24 June 2002 http://www.nandotimes.com/technology/story/444632p-3559225c.html Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: Doug Rosenberg Subject: Problems With Siemens Gigaset 2420 Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 05:47:52 GMT I have an older-model Siemens Gigaset 2420 with three handsets. For years, the system worked fine: I was happy with the range, sound quality, etc. Over the past several months, however, the signal has begun to break up at random times, and callers sound like they are under water, then it returns to normal. This does not seem related to distance from the base, interference from other equipment, weak batteries, or anything else I can think of. True, the system is getting old, but I would have thought that a part would fail all at once, not gradually deteriorate. Have others had this problem? Any ideas on what's causing it or how to fix it? Also, if I buy a "refurbished" phone (or the newer version 2420), will the same problems emerge, or have they been addressed? What about a brand new 8825? Thanks in advance, Doug ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 22:58:57 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Court Opens Baby Bells to Lawsuits Consumers can sue local providers for antitrust violations By Nicholas Kulish, Rebecca Blumenstein and Shawn Young THE WALL STREET JOURNAL JUNE 21 - A federal appeals court in New York ruled that consumers can sue their local Baby Bell telephone companies for antitrust violations, potentially exposing the much-criticized phone companies to a slew of lawsuits. IN A DECISION that could end up before the Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said consumers must be able to bring antitrust actions because "the antitrust laws serve the purpose of affording the consumer compensation that the Telecommunications Act does not provide." While competitors can make claims based on existing federal regulations, consumers have had no such recourse. The new ruling appears to change that with potentially high stakes for the regional Bells. In antitrust actions plaintiffs can collect triple the damages. http://www.msnbc.com/news/770391.asp ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 13:07:58 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FBI Checking Out Americans' Reading Habits / Bookstores Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer Sunday, June 23, 2002 For the first time since the Cold War, the FBI is visiting public libraries to keep tabs on the reading habits of people the government considers dangerous. The searches of some records kept by libraries and bookstores were authorized in an obscure provision of the USA Patriot Act, quietly approved by Congress six weeks after Sept. 11. The act, passed virtually without hearings or debate, allowed a variety of new federal surveillance measures, including clandestine searches of homes and expanded monitoring of telephones and the Internet. Section 215 gave the FBI authority to obtain library and bookstore records and a wide range of other documents during investigations of international terrorism or secret intelligence activities. Unlike other search warrants, the FBI need not show that evidence of wrongdoing is likely to be found or that the target of its investigation is actually involved is terrorism or spying. Targets can include U.S. citizens. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/06/23/MN75593.DTL ------------------------------ From: zebthepilot@hotmail.com (zeb palmer) Subject: Mitel Phone Switch Date: 25 Jun 2002 12:47:22 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I've been given the task of writing or finding the code for a visual basic program to be installed on a computer hooked to the serial port of a Mitel Phone switch. The point is to append every call to a log file. nothing fancy. We've got a program that is written in basic and is about 55 lines long. I know a little bit about visual basic 6.0, about enough to make slot machine and poker games, and a bit beyond that but I'm not up on VB enough to start logging an serial port. FYI FWIW: we won't be making money off of this program or the calls logged, we're not a telemarketer or anything of that sorts. ANY help would be great; be it actual code, suggestions, examples or such anything would help. Thanks a bunch. Zeb PS: Please e-mail me with any suggestions ------------------------------ From: wesrock@aol.com (Wes Leatherock) Date: 22 Jun 2002 13:48:40 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: TeleZapper? On Sat, 22 Jun 2002 01:36:49 GMT Stretch [ ... ] > ... Ignoring any call with "out of > area", If I had done that, I would have missed a call from the agricultural extension center telling me what to do to save my hedge (I had sent them a sample of the damage under the program where they make tests on it and advise remedial action). I also would miss calls from my bank, some of them in reply to requests for information I wanted, and calls from various other companies and acquaintances, not connected with telemarketing companies, who called from their employers' phone system that doesn't transmit caller ID. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: Al Niven Subject: as5350's For Sale New in Box Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 10:37:32 GMT Organization: Road Runner - NYC as5350's voip in stock, pre-owned, new in box 4T 21K USD 4E 22K USD 8T 29K USD 8E 30K USD http://www.Fone123.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 00:34:53 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Last Laugh! Scamming the Scammer: Reversing a 419 Scam http://www.buddyweiserman.com Here's a website of someone who got a 419 scam letter, purportedly from Prince Jubril Turey of Sierra Leone. Adopting the name of William "Bud" Weiserman, he decided to scam the scammer. So "Buddy Weiserman" exchanged Emails and answering machine messages with the prince, with the result that someone (guess who) was hopping around a park in Accra, Ghana, on one foot, wearing a red hat with a feather, and flapping his arms like a chicken. Lots of fun to read the correspondence and, optionally, listen to the WAV files of the phone messages. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: DarkFiber Subject: Another Last Laugh! Re: Examples of BAD Phone-Based User Interfaces Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 11:35:10 -0600 Organization: potted meat anti-defamation league Reply-To: Try posting to the group In article , bob_schumacher@hotmail.com says: [snip] > /bob > I'd be interested in REALLY good ones too (if any such examples exist ;)) REALLY GOOD ONE! 800.555.8355 DarkFiber PGP public key @ http://killaspammerforchrist.com/DarkFiber.asc [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ummm, yes! 800-555-8355 is a very good number, provided compliments of Pilgrim Telephone Company as a great example of what can happen if you don't disconnect IMMEDIATLY upon being informed to do so. Needless to say, call this Business Directory entry *only* when using a COCOT style phone, like the one most likely at the train/bus station in your community. *Never* use any private or business phone, unless maybe you hate your supervisor or boss anyway, then call from the office I guess, assuming the phone system does not trace it back to you personally. Since some guys get so 'enthusiastic' with phone sex chat, perhaps some 'females' in net chatrooms, etc might give it as a 'way to reach me personally so we can talk about whatever you want to tell me, etc'. For many/most guys, that *very brief* disclaimer at the start will go right past them, and since they 'know' that 800 numbers are toll-free, they'll thank the young lady for her thoughtfulness in providing the service to them 'at no charge' and who knows ... maybe stay on the phone for a couple hours of hot chat at night. You've been advised. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #293 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jun 26 01:59:06 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA14229; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 01:59:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 01:59:06 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206260559.BAA14229@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #294 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Jun 2002 02:00:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 294 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bucharest Diary, June 25 (Judith Oppenheimer) The Washington Phone Company??? (Sean Harding) Re: Bell is Cut Off as Originator of the Phone (Fred Goodwin, CMA) Re: Problems With Seimens Gigaset 2420 (Joseph Chiu) Re: Qwest/Former Ameritech Head Went Without Landline Phone (Ken Stox) Re: Qwest/Former Ameritech Head Went Without Landline Phone (G. Hlavenka) So Many Nigerian Scam Letters (Marcus Jervis) When Does an ACM Come From Intermediate Switch (Chirag) Re: Ameritech to MCI: Stop Slamming Now! (Dave Phelps) Re: Where to Look For "Bell System Technical Journal" on Line? (aes) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Bucharest Diary, June 25 Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 21:29:32 -0400 Forwarded to the group via E-Commerce/Random Bits/James Love: From: ecommerce-admin@lists.essential.org [mailto:ecommerce-admin@lists.essential.org]On Behalf Of James Love Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 7:47 PM To: E-Commerce discusison list; ecommerce@tacd.org Subject: [Ecommerce] Bucharest Diary, June 25 Subject: [Random-bits] Bucharest Diary, June 25 Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 19:43:10 -0400 From: James Love To: "random-bits@lists.essential.org" Bucharest, Romania Tuesday, June 25, 2002 James Love (james.love@cptech.org, local cell +40.72.164.3737) I'm here at the ICANN meeting, having arrived in the late afternoon. I briefly sat in the on a meeting about the .org bids, and in another meeting organized by the "icannatlarge.com" organizing effort, which featured quite surprising presentations by Esther Dyson, followed by about 5 hours of gossip, drinks and food in the Marriott Grand Hotel, where the meeting is being held. We have wi-fi, which makes email easy. Everything will lead up to the ICANN board meeting on Friday, and so far it looks like a depressing week. Most people say the June 20 "Blueprint for reform" document will be approved with a few changes on Friday. Among other things, ICANN is seeking to eliminate any possibility that there will ever be votes from the general public for anything, and doing its best to pass this off this as some consensus decision. ICANN also proposes to abandon an independent review board, and is seeking to adopt a statement on policy making that opens the door to just about anything. The main thing here is about raising fears about what will happen if people don't go along with the ICANN "reform" proposal, no matter how bad it is. Many of these are seemingly inconsistent, and appeal as much to emotions as reason. Top on the list is the resentment toward the US for its current perceived control over the Internet DNS. Recent statements by members of Congress are being used to work people up over the US government taking over the ICANN functions. A large number of persons here find this a compelling reason to sign off on almost anything here, so that ICANN can (drum roll) sign a new MoU with the US DoC. Apparently having a really bad ICANN and DoC is held out as much better than DoC running the DNS without ICANN, as if this is something to worry about (plausible as a sustainable alternative), or the likely outcome of a failed ICANN. Second on the list of feared things is the ITU, one possible replacement for the US DoC if there was international management of the DNS. The ITU is now receiving some member government support for taking a greater look a the DNS, particularly among developing countries. One of the issues here would be the redelegation issue for ccTLDs, an obvious role that ITU could play. A number of persons here express fear that this would lead to undesired national government involvement in the way some ccTLDs are run, on the theory that the current ambiguity of who controls the ccTLDs has prevented some countries from being too ambitious in regulating domestic Internet activity (or taking away lucrative franchises). Clearly some ccTLD operators are nervous about ICANN, and some ccTLDs are nervous about national governments. For those who are worried about domestic governments, they had hoped ICANN would provide a buffer. I asked people, if you don't want the US DoC to have the DNS MoU, and you don't want the ITU, what do you want? The GAC? The answer among many was, nothing -- they want ICANN without any government involvement. What seems missing from this wish is any evidence that governments will just turn everything over to ICANN and give ICANN a blank check to do whatever it wants, without any public accountability. Plus, ICANN is asking goverments to take a larger role, and they are. Meanwhile, ICANN itself looks more and more like a cartel, or a quasi-government that seeks taxes and unwanted supervision of a cartel. Verisigin doesn't want an expansion of the name space, unless they can run everything, and neither do the ccTLDs. ICANN is doing approximately zero to introduce new TLDs. This problem is so obvious that ICANN is being warned that if can face antitrust law suits, an issue Joe Sims is advising the ICANN board on, I was told. The at large organizing meeting was small and even I was surprised at how weak the support is here for elections of any kind. Esther Dyson and Denise Michel gave long presentations on how the board would not tolerate anything that involved the general public electing board members, and they described the new official ICANN "reform" version of the at large, which is a highly structured consultation system, that ICANN controls from the top, and which is not capable of holding votes from individuals. Esther went on about how unpopular elections and were in Asia and parts of Latin America, and how little support there was for elections among the non US members of the ICANN board. At one point I said "look, in the White Paper, individuals were going to have 8 of 19 board seats. In Cairo this was reduced to 5 elected members. Then there was talk after Accra of having an at large as a supporting organization, with 3 board members. Now in the blueprint document, they will have 1 of 19 members of a nominating committee. Can you tell me how that 1 member will be chosen?" At this point, Dyson told me I should stop criticizing people, and be constructive. The answer, of course, is that the ICANN board cannot tolerate even the election of one person to a 19 member nominating committee. Apparently the mere existence of a system for having elections is a taboo, because it might lead to demands that elections be used for more important things, and could provide evidence that the public doesn't agree with the decisions of the hand picked board members. Of course, it is ironic that we having this meeting in Romania, and headed next to the People's Republic of China, to finish the job of eliminating democratic input or mechanisms to express dissent or popular opposition to ICANN Board policies. Three members of the atlarge.com temporary steering committee (Vittorio Bertola, Izumi Aizu, and Wolfgang Kleinwaechter) and were at the at large meeting, and to my suprise, each of them signaled a willingness to accept the ICANN proposal to abandon any voting from individuals, in favor of a promise by ICANN to consulate with the public on issues. The Dyson, Michel suggestion is to be very docile, or the ICANN board won't even allow the consultation process. It is of course also relevant that the ICANN board wants to strip the ICANN General Assembly from the right to elect its own chair or vote on any motions. I got into a debate with Denise about the value of pushing for a harder line on a role for the public in ICANN, mentioning the possibility that the US government could protect the rights of individuals in the ICANN process. Densie told us that she had 20 years of policy experience, and she knew exactly what was going to happen. She said: The US Senate would do nothing. The US House of Representatives would do nothing. The DoC would accept a slightly modified MoU in the fall, and the ICANN board would adopt the blueprint, without elections, in Shanghai. Tonite Andy Mueller told me the ICANN board had one of its secret get togethers this evening, and agreed to approve the blueprint on Friday, with a few changes. The board is closing ranks, and trying only to cut whatever deals it needs to get the registries to go along. The $.25 per domain tax is not in the bag, according to some, while others say it will go through. There is an army of registry/registrars attending, but very few domain holders are here to complain about the tax, or to ask why they should have to pay, if they have no voice in the organization. The tax was just proposed on June 20. People have very low expectations that the US DoC will do anything to back consumer or civil society concerns about ICANN, and seem willing to give up on lots of things. James Love, Consumer Project on Technology http://www.cptech.org, mailto:love@cptech.org voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040 ------------------------------ From: jkm93ska@temp.seanh.net (Sean Harding) Subject: The Washington Phone Company??? Date: 25 Jun 2002 19:49:47 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ What's the deal with this company that is calling itself "The Washington Phone Company"? I've never heard of them before, and now I've seen three or four ads for them on TV in the last hour and a half. Their ads are pretty hokey looking. They advertise the web site http://www.dialwa.com/ and it's not much more impressive. The page title on the contact page for "The Washington Phone Company" is "Phone Company of Arizona Contacts." So apparently they're doing this in more than one state. All of the email addresses are @epobox.ws. The order page uses a third company name -- "Mile High Telecom" (milehigh.ws). The dialwa.com domain is registered to to someone named "Frank Tricamo" (it doesn't really look like a business registration) and was only created in february of this year. The address associated with the domain doesn't really exist, though that address does exist within another zip code in the same city so it may be a typo. The phone number on the domain registration gets me to voicemail for "Frank," which isn't really what I'd expect from a phone company. The whole thing just seems sort of fishy to me. I'm really curious what the story is. Are these guys legit? ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Bell is Cut Off as Originator of the Phone From: Fred Goodwin, CMA Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 03:06:16 GMT Randal Hayes wrote in news:telecom20.293.3@telecom- digest.org: > The report here regarding a Congressional Resolution regarding Antonio > Meucci being regarded as the inventor of the telephone rather than > Alexander Graham Bell is a bit dated. June 11, 2002 > I appreciated the info, as it will fit nicely into a telecom > legislative/regulatory primer I'm presenting at an upcoming > conference, but it would be a good service to readers for posters to > include the date, etc. on such items. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c107:2:./temp/~c107gaxvli:: Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." Skeptic's Creed: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." ------------------------------ From: Joseph Chiu Subject: Re: Problems With Siemens Gigaset 2420 Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:22:15 -0700 Doug Rosenberg wrote: > I have an older-model Siemens Gigaset 2420 with three handsets. For > years, the system worked fine: I was happy with the range, sound > quality, etc. Over the past several months, however, the signal has > begun to break up at random times, and callers sound like they are > under water, then it returns to normal. I've been researching 802.11b systems for my employer, and in the process found that many "2.4 Gigahertz" phones will interfere or receive interference from 802.11b wireless LAN cards. It's possible that you might have a neighbor that recently added 802.11b networking at his location, and his equipment is causing reception problems. I don't know if this is something that "channel changing" will fix, but that would be my first guess to try to eliminate the problem. ------------------------------ From: Kenneth P. Stox Subject: Re: Qwest/Former Ameritech Head Went Without Landline Phone Service! Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 22:35:25 -0500 Jack wrote: > Now, when the chief executive of a big telephone company admits that > he was able to get by without a landline phone line (perhaps once he > no longer qualified for free service from Ameritech?), you realize how > serious the wireless threat is to the established wireline phone > companies! If I were in his shoes, after the job he did on the employees of Ameritech, I wouldn't get a landline either. I'm sure his line(s) would have had all sorts of mysterious problems. God help the folks in Denver. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 22:44:55 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: Qwest/Former Ameritech Head Went Without Landline Phone Service! Jack wrote: > The Chicago Tribune has unfortunately taken a page from the New York > Times, and now requires free registration to read certain articles If you were "johnqpublic" and your password was "easytoremember" you might find it easier to get in ... Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com Burma! ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: So Many Nigerian Scam Letters Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 03:58:50 +0000 I've never seen so many Nigerian scam letters. Lately I often get four or five a day. I know that people have had their bank accounts cleaned out or have been killed when responding to these, but I wonder if there might be a way to have a little fun with them? Today I got one from a guy connected with the ministry of something or other in South Africa, and earlier from someone in Nigeria connected with mining. Before that was one from Ghana, then Uganda ... it goes on and on. Each one is a little different, but lately they all seem to offer about 17 or 18 million bucks. I thought of responding to them (these are on web based email accounts where I don't use my real name) and then offering to introduce them to each other! Or "Hey, I'm busy this week. Maybe I can help you after I get that 18 million from the ministry of mines." Anyone had any fun stringing these guys along? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See one issue of the Digest from Tuesday from a guy who strung them along pretty well with some bizarre ideas. Someone else today suggested responding, telling that big-fat cannibal king in Nigeria we will give him free investigative help in 'getting to the bottom of the 419 scams'. All he has to do is call our office on 800-555-8355. Can't you see his indignation level rise after he calls a few times, 'talks' to those hot ladies who are waiting for him, then his phone bill arrives from the Nigerian phone company, or whatever they call it there? PAT] ------------------------------ From: chirag@cellcloud.com (Chirag) Subject: When Does an ACM Come From Intermediate Switch Date: 25 Jun 2002 21:49:37 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, Currently I am working on ISUP for call routing. I have gone thru ITU-T specs for the same. However, I have one doubt. Consider a scenario where a call originates from Switch-A, routes through intermediate switches to the destination switch say switch-B. Let us consider that there is only one intermediate switch say switch-Mid. Hence, Switch-A -----------> Switch-Mid -------------> Switch-B Now when switch-A sends an IAM to switch-Mid, does Switch-Mid 1) immediately send back an ACM and simultaneously sends an IAM to switch-B OR 1) it(switch-Mid) forwards the IAM to switch-B, switch-B sends back and ACM and then switch-Mid returns back the ACM to switch-A ? The archival on this group has also confused me regarding the same. Can anyone clear my doubt. Another question is that if switch-Mid is a Service Node, then does it have to change the IAM, ACM, ANM, REL, RLC packets? Or it just has to forward the same packets to either side? Any help would be highly appreciated. Chirag ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Ameritech to MCI: Stop Slamming Now! Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 00:10:38 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Too bad Ameritech doesn't take complaints about its own service so seriously. I'd bet there are 10 times the number of complaints about Ameritech service in the same time frame, but I don't see them making a press release condemning that! In article , unspammable-4719 @workbench.net says: > Ameritech issued a blistering press release today in which it accused > MCI of slamming Ameritech customers. In effect it said that MCI has > 48 hours to stop "its deceptive sales and marketing practices, and > slamming" (also described as its "illegal behavior") or a formal > complaint will be lodged with the Illinois Commerce Commission. > Ameritech says that "SBC Ameritech Illinois has received nearly 1,000 > complaints about MCI between November 2001 and May 2002. These > complaints charge MCI with switching SBC customers to MCI without > their authorization, and other deceptive sales and marketing > practices." > Carrie Hightman, the president, SBC Ameritech Illinois, is quoted as > saying, "In the last six months, almost 2,000 customers have turned to > us for help with problems they are having with other carriers -- and > more than half of those complaints concern MCI", and also, "Customers > have reported that MCI representatives claimed MCI had 'merged' with > Ameritech or was assuming Ameritech accounts, apparently as a ploy to > get the Ameritech customer to switch to MCI." > The press release also notes that "The Texas Public Utility Commission > last week fined MCI $245,000 for slamming and cramming based on 1,230 > complaints levied against MCI before April 1. On March 7, 2002, MCI > paid $8.5 million in fines and agreed to change many of its business > practices to settle a lawsuit brought against the company by the > California attorney general in the wake of extensive consumer > complaints about slamming and deceptive sales practices. The same > month, the Federal Communications Commission entered eight separate > orders finding MCI guilty of slamming; and USA Today reported that MCI > was the number one generator of FCC slamming complaints." > The full press release may be found here: >http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/f_headline.cgi?day0/221762536&ticker=sbc > Jack > (Temporary e-mail address in the From: line vanishes when touched by spam.) > Resources for Michigan Telephone Users page: > http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/ Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: aes Subject: Re: Where to Look For "Bell System Technical Journal" on Line? Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:45:45 -0700 Organization: Stanford University In article , Jeff wrote: > Hi, everyone: > I want to look for some articles (on line) published on "Bell System > Technical Journal". Even though I get the following link: "http://216.239.51.100/search?q=cache:KkzD0i-k5UoC:hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/ telecom-archives/TELECOM_Digest_Online/0774.html+BSTJ+on+line&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 " > from the search engine, I could not find the Bell System Technical > Journal from the link. > Could you help me? > Thanks in advance. I don't believe it's on line anywhere. It *should* be on line. (Especially since the complete publication run of Phys Rev is on line at the APS, all the way back to 1893, along with the complete runs from vol 1, no 1 of Phys Rev Letters and Reviews of Modern Physics. BSTJ is of comparable intellectual importance and significance). I've been trying to get to the right people in Bell Labs/Lucent to get this done. If anyone has any ideas on how to help, get in touch with me. siegman@stanford.edu ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #294 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jun 26 23:31:16 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA01501; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 23:31:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 23:31:16 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206270331.XAA01501@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #295 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Jun 2002 23:30:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 295 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson MCI: WorldCom's "Massive Fraud" (Marcus Jervis) SEC Probes Capacity Swaps at Qwest (Marcus Jervis) MCI: WorldCom, Vint Cerf, and ICANN (Judith Oppenheimer) AT&T TO PAY $3.4B FOR CANADIAN DIVISION (Gordon MacNay) Re: Siemens PBX (Chip G) Re: Bell is Cut Off as Originator of the Phone (Fred Goodwin) We Nigerians Are Sorry (Francis Idada) Re: So Many Nigerian Scam Letters (Carl Moore) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marcus Jervis Subject: MCI: WorldCom's "Massive Fraud" Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:25:03 +0000 A WORLD OF TROUBLE WorldCom Internal Probe Uncovers Massive Fraud Expenses of $3.8 Billion Were Improperly Booked, Boosting Cash Flow and Profits; CFO Is Dismissed By JARED SANDBERG, REBECCA BLUMENSTEIN and SHAWN YOUNG Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL NEW YORK -- WorldCom Inc.'s audit committee uncovered what could be one of the largest accounting frauds in history, with the discovery of $3.8 billion in expenses improperly booked as capital expenditures, a gimmick that boosted cash flow and profit over the past five quarters. Without the transfers, WorldCom, one of the biggest stock market stars of the past decade, said it would have reported a net loss for 2001, as well as the first quarter of 2002. WorldCom reported a profit of $1.4 billion for 2001 and $130 million for the first quarter of 2002. In turn, WorldCom Tuesday fired its longtime chief financial officer, Scott Sullivan, and accepted the resignation of David Myers, its senior vice president and controller. Neither Mr. Sullivan nor Mr. Myers could be reached to comment. Clearly, WorldCom's survival is in question. WorldCom said it intends to restate its financial statements for the five quarters in what could be among the largest restatements in corporate history. The telecommunications firm already has been hobbled by an industrywide meltdown, a Securities and Exchange Commission probe and $30 billion in debt. WorldCom is one of the world's largest telecom companies, with 20 million consumer customers, thousands of corporate clients and 80,000 employees. The company said an irregularity was initially picked up during a routine internal audit conducted soon after the ouster of WorldCom's chief executive, Bernard J. Ebbers, in April. WorldCom officials said they then turned the matter over to the company's audit committee and its auditors, newly hired KPMG LLP, who determined that the issue was serious enough to alert the SEC. The agency already had launched its own investigation into WorldCom in February. At the SEC, a person familiar with the situation said the agency's investigation into the WorldCom fraud could "go right to the top" of the company's management, potentially including the role of Mr. Ebbers. The person said the SEC's inquiry will now accelerate and broaden to include the massive financial deception. "This is a matter that has none of the complexities of Enron," this person said. "It's a matter of figuring out who knew about it, and what they thought they were doing." Mr. Ebbers couldn't be reached for comment. John Sidgmore, who took over as WorldCom's chief executive in late April, declined to comment. But in a statement issued shortly before 8 p.m. Tuesday night, Mr. Sidgmore said, "Our senior management team is shocked by these discoveries ... I have committed to driving fundamental change at WorldCom, and this matter will not deter the management team from fulfilling our plans." Mr. Sidgmore said that with no debt maturing during the next two quarters, the restatement of its operating results for 2001 and 2002 is not expected to have an impact on its cash position and will not affect its service to customers. WorldCom said it is taking measures to conserve cash, including plans to lay off 17,000 employees and cut capital spending to $2.1 billion annually. It remains unclear how the company's banks will handle the news of the accounting problems, and whether the pending restatement puts the company in default of its bank covenants. Many details of WorldCom's accounting improprieties remain unclear. In its statement, WorldCom said only that "certain transfers from line cost expenses to capital accounts" weren't made according to generally accepted accounting principles. The amount of these transfers totaled $3.8 billion for the four quarters of 2001 and the first quarter of 2002. Arthur Andersen LLP, which was WorldCom's longtime accounting firm, advised the company that in light of the inappropriate transfers, Andersen's audit reports "could not be relied upon" for the five quarters in question, WorldCom said. WorldCom hired KPMG, which declined to comment Tuesday, to replace Andersen in May. Arthur Andersen issued a statement Tuesday night that shifted blame to Mr. Sullivan. "It is of great concern that important information about line costs was withheld from Andersen auditors by the chief financial officer of WorldCom," the statement said, adding that its work for WorldCom complied with accounting standards. Shocked analysts feared there could be more revelations. "This pretty much closes the chapter on this company," said Lehman Brothers analyst Blake Bath. "They violated the trust of their financial institutions." WorldCom has been in difficult negotiations with its banks for a $5 billion line of credit and in May drew down a $2.65 billion credit line. Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Jeff Halpern said he expected swift action from WorldCom's banks. "I would think the banks will foreclose on them immediately," said Mr. Halpern, who said that a Chapter 11 filing is quite possible. "This will send them into a spiral of customer defections." Last week, one of WorldCom's internal auditors discovered that starting in early 2001, huge amounts of expenses related to building out their telecom system weren't being treated as a regular cost but were being booked as a capital expense, these people said. That resulted in a significant boosting of the company's earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, otherwise known as Ebitda, which WorldCom used as a critical gauge of its growth. While it's not clear exactly what costs WorldCom capitalized, the process helped boost cash flow because it treated the costs as an asset that can be written down over time, not immediately. The accounting treatment means the expenditure doesn't affect the all-important operating cash-flow figure -- though money actually may be going out the door. Capitalizing costs is prevalent in industries like cable TV and is allowed under generally accepted accounting principles in some instances. Still, some investors say the practice helps the cable industry overstate its financial strength. Based on a preliminary investigation, WorldCom believes that its Ebitda was inflated by about $3.8 billion. The committee turned its findings over to its new auditor, KPMG. The board ousted Mr. Sullivan and informed the SEC. Mr. Sullivan, 40 years old, served as a WorldCom director since 1996 and as chief financial officer, treasurer and secretary of the company since 1994. He became an executive vice president at WorldCom when Mr. Ebbers resigned April 30. He initially came to WorldCom, then known as LDDS, in 1992 when his firm, Advanced Telecommunications Corp. became one of the 75 firms Mr. Ebbers acquired to form his empire. Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Ebbers worked so closely together over the years as they did acquisition after acquisition that Mr. Ebbers relied on Mr. Sullivan's approval before going ahead with a deal. WorldCom's directors and its underwriters could also face liability, in large part because of a bond offering the company had in May 2001. Henry Hu, a corporate and securities lawyer at the University of Texas at Austin, said any kind of material misstatement or omission in a prospectus for a bond offering opens the directors and underwriters to liability. "It's not enough for the directors to say they didn't know," he said. Anyone who wants to sue "doesn't have to show any necessary bad intent on the part of the various directors," said Mr. Hu. The underwriters for the offering could also be in trouble. That's because the underwriters are required to perform a certain amount of "due diligence" to make sure the information it presented to potential investors was accurate, said Mr. Hu. In 4 p.m. Nasdaq Stock Market trading Tuesday, WorldCom's stock was at 83 cents, a far stretch from its high of $64.50 in June 1999. -- Yochi Dreazen, Deborah Solomon and Ryan Chittum contributed to this article. June 5, 2002: WorldCom announces plans to cut up to 20% of its work force in a restructuring that would involve selling its wireless unit. June 20, 2002: WorldCom says it will defer interest payments on some preferred securities of MCI Group, to conserve cash. June 24, 2002: WorldCom shares fall below $1 after analyst Jack Grubman issues a negative report about the telecom's finances. June 25, 2002: WorldCom unveils massive corporate fraud, with $3.8 billion in expenses that were improperly booked as capital expenditures. ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: SEC Probes Capacity Swaps at Qwest Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:26:23 +0000 June 26, 2002 SEC Adopts Tougher Position On Qwest Accounting Methods By DEBORAH SOLOMON and SUSAN PULLIAM Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL The Securities and Exchange Commission is taking a tough stance on how Qwest Communications International Inc. accounted for as much as $1.4 billion in sales of fiber-optic capacity and whether it was proper for the company to recognize the revenue right away, people close to the investigation said. Qwest officials acknowledge they are trying to convince the SEC that the beleaguered telecommunications company used proper accounting in recording the sales, which included "swaps" of capacity. Although the sum in question amounts to roughly 4% of the company's combined revenue for the two years, a finding that Qwest improperly booked the sales could be a serious blow to a company struggling to maintain its credibility with investors. Shares of Qwest have fallen 85% in the past year, and its new management is trying to sell assets to relieve its crushing debt load. Qwest's outside attorney, Jonathan Schiller, said Qwest's accounting, including for swaps, was "reasonable," and added that "Qwest would hope to bring the SEC to that conclusion as well." A Qwest spokesman said the "things we are discussing with the SEC are the things we said we were discussing with them on March 11. There are no new issues that we are aware of." The SEC declined to comment. Three top company officials, including Joseph P. Nacchio, who resigned under pressure as chief executive last week, have testified before the SEC's Denver office. Qwest's chief financial officer and its president also have testified, according to people close to the matter. The SEC is also questioning executives of other telecom companies, including Global Crossing Ltd., which swapped fiber capacity with Qwest. Mr. Nacchio and his top executives were heavy sellers of Qwest stock during the years that the swapping took place. Mr. Nacchio's sales alone netted him about $130 million in profits during that period, raising questions about his motivation to keep the stock price as high as possible. Qwest insiders sold shares between January 2000 and July 2001 valued at a total of $530 million. At issue in the SEC investigation is the difference between the way Qwest accounted for the sales and the method used by its competitors, such as Global Crossing, which is also under SEC investigation. Like Global Crossing, Qwest sold capacity on its fiber-optic network to carriers and also purchased capacity from them. In some cases, the amount of the sale and purchase were almost identical. But unlike Global Crossing and most other players in the industry, Qwest booked the revenue from these sales all at one time instead of deferring part of it over many years. Global Crossing, by contrast, only booked reported revenue over the life of the contract, which in some cases was as long as 20 years. (It did include the whole amount in something it called "cash revenue," its own term, separate from accepted accounting rules, for the revenue that came in for services that hadn't yet been delivered.) While its sale was booked upfront, Qwest's purchase of fiber capacity was booked as a capital expense, meaning the company could record the purchase over time instead of all at once. Among the issues beginning to take shape in the SEC investigation are whether Qwest and its counterparties in the capacity swaps needed the fiber that was being exchanged and whether the company properly followed the accounting guidance given by its auditor on the transactions, Arthur Andersen LLP. "Was the guidance reasonable and did they follow the guidance or did they do something that went beyond what was allowed?" are among the questions regulators are asking, said one person familiar with the probe. In addition, the SEC is described by some people familiar with the investigation as focusing on whether the guidance itself was proper. Qwest has been defending its accounting to the SEC by referring to guidance it received from Arthur Andersen, specifically a "white paper" that gave clients such as Qwest accounting guidance. Qwest, arguably more than any other telecom company, engaged in swaps of capacity, equipment sales and other transactions that helped the company achieve phenomenal growth. The effect was marked and boosted Qwest's revenue by $1 billion in 2001 and $465 million in 2000. In 2001, it recorded total revenue of $19.7 billion, up from $16.6 billion in 2000. Qwest has said it was able to book revenue upfront because it followed guidelines that allowed it to account for the transactions as "sales type" leases and therefore take the revenue in one lump sum. Qwest's guidelines included steps such as selling a specific asset for a specified period of time and transferring title of the asset to the buyer. Carr Conway, a former SEC official, said that if the agency concludes the transactions weren't of any substance and were intended to pump up the financial statements unfairly, that could constitute accounting fraud. "What they're going to do is depose the various parties involved in making the decisions and ask, 'How did these accounting judgments come to be made?' " said Mr. Carr, senior forensic accountant with Dickerson Financial Investigation Group in Denver. If Qwest is forced to restate revenue, it could open the company up to lawsuits from shareholders who lost money as questions about Qwest's accounting surfaced. The company's stock closed at $4.19, down 23 cents, as of 4 p.m. Tuesday in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. A restatement could also potentially put Qwest in violation of certain debt covenants, which require the Denver company to keep a certain level of debt to cash flow, as measured by earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. At the same time, congressional interest in Qwest's accounting also is growing. At least one Qwest executive already has been called to testify at the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee, according to a person familiar with the federal investigations. And House and SEC inquiries of Global Crossing have taken a strong look at Qwest's roles in telecom transactions during 2000 and 2001. A person familiar with the situation said that one official who gave extensive testimony to regulators is Robin Wright, the Global Crossing saleswoman in charge of the company's relationship with Qwest. "Qwest is the first issue" that regulators ask Global Crossing officials about, according to a person familiar with the matter. Compared with Global Crossing, Qwest is said to face more extensive questioning about its aggressive accounting treatment. The accounting rules that allowed Qwest to book the revenue in one chunk have a number of stringent qualifications. One of the most important is that Qwest -- when selling its telecom capacity -- would have to specify exactly what it sold to another telecom carrier. That means a Qwest customer could not, for example, buy $50 million in capacity and determine later how it would be used. While battling the government on these points, Qwest attorneys are also expected to argue that the dollar amounts in question weren't material to the company's overall performance. That remains to be seen, particularly given the pressure inside telecom companies during 2001 to meet Wall Street expectations. The difference of just tens of millions of dollars could have significant effects on a company's stock price, people close to the investigation say. -- Dennis Berman contributed to this article. ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: MCI: WorldCom, Vint Cerf, and ICANN Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 07:28:33 -0400 WorldCom, it seems, spent the last five quarters overstating its cash flow by $3.8 billion in what the New York Times has called "one of the largest cases of false corporate bookkeeping yet." WorldCom's press release is, as MasterCard would say, priceless: "'Our senior management team is shocked'" -- shocked! -- "by these discoveries,' said John Sidgmore, appointed WorldCom CEO on April 29, 2002. 