From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Dec 20 13:44:22 2002
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id gBKIiMM04070;
	Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:44:22 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:44:22 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200212201844.gBKIiMM04070@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #201

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:43:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 201

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    How to Stop Telephone Harrasment by IBM? (flogi)
    Nokia vs. Microsoft (Chris Kantarjiev)
    Re: Celluar Phones Question (Michael D. Sullivan)
    Re: Celluar Phones Question (Ken Wheatley)
    Re: Query About Pulse Dialing (Hank Fung)
    Re: New Weblink of Interest (jt)
    Re: (Local) Gov't Groups Using "*.gov", was Re: Ten TLD's (Pete Weiss)
    Re: Microsoft to Bump Apple Into Sync-Hole? (John Higdon)
    RE: National Branding (Paul A Lee)
    Re: National Branding (Ed Ellers)
    Re: National Branding (Barry Margolin)
    Re: The Farce of National Branding (Ron Chapman)
    Re: SBC Name - was Re: The Farce of National Branding (Steven J. Sobol)

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: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:59:16 -0800
From: flogi <flogi@speakeasy.net>
Subject: How to Stop Telephone Harrasment by IBM?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Here is a **very disturbing** report
to start the day's news. This occassionally happens where a large 
company gets off in an orbit of their own, colliding with the rest
of the world, and no one/nothing seems able to stop them. The last
time I reported something like this, it was when First National Bank
of Chicago was harassing a family in Germany with unwanted fax phone
calls, and nothing would stop the bank from making their calls until
(the old) Illinois Bell Telephone Company literally went to the bank's
premises in downtown Chicago prepared to disconnect the phone line in
question and carry away the fax machine. The story has been told many
times; now today IBM is the culprit. Let's see how long it takes IBM
to wise up or stop the harassment; if they ever do.  PAT]
 
                   ===========================

Hello,

I'm looking for suggestions ( non-malicious please) to get the
harrasment that has been confirmed to be coming from an IBM site to
stop.

I am tempted to hook up my computer to the line and see if I can get a
terminal session.  It's like reverse hacking, instead of me trying to
get to them, they just call me and open a terminal session.  However,
I really just want the calls to stop.

Any ideas?

Any legal contacts in California that might be able to help me pursue
this?  And by pursue -- I mean give them a deterrent that will make IBM
listen ($$$) and one that will make me welcome a few more calls -- so
I can keep on suing them.

Thanks,

JM

<<text of email thread with a privacy rights group >>

I'll provide a little more detail:

The calls started in October and come up on my caller ID as "out of 
area" with no phone number attached.

I had this happen before when I first got the phone number, it appears
that my number was an old billing number for Arch Wireless. Users of
the Arch wireless service would have a computer call in their billing
records via modem to my phone number.

So I get 30-45 calls daily from an unknown number.  I had Pacific Bell 
put a trace on the call and they contacted the company responsible for 
the calls.  They would not release the company name to me directly but 
would only do so with a police report.  The company refused to return 
Pacific Bell's phone calls so I opened the police report.  The officer 
was able to get the number that was showing up on Pac Bell's caller ID 
and also the name of the company (IBM).

The officer contacted IBM at the site where the calls were coming
from.  They asked for one week to investigate and resolve the
situation.  I waited two weeks.  The timeframe is now mid-November.  I
followed up with the police officer and he called his contact at IBM.
His contact disputed the information traced by Pacific Bell to his
number and said that we were wrong.  I then reactivated the trace and
explained this to Pacific Bell.  Pacific Bell confirmed that there is
no way that the trace is incorrect and that they have re-confirmed
that the calls are coming from IBM.

I have logged over 300 phone calls with dates, and times.  I still get 
30-45 calls daily.

My local police officer has not gotten any additional information from
IBM.  He has provided them with the updated information and the
confirmation that this is coming from their telephone number.  They
have not responded to him.

I have asked that he refer this case to the District Attorney in my
area so that this will become a criminal harassment case.  While this
is still a misdemeanor, it is also still harassment.

I am also considering pursuing this in civil court.  The calls come at
all hours of the day and night.  It is easy enough to ignore the calls
during the day but at 2:00am, I must answer the phone each time it
rings because it could be an emergency call from someone that I know.

In civil court I believe I can obtain punitive damages since IBM has
had the opportunity to resolve this and refused to do so.  I have
contacted an attorney about a civil case and we are investigating who
would be the defendant in this matter.

I am also considering small claims court but need to confirm
jurisdiction.

I'm open to hearing about attorneys that have experience in this area
as well as other possible solutions.  I have had my days and nights
interrupted by this for almost 90 days and do feel some restitution is
in order. Please feel free to pass this message along to the IBM
privacy officer.

   -----Original Message-----
  From: Beth Givens [mailto:bgivens@privacyrights.org]
  Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 2:47 PM
  Subject: Re: Question about harassing telephone calls from IBM

I'm very sorry for the delay in responding.

I find this most disconcerting. Do you yourself have the phone number
that was identified by the phone company?

I am not at the office right now, but I'd like to contact IBM's
privacy officer about this. In the meantime, you might want to do the
same. If you go to their web site, you can click on their privacy
policy, and I think you can send an email msg to the privacy officer.

Do you know why IBM is calling you? Do they leave any messages?

Also, I'm pretty sure IBM is a member of TRUSTe. You should file a
complaint about them with www.truste.org and see if they can help you.

Beth Givens


At 04:52 PM 12/6/2002 -0500, you wrote:

 > Hi,
 > I am receiving about 40 telephone calls per day by a computer
 > auto-dialer at IBM. These calls come in at all hours of the day and
 > night; 2am, 6am, 9pm etc. I have filed a complaint with Pacific Bell
 > and they have traced the calls to one number at IBM.
 > I have filed a complaint with the Mountain View Police Department and they
 > have opened a case and contacted IBM.  IBM refuses to correct this.

 > Do you think I have any other recourse?
 > I've considered small claims court but don't know who to file a suit
 > against. Any other ideas?  I'm getting desperate here.
 
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse
3100 - 5th Ave., Suite B
San Diego, CA 92103
Phone: (619) 298-3396
Fax: (619) 298-5681
Email: prc@privacyrights.org
Web: www.privacyrights.org

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How typical ... corporation denies they
are idiots and causing harassment; police and others who *could* take
agressive action to stop it do not really comprehend what is happening
so just shrug their shoulders and walk away from it. Corporation then
continues harassment unmolested. In the case at First National Bank of
Chicago (now they have changed their brand name a couple times since)
had these German people in tears. Over and over, all night long for a
month or two, the calls were coming in from the USA. This was back
before the system could automatically trace calls and those things had
to be done manually. After repeated complaints of 'phone ringing then
dead silence when we answered' from the people, Bundespost finally got
AT&T on the wire and asked them to investigate. It was traced back to
Illinois Bell, who then tracked it back to the bank, a full month or
more after the calls were going on nightly. The bank totally ignored
requests from Illinois Bell to fix the problem. Finally a security rep
went from Bell over to the bank with a legal notice and an ultimatum;
'we are turning off your phones at (whatever time was permitted under
the law) because you will not correct this problem.' The notice was
given by telco to the Vice President-Telecom for the bank who went
downstairs with a vengeance to correct the problem himself. After a
bit of rudeness by him, the problem got corrected. And the idiots have
such short term memory problems; a month or so later when the bank got
a phone bill with page after page after page after page of one minute
phone calls to Germany at hours in the middle of the night when the
bank was closed, they complained 'Bell really screwed up our phone
bill this month' and wanted credit for all those calls.

I finally had to complain to the State Commission here in Kansas about
the way Southwestern Bell's alleged Privacy Manager does not work (the
one they charge people BIG $$ for without actually providing any
service for the money.) And guess who *my* culprit was?  A divison of
*AT&T* who was getting around caller-ID by filling the screen with
'name unavailable' and ten zeros for a phone number. Do any of you
young'uns remember when the phone company used to actually take
seriously their obligations toward their customer's privacy and not
just mock and humor the customers with things like Privacy Manager?
Good luck to our latest victim from IBM. Let's see how long it takes
to get them straightened out. I wonder if he has considered putting
'privacy manager' (snicker) on his phone line or call blocking?  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:05:02 PST
From: Chris Kantarjiev <cak@dimebank.com>
Subject: Nokia vs. Microsoft


A few weeks back, Monty posted an article from the Economist
speculating whether Nokia or Microsoft would control the evolution of
handheld computing.  I wrote the attached to the editors at the
Economist; they are apparently not going to run it, and seems a shame
to waste a good rant:

Gentlemen:

I read with great interest your article "Nokia vs Microsoft". I
believe (and have for some time) that it is not merely an issue of two
companies competing for the same dollars, but two modes of computer
interaction trying to find the right balance.

Most mobile phone users would not describe themselves of interacting
with a computer system, but that is exactly what they are doing - the
handset is but a terminal attached to a very large distributed system.
In the early 1990s, researchers at the Xerox Palo Alto Research
Center, led by Mark Weiser, put forth the idea of "ubiquitous
computing" -- see

 <URL http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/UbiHome.html >

where a key element of the model was that mobile terminals are not
standalone, but are in communication with one another and a large
system behind them. The mobile phone-as-computer is an excellent
example of what Weiser called an "invisible system".

Microsoft's (and those of other manufacturers who are pushing into the
handheld space) systems are anything but invisible. They are, largely,
based on the idea that the computer must be self-contained,
standalone, out of touch. They also have a tendency to try to take
applications that were developed for large machines with large
displays and large input devices and squash them down into an
environment that has a minimalist processor, simplistic display, and
barely adequate input. No wonder that "convergence" devices have been
such dismal failures!

Your discussion omits completely a very important set of players: the
wireless carriers themselves. They control the technology, network
access, billing, technology, content and user experience in a way that
Microsoft (and large ISPs) can only dream of.

The past several years have brought an effort by US mobile carriers to
imitate the success of SMS in the GSM world, without much success.
There are many reasons for this - carrier implementation missteps
aside - but I believe that in large part it is because the financial
models and user expectations that form the background of use are
completely different.

In the US, network consumers were raised on flat rate fixed-wire phone
service. This carried over to web access and wireless rate plans:
consumers are accustomed to flat fee unlimited access web browsing
from home and work and generous billing plans that provide a surfeit
of "free" talk minutes - so many minutes that most consumers can't use
them all. AOL's current advertising scheme offers so many free minutes
that you can't use them up in the number of days they remain valid.
Voice plans usually begin with a "bucket" of 200 minutes/month for
US$20.

The always-on Internet access in the US has taught users to expect
high-quality, high-bandwidth content delivery. Communication is via
instant messaging, with a constant view into the reachability and
status of their IM "buddies".

On the other hand, until recently, US mobile phone users could only
send SMS messages to users on their same wireless network. Carriers
are now counting on SMS to increase their revenue growth, but don't
make a compelling case for the functionality or cost. They have broken
the longstanding financial model by introducing usage-sensitive
pricing: SMS messages typically cost US$0.10, often both incoming and
outgoing.  Why would users want to pay per-message fees to thumb type,
when they can just make a voice call for "free"?

The rest of the world has grown up with usage sensitive pricing for
fixed telephone usage, and web and wireless pricing continues to
follow that model.  Thus, the rest of the world is not so well
connected to the Internet (if at all), doesn't have flat rate Internet
access, and pays for every minute of talk.  In this model, SMS makes
financial sense: an SMS costs less than 1/4 of a voice minute, and
both minutes and messages are pay-as-you-go. Users are accustomed to
small displays and small devices and wonder why they should be
expected to carry something too bulky to fit in a pocket. Carriers
were happy to have SMS messages use up the idle capacity of their
networks.

To put it bluntly, the wireless experience in the US is that of trying
to cram a full PC into a portable phone; in the rest of the world, it
has been a slow expansion of functionality on devices that consumers
are carrying anyway.

Nokia (and other mobile phone technologists) have continued to build
systems that are based on communication; they slowly add more
functionality (such as SMS, and now MMS) to those systems. Third
parties have built very powerful, if deceptively simple, applications
on top of these systems. Users of the GSM mobile telephony system have
used these two-way systems for many years; the success and growth of
SMS messaging is a testament to their utility.

Microsoft (and other computer technologists) have built, and continue
to build, systems that are meant to stand alone. The Microsoft
Smartphone platform is no different - it just happens to have a phone
and Internet connection in it. I don't really believe that the ability
to browse the web will make it that much more succesful - it didn't
work for WAP, did it?

I believe that the "one, true way" lies somewhere between - but closer
to well-designed applications that involve personalized communication
with a smart backend system, rather than more and more powerful
devices that are carried in one's pocket. My personal bet is on Nokia;
they don't have the baggage to jettison that Microsoft do.

The mobile carriers still have the opportunity to foul it up for both
sides - especially by trying to equate the pricing of data bytes with
voice minutes, to maximize their short-term profits at the expense of
user experience and content/application availability. Trying to meet
fixed-line expectations with (expensive) wireless bandwidth is a
recipe for disaster.

(I have written about this at length in various guises; one readily
accessible though not very polished version can be found at

 <URL http://bosphorus.dimebank.com/~cak/WirelessApps.html > )


Sincerely,

Christopher Kantarjiev

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

From: Michael D. Sullivan <zyxNOSPAM@camsul.com>
Subject: Re: Celluar Phones Question
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 06:21:51 GMT


[This followup was posted to comp.dcom.telecom and a copy was sent to 
the cited author.]

On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:27:45 -0800, John J. Trombetti posted the 
following to comp.dcom.telecom:

> Dear Sir,

> I am writing to see if you can tell me how many celluar phones are 
> active in the United States; or where I may find such data?

> I do not need specifics, but a general number, even a rational estimate 
> would work. I am putting together a project and it will be useable with 
> celluar phones and I really don't know "how" many users there are out
> there?

The current number, according to CTIA's website at www.wow-com.com, is 
137,458,902 (includes cellular, PCS, and ESMR, which operate in 
different frequency bands but are all commonly referred to as 
cellular).


Michael D. Sullivan
Bethesda, MD, USA
(delete NOSPAM from address to mail me)

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

From: Ken Wheatley <kenneth.wheatley@gb.unisys.com>
Subject: Re: Celluar Phones Question
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 09:49:35 -0000
Organization: Unisys - Roseville, MN


John J. Trombetti <j.trombetti@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:telecom22.200.5@telecom-digest.org:

> I am writing to see if you can tell me how many celluar phones are
> active in the United States; or where I may find such data?

> I do not need specifics, but a general number, even a rational estimate
> would work. I am putting together a project and it will be useable with
> celluar phones and I really don't know "how" many users there are out
> there?

According to http://www.e-searchwireless.com (subsciption necessary)
there were 129,375,600 cellphones active in the US last
month. Penetration at end of 2001 was under 46% - still very low by
the standards of many other industrialised economies. Finland had 83%
penetration (although I'm not sure if that figure was before or after
the industry adjusted the published subscriber figiures to make their
ARPU look better).

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

From: fungus@OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Hank Fung)
Subject: Re: Query About Pulse Dialing
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:26:44 UTC
Organization: Univ. of California Berkeley Open Computing Facility


In article <telecom22.196.5@telecom-digest.org>,
Ed Ellers  <ed_ellers@msn.com> wrote:

> John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com> wrote:

>> Pulse dialing is rarely used in the US.

> More often than you might think ... especially by people who *do* have
> Touch-Tone provisioned on their line but don't realize that they need
> to change a switch setting on their phone to use it.

Aren't there still some phone companies that charge for the
"privilege" of using touch tone dialing (or "touch calling" as it was
called by GTE)?

What usually happens is that these cheapskates will then switch the
phone to tone when they need to access a voice mail or interactive
response system.


Hank Fung			         fungus@ocf.berkeley.edu
Go Bears!		             http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~fungus


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You call someone a 'cheapskate' because
they refuse to let telco rip them off for a service which is more
effecient to use, costs telco less in switch time?  PAT]

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

From: jt <jtaylor@spamkiller.hfx.andara.com>
Subject: Re: New Weblink of Interest
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:35:44 -0500
Organization: WorldCom Canada Ltd. News Reader Service


TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe I will do that, in the form of a
> large collection of messages from you readers. I could not begin to
> do it as a solo project without some assistance; i.e. financial help;
> i.e. the impartiality gets on shaky grounds. But if I had four or five
> hundred messages on various carriers, the programs they offer, etc and
> organized them according to carrier; type of offering; cost and other
> factors then it would cost me very litle also. It might be a very
> useful file for netizens. I could put it all on a web site and offer
> it for free as a truly impartial guide. Ideas on this, anyone?   PAT]

Pat, make a form.  There are so many plans and ways of describing them
that you must have a standard way of setting out the criteria.  Maybe
some kind of spreadsheet that you can import and interested parties
could get the compilation -- would let them sort out what THEY thought
was important.

P.S. Don't forget to put out your milk and cookies next week.  The way
the world seems to be going, that big guy may need to eat well.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wouldn't it be a real riot if Sodomy
Insane chose Christmas Eve or Christmas Day to set off a massive 
nerve gas bomb in the USA?  'Here you go, you Satanic Devils! Have
a Merry holiday compliments of the middle-east people. Eat and breath
this gas we are sending you! Remember to put the 'X' back in X Mass.'
PAT]

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

From: Pete Weiss <pete-weiss@psu.edu>
Subject: Re: (Local) Gov't Groups Using "*.gov", was Re: Ten TLD's
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:00:44 -0500
Organization: Penn State University -- Administrative Information Services


And my personal favorite for a .GOV site that is a state agency:

http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/press/pr.cfm

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Microsoft to bump Apple into sync-hole?
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 08:09:58 -0800


In article <telecom22.200.2@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> By Joe Wilcox
> Staff Writer, CNET News.com

> Apple Computer is refining a strategy for connecting cell phones and
> other portable devices to its Macintosh systems in an effort to boost
> sales.