'We are committed to operating WorldCom in accordance with the highest ethical standards.'" Uh, yeah ... And, aside from driving Yet Another Really Big Nail into the high-tech bubble that ICANN has ridden to ill-deserved prominence, what's this got to do with ICANN? Well, someone has to be crass enough to point out the glaringly obvious fact that ICANN's chairman, Vint Cerf, is also senior vice president of Internet Architecture and Technology for WorldCom -- that is, senior management of what would appear to be a borderline criminal organization. If that seems like rough stuff to say, well, tell it to the thousands and thousands and thousands of people who'll be paying a very heavy price indeed for WorldCom's apparent malfeasance -- including the 17,000 people the company plans to start laying off on Friday. Continued here: http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=833 Judith Oppenheimer http://JudithOppenheimer.com http://ICBTollFreeNews.com 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert Visit 1-800 AFTA, http://www.1800afta.org [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ever since Vint taught us the meaning of 'Cerf the net' -- that is, okay guys, bend over and touch your ankles while my friends and I use probes on your backsides -- I have had very serious reservations about his loyalty to the Internet. Yes, he was a founder father; yes, he developed some great standards that are still in use; yes, he is truly one of the great internet pioneers. But you may recall that Judas from Ishcarion was one of the first disciples of Jesus also. And Vint Cerf is every bit a Judas to the net these days. MCI provided *his* thirty pieces of silver, maybe from the old, rotten uncollectible carrier reciepts we read about here last week. The jingle of coins got Vint to shape up in a hurry. Remember that netcast press conference several years ago featuring Vint in a panel discussion with others describing the 'new future of the net'? I called in during the audience participation part and was able to ask Vint "what about us little guys who run moderated newsgroups, etc? Where is our part in it all?" (Remember the 1993-94 audio webcast?) Vint's response was 'oh hello, Patrick, gee that's a good question you asked ... a real good question ... I don't know the answer'. Uh huh ... He knew who I was, and now I suspect he wonders why I have become so radicalized. Then we went through the first two or three years of ICANN and Vint busy Cerfing the net as MCI's mouthpiece pumping a few million dollars into ICANN and his own pockets from MCI. Yes Judith, Vint's connection with ICANN and MCI-Worldcom is very appropriate I think. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Gordon MacNay Subject: AT&T to Pay $3.4B For Canadian Division Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 08:40:17 -0600 National Post - June 26, 2002 After much speculation, AT&T Corp. said yesterday that it will spend about $3.4-billion to buy out shareholders who own 69% of AT&T Canada Inc. The deal, which is a significant premium to AT&T Canada's market value, is part of a 1999 agreement that forced AT&T Corp. to buy the 69% stake by June 30, 2003, at a floor price that climbs 4% per quarter. If AT&T Corp. had waited until next year, it would have cost the New York-based company an additional $600-million. The current floor price is $51.32 a share. The transaction has a unique structure. Two subsidiaries of Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce have been created to buy the AT&T Canada shares. CIBC will attempt to sell the subsidiaries to Canadian investors by Aug. 15. If buyers are not found, AT&T will designate another purchaser, which could include a trust. It is unclear whether AT&T Corp., which plans to keep its 31% stake in AT&T Canada, could eventually take control of the 69% stake if no buyers appear and Canada changes its foreign ownership rules. AT&T Corp. spokesman Dan Lawlor said the company decided to create the subsidiaries rather than a trust because it allows AT&T Corp. to take a tax write-off. CIBC will have a huge challenge trying to sell the subsidiaries given the telecommunication market's bleak market conditions, AT&T Canada's $4.5-billion debt load and the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission's recent price-cap decision that failed to give AT&T Canada the cost reductions it was seeking. AT&T Canada is also seeking to speak with its bondholders, who are suing the Toronto-based company. While AT&T Corp.'s decision is good news for AT&T Canada shareholders, bondholders are still waiting for AT&T Canada to follow up on plans to talk with them about a debt restructuring. Evan Flaschen, a lawyer with Bingham Dana LLP in Hartford, Conn., said he does not expectations discussions to start until mid-July. AT&T is expected to announced a new business plan within the next week to reflect the CRTC decision. Last month, it announced plans to chop 20% of its 5,200 employees. Gordon MacNay Technical Analyst Local Centrex Resale Traffic AT&T Canada Corp. 85 Bayfield St. Barrie, Ontario L4M-3A7 800-822-4140 ext. 245 705-727-1238 fax ------------------------------ From: Chip G Subject: Re: Siemens PBX Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 05:23:21 GMT G. Ratcliff wrote in message news:telecom20.292.7@telecom-digest.org: > Am looking for a newsgroup for end-users of Siemens HCM 300 pbx's. Am > a relative 'newbie' to newsgroups so am unsure of the search process. > Thanks in advance. Depending on your objective, I would say this one and comp.dcom.telecom.tech are probably good places to start. If you are trying to sell things, these are probably not the best place to post but if you are looking for help from a wonderful community of seasoned telcom professionals who freely share thoughts and ideas (albeit sometimes a little heatedly), the welcome aboard! Regards, Chip ------------------------------ From: fgoodwin@yahoo.com (Fred Goodwin) Subject: Re: Bell is Cut Off as Originator of the Phone Date: 26 Jun 2002 05:29:33 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Fred Goodwin, CMA wrote in message news:: > http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c107:2:./temp/~c107gaxvli:: Of course the link doesn't work. Just go to http://thomas.loc.gov and do a search for H.RES.269 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 18:17:06 PDT From: Francis Idada Subject: We Nigerians Are Sorry Hi Editor, I am a Nigeria student who also operates a cybercafe in Lagos our biggest city and I accidentally came across your article on the net. I feel I should respond to it on behalf of those Nigerians especially the youth who are disgusted by what our country men, most of them youths too, are doing not only to soil the country's reputation but to leave a very bad precedent for the unborn. I sincerely sympathise with all those who have received such scam letters and earnestly pray that no one falls victim to the avarice inherent in our people. Many schemes have been initiated both locally and international to combat the menace in our society but none seems to be absolutely effective in eradicating the virus of advanced fee fraud in our society. Just to educate the reader a little, the internet is not the first medium used by these con men. In the early nineties, letters where written asking for help or for transfer of huge sums of money out of the country. When the person on the other end agreed to the deal he was asked to first pay a fee; this scam became known as advanced fee fraud, or more popularly "419", after the relevant section our criminal code. At that time most of the fraudsters had first hand information about a target before contacting him or her, and they were like a mafia, drove nice cars and built mansions. Now those who were young at that time think it is the best and easiest way to make money; with the internet they now use a double blind technique to search for susceptible individuals; it works sometimes and that gives them the motivation to go ahead. I hope this small information has given the reader a little insight into the cankerworm eating into the moral fabric of our society. I hope it is eradicated sooner than later. Francis Idada, 23 yr old, student [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you for your input, Francis. It is a serious problem generally, but I do not see it going away anytime soon. You see, Francis, large numbers of Americans are stupid and an even larger number are greedy. Your countrymen know perfectly well how stupid and greedy Americans can be ... that's the reason their scam works so well. If it was originating here in the USA, the same scam, 'advance payment in order to gain more money' would go under the names of 'bank examiner trying to catch dishonest cashier/manager' as one example, or 'I found some money that belongs to you; send me an advance deposit to tell you where' (or call my 900 phone line to get instructions, etc). Oh, there are a thousand variations on the 419 scheme, American style; you Nigerians are not unique. The best one I ever read many years (pre-Internet) ago came on paper from 'The Money Recovery Company'. For some amount of money, paid in advance of course, you could be a licensee for the Money Recovery Company. Your job would be in your own city, to walk around all day (all night, whatever hours you wanted to work) with your head down, looking at the sidewalk. Anytime you found money, you remitted it to the Money Recovery Company and deducted your forty percent commission before remitting proceeds to MRC. A dream job, eh? The postal inspector who broke that one up said several 'applications' for jobs along with the requisite license fee were found in the possession of the scammers. Stupid, greedy people, those Americans. Thanks very much for writing, Francis. Be well. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 09:56:51 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: So Many Nigerian Scam Letters At least in private, I'll tell you that I have only gotten 1 in the last week or two weeks or more. I have been forwarding them to: 419.fcd@usss.treas.gov in the U.S. Secret Service, along with subject header something like "no financial loss (or contact), but for your database" I do read those messages, and even with no plans to respond to them I can grab off things like addresses and phone numbers, which can help me learn about an area without doing (or causing to have done) any calling, writing, or visiting. When I forward them, I summarize things I find in it, such as (on the latest one I got) some information about Jonas Savimbi's relatives (including the person -- Pedro Savimbi, a son -- who supposedly sent the message I got). ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #295 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jun 27 22:20:51 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA19036; Thu, 27 Jun 2002 22:20:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 22:20:51 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206280220.WAA19036@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #296 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Jun 2002 22:20:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 296 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Need To Find a Decent Cordless Phone (Rea) Sound Files of OLD Tones/Messages (Web Lion) Telephones and Modems (John A. Limpert) Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) (Mark Atwood) Addition to the Clueless Toll Free Spammers Directory (Steven Lichter) Re: Problems With Siemens Gigaset 2420 (Doug Rosenberg) Re: Problems With Siemens Gigaset 2420 (David Clayton) Mitnick Testifies Against Sprint in Vice Hack Case (Monty Solomon) News Headlines of Interest 6/27/02 (Monty Solomon Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (Craig Macbride) Toll-Free Number Routing Info (Joe Wineburgh) Legislation Would Sanction Studio Hack Attacks (Marcus Didius Falco) AMPS TIA-553: Looking for Development Kit (Alex) Wanted: Ferrite Snap Bead (Anthony Alvarez) Need Registrar Recommendations (nospam) Cheap Virtual Calling Cards (Alex) Re: Mitel Phone Switch (Richard D G Cox) Quick Question (Naser) Re: MCI: WorldCom, Vint Cerf, and ICANN (Thomas A. Horsley) Re: When Does an ACM Come From Intermediate Switch (RayJ) Altering Ring Cadence (Doug Rosenberg) I Need Fiber Help!!I am Desparate (Brad Wilson) International Telephone Directories (Alan Pritchard) Re: We Nigerians Are Sorry (Peter Dubuque) Re: We Nigerians Are Sorry (Alistair Gale) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: spa232@yahoo.com (Rea) Subject: Need To Find a Decent Cordless Phone Date: 26 Jun 2002 00:26:01 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I want to buy a cordless phone that has caller ID and preferably an answering machine that also scrambles the signal so there can be no evesdropping on scanners. I have heard the 2.4 ghz phones can interfere with WiFi and cause disconnects, so I thought it best to stay away from those. I have a Vtech 900 mhz with these features, but it is a piece of junk, with poor sound quality both on the phone and the answering machine and it is already malfunctioning after a few months. Does anyone have any suggestions? I don't mind paying more for quality, but am hoping to find something that doesn't cost a fortune. ------------------------------ From: Web Lion Subject: Sound Files of OLD Tones/Messages Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 02:56:22 -0500 I remember when I was a kid growing up in the 60's in Detroit. I would sit next to the phone and take it off hook and listen. The dial-tone would change to a high-pitched tone and then to another high pitched tone that would kind of oscillate. Only after quite a long time, would it get connected to the howler trunk. Back then, the dial tone was more like a buzz and so was the busy signal. I think this changed when the CO (Detroit Niagra) went from a #5 crossbar to a 1AESS. (Does anyone know what DTRTMINICGO - I think thats the code - is now)? Anyways -- I know someone posted a website with .WAV or .MP3 files with various messages and tones from recent systems. Does anyone have any of these from the old days? ------------------------------ From: John A. Limpert Subject: Telephones and Modems Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 04:39:59 -0400 Organization: RadixNet Internet Services I recently ran into a problem with a built-in modem in a piece of consumer electronics equipment. The modem is used to get updated TV listings and software updates. The modem was unable to make a reliable connection to the vendor's update server. Troubleshooting revealed the culprit to be a recently installed telephone, an AT&T Trimline Caller ID Telephone 250. After the telephone was disconnected, the modem problems disappeared. I'm familiar with ringer equivalence numbers, from the old days of the telephone system. This appears to be a different sort of problem. Something in the telephone's circuitry was degrading the line, even when it was on-hook. Does anyone have a better explanation of the problem or how it can be avoided when buying new telephone equipment? ------------------------------ From: Mark Atwood Subject: Re: PenDrive (USB Flash Drive) Date: 26 Jun 2002 03:03:43 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Carl Navarro writes: > I have had a "thumb drive" for about 2 years and I think I paid > maybe $30 from Tiger Software for it. It needs drivers. They only need drivers if you are running Win95/98. All the later Windows, MacOS, as well as Linux and BSD, they Just Work. In Windows and MacOS they appear on your desktop as a filesystem volume, and on Linux and BSD they appear as a mountable SCSI device (preformated with a FAT16 filesystem.) (Note: if you reformat it to some other filesystem and then plug it into a Windows box, it will (instantly) reformat it back to FAT16.) Mark Atwood | Well done is better than well said. mra@pobox.com | http://www.pobox.com/~mra ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 26 Jun 2002 12:51:15 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Addition to the Clueless Toll Free Spammers Directory GET CERTIFIED TODAY! (Microsoft, Novell, Cisco, CompTia) COMPLETE ONLINE/OFFLINE 24 HOUR SUPPORT. SUPPORT FROM BEGINNING TILL END. INCREASE YOUR INCOME WITH A CAREER IN THE COMPUTER INDUSTRY† ONLY $10.00 MONTH, ASK HOW CALL TO ENROLL TODAY!† 877.392.6006 ... to teach this individual about the cost of owning an Toll Free number ... -----Original Message----- GET CERTIFIED TODAY! (Microsoft, Novell, Cisco, CompTia) COMPLETE ONLINE/OFFLINE 24 HOUR SUPPORT. SUPPORT FROM BEGINNING TILL END. INCREASE YOUR INCOME WITH A CAREER IN THE COMPUTER INDUSTRY. ONLY $10.00 MONTH, ASK HOW. CALL TO ENROLL TODAY! 877.392.6006 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Remember it is against the law to harrass anyone by telephone. Also you should use a payphone so that the operator can make a little money. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. ------------------------------ From: Doug Rosenberg Subject: Re: Problems With Siemens Gigaset 2420 Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 13:46:19 GMT Joseph Chiu wrote in message news:telecom20.294.4@telecom-digest.org: > Doug Rosenberg wrote: >> I have an older-model Siemens Gigaset 2420 with three handsets. For >> years, the system worked fine: I was happy with the range, sound >> quality, etc. Over the past several months, however, the signal has >> begun to break up at random times, and callers sound like they are >> under water, then it returns to normal. > I've been researching 802.11b systems for my employer, and in the > process found that many "2.4 Gigahertz" phones will interfere or > receive interference from 802.11b wireless LAN cards. > It's possible that you might have a neighbor that recently added > 802.11b networking at his location, and his equipment is causing > reception problems. I don't know if this is something that "channel > changing" will fix, but that would be my first guess to try to > eliminate the problem. Thanks. I have been operating my own 802.11b network in the house for years, and it hasn't caused a problem. I suppose it's always possible a neighbor has added a less benign system. In any event, the Siemens uses "frequency hopping," so there is no way to change the channel (frequency hopping also makes it less subject to interference). Doug ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Problems With Siemens Gigaset 2420 Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 18:36:42 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au Joseph Chiu contributed the following: > Doug Rosenberg wrote: >> I have an older-model Siemens Gigaset 2420 with three handsets. For >> years, the system worked fine: I was happy with the range, sound >> quality, etc. Over the past several months, however, the signal has >> begun to break up at random times, and callers sound like they are >> under water, then it returns to normal. > I've been researching 802.11b systems for my employer, and in the > process found that many "2.4 Gigahertz" phones will interfere or > receive interference from 802.11b wireless LAN cards. > It's possible that you might have a neighbor that recently added > 802.11b networking at his location, and his equipment is causing > reception problems. I don't know if this is something that "channel > changing" will fix, but that would be my first guess to try to > eliminate the problem. Or the door seals on a nearby microwave oven are leaking ... It doesn't take much leaking out of a 850W klystron to interfere with a 100mW transmission. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 14:15:16 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mitnick Testifies Against Sprint in Vice Hack Case The ex-hacker details his past control of Las Vegas' telecom network, and raids his old storage locker to produce the evidence. By Kevin Poulsen, Jun 24 2002 11:25PM LAS VEGAS--Since adult entertainment operator Eddie Munoz first told state regulators in 1994 that mercenary hackers were crippling his business by diverting, monitoring and blocking his phone calls, officials at local telephone company Sprint of Nevada have maintained that, as far as they know, their systems have never suffered a single intrusion. The Sprint subsidiary lost that innocence Monday when convicted hacker Kevin Mitnick shook up a hearing on the call-tampering allegations by detailing years of his own illicit control of the company's Las Vegas switching systems, and the workings of a computerized testing system that he says allows silent monitoring of any phone line served by the incumbent telco. http://online.securityfocus.com/news/497 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 23:44:10 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: News Headlines of Interest 6/27/02 Wi-Fi Users Take Cue From Hobos By Matt Loney Special to CNET News.com June 26, 2002, 10:55 AM PT Seventy years ago, during the Great Depression in the United States, hobos drew signs to indicate to each other where they could get a meal. Now, across the Atlantic in London, geeks are talking about using a similar system of chalk symbols to signal where they can get a decent wireless Internet connection. Warchalking, as the practice has been coined by Matt Jones, entails simply drawing a chalk symbol on a wall or pavement to indicate the presence of a wireless networking node. If you see one of these symbols, you should -- in theory at least -- be able to whip out your notebook computer equipped with an 802.11 wireless networking card, and log on to the Net. http://news.com.com/2100-1033-939546.html SEC Gets Tough on Qwest Accounting Fiber optic capacity "swaps" under investigation By Deborah Solomon and Susan Pulliam THE WALL STREET JOURNAL June 26 - The Securities and Exchange Commission is taking a tough stance on how Qwest Communications International Inc. accounted for as much as $1.4 billion in sales of fiber-optic capacity and whether it was proper for the company to recognize the revenue right away, people close to the investigation said. QWEST OFFICIALS ACKNOWLEDGE they are trying to convince the SEC that the beleaguered telecommunications company used proper accounting in recording the sales, which included "swaps" of capacity. Although the sum in question amounts to roughly 4 percent of the company's combined revenue for the two years, a finding that Qwest improperly booked the sales could be a serious blow to a company struggling to maintain its credibility with investors. http://www.msnbc.com/news/772521.asp ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules From: craigm@ragingbull.com (Craig Macbride) Organization: Nyx, the Spirit of the Night (www.nyx.net) Date: 26 Jun 2002 22:40:22 -0600 RyanHope@mail.alum.rpi.edu (Ryan Hope) writes: > From my research, I believe each country would have at least the > following information: > - the country code (to call the country from another country) > - the international prefix (to dial out of the country) > - the long distance code (to dial between regions/cities) if one is needed > - the length of the "area code" > - when the "area code" should be used > I think the first three are pretty standard (and pretty static?). There may be multiple international prefixes, depending on