> But a rival endeavor from Microsoft, expected to be unveiled early
> next year, could dim the company's hopes, analysts said.

That's the history of Microsoft. Let someone else pioneer a product or 
service, wait and see if it turns out to be anything, and then muscle in 
on it with a crippled, inferior version.

It is very good to be Microsoft-free in my computing these days!


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: Paul A Lee <palee@riteaid.com>
Subject: Re: National Branding
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:32:17 -0500


In TELECOM Digest V22 #199, John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
wrote (in part):

> Obviously, you haven't examined [GE and Whirlpool washers and dryers]
> very closely. I have. They not only use idential parts, the chassis,
> panels, knobs, and trim were obviously stamped from the same dies.

Okay ... I said my piece and gave my examples a while back, when this
thread was new. Then, I let it drop when it became apparent to me that
John's position is more philosophical than factual. I appreciate what
he's saying, and there are many instances where it's true -- perhaps
more often than not.

I'm chiming back in, though, because I'm pretty certain John has his
facts wrong on this point (and others, perhaps ...?). I'll concede
that GE and Hotpoint major appliances are the same basic boxes, and
that Whirlpool, some KitchenAid, and most Kenmore major appliances are
the same boxes.

GE and Whirlpool, though, are two distinctly different lines. Both use
some components (timers, motors, electronics, solenoids, and maybe
even some trim parts) that come from the same manufacturers and may
even be identical.  However, cabinets, transmissions, and other major
"brand-identity" components are different on all examples I've
seen. John may have "examined" them, but I've repaired a number of
both GE and Whirlpool (including Kenmore) appliances, and the design
and assembly techniques are distinct.

Since I'm not in the appliance industry, I can't be absolutely certain
that there's no crossover. I'd concede this point if John (or someone
else) can give me an example of one major appliance -- one Whirlpool
model number and one GE model number -- that are identifiable as the
same basic machine.


Paul A Lee
*palee*at*dca*dot*net*

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

From: Ed Ellers <ed_ellers@msn.com>
Subject: Re: National Branding
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 05:43:42 -0500


John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com> wrote:

> Well, now you have.

Which models of washers or dryers (or for that matter ranges,
refrigerators or freezers) are imported into the U.S. from overseas?

> Obviously, you haven't examined them very closely. I have. They not
> only use idential parts, the chassis, panels, knobs, and trim were
> obviously stamped from the same dies.

That will come as a big surprise to the GE engineers, a few miles from
me here in Louisville, who work hard to differentiate their appliances
from those of Whirlpool and others.

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

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@genuity.com>
Subject: Re: National Branding
Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:34:52 GMT


In article <telecom22.199.2@telecom-digest.org>, John Higdon
<no-spam@amadeus.kome.com> wrote:

> In article <telecom22.198.7@telecom-digest.org>, Barry Margolin
> <barmar@genuity.net> wrote:

>> The new management that takes over after a merger or acquisition.
>> Aren't most of the examples of brand name changes that you gave a
>> result of such activity?

> I don't care who is responsible. It is still a mistake to muck with the 
> brand name if "national branding" is important.

Maybe they think the new brand is better than the old one.  How can they
emphasize their integration if they have to keep using the old brand?

> I have sold companies before, and I have watched the new owners 
> literally toss the company's reputation and indentity into the garbage. 
> I had to wonder why they bothered to buy the company.

Because the name isn't the only asset that a company has.  They bought it
for its customer base, employees, technology, etc.

>> I don't know where you got the idea that name changes are spontaneous
>> or capricious.  They're a consequence of other changes in the
>> business, primarily mergers and acquisitions.

> The decision to change a name requires an affirmative action by the
> board.

But it's not the *same* board that decided to start a national branding
campaign many years before the takeover.

When Ted Turner ran his own media empire, he went around naming
everything he could Turner This and Turner That.  When he sold out to
Time Warner, he no longer had the control of the board that allowed
him this freedom.

> All you are telling me is that leadership changes at a company. Well,
> duh! My unrefuted assertion is that someone (or a board of directors)
> must take affirmative steps to change the name of a company. Why would
> they do that (be they grandsons or hostile purchasers) when it dilutes
> and nullifies the national name recognition?

Because they want the public to recognize that this is the "new and
improved" company, not the same old one.  Or sometimes the new company
that results from the mergers has different goals than the old one,
and the old name doesn't fit.  For instance, I've noticed over the
years that lots of public utility companies would branch out into
other industries, and then the old name no longer describes them well.
When XXX Electric is no longer solely in the electric power business,
but is a holding company for many different types of businesses, a
name change is appropriate; some companies simply adopted their
initials (e.g. I think Wiscon Electric Power became WEP Holdings),
while others go for a coined name that doesn't pigeonhole them (Boston
Edison became NSTAR and Boston Gas became Keyspan Energy).


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.

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

Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 05:21:52 -0500
From: Ron Chapman <ronchapman@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: The Farce of National Branding


In article <telecom22.199.1@telecom-digest.org>, John Higdon
<no-spam@amadeus.kome.com> wrote:

> I'll survive. Believe me, my fulfillment as a functional human being
> and as a player in my chosen field of endeavor has long since ceased
> to be dependent on the attitudes and belief systems of Usenet
> posters. You'll know what I mean after you have been posting for
> fifteen years or so.

I have been posting for fifteen years or so.  More, actually.

And that your fulfillment as a human being is not dependent on "Usenet
posters" doesn't mean that you're not wrong.  You did put forth your
case in the court of public opinion, and you failed -- miserably -- to
make that case.

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

From: sjsobol@JustThe.net (Steven J. Sobol)
Subject: Re: SBC Name - was Re: The Farce of National Branding
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:27:39 -0000
Organization: JustThe.net LLC


John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com> wrote:

> SBC will have to figure out how to cash my checks made out to "Pacific
> Bell" in perpetuity. I have a long-standing practice of refusing to
> regularly change the name on checks made out to vendors. Pager checks
> are still made out to "AirTouch"; telephone service checks are still
> made out to GTE; wireless checks are still made out to "PacBell Mobile
> Services" instead of "Cingular".

The bank will cash them anyway. Even if you make the check payable to,
say, Richard Notebaert, they'll probably still cash the check. And
Notebaert isn't even *with* SBC anymore.


Steve Sobol, CTO  JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH
http://JustTheNetLLC.com/  888.480.4NET (4638)

A practicing member of the Geek Orthodox religion!

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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 2002 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 V22 #201
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Dec 20 16:31:58 2002
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id gBKLVwo07581;
	Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:31:58 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:31:58 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200212202131.gBKLVwo07581@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #202

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:32:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 202

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Update (Canada) #363, December 20, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement)
    Re: Are All 900 Number Providers Hype Artists? (J Bass)
    How Do You INSERT CID (Jim Thompson)
    Re: Query About Pulse Dialing (David Christensen)
    Error Accessing Your Website (Kathy Bradley)
    Re: Ground Start Lines (Owain)
    We Had Better Cool it a Little (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Last Laugh! A Lesson in Modern Electronics (Jeffrey Mattox)

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, 20 Dec 2002 11:43:51 -0500
From: Angus TeleManagement <jriddell@angustel.ca>
Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #363, December 20, 2002


************************************************************
TELECOM UPDATE
************************************************************
published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group
http://www.angustel.ca

Number 363: December 20, 2002

Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous
financial support from:
** BELL CANADA: http://www.bell.ca
** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: http://www.cisco.com/ca/letstalk
** CYGCOM INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES: http://www.cygcom.com
** ERICSSON CANADA: http://www.ericsson.ca
** JUNIPER NETWORKS: http://www.juniper.net
** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca
** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com
** TELUS: http://www.telus.com

************************************************************

IN THIS ISSUE:

** CRTC Posts Report on Canadian Telecom
** We're Taking a Holiday
** Newfoundland Bans Handset Use While Driving
** BCE to Cut 1,700 More Jobs
** Telus Forecasts Increased Sales, Profits
** Court Rejects Ledcor Appeal
** Videotron Buys Ontario Fibre
** Bell Absorbs Aliant Network Groups
** Rural Broadband Selection Committee Named
** City Wants 613 Overlay Decision Revisited
** Ted Rogers Succession Set?
** Telus to Trial iMagic Software
** Internet TV Law in Force
** ExpressVu Says Cablecos Have Theft Problem Too
** Ontario Research Network to Use Bell Fibre
** CANARIE Funds Distance Learning Development
** Bell Offers Wireless Location-Based Services
** CAIP Merges With CATA
** President of Broadband User Group Resigns
** Canadian Satellite Launch Set
** RIM Posts $92 Million Loss
** GT Changes Win Creditor Support
** Shaw Rating Cut to Junk Status
** Com Dev Back in the Black
** Meriton Raises $26 Million
** The Hidden Costs of IP Telephony

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

CRTC POSTS REPORT ON CANADIAN TELECOM: As this issue went to press,
the CRTC released its second annual report to Cabinet on Canada's
Telecommunications Industry. The full report is available at:
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/PolicyMonitoring/2002/gic2002.pdf

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

WE'RE TAKING A HOLIDAY: Telecom Update is taking a winter break; our
next issue will be published Monday, January 6. We wish all readers a
successful and rewarding New Year.

NEWFOUNDLAND BANS HANDSET USE WHILE DRIVING: 

Newfoundland has adopted Canada's first law banning the use of
handheld cellphones while driving. Offenders will lose demerit points
and pay a fine of $45-$180.

BCE TO CUT 1,700 MORE JOBS: 

In 2003, BCE Inc. will cut capital spending by 10%-15% and eliminate
about 1,700 jobs in 2003. At the company's annual investor conference,
BCE executives forecast revenue of $19.5 billion in the next year.

** CEO Michael Sabia said that CTV and the Globe and Mail are
    not strategic assets, but did not suggest any plan to sell
    them soon.

** Separately, Bell announced that it is in discussions
    regarding possible divestiture of some or all of its
    investment in CGI Group.

TELUS FORECASTS INCREASED SALES, PROFITS: 

Telus Corp. says a workforce reduction of 5,000 by year-end will
contribute to an increase in EBITDA of 8% to 12% and a return to
profitability in 2003. Sales are expected to rise 3%-4%; capital
expenditures will be reduced 12%.

COURT REJECTS LEDCOR APPEAL: 

In a 2-1 decision, the Federal Court of Appeal has dismissed the
appeal by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and several cities
against CRTC Decision 2001-23, the "Ledcor Decision." The Court
rejected FCM's argument that the CRTC exceeded its jurisdiction when
it restricted the municipalities' ability to charge carriers for using
rights-of-way. (See Telecom Update #354)

VIDEOTRON BUYS ONTARIO FIBRE: 

Videotron Telecom has purchased 1,200 km of dark fibre in Ontario from
360networks, including routes from Ottawa to Toronto, Toronto to
Buffalo, and Toronto to Detroit. (See Telecom Update #326)

BELL ABSORBS ALIANT NETWORK GROUPS: 

130 management employees in Aliant's technology development and
network planning/ provisioning functions are being transferred to Bell
Canada, as part of a plan to unify the two companies' network
operations.

RURAL BROADBAND SELECTION COMMITTEE NAMED: 

Industry Minister Allan Rock has announced the members of the National
Selection Committee for the Broadband for Rural and Northern
Development pilot program (see Telecom Update #348). Names and
biographies of the committee members and a list of all 223
applications for the Round 1 competition are posted on the Industry
Canada website.

http://broadband.gc.ca/applications/applist_e.asp

CITY WANTS 613 OVERLAY DECISION REVISITED: 

The City of Ottawa says it supports the proposal to delay introduction
of 10- digit local dialing in 613 until 2006, and to indefinitely
postpone an Area Code overlay. The City's lawyers say that it wants to
revisit the overlay decision in future, because "there may be some
advantage ... in adopting a geographical split."

TED ROGERS SUCCESSION SET? 

Rogers Cable CEO John Tory has been named Chairman of the company,
replacing Ted Rogers.  Edward Rogers, son of Ted, has been named
President and COO.

TELUS TO TRIAL IMAGIC SOFTWARE: 

iMagicTV is supplying its Media Manager 5.0 software to Telus for a
trial of digital TV service delivery over phone lines.

INTERNET TV LAW IN FORCE: 

Bill C-11, an "Act to Amend the Copyright Act," is now law. The
amendment prevents "Internet retransmitters" of TV programs from
holding the compulsory licences that permit cable and satellite
broadcasters to use TV programs for a fixed royalty -- they must
negotiate their own agreements with copyright holders.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/2/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/government/C-11/C-11_4/90174bE.html

EXPRESSVU SAYS CABLECOS HAVE THEFT PROBLEM TOO:

Bell ExpressVu has released a study by Pathlink Engineering claiming
that Canadian cable companies lose over $400 million each year due to
unauthorized use of cable broadcasts. The cablecos earlier accused
ExpressVu of being too lax in policing signal theft. (See Telecom
Update #359)

http://www.bell.ca/shop/en/jsp/content/aboutbell/expressvu/newsreleases/pdfdocs/pathlink.pdf

ONTARIO RESEARCH NETWORK TO USE BELL FIBRE: 

The Optical Regional Advanced Network of Ontario (ORANO) has granted
Bell Canada a $25 million contract to supply fibre and equipment for a
research network linking about 100 educational institutions and
research facilities in 21 communities. (See Telecom Update #316)

http://www.orion.on.ca

CANARIE FUNDS DISTANCE LEARNING DEVELOPMENT: 

CANARIE has awarded $1.56 million to the Advanced Broadband Enabled
Learning project, which aims to help teachers learn to use broadband
networks as teaching tools.

http://www.abelearn.ca

BELL OFFERS WIRELESS LOCATION-BASED SERVICES: 

Bell Mobility subscribers in Ontario and Quebec can now obtain
directions and other location-based services from MyFinder, which
locates the user's closest cellphone tower. Price: 25 cents per
request plus airtime charges.

CAIP MERGES WITH CATA: 

The Canadian Association of Internet Providers is merging with the
Canadian Advanced Technology Alliance. CAIP will continue to have its
own Board of Directors.

PRESIDENT OF BROADBAND USER GROUP RESIGNS: 

Chris Weisdorf, founder of the Residential Broadband Users'
Association, has resigned as President of the volunteer group. RBUA's
advocacy efforts are unlikely to continue. (See Telecom Update #276,
335)

CANADIAN SATELLITE LAUNCH SET: 

Telesat's Nimiq 3 satellite is scheduled for launch from Kazakhstan on
December 30. Bell ExpressVu has booked the satellite's entire capacity
for high-definition television, pay-per-view programming, and other
services.

RIM POSTS $92 MILLION LOSS: 

Research In Motion lost US$92 million in the three months ended
November 30, compared to a $6 million loss last year. One-time charges
totaled $72 million, including $28 million for legal costs and
damages.  Revenue of $34.5 million was up 3% from the previous quarter
and 30% from the same period last year.

GT CHANGES WIN CREDITOR SUPPORT: 

More than 95% of Group Telecom creditors have backed the
reorganization plan providing for GT's purchase by 360networks. GT
will seek court approval in Ontario on December 23, and in the U.S. on
January 2.

SHAW RATING CUT TO JUNK STATUS: 

Moody's Investors Service has lowered its rating on Shaw
Communications unsecured debt by two steps to Ba2 -- "junk"
status. The agency says Shaw has too much debt and faces stiff
competition.

COM DEV BACK IN THE BLACK: 

Com Dev International, a satellite technology supplier, recorded
August-October net income of $748,000, compared to a loss of $89
million during the same period last year. Revenue was $25.2 million,
down from $32.6 million. (See Telecom Update #347)

MERITON RAISES $26 MILLION: 

Ottawa-based Meriton Networks, which makes combined
switching/transmission gear for metro optical networks, has raised
C$26.4 million in equity and debt financing.

THE HIDDEN COSTS OF IP TELEPHONY: 

When McGill University looked at IP telephony, it found that the cost
of preparing for a voice-data network would be much greater than
anyone expected. Read full details in an exclusive insider report,
only in the January issue of Telemanagement.

** Subscribe now to Telemanagement and receive this issue
    along with a comprehensive subject index to Telemanagement
    in 2002.

    http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.html

** Single copies of the January Telemanagement will be
    available for $75 each -- call 905-686-5050 ext 500 and
    charge to Visa, American Express, or MasterCard.

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

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: nobleGOODDOGgeorges@earthlink.net (J Bass)
Subject: Re: Are All 900 Number Providers Hype Artists?
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:07:41 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Would you please provide some contact
>> names and phone numbers for the people at the IXCs who offer 900
>> number service?  As the man said in the original message, everyone
>> *he* has spoken to denies any knowledge of them. How about some 
>> actual contact names and numbers?   PAT]

I guess this isn't turning out to be as easy as first imagined.

J. Bass

On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:21:43 GMT, nobleGOODDOGgeorges@earthlink.net (J
Bass) wrote:

> Folks,

> Are there any legitimate 900 number providers?

> Who are they? 

> A google search turned up droves of outfits with hucksteresque
> pitches.