carrier. For example, the standard prefix from Australia is 0011. If you are a Telstra customer, you can use 0018 for billing in 1/2 hour chunks or 0015 for sending faxes. I guess there would be nothing to stop other carriers uses other prefixes for special billing arrangements or connection types. Australia has moved to a single digit area code (2 digits, including a leading '0' when dialed within the country) and 8 digit number, but it used to be between 1 and 3 digit area code (between 2 and 4 digits including '0') and between 5 and 7 digit phone number, depending on how old the exchange was. When they upgraded old exchanges, they added some arbitrary digits in to take numbers up to 7 digits. There is no guarantee that a country has area code or the rest of the number of a constant, specific length. Craig Macbride http://www.nyx.net/~cmacbrid "People want to be educated, they shouldn't be watching television, they should be reading books." - Jerry Springer ------------------------------ From: Joe Wineburgh Subject: Toll-Free Number Routing Info Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:21:36 -0400 Anyone know of a good way to find out what carrier is the resporg on a toll-free and where it terminates? Thanks. JOE ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:27:29 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Legislation Would Sanction Studio Hack Attacks NewsScan Daily, 26 June 2002 ("Above The Fold") LEGISLATION WOULD SANCTION STUDIO HACK ATTACKS Proposed legislation crafted by California congressman Howard Berman, whose district includes Hollywood, would provide a shield against legal liability for copyright owners, such as record labels and movie studios, that used high-tech attacks against peer-to-peer Web sites to stop them from enabling illegal file-sharing. "While P2P technology is free to innovate new and more efficient methods of distribution that further exacerbate the piracy problem, copyright owners are not equally free to craft technological responses," says Berman. "This is not fair." Included in the actions a copyright holder would be allowed to take are: interdiction, in which the copyright holder swamps a P2P file server with false requests so that downloads can't get through; redirection, in which would-be file swappers are pointed to a site that doesn't contain the files they're seeking; and spoofing, in which a corrupt or otherwise undesirable file masquerades as the song or movie file being sought by a file swapper. File-swapping companies criticized the bill, saying it opens the door for copyright holders to conduct "cyber warfare" against consumers. (CNet News.com 25 Jun 2002) http://news.com.com/2100-1023-939333.html?tag=fd_top -- Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: ac@iqdx.net (Alex) Subject: AMPS TIA-553: Looking For Development Kit Date: 26 Jun 2002 14:22:48 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I am looking for a development kit that would allow me to implement changes in the registration procedure of an AMPS phone as specified in the TIA-553 standard. More specifically, I want to implement a piece of code that will manually set the value of the ESN that is sent during registration, as well as force the value of the digital color code to be used. Please let me know with what equipment I could do this. Thank you. ------------------------------ From: acunet3278@yahoo.com (Anthony Alvarez) Subject: Wanted: Ferrite Snap Bead Date: 26 Jun 2002 18:39:17 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I need to purchase one or two ferrite snap beads in the North Atlanta area. Can anyone recommend a vendor in zip code area of 30024? The ferrite snap bead is designed to reduce RF radiation in a cable. Ferrite snap beads are two piece snap-together assembly that wraps around coax. They remove RF from outside of cable. Made in two halves, you simply press the ferrite snap bead around the hands free wire at any convenient location near the earpiece end. The ferrite snap bead I am looking for accommodates wires up to 5 mm (inch) in diameter. About 1 inch long. I am looking for a place to purchase ferrite snap beads in the North Atlanta area. I would rather not purchase the item from Radio Shack. Please advise. Thank you. ------------------------------ From: nospam Subject: Need Registrar Recommendations Date: 27 Jun 2002 02:11:26 GMT Organization: Concentric Internet Services Hi all, Hope this isn't too OT, but my domain name is expiring in August, and I'm not looking forward to renewing it with Network Solutions. Who are generally regarded as decent registrars these days? Thanks, glenn ------------------------------ From: gvadim@qed.net (Alex) Subject: Cheap Virtual Calling Cards Date: 27 Jun 2002 11:19:14 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ www.StartDialing.com founded to give the consumer the best quality prepaid calling cards available on the market, at the lowest cost possible. Order Calling Cards as easy as 1-2-3! 1) Order Online 2) Receive Email Notification 3) Access Your Virtual Phone Card with your PIN and call right away! www.StartDialing.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 20:40:59 +0100 From: Richard D G Cox Subject: Re: Mitel Phone Switch Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 at 19:47 UT, zeb palmer asked: > I've been given the task of writing or finding the code for a visual basic > program to be installed on a computer hooked to the serial port of a Mitel > Phone switch. The point is to append every call to a log file. Why bother reinventing the wheel (and so risk inventing a square variant)? There is already an excellent utility to do exactly what you say you need, it's called "ComCap" by Magenta Systems (based in Croydon, UK) and you can find out about it at http://www.magsys.co.uk/comcap/ or download a copy directly from http://www.magsys.co.uk/comcap/comcap.zip It's shareware, but the fee is modest considering what the package does. (My firm is just a happy user of the product!) Richard Cox ------------------------------ From: Naser Subject: Quick Question Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 20:43:46 GMT What is the one interface that every COM or DCOM object is required to have? Thank you. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: MCI: WorldCom, Vint Cerf, and ICANN From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 21:34:11 GMT > -- that is, senior management of what would appear to be a > borderline criminal organization. No, no, no. You haven't fully analyzed all these wall street "scandals" yet. In the end, you will see these companies were in the forefront of a new economic wave based on the conservative philosophy that everything ought to be privatized: All they have done is start to privatize the tax system. Instead of taxpayers financing public infrastructure investments, gullible investors financed them. Worldcom and Global crossing may be gone soon, but the fiber optic networks will still be there (being run, no doubt, by a new company that gets enormous tax breaks for making the huge sacrifices involved in taking over a communications system they didn't have to pay for, but collect all the profits from). This is why all the CEOs and other top executuves deserve such huge bonuses. They have been creatively developing this whole new paradigm for the creation of infrastructure without needing taxpayers. Why this is such revolutionary new thinking, they ought to get even bigger bonuses! Naturally, there is the potential for investors to start shying away from the market if they figure they are going to be defrauded, but the soultion to that is in the works as well: It is vital that the social security system be privatized so an endless stream of new mandatory investments will flow in to finance the next public works project we just haven't found out about yet :-). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: RayJ Subject: Re: When Does an ACM Come From Intermediate Switch Organization: WEBUSENET.com Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 19:30:35 -0400 You second choice is the correct one. ACM implies reserving the circuit. Why reserve the cicuit if the terminating line is busy or OOS? For your second question, although I have no experience with Service Nodes, I would say that the switch-mid should not change the IAM at all. I guess if the call were interworking, it could change the ACM. It could originate a REL or RLC, so it could formulate them as it pleases (according to the requirements that is)... Ray Chirag wrote in message news:telecom20.294.8@telecom-digest.org: > Currently I am working on ISUP for call routing. I have gone thru > ITU-T specs for the same. However, I have one doubt. Consider a > scenario where a call originates from Switch-A, routes through > intermediate switches to the destination switch say switch-B. Let us > consider that there is only one intermediate switch say switch-Mid. > Hence, > Switch-A -----------> Switch-Mid -------------> Switch-B > Now when switch-A sends an IAM to switch-Mid, does Switch-Mid > 1) immediately send back an ACM and simultaneously sends an IAM to > switch-B > OR > 1) it(switch-Mid) forwards the IAM to switch-B, switch-B sends back > and ACM and then switch-Mid returns back the ACM to switch-A ? > The archival on this group has also confused me regarding the > same. Can anyone clear my doubt. > Another question is that if switch-Mid is a Service Node, then > does it have to change the IAM, ACM, ANM, REL, RLC packets? Or it > just has to forward the same packets to either side? > Any help would be highly appreciated. ------------------------------ From: dougr98112@yahoo.com (Doug Rosenberg) Subject: Altering Ring Cadence Date: 27 Jun 2002 17:09:43 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I'd like to find a simple, inexpensive device that sits between the wall and the phone to alter the ring cadence of incoming calls. I have a 2-line, multi-handset cordless phone system that, unfortunately, does not provide for independent control of the ring tones on each of the two lines. I'd like to be able to distinguish the lines when they ring at the handsets. The phone company's Custom Ring service will support alternative ring cadences, but not on the primary number -- which I don't want to change. I could add an external ringer, but I have a large area and a lot of handsets; also, a loud bell is not a very elegant solution. I could get a different phone system, but this one meets my needs in other respects. Has anyone heard of such a device? I read that there was once something called the "Ring Morph" that did this, but I can't find out whether it is still being made. Thanks, Doug ------------------------------ From: Brad Wilson Subject: I Need Fiber Help!! I am Desparate Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 00:40:56 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - Carolina Guys and gals, I got a problem. First of all I am coordinating a move for a company in my area. They are moving into a huge warehouse where the telecom closet is 600 feet away from one of the islands. I have to put phones and a data network over in this location. The phones are yet to be determined but it could end up being an IP type phone. I believe I have a solution for this. I would run one fiber cable from the telecom closet to the location and put media converters on each end converting them back to CAT 5 or RJ-45 connectors. I would then plug the cat 5 patch cable into a switch on each side. This would work with an IP phone. Next situation. First the data network is an old UNIX based system the runs dummy terminals for their application. There is not much data transfer or let me say not much bandwidth being used. None of the computers are connected to the internet. If I do not put in a IP phone system this is where I am confused. If I run a digital phone system such as a Nortel, can I run the data and phone across the same piece of fiber to the remote location. In other words does the data and phone need to be on seperate media converters and seperate strands of fiber to make each system work? If it does not how would this work? Would I have to put in a switch? I am really lost on this one guys and I need your help. Anybody that has any info or a website to help me out please respond. I would be most gracious if I could get some info on this. Brad Wilson nctarheelfan@hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:04 BST From: apritchard@cix.co.uk (Alan Pritchard) Subject: International Telephone Directories Reply-To: apritchard@cix.co.uk I wonder if I could appeal to all overseas members of your group for some help over international telephone directories. I have developed the Global Gazetteer, a database of some 4.5 million populated places around the world. One field included is the area code for the place. I would be pleased to receive any foreign telephone directories that (a) include internal area codes (b) include international dialling information. I also collect place and country names in all languages and international dialling directories are a very good source for obtaining, say, Spanish names for the countries of the world, and the major towns within the counties. I am happy to pay for the directories (if there is a charge) and for postage. TIA Alan Pritchard ------------------------------ From: Peter Dubuque Subject: Re: We Nigerians Are Sorry Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 19:27:53 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > The best one I ever read many years (pre-Internet) ago came on paper > from 'The Money Recovery Company'. For some amount of money, paid in > advance of course, you could be a licensee for the Money Recovery > Company. Your job would be in your own city, to walk around all day > (all night, whatever hours you wanted to work) with your head down, > looking at the sidewalk. Anytime you found money, you remitted it to > the Money Recovery Company and deducted your forty percent commission > before remitting proceeds to MRC. A dream job, eh? The postal > inspector who broke that one up said several 'applications' for jobs > along with the requisite license fee were found in the possession of > the scammers. Stupid, greedy people, those Americans. More stupid than greedy. The less stupid ones would just keep everything. (Or would the MRC charge them with embezzlement? Was there some non-compete clause in the license to keep you from finding money on your own time? The mind reels.) Peter F. Dubuque - peterd@panix.com ------------------------------ From: Alistair Gale Subject: Re: We Nigerians Are Sorry Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:54:22 -0300 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 18:17:06 PDT, Francis Idada wrote: > Hi Editor, [snip] > Francis Idada, 23 yr old, student > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you for your input, Francis. It > is a serious problem generally, but I do not see it going away anytime > soon. You see, Francis, large numbers of Americans are stupid and an > even larger number are greedy. Your countrymen know perfectly well > how stupid and greedy Americans can be ... that's the reason their > scam works so well. If it was originating here in the USA, the same > scam, 'advance payment in order to gain more money' would go under the > names of 'bank examiner trying to catch dishonest cashier/manager' as > one example, or 'I found some money that belongs to you; send me an > advance deposit to tell you where' (or call my 900 phone line to get > instructions, etc). Oh, there are a thousand variations on the 419 > scheme, American style; you Nigerians are not unique. > The best one I ever read many years (pre-Internet) ago came on paper > from 'The Money Recovery Company'. For some amount of money, paid in > advance of course, you could be a licensee for the Money Recovery > Company. Your job would be in your own city, to walk around all day > (all night, whatever hours you wanted to work) with your head down, > looking at the sidewalk. Anytime you found money, you remitted it to > the Money Recovery Company and deducted your forty percent commission > before remitting proceeds to MRC. A dream job, eh? The postal > inspector who broke that one up said several 'applications' for jobs > along with the requisite license fee were found in the possession of > the scammers. Stupid, greedy people, those Americans. Thanks very > much for writing, Francis. Be well. PAT] I for one am delighted to see people with the same can-do spirit that exemplified the victorian era US robber barons. I was reading a story by L. Sprague de Camp that glorified "sharp operators" (The Warrior Race). Seems quite appropriate in this Andersen era. alistair ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #296 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jun 28 20:38:04 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA07532; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 20:38:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 20:38:04 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206290038.UAA07532@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #297 TELECOM Digest Fri, 28 Jun 2002 20:37:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 297 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Wanted: Ferrite Snap Bead (Arthur Shapiro) Re: Wanted: Ferrite Snap Bead (Rich Greenberg) Re: Wanted: Ferrite Snap Bead (Scott Dorsey) Re: I Need Fiber Help!! I am Desparate (Scott Dorsey) Re: I Need Fiber Help!! I am Desparate (Jeremy Lee) Re: I Need Fiber Help!! I am Desparate (John Hines) Re: Sound Files of OLD Tones/Messages (Joseph Singer) Re: Sound files of OLD Tones/Messages (Paul Coxwell) Introduction (Robert Winn) Re: Need Registrar Recommendations (NOSPAM) Re: Need Registrar Recommendations (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Need Registrar Recommendations (Paul Erickson) Re: Problems With Siemens Gigaset 2420 (Doug Rosenberg) Will Congress Tackle Pay-For-Play? (Monty Solomon) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: art.shapiro@unisys.com (Arthur Shapiro) Subject: Re: Wanted: Ferrite Snap Bead Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:11:23 GMT Organization: Unisys Corporation In article , acunet3278@yahoo.com (Anthony Alvarez) wrote: > I need to purchase one or two ferrite snap beads in the North Atlanta > area. Can anyone recommend a vendor in zip code area of 30024? These are a common item in high-end audio applications, so a relatively big stereo store (meaning something with a higher class of componentry than Circuit City or Good Guys) would be likely to carry them. Firms such as AudioQuest market them through stereo shops, or online retailers such as Audio Advisor or Music Direct have them in their catalogues. That aside: I'm vaguely aware that ferrite characteristics can "tune" such devices for different parts of the frequency spectrum, so what is designed for audio might (or might not) be appropriate for telephony apps. And anything sold for audio is ridiculously marked-up in price; I've gotten these things for a quarter or the like at computer swap meets, whereas they're probably $10 per as an audio item. Art ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Wanted: Ferrite Snap Bead Date: 28 Jun 2002 16:23:07 -0400 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , Anthony Alvarez wrote: > I need to purchase one or two ferrite snap beads in the North Atlanta > area. Can anyone recommend a vendor in zip code area of 30024? Not sure where 30024 is or if they would have it, you might try Graybar which is in an industrial park off Cobb parkway (US-41) a bit north of where hiway 5 crosses it. Rich Greenberg Work: Rich.Greenberg atsign worldspan.com +1 770-563-6656 N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign panix.com +1 770-321-6507 Eastern time zone. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT), Red & Shasta(Husky,(RIP)) Owner:Chinook-L Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/ Asst Owner:Sibernet-L ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Wanted: Ferrite Snap Bead Date: 28 Jun 2002 10:59:24 -0400 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Anthony Alvarez wrote: > The ferrite snap bead is designed to reduce RF radiation in a cable. > Ferrite snap beads are two piece snap-together assembly that wraps > around coax. They remove RF from outside of cable. Actually, all they do is eliminate common mode noise, and they don't really do a very good job of that. > I am looking for a place to purchase ferrite snap beads in the North > Atlanta area. I would rather not purchase the item from Radio Shack. > Please advise. Thank you. Recoton sells them. Anybody that carries Recoton junk (Hi Fi Buys definitely does) will have them. scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: I Need Fiber Help!! I am Desparate Date: 28 Jun 2002 11:06:06 -0400 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Brad Wilson wrote: > This would work with an IP phone. Next situation. First the data > network is an old UNIX based system the runs dummy terminals for their > application. There is not much data transfer or let me say not much > bandwidth being used. None of the computers are connected to the > internet. If I do not put in a IP phone system this is where I am > confused. If I run a digital phone system such as a Nortel, can I run > the data and phone across the same piece of fiber to the remote > location. In other words does the data and phone need to be on > seperate media converters and seperate strands of fiber to make each > system work? If it does not how would this work? Would I have to put > in a switch? I am really lost on this one guys and I need your help. The terminals just have RS-232 connections to the server. You can use any sort of device that will carry RS-232. That is, you could run a long cable, or you could plug the terminals into a terminal server and connect that to an ethernet and plug the server into the ethernet. Or you could use media converters and run fibre between each terminal and the server (this is outrageously expensive and no better than the other two methods). > Anybody that has any info or a website to help me out please respond. > I would be most gracious if I could get some info on this. You can always hire me as a consultant for a week. scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: J3r3my L33 Subject: Re: I Need Fiber Help!! I am Desparate Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 14:27:38 -0400 Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County You could use something like this http://www.arcelect.com/fiber_optic_multiplexer_analog_voice_inputs.htm but at 600' away just pull some copper with the fiber. I think Belden or OCC make a hybrid 4 Fiber 4Pr Copper cable in a single jacket. Jeremy Brad Wilson wrote in message news:telecom20.296.22@telecom-digest.org: > Guys and gals, > I got a problem. First of all I am coordinating a move for a company > in my area. They are moving into a huge warehouse where the telecom > closet is 600 feet away from one of the islands. I have to put phones > and a data network over in this location. The phones are yet to be > determined but it could end up being an IP type phone. I believe I > have a solution for this. I would run one fiber cable from the > telecom closet to the location and put media converters on each end > converting them back to CAT 5 or RJ-45 connectors. I would then plug > the cat 5 patch cable into a switch on each side. > This would work with an IP phone. Next situation. First the data > network is an old UNIX based system the runs dummy terminals for their > application. There is not much data transfer or let me say not much > bandwidth being used. None of the computers are connected to the > internet. If I do not put in a IP phone system this is where I am > confused. If I run a digital phone system such as a Nortel, can I run > the data and phone across the same piece of fiber to the remote > location. In other words does the data and phone need to be on > seperate media converters and seperate strands of fiber to make each > system work? If it does not how would this work? Would I have to put > in a switch? I am really lost on this one guys and I need your help. > Anybody that has any info or a website to help me out please respond. > I would be most gracious if I could get some info on this. > Brad Wilson > nctarheelfan@hotmail.com ------------------------------ From: John Hines Subject: Re: I Need Fiber Help!! I am Desparate Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 10:41:20 -0500 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: john@jhines.org Brad Wilson wrote: > This would work with an IP phone. Next situation. First the data > network is an old UNIX based system the runs dummy terminals for their > application. There is not much data transfer or let me say not much > bandwidth being used. None of the computers are connected to the > internet. If I do not put in a IP phone system this is where I am > confused. If I run a digital phone system such as a Nortel, can I run > the data and phone across the same piece of fiber to the remote > location. In other words does the data and phone need to be on > seperate media converters and seperate strands of fiber to make each > system work? If it does not how would this work? Would I have to put > in a switch? I am really lost on this one guys and I need your help. You can use terminal servers to move the serial lines onto the network, at both the computer end, and the dumb terminal end. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: Sound Files of OLD Tones/Messages Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 09:00:11 -0700 Organization: Drizzle Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 02:56:22 -0500, Web Lion wrote: > I remember when I was a kid growing up in the 60's in Detroit. I would > sit next to the phone and take it off hook and listen. The dial-tone > would change to a high-pitched tone and then to another high pitched > tone that would kind of oscillate. Only after quite a long time, would > it get connected to the howler trunk. > Back then, the dial tone was more like a buzz and so was the busy > signal. I think this changed when the CO (Detroit Niagra) went from a > #5 crossbar to a 1AESS. (Does anyone know what DTRTMINICGO - I think > thats the code - is now)? > Anyways -- I know someone posted a website with .WAV or .MP3 files with > various messages and tones from recent systems. Does anyone have any > of these from the old days? http://www.wideweb.com/phonetrips/ Personal replies most likely will not be read. Please reply in the newsgroup ------------------------------ From: PaulCoxwell@aol.com Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 15:13:40 EDT Subject: Re: Sound Files of OLD Tones/Messages Try the "Phone Trips" site at www.wideweb.com/phonetrips/index2.html There are numerous narrated recordings made from various parts of the U.S. in the late 1960s/1970s era. In a message dated 6/28/02 3:35:31 AM GMT Daylight Time, editor@telecom-digest.org writes: > I remember when I was a kid growing up in the 60's in Detroit. I would > sit next to the phone and take it off hook and listen. The dial-tone > would change to a high-pitched tone and then to another high pitched > tone that would kind of oscillate. Only after quite a long time, would > it get connected to the howler trunk. > Back then, the dial tone was more like a buzz and so was the busy > signal. I think this changed when the CO (Detroit Niagra) went from a > #5 crossbar to a 1AESS. (Does anyone know what DTRTMINICGO - I think > thats the code - is now)? > Anyways -- I know someone posted a website with .WAV or .MP3 files with > various messages and tones from recent systems. Does anyone have any > of these from the old days? ------------------------------ From: Robert Winn Subject: Introduction Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 03:11:07 -0500 I've been a long-time off again / on again lurker, but I've decided to join the list and make an effort to read as much as possible and to contribute what I can. I'm currently Lucent's lead instructor and developer for the 5ESS line translations curriculum: ES505A (intro to translations), ES505B (business / centrex translations) and ES505C (ISDN translations). Most of my students are from LECs and CLECs, but sometimes I've got students from private switch owners who use the 5ESS as a PBX. I've been at Lucent for almost two and a half years, before that I worked for a CLEC / long distance carrier in Anchorage, Alaska called GCI (General Communications Incorporated). Before GCI, I did various and sundry telecom jobs from PBX and key system administration to consulting on voice-processing systems. My clients ranged from small, local businesses to Nortel. Looking forward to learning as much as possible! -Robert [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Welcome aboard, Robert! You are in some good company here, and from your background, it sounds like we will be able to learn a little from you also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: NOSPAM Subject: Re: Need Registrar Recommendations Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 04:15:01 GMT Stick with Verisign. They will be around the next time you renew too. More info @ http://access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm . nospam wrote in message news:telecom20.296.15@telecom-digest.org... > Hope this isn't too OT, but my domain name is expiring in August, and > I'm not looking forward to renewing it with Network Solutions. > Who are generally regarded as decent registrars these days? > Thanks, > glenn ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 01:14:06 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: Need Registrar Recommendations Glenn wrote: > Who are generally regarded as decent registrars these days? I have a couple of domains registered with Verisign, and a couple registered with Namesecure. I had great experience with Namesecure, and I decided to move my Verisign domains there. But here's where it gets interesting ... I've been trying to get this changed for over a month, with no success. And Namesecure has dropped telephone support entirely -- all support is handled by fax or email, and I have yet to get a response to a fax or an email. From a few months back I have several phone numbers, direct-dial and switchboard, for Namesecure. They're all disconnected now. And while poking around on Namesecure's homepage, I learned something that surprised me: > This Certificate belongs to: > www.namesecure.com > NameSecure, Inc. > Network Solutions, Inc. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Huh? > Concord, California, US > > This Certificate was issued by: > Secure Server Certification Authority > RSA Data Security, Inc. > US > Serial Number: 7B:03:BA:27:E8:EA:F3:FD:9B:59:B5:03:A9:9D:C5:16 > This Certificate is valid from Sun May 19, 2002 to Wed May 19, 2004 > Certificate Fingerprint: > ED:78:E6:7C:A7:34:08:B2:5A:D9:35:2E:48:10:99:08 Namesecure is Network Solutions? But wait -- it gets better; here's the certificate from Verisign's site: > This Certificate belongs to: > www.netsol.com > Registrar > Network Solutions, Inc. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Hey! > Herndon, Virginia, US > This Certificate was issued by: > Secure Server Certification Authority > RSA Data Security, Inc. > US > Serial Number: 0C:BC:A9:84:B6:F8:F2:E1:50:08:FF:2A:4B:73:DA:24 > This Certificate is valid from Thu Aug 02, 2001 to Sat Aug 03, 2002 > Certificate Fingerprint: > D8:9B:E5:0D:EF:0D:12:46:0E:71:F7:50:77:35:B8:C Verisign is Network Solutions as well? Am I reading these right? If so, is there another (non-NSI) registrar that provides similar services to what Namesecure does? Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com Burma! ------------------------------ From: Paul Erickson Subject: Re: Need Registrar Recommendations Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 15:44:19 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com > Who are generally regarded as decent registrars these days? That's like asking who's a decent long distance company - there isn't one ... I don't like NSI / Verisign either, but since they run a couple of the root servers, I figure my domain is a tad safer there than elsewhere. www.opensrs.net is another option, but you must go through a reseller who can be just about any nickel and dime ISP, and in addition you'll also have to transfer your domain's registrar from NSI to that reseller. That might be a headache not worth $10 to $20 a year in savings, IMHO. Paul nospam wrote in message news:telecom20.296.15@telecom-digest.org: > Hi all, > Hope this isn't too OT, but my domain name is expiring in August, and > I'm not looking forward to renewing it with Network Solutions. > Who are generally regarded as decent registrars these days? ------------------------------ From: Doug Rosenberg Subject: Re: Problems With Siemens Gigaset 2420 Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 05:19:55 GMT > Or the door seals on a nearby microwave oven are leaking ... > It doesn't take much leaking out of a 850W klystron to interfere with a > 100mW transmission. Possibly, but we almost never run our microwave. I suppose it could be someone else's. Maybe a neighbor bought the same phone? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 01:37:36 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Will Congress Tackle Pay-For-Play? Radio-station owners are shocked -- shocked! -- as the music industry's payola scandal widens. Record-label execs aren't buying it (and neither should you). By Eric Boehlert June 25, 2002 | Is pay-for-play here to stay? Once a hush-hush topic rarely discussed even within the music industry, "pay-for-play," the costly system by which record companies pay independent promoters to get songs on the radio, has now become a hot-button political issue. Some members of Congress are talking about holding hearings and offering legislation in hopes of tearing down the entrenched pay-for-play system. Not only does pay-for-play cost the music industry approximately $150 million each year, it virtually shuts off access to commercial FM radio for artists or record companies who can't or won't spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to promote a new single. Inside the industry, the veil has also been lifted; an entire panel discussion devoted to indie promotion is being put together for the radio industry's largest annual convention this fall. Meanwhile, ABC's "20/20" ran a prime-time segment on pay-for-play, and even the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal have introduced the topic to their readers. http://salon.com/ent/feature/2002/06/25/pfp_congress/index.html ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #297 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jun 28 21:06:41 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA08323; Fri, 28 Jun 2002 21:06:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 21:06:41 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206290106.VAA08323@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #298 TELECOM Digest Fri, 28 Jun 2002 21:06:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 298 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #339, June 28, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) MCI: SEC v. WorldCom (Monty Solomon) Re: MCI: WorldCom, Vint Cerf, and ICANN (Brett Frankenberger) MCI: Worldcom's Businees Customer List Available? (drill) 411 no Longer Free From Pay Phones in NYS (Daniel Salomon) Re: Quick Question (Chip G) Re: Need Registrar Recommendations (John R. Levine) Re: Cheap Virtual Calling Cards (John R. Levine) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:45:24 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #339, June 28, 2002 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 339: June 28, 2002 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** AT&T CANADA http://www.attcanada.com ** BELL CANADA http://www.bell.ca ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** BCE to Buy SBC-Owned Bell Shares ** WorldCom Hit by Giant Accounting Fraud ** GT Obtains Creditor Protection ** AT&T Corp. Begins Purchase of Canadian Unit ** Call-Net Lays Off 350, Reins in Service Expansion ** CRTC Denies ISP Bid for Lower Rates ** ICANN Ends Individual Representation on Board ** Rogers Completes GSM/GPRS Network ** Mitel to Provide IP Migration for SX-200 ** Another Study Finds No Cellphone-Cancer Link ** Sierra Wireless Lays Off a Third of Staff ** 360networks Protection Extended ** New CEO at Cell-Loc ** Layoff Watch: Alcatel, Motorola ** Telecom Update Special Issue ** Angus Analyzes Price Cap Decision ============================================================ BCE TO BUY SBC-OWNED BELL SHARES: BCE Inc. has agreed to buy back SBC's 20% share of Bell Canada for $6.32 billion, 24% more than it received for the shares when Ameritech bought them three years ago. Part of the financing will come from the sale or securitization of Bell's directory business; the rest will be raised through a common equity issue and public debt. Under the deal: ** Immediately, BCE pays $1.33 Billion for 4.2% of Bell Canada shares. ** On July 15, SBC will buy $250 million worth of BCE common equity through a private placement. ** By January 3, 2003, BCE will buy the remaining shares for $4.99 billion, paying with a combination of 18-month promissory notes, cash, and up to $250 million more in BCE stock -- the mix will be determined by BCE. WORLDCOM HIT BY GIANT ACCOUNTING FRAUD: WorldCom says that during 2001 and the first quarter of 2002 it improperly recorded US$3.8 billion in expenses as capital expenditures and overstated EBITDA by about $3.6 billion. New cost-cutting measures include laying off 17,000 WorldCom employees. ** The Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec and the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan say they have lost $109 million and $10 million respectively on WorldCom stock. GT OBTAINS CREDITOR PROTECTION: The Ontario Superior Court has granted Group Telecom protection under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act, with PricewaterhouseCoopers acting as GT's monitor. ** GT is laying off 360 employees, 34% of its staff. Chairman Leo Hindery has resigned; his interim replacement is CEO Dan Milliard. GT has appealed its delisting by Nasdaq. AT&T CORP. BEGINS PURCHASE OF CANADIAN UNIT: AT&T Corp. says it has begun buying the 69% of AT&T Canada's shares that it does not own already, as required under its 1998 merger agreement with MetroNet. AT&T Corp. will pay about US$3.4 billion for the shares, which will be temporarily held by two CIBC subsidiaries. (See Telecom Update #173) CALL-NET LAYS OFF 350, REINS IN SERVICE EXPANSION: Call-Net Enterprises is laying off 350 employees (15% of its staff) and cancelling its launch of local phone service in Quebec City, Edmonton, and other centres. ** Call-Net blames the CRTC's price cap decision, which it says will save "only 7% of our annualized charges" from telcos, and on the general deterioration of the telecom industry. CRTC DENIES ISP BID FOR LOWER RATES: CRTC Telecom Decision 2002-37 rejects an application by independent (non-telco) members of the Canadian Association of Internet Providers to require Bell Canada to offer independent ISPs wholesale DSL at 50% below the lowest rate charged to residential customers. ** The Decision approves CAIP's proposal to bar Bell from trying to win back customers who switch to another provider's DSL Internet Service, for 90 days. ** The independent members of CAIP say they are "aghast" that the CRTC "has rejected widespread Internet competition and has instead effectively blessed high-speed market dominance by the large telephone and cable companies." http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2002/dt2002-37.htm ICANN ENDS INDIVIDUAL REPRESENTATION ON BOARD: The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, which oversees the Internet's name system, has abolished the election of individual Internet users to the group's board. ICANN's 19 directors will instead be named by technical, business, government, and nonprofit organizations. ROGERS COMPLETES GSM/GPRS NETWORK: Rogers AT&T Wireless has completed rollout of its GSM/GPRS digital wireless network, which provides coverage to 93% of the Canadian population. MITEL TO PROVIDE IP MIGRATION FOR SX-200: Mitel Networks says it will introduce an IP migration option for its SX-200 PBX by year-end. ** Mitel has laid off 50 employees, 2% of its work force. ANOTHER STUDY FINDS NO CELLPHONE-CANCER LINK: A Motorola-financed study at Washington University in St. Louis has found no link between brain cancer and exposure to cellphone radiation. http://mednews.wustl.edu/medadmin/PAnews.nsf/0/96DE7C3FD72F65 B386256BDE00745F31 SIERRA WIRELESS LAYS OFF A THIRD OF STAFF: Sierra Wireless is reducing its staff by one-third, to 180 employees, because of lagging sales. 360NETWORKS PROTECTION EXTENDED: A B.C. court has extended 360networks' bankruptcy protection to July 31. NEW CEO AT CELL-LOC: Sheldon Reid, Executive VP of Cell-Loc, has been named President and CEO. He replaces company co- founder Michel Fattouche, who continues as Chief Technology Officer. LAYOFF WATCH: ** Alcatel says it will cut another 10,000 jobs worldwide by year-end, reducing its staff to 70,000. Alcatel employs 4,000 in Canada. ** Motorola is laying off 7,000 employees, 7% of its current work force. TELECOM UPDATE SPECIAL ISSUE: This special issue is published four days early to provide immediate coverage of BCE's announcement. ** We're taking a summer break: the next issue of Telecom Update will be published on July 15. ANGUS ANALYZES PRICE CAP DECISION: In the July-August issue of Telemanagement, available July 2, Lis Angus explains the "New Ground Rules for Telecom Competition" created by the CRTC price cap decision. Also in Telemanagement: ** Special Report: M-Business Takes Off ** Purolator, FedEx Bet on GPRS for Tracking ** The Great Bandwidth Boom: Anatomy of a Fiasco While supplies last, a copy of "The IP PBX Revolution," an anthology of Telemanagement feature articles, will be included with every introductory risk-free subscription to Telemanagement. Download full information at: http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-IP_PBX_Bonus.pdf. PDF File: 208 KB. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 02:07:54 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: MCI: SEC v. WorldCom SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. WORLDCOM, INC. June 26, 2002 http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/worldcom/secwrldcm062602cmp.pdf ------------------------------ From: rbf@rbfnet.com (Brett Frankenberger) Subject: Re: MCI: WorldCom, Vint Cerf, and ICANN Date: 28 Jun 2002 19:37:23 GMT Organization: rbfnet In article , Judith Oppenheimer wrote: > WorldCom, it seems, spent the last five quarters overstating its cash > flow by $3.8 billion in what the New York Times has called "one of the > largest cases of false corporate bookkeeping yet." They did no such thing. They reclassified operating expense as capital expenditure, which manipulated all sorts of measures, but not cash flow. (That doesn't really make their activities any more excusable or any less criminal. I'm just pointing it out in the interests of accuracy; the fact that they cooked their books doesn't mean we should cook our reporting of their cooking.) -- Brett [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Brett has a very good point. There are ample plenty complaints about MCI/Worldcom these days; their criminal activity regards their accounting activities (as aided by Arthur Andersen their accountant) are just a small sampling of the illnesses going on there. There is no reason to make anything up. Just the facts please, Judith. Considering that Arthur Andersen is probably going to be placed on federal probation as a result of the Enron fiasco, I am wondering now if the MCI/Worldcom mess is going to put A. Andersen out of business totally. (Secretly applauding; glad to see the mess they are in. PAT] ------------------------------ From: likeatruck2002@yahoo.com (drill) Subject: MCI: Worldcom's Businees Customer List Available? Date: 28 Jun 2002 15:30:23 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Anyone know where to obtain a copy of Worldcom's BUSINESS Customer list? ------------------------------ From: danielksalomon@my-deja.com (Daniel Salomon) Subject: 411 No Longer Free From Pay Phones in NYS Date: 28 Jun 2002 15:41:01 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ So I tried to dial 411 from a Verizon pay phone in New York City (one where local calls went from 25 cents for 3 minutes, to 50 cents unlimited, to 25 cents for 4 minutes), and I was prompted to deposit 50 cents. I called the operator, who said that 411 has been 50 cents since March, which is when local calls wen to 50 cents. I complained that Verizon's excuse for no longer providing phone books at pay phones was that directory assistace would be free, and she replied that all of the other pay phone companies now charge as well. And they wonder why they're losing market share ... Dan ------------------------------ From: Chip G Subject: Re: Quick Question Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 06:17:31 GMT I believe the answer is: IUnknown. Take a look at David Kruglinski's books for more good info on the topic. I think you may have misinterpreted the dcom in the group name of this newsgroup though. This group is about telecom ... not Microsoft programming. You might want to post on the news.microsoft.com groups for better results with these types of questions. Regards, Chip Naser wrote in message news:telecom20.296.18@telecom-digest.org... > What is the one interface that every COM or DCOM object is required to > have? > Thank you. ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Need Registrar Recommendations Date: 28 Jun 2002 20:28:30 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA nospam wrote: > Who are generally regarded as decent registrars these days? I like OpenSRS/Tucows, who only sell through resellers. Domain owners who don't like spam should visit the Spamcon Foundation at www.spamcon.org, an educational anti-spam group run by people I know. If you click the "domain registration" link at the left side of the home page, you can transfer or register domains through OpenSRS for $25/yr, of which $15 is a donation to the foundation. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Cheap Virtual Calling Cards Date: 28 Jun 2002 20:38:05 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > www.StartDialing.com founded to give the consumer the best quality > prepaid calling cards available on the market, at the lowest cost > possible. Order Calling Cards as easy as 1-2-3! Hmmn. They charge 6.8 cpm. But www.onesuite.com, another prepaid calling card recommended by other readers of the Digest, costs only 2.9 cpm, and has comparably lower international rates. Why pay more? John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #298 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Jun 29 18:38:59 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA26652; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 18:38:59 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 18:38:59 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206292238.SAA26652@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #299 TELECOM Digest Sat, 29 Jun 2002 17:39:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 299 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson MCI: The Rise and Fall of the Ebbers Empire (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: MCI: WorldCom, Vint Cerf, and ICANN (Judith Oppenheimer) Re: I Need Fiber Optic Advice?? (Brad Wilson) Re: I Need Fiber Optic Advice?? I am Desparate (s falke) Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (Denis Mcmahon) Re: Need Registrar Recommendations (Richard D G Cox) Re: Cheap Virtual Calling Cards (kumar) Truth or Fiction: Telemarketing Call Saves Man's Life (Mark Brader) Book Review: Telecom Marketing (ABCI) Re: MCI: Worldcom's Businees Customer List Available? (Dave Phelps) Another Shareware Day (TELECOM Digest Editor) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 01:30:12 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: MCI: The Rise and Fall of the Ebbers Empire From National Review -- http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_comment/comment-wohlstetter062802.asp The Rise and Fall of the Ebbers Empire How it crumbled. By John C. Wohlstetter WorldCom, one-time poster-boy telecom firm for the New Economy, lies in ruins. Its 19-year saga mirrors that of the once-vibrant long-distance industry. Its imminent demise, while hastened by scandal, was inevitable. The seedlings of WorldCom were planted on January 8, 1982 when Charles Brown, last chairman of legendary Ma Bell, capitulated to antitrust chief William Baxter. Facing imminent defeat in the government's antitrust suit, Brown elected to end his company's litigation nightmare and accept Baxter's vision of juridically separate long-distance and local markets, effective January 1, 1984. Baxter's vision was based on, he later admitted, a "hunch": Consumer-welfare gains from scale economies generated by separating local and long distance would more than offset losses due to foregone scope economies from integration of the two. Baxter based his calculus on superior economies of terrestrial microwave transmission via radio towers spaced 30 miles apart, versus cables buried in the ground. It proved a masterpiece of bad regulatory timing: Just as Baxter achieved his goal, advances in fiber-optics began to transform the economies of long distance, and in time vertical reintegration of local and long distance would become the only sensible strategy. Bernie Ebbers co-founded Long Distance Discount Services in 1983. He would take advantage of regulatory rules established by the Federal Communications Commission that subsidized AT&T's competitors into the early 1990s. Until then his firm flew below the radar screen. When Ebbers acquired UUNet, a company providing data services over the burgeoning Internet backbone, the re-christened WorldCom targeted the high-growth business-data market. Wall Street took notice, and Ebbers became the new star in the telecom firmament. Aiding WorldCom's rise was that between 1990 and 1996 AT&T, MCI and Sprint, the long-distance Big Three with some ninety percent of the market, operated a cozy triopoly, passing six price increases on to customers. But the advent of the mass-market Internet in 1995 (when "Wintel" PC married Netscape's Navigator browser) signaled that the cartel's days were numbered. The 1996 Telecom Act not only failed to introduce more competition into long distance; by erecting stiff barriers to Bell entry into long distance the law actually prolonged the cartel's life. But further advances in fiber-optic technology soon made the cost of a call across the country almost exactly the same as that of a call across the street. The vast scale economies of fiber-galvanized entry into long distance by new fiber carriers, unencumbered by legacy networks built with older generations of fiber. Qwest, Williams Telecommunications, Level-3, and Global Crossing laid thousands of miles of fiber connecting hundreds of cities. By 1997 the core voice revenues of established carriers began to deteriorate, a process continuing today at an accelerated pace as Internet fax and e-mail displace no-rush voice calls. Ebbers did not fully grasp this. Which explains why in 1997 he outbid British Telecom and GTE for Old Economy icon MCI, a firm distinguished not by its technology but its inspired marketing. When John Sidgmore, WorldCom's current CEO and back then its president, told Wall Street that high-flyer WorldCom planned to jettison MCI's 20 million LOLITAs (telecom-speak for Little Old Ladies In Tennis Apparel) a firestorm erupted in Washington. Within 24 hours Ebbers pledged to keep Grandma. He thus sealed WorldCom's fate: His New Economy business was now fatally entwined with Old Economy voice. Three years later Ebbers realized this and spun off MCI's consumer business as a separate company, but it was too late. The long-distance price collapse deprived all firms of pricing power, a signal to investors that the glory years were over. Long distance is no longer a stand-alone business, a realization dawning slowly, but surely, upon the FCC, which in 1997 blocked AT&T's purchase of a Bell firm, SBC. As recently as 2000 regulators on both sides of the Atlantic so feared WorldCom that they blocked its merger with Sprint, fearing impending dominance of the Internet. They (and the local phone companies that opposed the deal) needn't have worried. Vertical reintegration of the local and long-distance markets, separated by government fiat 20 years ago, finally beckons. Presaging ultimate vertical reintegration, Qwest in 2000 morphed into a local phone company by acquiring a Bell, USWest, with integration of local and long distance segments still awaiting slow-motion regulatory approval of USWest's entry into long distance within its 14-state territory. The criminal fraud investigation that forced suspension of trading in WorldCom's stock had nothing to do with all this, but profoundly alters the emerging structure of the telecom industry. Courtesy of Enron and the parade of scandal that daily graces the morning headlines, telecom balance sheets are radically revalued. Stodgy Bell assets look a lot better to skeptical investors than under-capitalized fiber carriers, some already bankrupt. Enron thus made possible the acquisition, at scrap value, of newer networks with fewer LOLITAs to subsidize. Why pay a premium for a LOLITA-laden long-distance firm like AT&T and face Justice Department scrutiny, when scads of long distance fiber can be acquired without regulatory headache? For WorldCom and, soon, AT&T now negotiating with lenders to spin off its cable properties without violating loan covenants limiting its balance-sheet debt the end of the line is nigh. Within three years there will be three or four end-to-end carriers offering local plus long distance. The final number awaits whether USWest survives intact or is sundered and parceled out among the remaining Bell firms. Regulators could still scramble the picture by trying to get the Bells to rescue WorldCom, setting a precedent for an AT&T bailout. Such "lemon socialism" could preclude consumers from realizing the full benefit of falling long-distance prices. However, the edifice elaborately constructed 20 years ago by William Baxter on a hunch, has crumbled. No other country followed Baxter's lead, and no other country has such a mess in its long-distance market. John C. Wohlstetter is a senior fellow at the Seattle-based Discovery Institute. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Re: MCI: WorldCom, Vint Cerf, and ICANN Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 21:44:09 -0400 What I posted was the first paragaph of an ICANNWatch article written by Ted Byfield - http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=833 -- with the link to ICANNWatch to read the rest of the article. I did miss the error - thanks, Brett, for the correction. :-) Judith Oppenheimer http://JudithOppenheimer.com http://ICBTollFreeNews.com 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert Visit 1-800 AFTA, http://www.1800afta.org ------------------------------ From: Brad Wilson Subject: Re: I Need Some Fiber Optic Advice?? Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 02:54:16 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - Carolina Guys and gals, I got a problem. First of all I am coordinating a move for a company in my area. They are moving into a huge warehouse where the telecom closet is 600 feet away from one of the islands. I have to put phones and a data network over in this location. The phones are yet to be determined but it could end up being an IP type phone. I beleive I have a solution for this. I would run one fiber cable from the telecom closet to the location and put media converters on each end converting them back to CAT 5 or RJ-45 connectors. I would then plug the cat 5 patch cable into a switch on each side. This would work with an IP phone. Next situation. First the data network is an old UNIX based system the runs dummy terminals for their application. There is not much data transfer or let me say not much bandwidth being used. None of the computers are connected to the internet. If I do not put in a IP phone system this is where I am confused. If I run a digital phone system such as a Nortel, can I run the data and phone across the same piece of fiber to the remote location. In other words does the data and phone need to be on seperate media converters and seperate strands of fiber to make each system work. If it does not how would this work? Would I have to put in a switch. I am really lost on this one guys and I need your help. Anybody that has any info or a website to help me out please respond. I would be most gracious if I could get some info on this. Brad Wilson nctarheelfan@hotmail.com ------------------------------ From: s falke Subject: Re: I Need Fiber Help!! I am Desparate Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 03:34:23 GMT > I Need Fiber Help!! I am Desparate Bran works very well here. s falke [Pat -- Someone had to say it.] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Metamucil works well for us older guys. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Denis Mcmahon Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 09:50:58 +0100 Reply-To: denisrt@pickaxe.net Linc Madison wrote: > Poor choice of example. If you are in Italy, you must always dial the > entire national number including the area code. Likewise for a number > of other countries, including France, Norway, and Denmark. France certainly had local as well as National dialling as recently as 1998. It just had 5 very big geographic code areas 01 .. 05, a single code for mobile 06, and afaik 07, 08 nd 09 were allocated to varying special codes. 00 was Intl like most of the rest of the EC. If you were in eg the Paris area (01) dialling another Paris area code you did not need the 01 prefix. I'm not aware of any subsequent changes .... Rgds, Denis McMahon / +44 7802 468949 / denis@pickaxe.net sulfnbk is not a virus, see the symantec virus encyclopaedia! Now restocking killfile, new entrants welcome: trolls, spam, xpost cascades, OT ads, top posters & terminally clueless! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 11:56:26 +0100 From: Richard D G Cox Subject: Re: Need Registrar Recommendations Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited On 29 Jun 2002 00:28 UT, johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) wrote: >> Who are generally regarded as decent registrars these days? > I like OpenSRS/Tucows, who only sell through resellers. They WERE generally regarded as decent registrars but more recently it has become apparent that they have been reckless as to the accuracy of the information that they have registered; ICANN has recently had to take the matter up with them: > We'll work with Tucows to ensure that they understand their obligations > as outlined in the "Registrar Advisory Concerning Whois Data Accuracy" > that we posted on 10 May 2002: > > Best regards, > Dan Halloran > Chief Registrar Liaison, ICANN While not spamming, they had apparently become very spammer-friendly! Richard D G Cox ------------------------------ From: raj1996@go2netmail.com (kumar) Subject: Re: Cheap Virtual Calling Cards Date: 29 Jun 2002 09:35:59 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) wrote in message news:: >> www.StartDialing.com founded to give the consumer the best quality >> prepaid calling cards available on the market, at the lowest cost >> possible. Order Calling Cards as easy as 1-2-3! > Hmmn. They charge 6.8 cpm. But www.onesuite.com, another prepaid > calling card recommended by other readers of the Digest, costs only > 2.9 cpm, and has comparably lower international rates. > Why pay more? > John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 > johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner > http://iecc.com/johnl I tried onesuite, but the sound quality was not too good (I think they use internet telephony) and I would get busy signals occassionally. Now I use peachcard.com ------------------------------ Subject: Truth or Fiction? Telemarketing Call Saves Man's Life Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 22:51:21 EDT From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) CNN is reporting (URL below) that last month one Leonardo Diaz of Colombia, stranded on a mountain in the Andes, tried to call for help on his cellphone only to find that he was out of prepaid minutes. But he avoided death by hypothermia when the phone company, Bellsouth, phoned him to ask if he wanted to buy more minutes ... Mark Brader, Toronto | "GUALITY IS FIRST" msb@vex.net | --slogan of "Dongda electron CO.,LTD" My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jun 2002 13:59:16 -0000 Reply-To: ANS-Customer-Service-feedback-25@lb.bcentral.com From: ABCI Subject: Book Review: Telecom Marketing Cut the Cost! "How to Market and Conduct Telecommunication Auditing Services" By ACCESS Services is an E-Book about marketing, selling and conducting Telecommunication Auditing Services for Telecom Professionals. The guide is chock full of tips for auditing business telecommunication cost, customer premises equipment, disaster preparedness procedures and expenses. The program is designed to place the Telecommunications professional in a consultative sales position. It is a comprehensive 'how to' program that will lead you deep into your client's telecommunication infrastructure and cost. Cut the Cost! will provide you with a professional technique to help you acquire appointments with qualified prospects, and to conduct in-depth discovery meetings that will uncover new telecommunication business opportunities. It is available as a downloadable E-Book and you may purchase on-line from our secure server. Visit http://www.access-networking.com/cut_the_cost.htm on the World Wide Web for more information. ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: MCI: Worldcom's Businees Customer List Available? Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 13:02:02 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In article , likeatruck2002 @yahoo.com says: > Anyone know where to obtain a copy of Worldcom's BUSINESS Customer list? LOL. Ebay. Maybe they will auction it to raise some working capital. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe I could get a copy and sell it to raise revenue for this Digest. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: Another Shareware Day Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 16:20:00 EDT Please see the message right next to this one regards MCI's customer list, which I doubt they are going to need any more. I *do* however need financial help again this month (what else is old?) At the end of each month I present this 'nagware' request for assistance from the folks who read, enjoy and are benifited by this Digest. If you are able to help -- and twenty <> fifty dollars per reader/year is considered quite appropriate and generous -- then I cordially invite your participation. You can send checks/money orders/cash to TELECOM, Post Office Box 50, Independence, KS 67301 ... or if you prefer to make a donation with a credit card (or just prefer to do it on the net) then PayPal is also available. Look at the very bottom of the main page on the web site, http://telecom-digest.org, and click the 'donate' button. Your payment will go through PayPal and you will be paying 'editor@telecom-digest.org' It will go through Visa/MC/Discover, etc. Either way is fine; just do what you think best. Your help is appreciated as always. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #299 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jun 30 17:26:53 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA06969; Sun, 30 Jun 2002 17:26:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 17:26:53 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206302126.RAA06969@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #300 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Jun 2002 17:27:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 300 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Who Invented the Telephone? Bell? Nah -- Meucci (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Cheap Virtual Calling Cards (John R. Levine) Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (Paul Coxwell) Re: MCI: The Rise and Fall of the Ebbers Empire (Fred Goldstein) Will This Work? Or Will Twisted Pair Work (Brad Wilson) Re: Truth or Fiction? Telemarketing Call Saves Man's Life (Mark Brader) Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules (Linc Madison) MCI: Trying to Catch WorldCom's Mirage (Marcus Jervis) MCI: Job Cuts Take Heavy Toll on Telecom Industry (Marcus Jervis) Local Telephone Company Assigns Same Number to Two Households (Jan) Another Shareware Day (TELECOM Digest Editor) 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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 04:13:23 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Who Invented the Telephone? Bell? Nah -- Meucci From the Italian Historical Society -- http://www.italianhistorical.org/MeucciStory.htm ANTONIO MEUCCI An invention none of us could live without, a tool of modern communications so basic that many of today's business and social activities would be inconceivable in its absence, the telephone, is at the center of a series of events so strange as to amount to a "whodunit." Most of us were brought up on the story of Alexander Graham Bell, the romantic figure of an inventor with dash and charm. Some of these favorable impressions must have come from the famous, if apocryphal, "Come here Watson, I want you" legend of the invention of the device, a tradition augmented by the movie version of the tale, in which actor Don Amiche became more or less permanently attached to the persona of Bell. But it seems that history must be rewritten if justice is to be done to an immigrant from Florence, Italy: Antonio Meucci, who invented the telephone in 1849 and filed his first patent caveat (notice of intention to take out a patent) in 1871, setting into motion a series of mysterious events and injustices which would be incredible were they not so well documented. Meucci was an enigmatic character, a man unable to overcome his own lack of managerial and entrepreneurial talent, a man tormented by his inability to communicate in any language other than Italian. The tragic events of his personal and professional life, his accomplishments and his association with the great Italian patriot, Garibaldi, should be legendary in themselves but, curiously, the man and his story are practically unknown today. Antonio Meucci was born in San Frediano, near Florence, in April 1808. He studied design and mechanical engineering at Florence's Academy of Fine Arts and then worked in the Teatro della Pergola and various other theaters as a stage technician until 1835, when he accepted a job as scenic designer and stage technician at the Teatro Tacon in Havana, Cuba. Absolutely fascinated by scientific research of any kind, Meucci read every scientific tract he could get his hands on, and spent all his spare time in Havana on research, inventing a new method of galvanizing metals which he applied to military equipment for the Cuban government; at the same time, he continued his work in the theater and pursued his endless experiments. One these touched off a series of fateful events. Meucci had developed a method of using electric shocks to treat illness which had become quite popular in Havana. One day, while preparing to administer a treatment to a friend, Meucci heard an exclamation of the friend, who was in the next room, over the piece of copper wire running between them. The inventor realized immediately that he held in his hand something much more important than any other discovery he had ever made, and he spent the next ten years bringing the principle to a practical stage. The following ten years were to be spent perfecting the original device and trying to promote its commercialization. With this goal, he left Cuba for New York in 1850, settling in the Clifton section of Staten Island, a few miles from New York City. Here, in addition to his problems of a strictly financial nature, Meucci realized that he could not communicate adequately in English, having relied on the similarities of Italian and Spanish during his Cuban residence. Furthermore, in Staten Island, he found himself surrounded by Italian political refugees; Giuseppe Garibaldi, when exiled from Italy, spent his period of United States residency in Meucci's house. The scientist tried to help his Italian friends by devising any number of industrial projects using new or improved manufacturing methods for such diverse products as beer, candles, pianos and paper. But he knew nothing of management, and even those initiatives which succeeded were to have their profits eaten up by unscrupulous or inept managers or by the refugees themselves, who spent more time in political discussion than they did in active work. Meanwhile, Meucci continued to dedicate his time to perfecting the telephone. In 1855, when his wife became partially paralyzed, Meucci