> Everyone in the legitimate telecommunication industry seems to claim
> no knowledge of 900 numbers, as if it was an irreparably tainted
> topic.

> Where do software companies go, for example, when they are setting up
> 900 tech support lines, etc?

Remove GOODDOG to reply

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

From: Jim Thompson  <Jim-T@analog_innovations.com>
Subject: How Do You INSERT CID
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:35:52 GMT
Organization: Cox Communications


I'd like to ring phones inside my house but also send caller-ID.  

I'm an EE, so it'd be no problem to build up something, but surfing
has yielded zero.

Any ideas?

Thanks!


|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  Jim-T@analog_innovations.com  Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |

            For proper E-mail replies SWAP "-" and "_"
             
I love to cook with wine.      Sometimes I even put it in the food.             
------------------------------

From: David Christensen <dchris8816@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Query About Pulse Dialing
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:53:24 -0700
Reply-To: dchris8816@hotmail.com


Its still used by some of us who collect older CPE and continue to use
it.

Used to drive my girlfriend nuts until I got an old Buscom dialer for
one of the phones.


Dave

Who has a WE 302 on his desk, an AE90 in the kitchen and an 
AE40 in the den.

Ed Ellers wrote:
> John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com> wrote:

>> Pulse dialing is rarely used in the US.

> More often than you might think ... especially by people who *do* have
> Touch-Tone provisioned on their line but don't realize that they need
> to change a switch setting on their phone to use it.

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

Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:08:13 EST
From: Kathy Bradley <kathy.bradley@mail.internetseer.com>
Reply-To: Kathy Bradley <mail.internetseer.com>
Subject: Error Accessing Your Website


On Fri Dec 20, 2002 at 07:08:08 AM EST I was unable to reach your web
site: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/sponsorlinks.html due
to the following error: Host Not Found

As of Fri Dec 20, 2002 at 12:11:27 PM EST I am able to access your web
site again.

I work for InternetSeer, a Web site monitoring company. InternetSeer
is conducting an ongoing study of web connectivity. As recommended by
the Robots Guidelines, this email is being sent to explain our
research activities and to let you know about the difficulty in
connecting to your site.

The error listed above was initially detected by our primary site
monitor in Philadelphia, Pa. then verified by our secondary site
monitor located in Los Angeles, Ca. before this error event was
recorded.

InternetSeer is the largest FREE web site monitoring company in the
world. We provide free web site monitoring to over 1 million users
worldwide. We'll monitor your web site 7 days a week, 24 hours a day -
for free. I am a robot. 

To have InternetSeer monitor your web site for free, click here for instant 
signup. http://scclick.internetseer.com/sitecheck/clickthrough.jsp?I5s57h5k5o5e5f5n5j53M5pyTKlebUyzNy5sPMSRRIH5c_LLVxT5aNPD53U5pXTxy5p5b5cNXzPIz5dS_W5aHSx5bM_W5exRIV_wC5a_w_QXTMz5cWNNyzNPSLyQx5dMPNS53T5p5g=e3

To learn more about our FREE service before signing up click here.
http://scclick.internetseer.com/sitecheck/clickthrough.jsp?I5s57h5k5o5e5f5n5j53M5pyTKldbUyzNy5sPMSRRIH5c_LLVxT5aNPD53U5pXTxy5p5b5cNXzPIz5dS_W5aHSx5bM_W5exRIV_wC5a_w_QXTMz5cWNNyzNPSLyQx5dMPNS53T5p5f=e3

As part of your free web site monitoring service, you'll receive
immediate notifications when we encounter problems accessing your web
site and weekly performance reports.

There is no need to cancel because InternetSeer will never contact you
again at this email address: ptownson@telecom-digest.org. If you have
other email addresses that you would like excluded from any potential
future contact, click here to have those email addresses excluded from
our system.
http://scclick.internetseer.com/sitecheck/cancelemails.jsp

InternetSeer does not store or publish the content of your pages, but
rather uses availability and link information for our research.

Click here to learn more about InternetSeer. 
http://scclick.internetseer.com/sitecheck/clickthrough.jsp?I5s57h5k5o5e5f5n5j53M5pyTKldbUyzNy5sPMSRRIH5c_LLVxT5aNPD53U5pXTxy5p5b5cNXzPIz5dS_W5aHSx5bM_W5exRIV_wC5a_w_QXTMz5cWNNyzNPSLyQx5dMPNS53T5p5f=e3

Sincerely,

Kathy Bradley
Web Site Analyst
InternetSeer.com
http://www.internetseer.com/ep/setoc?NR5p764lad5aP5q5eMNNV5cSHVMU5bGxy=e3

As stated above, there is no need to cancel since YOU WILL NEVER be
contacted again at ptownson@telecom-digest.org, but you may click here
for a removal confirmation from our web site.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone know anything about these
people? It *seems* like a good offer, but I had to pull it out of my
own spam bucket when it arrived here. I am wondering if this is going
to get me a bunch more spam if I agree to their service?  Anyone?  PAT]

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

From: spuorgelgoog@gowanhill.com (Owain)
Subject: Re: Ground Start Lines
Date: 20 Dec 2002 11:52:14 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Neal McLain wrote: 

> lots of mid-sized mid-priced hotels/motels don't have enough trunks to
> satisfy peak evening calling load.  The Holiday Inn Express in LaPorte
> Indiana stands out in mind as the worst offender I've ever
> encountered.  

Maybe La Porte has declined telephonically since 1892 :-)


Owain

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

Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:24:53 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: We Had Better Cool it a Little


To the group:

We (in an editorial sense, meaning I, the buffer of all messages here in
this department) have started getting complaints about the quality and
enduring significance as my competitor, Readers Digest would say, of the
messages printed here. 

To wit, the 'branding thread' is starting to get on some people's nerves.

Names are not neccessary; they don't matter:

   Subject: Please step in, Pat
   X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.3 required=5.0
	tests=REFERENCES,RESENT_TO,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,
	      USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_XM,X_ACCEPT_LANG
	version=2.41
   X-Spam-Level: 
   Status: R

Pat:

I'm sure you have standards and rules you operate the list within, and
perhaps the current situation is within those rules, but things are
getting out of hand.

John Higdon and his band of merry "I'm smarter than you" men are
destroying the value of the list, in this reader's opinion.

It is declining from a source of good information to stupid infighting
between so called 'intellectuals'.

How about telling them to take the silliness private?  I would prefer
to read the list, in the limited time I have available, and glean
mostly telecom related information, not a bunch of grown up 'kids'
slinging mud back and forth.

I notice, for the record, that Higdon and several others rarely offer
anything constructive, just the childishness that is SO much more
obvious in this 'branding' thread.

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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Reaction: Sitting here with mouth open, a
little embarrassed to have to mention it ... but golly gee, guys, why
not move anything further on the 'branding thread' over to email, if
you can get through all the spam congestion and blocks these days to
pass your messages, or maybe to Yahoo or AOL Instant Messengers,
where, once you get through the obligitory 'm or f?  how old?'
questions (and in more recent times the request to check out the other
guy's 'cam' [if the first two questions are answered in a pleasing
way; otherswise why bother]), you can get back to the branding thread,
or whatever else you decide to discuss -- as long as you have cams
available so you can give visual illustrations of your intentions and
interests.  PAT]

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Did you ever see me talk to myself
before like this? Instead of a harsh warning to evict the no-good
useless members of this list, I decided in the spirit of Xmas to try
and keep the X in Xmas this time around. Some moderators would simply
bounce the offenders and wash their hands of it; I need all the readers
I can find.  :(     PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:37:09 -0600
From: Jeffrey Mattox <deleted at readers-request>
Subject: Last Laugh! A Lesson in Modern Electronics


Pat:

I figure you're well aware of this, but it wasn't mentioned in the
recent discussion about telephone ring circuits and grounding -- maybe
you need a trigger to publish it again.  According to Google, it's on
the web at various places, one being:

    http://www.aljian.com/humorphile/humorphile/problem-solving.html

  --- cut here ---


  Subject: A lesson in modern electronics


This story was related by Pat Routledge of Winnipeg, Ontario about a
repair call he handled while living in England.

It's common practice in England to ring a telephone by signaling extra
voltage across one side of the two wire circuit and ground (earth in
England).  When the subscriber answers the phone, it switches to the
two wire circuit for the conversation.  This method allows two parties
on the same line to be signaled without disturbing each other.

Anyway, an elderly lady with several pets called to say that her
telephone failed to ring when her friends called; and that on the few
occasions when it did ring her dog always barked first.  Pat proceeded
to the scene, curious to see this psychic dog.

He climbed a nearby telephone pole, hooked in his test set, and dialed
the subscriber's house.  The phone didn't ring.  He tried again.  The
dog barked loudly, followed by a ringing telephone. Climbing down from
the pole, Pat found:

a. A dog was tied to the telephone system's ground post via an iron chain
   and collar.

b. The dog was receiving 90 volts of signaling current.

c. After several such jolts, the dog would start barking and urinating on
   the ground.

d. The wet ground now completed the circuit and the phone would ring.

Which shows that you that some problems can be fixed by just pissing
on them.

  --- end ---

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This *old* story was first printed here
in the Digest back about 1983 or so ... then a few more times over the
years until around 1990 or so when I retired it from use for what I 
felt were good reasons:  

(a)  I did not -- still don't -- think it is funny. It sounds 'cute',
     but really isn't.

(b)  It is cruel to keep animals chained up all the time. Animals do
     need to make some compromises with their human custodians, for
     example being spayed or neutered, and shortly after those medical
     procedures are finished, they don't miss those 'parts' anyway.

(c)  I've seen too many examples of animals being tortured on purpose
     or by omission, left tied up in a cold, wet, or very hot area
     with little or nothing to eat or drink. About fifteen years ago
     I found a grown dog, mostly skin and bones, who had been tied up
     in a mostly deserted basement with no food and very little water
     left for it. After I got over the shock of seeing that, I immediatly
     called the animal control officer who came out and took the
     little guy away, to the Animal Society in Chicago. Some people
     should not be allowed to have animals, if they do not know how to
     care for them. When animal control took the chain 'leash' off the
     dog, the animal immediatly licked our hands trying to say how 
     glad he was to be resuced. 

Aljian/humorphile probably got this from an old issue of the Digest,
and they are welcome to 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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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 2002 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 V22 #202
******************************


    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Dec 20 23:57:09 2002
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id gBL4v9i16080;
	Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:57:09 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:57:09 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200212210457.gBL4v9i16080@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #203

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:57:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 203

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Bush Administration to Propose System to Monitor Internet (Monty Solomon)
    What Do Intellectual Property Owners Want? (Monty Solomon)
    Mass. Officials Set Rules For State's No-Call List (Monty Solomon)
    Bay State Residents Can Register to Block Sales Calls (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Query About Pulse Dialing (Ed Ellers)
    Re: Error Accessing Your Website (Barry Margolin)
    Re: Are All 900 Number Providers Hype Artists? (John Higdon)
    Removing Passwords and Security From Access Databases (prong2099@hotmail)
    SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and NOW I GET EVEN (A. Hackbarth)
    Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country? (Alex Kasper)
    Re: Ground-Start Lines (was Coin Collect and Return) (Alex Kasper)
    Re: Last Laugh! A Lesson in Modern Electronics (Someone)
    *****SPAM***** Season's Best -- Another Last Laugh! (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: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:16:44 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Bush Administration to Propose System to Monitor Internet


By JOHN MARKOFF and JOHN SCHWARTZ

The Bush administration is planning to propose requiring Internet
service providers to help build a centralized system to enable broad
monitoring of the Internet and, potentially, surveillance of its
users.

The proposal is part of a final version of a report, "The National
Strategy to Secure Cyberspace," set for release early next year,
according to several people who have been briefed on the report. It is
a component of the effort to increase national security after the
Sept. 11 attacks.

The President's Critical Infrastructure Protection Board is preparing
the report, and it is intended to create public and private
cooperation to regulate and defend the national computer networks, not
only from everyday hazards like viruses but also from terrorist
attack. Ultimately the report is intended to provide an Internet
strategy for the new Department of Homeland Security.

Such a proposal, which would be subject to Congressional and
regulatory approval, would be a technical challenge because the
Internet has thousands of independent service providers, from garage
operations to giant corporations like American Online, AT&T, Microsoft
and Worldcom.

The report does not detail specific operational requirements,
locations for the centralized system or costs, people who were briefed
on the document said.


http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/20/technology/20MONI.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Is it true that Dubya has been quoted
as saying 'thank God for September 11 ... it gave me all the excuses
to do the things I have longed to do for years.' ?   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:49:56 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: What Do Intellectual Property Owners Want?


by Andy Oram
American Reporter Correspondent

CAMBRIDGE, MASS.-Researchers around the world were stunned. A
promising young graduate student, Dmitri Sklyarov, came to the United
States to deliver his insights about weaknesses in a commercial
product to a well-known computing conference. A few hours after his
presentation, he was in jail.

I don't want to belabor this case because it has already been aired in
the press a great deal, particularly since last Tuesday's startling
ruling in favor of the Sklyarov's employer, ElcomSoft, by a jury that
was clearly repulsed by the idea of punishing people who make software
with legitimate uses.

But Sklyarov and ElcomSoft start off this article because his arrest
marked a milestone in modern life-a fulfillment of the old prediction
that computer hackers used to utter as a joke: "Write a program, go to
jail." It's still scandalous that Sklyarov spent time in jail for his
non-crime.

Sklyarov suffered all this for working on a software product that was
perfectly legal in his own country, Russia, but was called a violation
of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in the United States. This
software allowed people using the popular Adobe eBook software-so long
as they had a legitimate license to the software-to make copies of
documents. The Russian software had many legitimate applications under
the "fair use" doctrine, but could also be used to make unauthorized
copies-and that brought down the vindictive hand of the U.S. Justice
Department, which insisted on bringing the case to trial even after
Adobe dropped their charges.

Nor was Sklyarov alone. A fifteen-year-old Norwegian, Jon Johansen,
was briefly arrested on flimsy charges related to his supposed role in
creating DeCSS software, a program that retrieves movies from their
encrypted format on DVD. Johansen's case was in court last week, but I
have not heard any news of the outcome. Many others have been sued for
similar causes, although they have not faced criminal proceedings.

http://www.praxagora.com/andyo/ar/ip_owners.html

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

Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:00:21 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Mass. Officials set rules for state's no-call list


By Associated Press, 12/20/2002

State consumer officials announced details yesterday about what steps
residents will have to take to sign on to Massachusetts' new 'Do Not
Call' law beginning Jan. 1.

Residents who want to block most calls from telemarketers will be able
to sign up on a Web site, call a toll-free number, or submit a request
by mail.

Those who want to be included on the first list, which will go into
effect April 1, must register by March 1. The list will be updated
every quarter.

The state Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation expects
to handle up to 1 million registrations in the first month, according
to its director, Jennifer Davis Carey.

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/354/metro/Officials_set_rules_for_state_s_no_call_list+.shtml

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

Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:40:52 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Bay State Residents in January can Register to Block Sales Calls


By Bruce Mohl, Globe Staff, 12/20/2002

Massachusetts consumers seeking to block unwanted telemarketing calls 
suddenly have a lot more ammunition at their disposal.

State officials yesterday detailed how Massachusetts residents can
sign up for a do-not-call list starting Jan. 1, a day after the
Federal Trade Commission announced plans to launch a similar national
list in the spring.

By signing up for both lists, state and federal officials say
consumers should be able to significantly reduce -- but not eliminate --
the number of telemarketing calls they receive at home.  Massachusetts
officials expect a huge response.

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/354/business/Bay_State_residents_in_Jan_can_register_to_block_sales_calls+.shtml

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

From: Ed Ellers <ed_ellers@msn.com>
Subject: Re: Query About Pulse Dialing
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:44:13 -0500


Hank Fung <fungus@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:

> Aren't there still some phone companies that charge for the "privilege" of
> using touch tone dialing (or "touch calling" as it was called by GTE)?

BellSouth in Kentucky gives a $1/month credit to those who already had
lines without Touch-Tone service, but new lines aren't available
without Touch-Tone AFAIK.

> What usually happens is that these cheapskates will then switch the phone
> to tone when they need to access a voice mail or interactive response
> system.

Be careful what you say about my mother.  :-)

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

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@genuity.com>
Subject: Re: Error Accessing Your Website
Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 21:52:10 GMT


In article <telecom22.202.5@telecom-digest.org>, Kathy Bradley
<mail.internetseer.com> wrote:

> InternetSeer is the largest FREE web site monitoring company in the
> world. We provide free web site monitoring to over 1 million users
> worldwide. We'll monitor your web site 7 days a week, 24 hours a day -
> for free. I am a robot. 

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone know anything about these
> people? It *seems* like a good offer, but I had to pull it out of my
> own spam bucket when it arrived here. I am wondering if this is going
> to get me a bunch more spam if I agree to their service?  Anyone?  PAT]

I don't know anything about them, but I think the old adage applies:
if it seems too good to be true, it probably is.  They need to make
money somehow, and since they spammed you in the first place that
seems like an important part of their business model.

A new adage probably also applies: don't ever respond to spammers.
BTW, I'll bet if you check your spam bucket, you'll find multiple
instances of the mail, despite the fact that it says it's a one-time
mailing.


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: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Are All 900 Number Providers Hype Artists?
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:49:23 -0800


In article <telecom22.202.2@telecom-digest.org>,
nobleGOODDOGgeorges@earthlink.net (J Bass) wrote:

>>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Would you please provide some contact
>>> names and phone numbers for the people at the IXCs who offer 900
>>> number service?  As the man said in the original message, everyone
>>> *he* has spoken to denies any knowledge of them. How about some 
>>> actual contact names and numbers?   PAT]

> I guess this isn't turning out to be as easy as first imagined.