set up a telephone system which joined several rooms of his house with his workshop in another building nearby, the first such installation anywhere. In 1860, when the instrument had become practical, Meucci organized a demonstration to attract financial backing in which a singer's voice was clearly heard by spectators a considerable distance away. A description of the apparatus was soon published in one of New York's Italian newspapers and the report together with a model of the invention were taken to Italy by a certain Signor Bendelari with the goal of arranging production there; nothing came of this trip, nor of the many promises of financial support which had been forthcoming after the demonstration. The years which followed brought increasing poverty to an embittered and discouraged Meucci, who nonetheless continued to produce a series of new inventions. His precarious financial situation, however, often constrained him to sell the rights to his inventions, and still left him without the wherewithal to take out final patents on the telephone. A dramatic event, in which Meucci was severely burned in the explosion of the steamship Westfield returning from New York, brought things to an even more tragic state. While Meucci lay in hospital, miraculously alive after the disaster, his wife sold many of his working models (including the telephone prototype) and other materials to a secondhand dealer for six dollars. When Meucci sought to buy these precious objects back, he was told that they had been resold to an "unknown young man" whose identity remains a mystery to this day. Crushed, but not beaten, Meucci worked night and day to reconstruct his invention and to produce new designs and specifications, clearly apprehensive that someone could steal the device before he could have it patented. Unable to raise the sum for a definitive patent ($250, considerable in those days), he took recourse in the caveat or notice of intent, which was registered on December 28, 1871 and renewed in 1872 and 1873 but, fatefully, not thereafter. Immediately after he received certification of the caveat, Meucci tried again to demonstrate the enormous potential of the device, delivering a model and technical details to the vice president of one of the affiliates of the newly established Western Union Telegraph Company, asking permission to demonstrate his "Talking Telegraph" on the wires of the Western Union system. However, each time that Meucci contacted this vice president, a certain Edward B. Grant, he was told that there had been no time to arrange the test. Two years passed, after which Meucci demanded the return of his materials, only to be told that they had been "lost." It was then 1874. In 1876, Alexander Graham Bell filed a patent which does not really describe the telephone but refers to it as such. When Meucci learned of this, he instructed his lawyer to protest to the U.S. Patent Office in Washington, something that was never done. However, a friend did contact Washington, only to learn that all the documents relevant to the "Talking Telegraph" filed in Meucci's caveat had been "lost." Later investigation produced evidence of illegal relationships linking certain employees of the Patent Office and officials of Bell's company. And later, in the course of litigation between Bell and Western Union, it was revealed that Bell had agreed to pay Western Union 20 percent of profits from commercialization of his "invention" for a period of 17 years. Millions of dollars were involved, but the price may been cheaper than revealing facts better left hidden, from Bell's point of view. In the court case of 1886, although Bell's lawyers tried to turn aside Meucci's suit against their client, he was able to explain every detail of his invention so clearly as to leave little doubt of his veracity, although he did not win the case against the superior - and vastly richer - forces fielded by Bell. Despite a public statement by the then Secretary of State that "there exists sufficient proof to give priority to Meucci in the invention of the telephone," and despite the fact that the United States initiated prosecution for fraud against Bell's patent, the trial was postponed from year to year until, at the death of Meucci in 1896, the case was dropped. The story of Antonio Meucci is still little known, yet it is one of the most extraordinary episodes in American history, albeit an episode in which justice was perverted. Still, the genius and perseverance of an Italian immigrant - genius, poor businessman, tenacious defender of his rights against incredible odds and grinding poverty - is a story which must be told. Antonio Meucci is waiting to be recognized as the inventor of a key element in our modern culture. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Cheap Virtual Calling Cards Date: 29 Jun 2002 17:53:43 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I tried onesuite, but the sound quality was not too good (I think they > use internet telephony) and I would get busy signals occassionally. Oh, phoo. > Now I use peachcard.com They don't look like a very good deal. The nominal rate is 1.8 cpm, but they add on 25 cents/call and charge 19 cents/week, which makes the effective rate rather higher unless you buy a card and immediately use it for a few very long calls. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: PaulCoxwell@aol.com Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 19:14:11 EDT Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules Hello Denis, Long time since we last had contact on FidoNet! > France certainly had local as well as National dialling as recently as > 1998. It just had 5 very big geographic code areas 01 .. 05, a single > code for mobile 06, and afaik 07, 08 nd 09 were allocated to varying > special codes. 00 was Intl like most of the rest of the EC. > If you were in eg the Paris area (01) dialling another Paris area code > you did not need the 01 prefix. > I'm not aware of any subsequent changes .... I haven't been to France since 1999, but I believe they have recently changed the system to require 10-digit dialing of all calls, including local. (Not sure of the rationale behind this move, if indeed it is true.) The 08 prefix is now for "numero vert" (toll-free) numbers which were previously allocated 05. Prior to the implementation of the five areas 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, they had a rather curious system which divided the country into just two areas: Paris, and everywhere else. Calls within Paris were dialed as 8 digits. Calls from anywhere outside of Paris to anywhere else outside of Paris were also dialed as just 8 digits. I believe that in most cases the first 2 digits gave the number of the "departement" (like counties), although I don't know when all numbers were made up to 8 digits. To call from Paris to elsewhere in France, you had to dial 16, wait for second dial tone, then the 8-digit number. To call into Paris from elsewhere, you dialed 16, wait for second dial tone, then dial 1 plus the number. I'd be interested in finding out when this system was introduced and how long-distance service developed in France over the years. I've not been able to track down detailed information on this. Many other service codes in France were/are 1x. For example, 19 was the IDDD prefix before 00 was adopted. 15, 17, 18 are still used for emergency services, with other 1x codes for directory assistance, Minitel, etc. ------------------------------ From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: MCI: The Rise and Fall of the Ebbers Empire Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 03:03:07 GMT Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > From National Review -- > The Rise and Fall of the Ebbers Empire > How it crumbled. > By John C. Wohlstetter > Regulators could still scramble the picture by trying to get the Bells to > rescue WorldCom, setting a precedent for an AT&T bailout. Such "lemon > socialism" could preclude consumers from realizing the full benefit of > falling long-distance prices. However, the edifice elaborately constructed > 20 years ago by William Baxter on a hunch, has crumbled. No other country > followed Baxter's lead, and no other country has such a mess in its > long-distance market. > John C. Wohlstetter is a senior fellow at the Seattle-based Discovery > Institute. What rot! It is, of course, expected of the National Review to troll the right wing for provocative articles; that does not mean that their trolls should go uncontested. In this case, they have turned to the creationist club that also brings us Gilder's pseudo-technical fantasies, and come up with new mythology. Wohlstetter is an old Contel guy ("ex-Con", they call themselves) from the time when Contel's CEO was Charles Wohlstetter; I suspect a familial relationship. To be sure, the Worldcon debacle is a serious one. But to pin it on Baxter is, well, amazing. The AT&T divestiture was a good idea, if imperfectly executed; it was also in large part AT&T's idea. Justice had sued them to spin off Western Electric (now Lucent), an idea that they realized was a good one about 15 years later. AT&T, however, looked at its own distorted books and determined that local was less profitable. So they spun that off, keeping LD and manufacturing together. There was good logic to this: The telephone network had been considered a "natural monopoly", but that really didn't apply to everything. Certainly it didn't apply to manufacturing, hence the original antitrust suit (United States vs. Western Electric). There were competing manufacturers; they just couldn't sell to the 82% of the market that was Bell companies! AT&T and Justice agreed, in the MFJ, that Long Distance wasn't a natural monopoly either, while local telephony was. The existence of MCI was evidence that LD competition was practical. John Wohlstetter does make a good point that fiber optics make parallel networks less economical than microwave. "Natural monopoly" occurs when economies of scale deter new entry because incremental costs to an existing provider are lower than unit costs of a new entrant. That describes fiber optics more than microwave. But it doesn't describe the way long distance companies operated, or the way the industry developed post divestiture. The natural monopoly effect of fiber on LD was simply not significant at the time. The old AT&T had been structured as a slow-moving regulated monopoly, with little sense of market, and little reason to stimulate demand. MCI changed the culture of telecommunications. By creating competition, prices began to move down towards costs. New applications could occur. LD calls went from being luxuries to being routine. 800 numbers became widely affordable. And the consumer-accessible Internet became practical. None of that was in AT&T's original monopoly agenda, which Wohlstetter seems to pine for. Indeed AT&T's old agenda, which has nothing to do with today's residual AT&T and which now the Bells', has resulted in anomalies like 30-mile intrastate toll calls that cost more than transpacific international calls. What was right about the 1984 divestiture was that it separated the remaining "natural monopoly", intraLATA, from the competitive marketplace. That prevented *tying*, the monopolist's instinctive urge to leverage its monopoly to force purchase of its competitive offering. With AT&T and the Bells separate, there was no tying between monopoly local and competitive LD. Positive economies of scale in fiber optic were not harmful. Indeed the existence of multiple fiber operators led to a lively wholesale bandwidth market, allowing many non-fiber-owning companies to market LD services. That's where many creative calling cards, 800 plans, etc., come from. A fiber monopoly wouldn't sell to its competitors, but with AT&T, MCI and Sprint all trenching away, they took wholesale customers too, lest their competition supply them instead. And while Wohlstetter pines for a return to vertically integrated telcos with monopolies in their home regions, he is asking for a worst-case scenario that would do unimaginable harm to an already weak domestic economy. The more obvious solution for today is to reexamine the boundary between "natural monopoly" and competitive markets. It seems clear, given the low cost of modern switching, that the natural monopoly is limited today to intraLATA transmission and related outside plant. ILECs are instead tying their often overpriced switched services to their natural-monopoly local loops, and preventing competitors from getting equal access to the loop. What's needed is a second breakup of the LECs, with the wire centers and wires going to strictly regulated loopcos, while the switches and customer base go to loosely regulated service-cos. Those service-cos would then get equal access to the loop with the CLECs. Today's structural integration is leading to a threat of content control by the loop owners. The ILECs want their DSL services, for instance, removed from common carrier status, so that independent ISPs couldn't use it any more. Re-divestiture is a far superior solution that would lead to real economies, and let broadband flourish the way consumers want it -- because consumers would then get a choice. Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" wn "dot" net ------------------------------ From: Brad Wilson Subject: Will This Work? Or Will Twisted Pair Work Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 03:06:14 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - Carolina Guys and gals, I got a problem. First of all I am coordinating a move for a company in my area. They are moving into a huge warehouse where the telecom closet is 600 feet away from one of the islands. I have to put phones and a data network over in this location. The phones are yet to be determined but it could end up being an IP type phone. I beleive I have a solution for this. I would run one fiber cable from the telecom closet to the location and put media converters on each end converting them back to CAT 5 or RJ-45 connectors. I would then plug the cat 5 patch cable into a switch on each side. This would work with an IP phone. Next situation. First the data network is an old UNIX based system the runs dummy terminals for their application. There is not much data transfer or let me say not much bandwidth being used. None of the computers are connected to the internet. If I do not put in a IP phone system this is where I am confused. If I run a digital phone system such as a Nortel, can I run the data and phone across the same piece of fiber to the remote location. In other words does the data and phone need to be on seperate media converters and seperate strands of fiber to make each system work. If it does not how would this work? Would I have to put in a switch. I am really lost on this one guys and I need your help. Anybody that has any info or a website to help me out please respond. I would be most gracious if I could get some info on this. Brad Wilson nctarheelfan@hotmail.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Truth or Fiction? Telemarketing Call Saves Man's Life Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 01:31:28 -0400 (EDT) From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) I would like it noted that my subject line did NOT include the words "Truth or Fiction?". I have no objection to the moderator making editorial comments, but doing it in someone else's name is a bit much. Mark Brader, Toronto | "What's fair got to do with it? It's going msb@vex.net | to happen." -- Lawrence of Arabia [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mark is quite correct. The phrase 'Truth or Fiction' was not part of his subect line. Those words were mine. I found it rather incredible is all ... and it would have been a true or false questin I would have used on one of those television quiz shows; asking the contestants to detirmine the veracity of the statement. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: Worldwide Dialing Rules Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 01:17:58 -0700 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , Denis Mcmahon wrote: > Linc Madison wrote: >> Poor choice of example. If you are in Italy, you must always dial the >> entire national number including the area code. Likewise for a number >> of other countries, including France, Norway, and Denmark. > France certainly had local as well as National dialling as recently as > 1998. It just had 5 very big geographic code areas 01 .. 05, a single > code for mobile 06, and afaik 07, 08 nd 09 were allocated to varying > special codes. 00 was Intl like most of the rest of the EC. > If you were in eg the Paris area (01) dialling another Paris area code > you did not need the 01 prefix. > I'm not aware of any subsequent changes .... 1998 is about when the change was put into place. You now must dial the full national number on all calls within France. For example, dialing within the Paris region, you must dial 01 xx xx xx xx. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: MCI: Trying to Catch WorldCom's Mirage Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 08:31:53 +0000 Trying to Catch WorldCom's Mirage By SETH SCHIESEL The New York Times In Dec. 6, 1999, AT&T replaced the chief of its huge business services division, Michael G. Keith, after barely nine months on the job. To the outside world, it appeared that C. Michael Armstrong, the company's chairman and chief executive, had moved Mr. Keith to the company's wireless unit simply because he was not getting the job done. Now some people close to AT&T say Mr. Keith was actually transferred mostly because his division could not match the reported profit margins of its biggest competitor, WorldCom. "He was being held to WorldCom's margins and he was screaming to Armstrong that it couldn't be possible and so he got moved out," one person who was close to Mr. Keith recalled last week. "It now turns out that the pressure that was put on him and on AT&T generally was based on a false assumption. And that happened across the industry." WorldCom's announcement last week that it had misrecorded $3.8 billion in costs has forced the company to the brink of bankruptcy. The ranks of the losers are legion: employees, investors, perhaps even consumers. In some ways, however, the most far-reaching effects of the financial shenanigans at companies like WorldCom, Global Crossing and Qwest were the dislocations and costs they caused for the companies that tried to compete with them. It is even possible that had it not been for AT&T's inevitable comparisons to WorldCom, Mr. Armstrong would not have felt compelled to set the company on the path to a three-way breakup. As WorldCom and Qwest, in particular, reported spectacular growth and gross profit margins as much as 62 percent at WorldCom and 70 percent at Qwest in recent years they made their peers seem sluggish and they may have compelled those companies to alter and even distort their strategies in an attempt to keep up. "Our performance did not quite compare and we were blaming ourselves." William T. Esrey, chief executive of Sprint, the No. 3 long-distance company, said in an interview last week. Mr. Esrey echoed other senior telecommunications executives in saying that the vicious price wars that decimated the long-distance industry in the 1990's were driven by an unsustainable, almost irrational pursuit of growth. "We didn't understand what we were doing wrong," he said. "We were like, `What are we missing here?' " Several top executives said last week that competing against WorldCom for the attention of investors and Wall Street analysts in recent years was essentially like running track against an athlete who is later discovered to be using steroids. A bird's-eye view of the numbers can illuminate the pressures on older companies. In 2001, for instance, WorldCom reported a gross profit margin of 62 percent while Qwest reported 64 percent. The comparable figures were 50 percent for AT&T and 51 percent for Sprint. Last week, WorldCom acknowledged misreporting its costs only as far back as the first quarter of 2001, yet the Securities and Exchange Commission had already begun an inquiry into WorldCom's accounting going back as far as the beginning of 1999. The costs of trying to keep up with the industry's highfliers may have extended far beyond the individual travails of executives like Mr. Keith, who is now a senior executive at AT&T Wireless, an independent company, and who declined to comment. (Some other people close to AT&T say that Mr. Keith really was removed from the business-services unit because he was not up to his job.) In October 2000, AT&T announced that it would break itself into three separate companies with four separate stocks. It made the move for many reasons, and some seem rational no matter how many of its competitors might have operated fraudulently. Nonetheless, it now appears at least possible that had it not been for comparisons with some bad seeds like WorldCom, AT&T could still be one company. In the months leading up to the breakup announcement, AT&T's shares had been hammered by investors concerned about the company's cable strategy and because Wall Street did not believe that AT&T's core operations were being run as well as, say, WorldCom's. "Wall Street was more than captivated by these new guys; they were eating the lotus leaves and it made companies like AT&T and Sprint look stodgy in comparison," said Howard Anderson, an investor who founded the Yankee Group, a research firm in Boston. "There was never any question that in terms of the strength and reliability of the network, none of these new guys compared to AT&T. AT&T made a lot of legitimate moves and the stock market did not reward them and in fact they were punished. In the end, that helped lead to the breakup." Charles H. Noski, AT&T's vice chairman, said the factors that prompted the company's break-up ranged far beyond its stock price. Nonetheless, he agreed that competing against WorldCom for the hearts and minds of investors at times seemed Sisyphean. "We were constantly dissecting all of the public information about WorldCom and we would scratch our heads and try to figure out how they were doing it," Mr. Noski said. "We were certainly frustrated because we couldn't figure it out. We sort of absorbed the beating and kept our heads down and kept trying to get better." Sprint's Time of Trial For all of AT&T's difficulties, in some ways the company that has best exemplified the evolution of the telecommunications industry over the last two decades has been Sprint, which but for the grace of regulators would have become a part of WorldCom. From its roots as a rural local telephone company founded in 1899 in Abilene, Kan., Sprint sprouted to become the nation's No. 3 long-distance carrier in the 1980's and a major national wireless carrier. During the 1990's, many young long-distance companies, including WorldCom, Qwest and Global Crossing, entranced Wall Street even as they helped transform long-distance into a commodity business. Trying to satisfy Wall Street demands, the new companies cut prices but still reported spectacular revenue growth, making old-line companies like AT&T and Sprint