Indeed. I found the names and numbers of all the folks I talked to in 
setting up our 900-number trunks, but NONE of them are still there! In 
fact, most of the contact numbers are now out of service. 

But still ... if you press the issue, you can finally end up talking to 
someone in a given company's 900 division. For instance, call any SBC 
business office and ask for the number of the "976/900 department" for 
the area in which you are interested.

I have some qualifying questions for you:

1. What is the nature of your service? (Recorded information, live 
assistance, etc.)?

2. What sort of call volume do you expect?

3. What is the geographical scope of your audience?

4. What is the magnitude of the charging you expect to impose?

5. How do you intend to advertise? (Media, number in instruction manual, 
etc.)

6. Where (what city) do you intend to physically house the equipment?

Answers to those questions would go a long way toward being able to
make some really concrete suggestions regarding your ultimate service
provider choice and whether you would be a candidate for station-side
or trunk-side connections.

If you feel inclined to answer these questions, please do so in email.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: prong2099@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Removing passwords and security from Access databases 73650
Reply-To: prong2099@hotmail.com
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:16:14 GMT
Organization: MTS Internet


Remove Access Security 3.0 Released

'Remove Access Security' can reveal and remove passwords and security
settings from Access databases. It is the only product to work on both
non-encrypted and encrypted databases. E-Tech offers a 100% money-back
guarantee if the product does not remove security settings from your
database.

For more information visit : http://www.e-tech.ca 

Remove Access Security 3.0' is the ultimate tool concerning security
for Access databases. 'Remove Access Security' can reveal passwords,
reset passwords and remove user-level security for secured and
non-secured database (.MDB) files. This software is simple to use, and
can be a real life-saver in a variety of situations, including
corrupted passwords, corrupted workgroup files, forgotten passwords
etc. This is the first software ever developed which works with
encrypted databases.

'Remove Access Security' is a must-have for all database
administrators and power users.

For more information visit : http://www.e-tech.ca 

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

From: betaphihack@hotmail.com (A. Hackbarth)
Subject: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: 20 Dec 2002 17:35:37 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Hi,

Because of the way that SBC Ameritech has ignored me I have now made
it my business to put Ameritech out of its ...

You may Laugh, but I assure you that I can, and will cause a loss of
SBC Ameritech's Revenue ... with this lost revenue I intend to finally
pay them the money I don't owe them ... Read my letter I sent to them
and you will see the satisfaction that will bring.

You see I am an Independent Representative for North America's Largest
Privately Held Telecom Company ...and with that comes the leverage of
multi million dollar telecommunications contracts.

I offer all Americans the chance to start a Revolution ... there are
many others who have been wronged by Verizon, Southbell, Pacificbell SBC
and Ameritech.  Now I can show you how to get paid, save your
customers $$$ and get even at the same time.

Now all Ameritech customers are eligible to become my customer. And
since my service is cheaper and has more benefits it will be no
problem to get people to try it for Free.

If you want to sign up for service or read my story you can go to my
website:

http://www.aaronhackbarth.com

If you work for SBC Ameritech its not your fault, its the way your
business model works.

Deregulation is Democracy Vote out Ameritech NOW!!


Sincerely,

Aaron Hackbarth

P.S.  Carrot top Is F*CK*NG annoying, and by using AT$T you pay for
him to annoy millions of TV viewers every day.

DO NOT pay him, and save money for yourself, that's what I offer.

If you don't Like Me there's a special link on my site for you
especially if you like Ameritech.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Listen, Aaron, I'd like to help you
out, but I am really busy right now, on the one hand trying to put the
X back in Xmas, and on the other, trying to get Mothers who use Pulse
Dialing out of Cheapness to put money in my Salvation Army pot this
week and next. Maybe someone who goes to look at your site will read
it to me and tell me what you/it are all about. PAT]

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

From: alex@nexspace.com (Alex Kasper)
Subject: Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country?
Date: 20 Dec 2002 17:53:30 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


We certainly do get incoming CLID for foreign countries. I get France,
England, Germany -- and most of Western Europe -- anyone with an SS7
connection.

As for your box, it wouldn't be that hard to build, but because Caller
ID information is so easy to spoof it wouldn't offer much security.

I can call you 'from' anyone or any country, and if you trust that
information for verification you need to rethink your security model.


AK

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

From: alex@nexspace.com (Alex Kasper)
Subject: Re: Ground-Start Lines (was Coin Collect and Return)
Date: 20 Dec 2002 18:28:49 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Another use for groundstart lines I have seen is as a cheap ACD for
Telethon rooms. (i.e. Jerry Lewis). You just order a bunch of
groundstart lines in circular hunt and hook them up to 500 sets.

The operators will never get a dial tone, and on some C.O switches you
can just stay off hook after the caller hangs up. You'll hear a clunk
and the next caller will be there.

I know Henry Cabot III used to do this in the 70's with an AE880
speakerphone on his desk. He would just leave it "off hook."

I would call the number, hear a clunk and I could yell to him wherever
he might be in the office and he could yell back. No doubt, a very
crude form of off-hook call announce -- it worked well though, and it
didn't require a PBX!


AK

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

Subject: Re: Last Laugh! A Lesson in Modern Electronics
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:14:12 EST
From: Someone 


[Not for publication in the Digest/newsgroup, unless you really want to]

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This *old* story was first printed here
> in the Digest back about 1983 or so ... then a few more times over the
> years until around 1990 or so when I retired it from use for what I 
> felt were good reasons...]

Not to mention (d) Winnipeg still is not in Ontario.

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:16:47 -0700
Subject: *****SPAM***** Season's Best -- Another Last Laugh
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Poor Joey. Even his holiday greeting
cards get treated as spam and tossed out unopened. Look at what I
found by poking through the bit bucket this evening.  It may have been
the word 'suck' to which SpamAssassin took such umbrage.  PAT]

SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ----------------------
SPAM: This mail is probably spam.  The original message has been altered
SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future.
SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
SPAM: 
SPAM: Content analysis details:   (7.00 hits, 5 required)
SPAM: TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL (2.1 points)  To: repeats address as real name
SPAM: NO_OBLIGATION      (1.5 points)  BODY: There is no obligation.
SPAM: SPAM_PHRASE_00_01  (0.6 points)  BODY: Spam phrases score is 00
SPAM:                    [score: 0]          to 01 (low)
SPAM: PORN_4             (2.8 points)  URI: URL uses words and phrases
SPAM:                                  which indicate porn.
SPAM:
SPAM: ------------------ End of SpamAssassin results ---------------------
SPAM:

In the spirit of the Royal Canadian Mint, The Gap, The City Of Toronto,
and a myriad of other groups that would have us remove the "Christ"
from "Christmas", I wish to offer the following:

Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes
for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low stress,
non-addictive, gender neutral celebration of the winter solstice
holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the
religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your
choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasions and/or
traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or
secular traditions at all ... and a fiscally successful, personally
fulfilling, and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of
the generally accepted Gregorian calendar year 2003, but not without
due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures (Incan,
Myan, and more) whose contributions to society have helped make Canada
great (not to imply that Canada is necessarily greater than any other
country or area of choice or any other such distinction that is
mutually agreeable to be discussed), and without regard to the race,
creed, colour, age, physical ability, religious faith, or sexual
orientation of the wisher or wishee.  

This wish is limited to the customary and usual good tidings for a
period of one year, or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday
greetings, whichever comes first. "Holiday" is not intended to, nor
shall it be considered, limited to the usual Judeo-Christian
celebrations or observances, or to such activities of any organized or
ad hoc religious community, group, individual, or belief (or lack
thereof).
 
Note: By accepting this greeting, you are accepting these terms. This
greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal, and is revocable
at the sole discretion of the wisher at any time, for any reason or
for no reason at all. This greeting is freely transferable with no
alteration to the original greeting. This greeting implies no promise
by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for the wisher
her/himself or others, or responsibility for the consequences which
may arise from the implementation or non-implementation of same. This
greeting is void where prohibited by law or by age limitations. Not
responsible for overconsumption of beverages or food substances.

Oh what the heck, let me get in trouble ... have a MERRY CHRISTMAS and
a HAPPY NEW YEAR ! 