look sick by comparison. While the dot-com boom lasted, with its wildly growing demands for data networking, that trend was sustainable. But as the Internet bubble collapsed and financing dried up over the last few years, the entire long-distance industry found itself in a shakeout. The local phone business, meanwhile, has remained a relative haven. As long-distance companies watched their revenue shrivel, the regional Bells and other local phone companies managed to survive. All of those trends found their expression at Sprint. Sprint had always used its stable local phone business, which remains the nation's fifth-biggest, to generate the cash needed to expand into arenas like long distance in the 1980's and wireless in the 1990's. But while the local operations were stable, they also prevented the company from reporting explosive growth rates like WorldCom's. "You should have seen in the '92, '95, '96 period, all of the guys from New York would come by with their suspenders you know, the investment bankers and would say: `You've got to get rid of this slow-growing local business. It's a dog!' " Mr. Esrey recalled. He questions whether Sprint would have remained solvent in recent years without its local phone business. But at some level, the bankers were right. Through the 1990's, Sprint was not able to match go-go companies in Wall Street esteem. WorldCom used its highflying stock to acquire MCI in 1998 and to agree to buy Sprint for $115 billion in October 1999. It would have been the biggest corporate acquisition in history. "At the time, you had to look at the payout for our shareholders," Mr. Esrey said last week. "It was $115 billion and this is a rural local phone company." (At least it was.) Then Mr. Esrey got lucky, though he did not realize it then. In 2000, European regulators and their American counterparts rejected the deal on the grounds that it would create a company with too much market power. "You've got to say, `Thank you Lord, you saved us from that,' " Mr. Esrey said. The Remnants of the Bubble In in its overall structure, the telecommunications industry has returned to where it was not only before the landmark Telecommunications Act of 1996, which was meant to allow new companies and forms of competition to flourish, but to where it was 15 years ago. After the industry's financial crash and accounting implosion, the only stable major carriers remaining are the Bell local phone companies, AT&T and Sprint, just as in the late 1980's. So was anything of lasting value created? "What happened was that the carriers did spur innovation and we had new technologies that might not have been seen before," said Mr. Anderson, the Yankee Group founder, who has been following the telecommunications industry for three decades. "But ultimately, the answer is no. "It's hard to say anything was created when trillions of dollars in value have been destroyed," he added. "Of the 29 or 30 public companies that are carriers, easily 20 of them could declare bankruptcy." Senior telecommunications executives are hoping at least that the industry may have hit bottom. "If you look at the remaining substantial players in the sector, clearly you've got AT&T and Sprint and the regional Bell operating companies, and given the monopoly position of the Bells, I would be surprised if there were any revelations there," said Mr. Noski of AT&T. "I think Sprint has clearly taken actions to try to secure their financial position," he added. "Obviously, I think we'll be in good shape as well. I've been surprised in recent months so I guess I would never say never. But it's hard for me to imagine greater problems than the industry has today." If any industry has been in deeper trouble than the long-distance sector, it may be the wireless business, where ruthless competition has sent stocks plunging. "Has the industry hit rock bottom?" asked John D. Zeglis, chairman of AT&T Wireless and a former president of AT&T. "Right now the wireless industry is looking up at rock-bottom thanks to a herd mentality that failed to differentiate wireless companies on the substance of the economics and the fundamentals of their financial and operating performance. But this insanity is temporary." Daniel F. Akerson, chairman of XO Communications, an upstart communications carrier operating under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, shares the belief of many in the telecommunications industry that the current troubles will prompt a newround of corporate acquisitions. "This may be a galvanizing event," said Mr. Akerson, a former MCI executive. "This may define the low point and we can start back up. But there is so much debt in the industry that I think what you'll see is fewer competitors and ultimately there will be a wave of consolidation." The conventional wisdom in the telecommunications industry is that one of the Bell companies will try to acquire Sprint over the next few years. After completing the sale of its cable television business to Comcast, the remaining AT&T would also be an attractive acquisition target for a Bell carrier. But, as pointed out by Edward E. Whitacre Jr., chairman of SBC Communications, the No. 2 local phone company, the regulators usually have the last word in the telecommunications arena. "This current situation shows that the rules that are in place from all of our regulators have some serious problems," Mr. Whitacre said. Referring to the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, he added, "We need a leader, and that's Michael Powell, to step up and make some decisions to give some clarity to all of this." Mr. Esrey of Sprint did not exactly tout his company's stock, but pointed to its long-term potential for growth. "If your investment horizon is three months or six months, then I don't know what might happen," he said. "But if you want to be conservative, and I know it sounds strange to put it that way, but if you want to make an investment in telecom and put it away, I think in two or three years you would be absolutely delighted." ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: MCI: Job Cuts Take Heavy Toll on Telecom Industry Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 08:37:43 +0000 By LOUIS UCHITELLE The New York Times WorldCom's downfall is swelling the exodus of workers from the telecommunications industry, which alone has accounted for more than one out of every 10 jobs lost in the United States since the recession began in March last year. Most of this rapid job shrinkage in telecommunications has come through layoffs, buyouts and forced retirements. Indeed, telecommunications companies have exceeded any other industry in the number of publicly announced job cuts over the last 18 months. The cuts have come from the dozens of companies that build and operate the nation's networks for telephone service, cable television, the Internet, e-mail and data transmission. Having wildly overexpanded in the 1990's, the companies have been rushing to shrink ever since, serving as a drag on the economic recovery. "They have to cut another 10 percent of their employees to get down to where they should be," said Kenneth McGee, a telecommunications expert at Gartner, the research firm. "And in the next economic expansion they won't need those people back." Not all job losses are prominently announced, of course. In total, the nation has lost 1.5 million jobs since the recession began in March of last year, with the telecommunications industry contributing 167,000 to that loss through April, according to the latest industry breakdown from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employment is so important to well-being that some economists are reluctant to declare a new expansion firmly under way until a revival in the job market is clearly happening. While telecommunications companies continue to eliminate jobs, many other industries appear to have stopped doing so. Since April, national employment has even begun to grow a bit, although so far adding back only 40,000 jobs. "I have not heard the phrase jobless recovery applied yet to our current experience but it is very much to the point," said Robert Hall, a Stanford economist and the chairman of the committee of economists that designates when recessions and recoveries begin and end. "We have regained almost none of the lost jobs; we are still very stalled." This time the rehiring and job creation must take place without help from telecommunications companies, industry executives insist. The jobs that are being eliminated in the industry will not have to be recreated, they say. Once the downsizing is over, the industry may level off at fewer than 1.2 million employees. Some of the lost jobs represented overstaffing, even in good times, to build more capacity into wireless and fiber optic networks than the nation will be able to use for a long time, said Scott Cleland, a telecommunications expert and chief executive of the Precursor Group, an investment research firm. "Everyone overbuilt," he said, "and telecom companies will not be spending appreciably for expansion for years to come." Other jobs are being lost to labor- saving technology, many in the industry argue, and to changes in the way the companies now operate, given that cellphones are cutting into the more labor-intensive regular phone service. Moreover, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has forced the Baby Bells to share their local phone monopolies with "resellers" that lease circuits at wholesale prices from the Bells and resell them to households and companies. "In some small markets, we have lost 50 percent of our customers," Jeff Battcher, a BellSouth executive, said. If past recoveries are a guide, the men and women who have lost their jobs in telecommunications will eventually find work in other industries. But that is not happening quickly for Roy Abrahamsen, a technician at an AT&T maintenance center at 33 Thomas Street in Manhattan until that center was closed in March. Told to choose between a buyout package or a transfer to an office in White Plains, Mr. Abrahamsen, 56 and a Brooklyn resident, took the buyout. That was partly to avoid the two-hour commute versus his previous 35 minutes, Mr. Abrahamsen said, and partly out of fear that AT&T would soon close the White Plains office, laying him off without a buyout. Now he is looking for a job at places like Home Depot, hoping that a skill in carpentry will help him recover some of the $57,000 in salary that he lost. As part of the buyout, AT&T is continuing his health insurance and is paying him the $22,000-a-year pension that he normally would have received in his 60's. "I miss the routines of work very much," he said. "I wake up at the same time every morning, and I cannot always fill my days. It sounds strange but I enjoyed working and I enjoyed my job." Until WorldCom came along with its announcement this week that it would eliminate 17,000 jobs on top of the 6,000 it cut last year — drastically shrinking a work force that totaled 85,000 in January — few companies in the telecommunications industry had drawn more attention for job shedding than AT&T. Since the beginning of 2001, it has announced more than 20,000 cuts, or roughly 16 percent of its job slots. But while AT&T cites efficiency gains through technology as a main reason for its actions, Mr. Abrahamsen says that technology is only part of the explanation for consolidating the Thomas Street maintenance center, where he worked, with a similar operation in White Plains. Using a computer, he performed remote repairs on telephone lines and data circuits leased to business customers American Express and Avis, for example or he pinpointed the trouble so others could make the repair. The staff doing this maintenance by computer had dwindled since early last year from 70 to 60. Fifty of the 60 made the transfer. "With fewer people, the time needed to make a repair grew longer," Mr. Abrahamsen said. "There was not a specific moment when this happened or a directive, but little by little it happened. Customer service declined." From January through May, job- cut announcements in the telecommunications industry reached 135,385, or nearly 29 percent of all such announcements, according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas, a consulting firm that tracks this data. That was up from 102,366 in the same period last year. The downsizing varies. Faced with a sharp dropoff in orders, Lucent Technologies, the manufacturer of switches and other communications equipment, has in effect sold three major factories to independent "contract manufacturers," transferring many of its factory workers in the bargain. Lucent now buys from the contractors only the amount of equipment that it can sell. The Lucent payroll has shrunk to 56,000 from 62,000 on Jan. 1. "We anticipate that by the end of September, it will be close to 50,000," said Mary Ward, a Lucent spokeswoman. BellSouth has announced that 4,000 to 5,000 jobs will be eliminated this year from its payroll of 85,740, which in turn has declined from 97,000 a year ago. "We feel we will then be at the right number of people to handle a quick and fast economic recovery," Mr. Battcher said. Beyond the competition from resellers, he lists some other reasons the cutbacks are likely to be long term. Cellphones, for example, are less labor intensive than standard telephones and rather than order another phone line for a teenager's bedroom, many parents are giving their children cellphones. And while demand is huge for high-speed Internet D.S.L. service, the labor requirement is small. "We have self-install," Mr. Battcher said. "A customer asks for D.S.L. and we can mail them out a do-it-yourself disc. It is simple for them and simple for us, and it saves us money." ------------------------------ From: jdrew63929@yahoo.com (Jan) Subject: Local Telephone Company Assigns Same Number to Two Households Date: 30 Jun 2002 07:32:03 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ MERCY! That is nothing! Can you imagine that Yahoo and AOL both assigned the same e-mail name to two different people? And I was first. Now I am the correct Jan because I tell everybody that root canal treatment causes multiple sclerosis in 100% of the patients. Same for amalgam. I am right and the world is wrong. So there. Why go to dental school? I know everything already. Jan [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here is the message in reference, from this Digest, almost eleven years ago. PAT] From: Barry Ornitz (ornitz@kodak.kodak.com) Subject: Re: Local Telephone Company Assigns Same Number to Two Households Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom View: (This is the only article in this thread) | Original Format Date: 1991-11-21 06:51:54 PST In article ornitz@kodak.com writes: > I learned late Friday afternoon (after business hours) that the local > telephone company has assigned another household the same telephone > number as ours. ----- Much deleted ----- > [Moderator's Note: First of all, *who told you* another party had > the same phone number? You mention you 'found out', but don't say > who told you or why they could not fix it. To start with, my wife was told by a member of the other household that their number was the same as ours. She called me at work, and I called local directory information since the other party was not listed in the telephone book. The directory information operator verified that both the other household and ours were listed as the same number. They referred me to the repair service. The repair service told me that they would file a service request, but that this problem had to be corrected by the business office as they had no capability of assigning or changing numbers. The repair service did send a lineman by our house on Saturday to check our line. He told my wife it was IMPOSSIBLE for two pairs to be assigned the same number. > I think it is far more common to have two subscribers on the same > pair by accident rather than two subscribers with two pairs but > only one number. Quite true, especially when theft of service occurs. > If you have never once heard anyone else talking on the line; > never once called and found the line busy when you knew it should > not be; never once come across charges on your bill that should > not be there, then I suggest you do not have anyone sharing your > number and/or your line. What probably happened was the other > party got listed incorrectly in the data base with your number > attached instead of theirs; no more, no less. The large number of > calls you receive for the other party is due to the number of > people trying to call the other party who check with directory > assistance for the number. Is it also in the phone book? I have never heard anyone else talking on the line, but I have called and found the line busy when it should not have been. I have never found any unexplained long distance charges, but I should point out that the other household used a different long distance carrier. The other household began their service about three months ago, after the directory was published. > Have you yet talked to the other party to see if they consider > themselves to have the same phone number, or if they understand > it to be just a typographical error yet to be corrected, or > something else. Only once when the other party spoke to my wife. They claimed their number was the same as ours. I have tried several times recently but always got a busy signal. > If I were you, I'd approach the Business Office saying you > believe someone else has been listed in the directory data base > with your number, and let them handle it from there. I spoke with the business office Monday morning. They said it was impossible to have identical numbers with two different pairs. I told them about the information from directory assistance, and they again said this was impossible and that I was obviously mistaken. The business office then called directory assistance and checked on the number of the other party. It was the same as mine except two digits had been transposed. I asked if they had corrected the problem between Friday when I reported it to the repair service and Monday morning. They said they had no way of checking on this, and that I was still obviously mistaken and wasting their time. Not liking to be called a liar, I then called the repair service. They told me that the other party had not filed any repair orders but they had my complaint from Friday evening. I asked if the problem could have been corrected between then and Monday. The clerk ran through their files and found where the lineman who had come to our house had filed a change order for the other people's line. They HAD corrected the problem after all. At this point I called the Tennessee Public Service Commission. The commissioner listened to my story and said that the telephone company was certainly wrong to deny there was ever a problem and accuse me of wasting their time. He said he would call the telephone company to insure that this kind of problem could not happen again and that the other household was treated properly also. On Tuesday after lunch, I had a message waiting on my answering machine from the business office. I tried to return the call, but twice got a single ring tone followed by a dead line when I called the business office. I probably should have called the PSC back at this point, but instead I called the business office in Bristol, TN, the central business office in this area (long distance, by the way). This time, I was finally able to speak with someone who at least understood a little of what I was talking about. I learned that the original service order for the other household was entered correctly. However when the number was entered into the "processor" (basically their version of the ESS from her description, she had never heard of an ESS), two digits were transposed. The second line pair was assigned the same number as ours. I was told that there are occasional legitimate reasons for having two pairs assigned the same number, so the "processor" did not flag the problem. The correction was indeed made after the change ordered by the lineman. They were not sure how the long distance charges were sorted correctly. The woman at the business office then apologized for the way I was treated and said they certainly had made no attempt at a cover-up, and that the error was entirely a human one. Since I had never, ever, mentioned anything about a "cover-up", I suspect the PSC commissioner got a little carried away when he spoke to them. I did tell the woman that the business office certainly seemed inept, especially considering the dead lines when I tried to call them. She agreed that they did have problems, especially with their attitude towards customers. I told her that the repair service, on the other hand, seemed very helpful and competent. I told her that I had also told this to the PSC; she said she would ask the repair office manager to commend his staff. > And no, you have no compensation coming. Your service was not > interrupted. PAT] I did not think so either, but I would still like to awaken the person responsible a few times in the middle of the night! ;-) I would like to thank you for your comments, PAT. I would also like to mention that while speaking to the PSC commissioner, I strongly endorsed the ISDN services being considered by the PSC. The CATV people in Tennessee have been fighting ISDN tooth and nail. I would also like to add that until about four years ago, United Intermountain Telephone System in Kingsport still used Strowger step-by- step equipment for large portions of the town. This was sitting in a room next to the latest fiber equipment (my exchange was one of the first to go fiber). When the Guatemala telephone system went to crosspoint, UTS bought much of their old Strowger equipment as spare parts. I believe crosspoint switching is still used in parts of the system. Barry L. Ornitz ornitz@kodak.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 16:22:15 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Another Shareware Day I *do* need financial help again this month (what else is old?) At the end of each month I present this 'nagware' request for assistance from the folks who read, enjoy and are benifited by this Digest. If you are able to help -- and twenty <> fifty dollars per reader/year is considered quite appropriate and generous -- then I cordially invite your participation. You can send checks/money orders/cash to TELECOM, Post Office Box 50, Independence, KS 67301 ... or if you prefer to make a donation with a credit card (or just prefer to do it on the net) then PayPal is also available. Look at the very bottom of the main page on the web site, http://telecom-digest.org, and click the 'donate' button. Your payment will go through PayPal and you will be paying 'editor@telecom-digest.org' It will go through Visa/MC/Discover, etc. Either way is fine; just do what you think best. Your help is appreciated as always. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 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 second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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 V20 #300 ******************************