-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And you as well, Joey!     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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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 2002 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 V22 #203
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Dec 21 23:44:52 2002
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id gBM4iqn12920;
	Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:44:52 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:44:52 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200212220444.gBM4iqn12920@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #204

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 21 Dec 2002 23:45:00  EST    Volume 22 : Issue 204

Inside This Issue:                              Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    EFFector 15.40: Hollywood Loses Again in ReplayTV Case (Monty Solomon)
    Providing DSL Service Without Any POTS? (Phil Earnhardt)
    Re: Error Paying Attention to Internet Seer (John R. Levine)
    Re: The Spam From Internet Seer (Charles B. Wilber)
    Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even (Steven J. Sobol)
    Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even (joe@obilivan.net)
    Re: ARPA ... The 20th Anniversary of the Internet (Jim Fleming)
    Web Security Plan Won't Invade Privacy - White House (Monty Solomon)
    Some Companies Will Release Customer Records on Request (Monty Solomon)
    GILC Alert v6i8 (Monty Solomon)
    Is That a TiVo Under the Tree? (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.

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

Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:00:00 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 15.40: Hollywood Loses Again in ReplayTV Case


http://www.eff.org/effector/HTML/effect15.40.html

EFFector Online Newsletter
EFFector       Vol. 15, No. 40       December 20, 2002     ren@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation     ISSN 1062-9424
In the 239th Issue of EFFector:

    * Hollywood Loses Again in ReplayTV Case
    * Jury Acquits Elcomsoft in eBook Copyright Case - Party at EFF!
    * EFF Urges Copyright Office to OK Consumer Uses of CDs and DVDs
    * Deep Links (4): RIAA Statisticians Have Group Hallucination?
    * Administrivia

For more information on EFF activities & alerts:
http://www.eff.org/

To join EFF or make an additional donation:
http://www.eff.org/support/

EFF is a member-supported nonprofit. Please sign up as a member today!


* Hollywood Loses Again in ReplayTV Case
Electronic Frontier Foundation Wins Access to Lawsuit Docs

Los Angeles - Another federal judge affirmed the right of the
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) to represent ReplayTV owners in
their lawsuit against 28 motion picture and television industry
companies.

Craig Newmark of craigslist.org and four other ReplayTV customers are
suing the entertainment companies to clarify their rights to record
television programs and to skip commercials using digital video
recorders (DVRs). Hollywood representatives have publicly stated that
skipping commercials is "stealing."

The ReplayTV customers are represented by EFF attorneys and Ira
Rothken of the Rothken Law Firm.

The entertainment companies have tried repeatedly to prevent EFF
attorneys from accessing documents that the court ordered the
companies to produce as part of the legal discovery process. EFF
attorneys sought access because they believe these documents are
critical to preparing the ReplayTV owners' case. The entertainment
companies claimed that EFF is a "competitor" with Hollywood because of
its public statements about copyright law policy. The ruling sought by
the entertainment companies would have effectively disqualified EFF
attorneys as legal counsel for the ReplayTV owners in this case.

In October, Magistrate Judge Eick ruled in favor of EFF pointing out
that the restriction sought "would impair significantly the
prosecution of the Newmark Plaintiffs' claims by effectively
preventing attorneys from the Electronic Frontier Foundation from
serving as litigation counsel for the Newmark Plaintiffs" and found
that the entertainment companies "have failed to demonstrate a
sufficiently significant disclosure-related risk or danger" from
disclosure of their confidential information by EFF attorneys to
justify complete denial of access.

The entertainment companies appealed this decision and U.S. District
Court Judge Cooper reaffirmed today the earlier ruling in favor of EFF
commenting in a written opinion that: "The Court finds factual support
in the record to support the conclusion that EFF attorneys would be
precluded from viewing a number of documents that are relevant to the
Newmark Plaintiffs' contention that their uses of the RePlayTV DVRs
constitute fair use of the Entertainment Companies' copyrighted
works."

"We are pleased that the courts have twice recognized the importance
of access to discovery documents in the ReplayTV case," said EFF
Intellectual Property Attorney Gwen Hinze. "EFF is now committed to
protecting the fair use rights of ReplayTV owners as this case moves
forward."

"Public interest litigation and public advocacy groups like EFF can
now breath a sigh of relief," added EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn.
"The entertainment companies were unable to set a precedent for
pushing us out of cases litigated in the public interest simply for
expressing our views on other matters."

Links:
For this release:
http://www.eff.org/Cases/Newmark_v_Turner/20021216_eff_pr.html

Latest court ruling in Newmark v Turner case:
http://www.eff.org/Cases/Newmark_v_Turner/20021216_motion_denied.html

More documents from Newmark v Turner case:
http://www.eff.org/Cases/Newmark_v_Turner/

EFF Fair Use FAQ:
http://www.eff.org/IP/eff_fair_use_faq.html


*Jury Acquits Elcomsoft in eBook Copyright Case

Dmitry Sklyarov Odyssey Leaves Prosecutor Empty-Handed

San Francisco - The highly publicized case that began with the arrest
of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov this week came to a close. A
federal jury in San Jose recently returned a verdict of not guilty on
all counts in the criminal trial of Sklyarov's employer, a Russian
software company called Elcomsoft Ltd. The case was the one of the
first criminal cases to be brought under the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act of 1998 ("DMCA").

"Today's jury verdict sends a strong message to federal prosecutors
who believe that tool makers should be thrown in jail just because a
copyright owner doesn't like the tools they build," said EFF Senior
Intellectual Property Attorney Fred von Lohmann. "We have said from
the beginning that Dmitry Sklyarov, Elcomsoft, and technologists like
them are not pirates, and today a jury agreed."

The case began in July 16, 2001, when the FBI arrested Dmitry Sklyarov
at the Defcon conference in Las Vegas. Sklyarov was the lead engineer
on an Elcomsoft product known as the Advanced eBook Processor (AEBPR),
which software giant Adobe Systems Inc. claimed was a "circumvention
tool" prohibited by the DMCA.

* Party at EFF to Celebrate the Victory!

On Saturday, December 21, 2002, freedom-loving people will have a
party in San Francisco to celebrate a total acquital in the first
criminal prosecution under the controversial Digital Millennium
Copyright Act (DMCA).

Who: Freedom-loving people (that's you)
What: Party to celebrate the Elcomsoft verdict
Where: Electronic Frontier Foundation
454 Shotwell Street
San Francisco CA 94110-1914 USA
When: Saturday, December 21, 2002, 8:00 PM
Why: DMCA reform isn't just about computer programmers any more. 12
randomly chosen American people say the DMCA has gone too far.

Contact: Don Marti dmarti@zgp.org
650-967-1840

Links:
For this release:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/US_v_Elcomsoft/20021217_eff_pr.html

EFF FAQ on U.S. v. Elcomsoft:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/US_v_Elcomsoft/us_v_elcomsoft_faq.html

Larry Lessig editorial about the case in the New York Times:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/US_v_Elcomsoft/20010730_lessig_oped.html

EFF Elcomsoft/Sklyarov case archive:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/US_v_Elcomsoft/


* Electronic Frontier Foundation Seeks Consumer Rights

Urges Copyright Office to OK Consumer Uses of CDs and DVDs

San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today urged
the Librarian of Congress (LoC) to recognize the rights of consumers
to skip past commercials on DVDs, view DVDs sold only outside the
U.S., and play copy-protected CDs on the players of their choice.

EFF has long sought exemptions from the Digital Millennium Copyright
Act's (DMCA) prohibition on bypassing technological protections used
to limit consumer use of DVDs and copy-protected CDs.

Public-interest advocacy organization Public Knowledge joined EFF in
filing the comments to the LoC, prepared with the assistance of law
students at the Glushko-Samuelson Intellectual Property Clinic of
Washington College of Law.

EFF asked the LoC to create DMCA exemptions for four types of digital
media:

1) music on copy-protected CDs;

2) movies on DVDs whose region coding restrictions prevent playback on
U.S. players;

3) movies on DVDs which prevent skipping of commercials;

4) movies in the public domain released on DVD;

If granted, these exemptions will allow consumers to make full use of
the music and movies that they've lawfully obtained.

The entertainment industry encodes DVDs by region sold in an attempt
to control release and pricing of movies sold worldwide. Region 1
includes the United States.

"Many great films are available only outside the U.S.," said EFF Staff
Attorney Gwen Hinze. "We urge the LoC to allow film buffs to play
movies they've legitimately purchased outside the U.S. without fear of
breaking the law."

The recent distribution of "copy-protected" CDs has made some CDs
unplayable on PCs and DVD players. "The music industry intends to stop
copying, but the copy-protected CDs they sell are completely
unplayable in many PCs and newer disc players," said EFF Senior
Intellectual Property Attorney Fred von Lohmann. "When I buy a CD, I
should at least be able to play it on my CD players."

The LoC has called for comments as part of a triennial process of
granting exemptions to the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA.
Legislators charged the LoC and the U.S. Copyright Office with
reviewing the effect of the anti-circumvention provisions on the
public's ability to make non-infringing uses of copyrighted works
secured by digital protection technologies.

This rulemaking procedure allows the LoC and the Copyright Office to
grant limited three-year exemptions to the DMCA's blanket prohibition
on bypassing technological protection measures. In that way, users
could access particular classes of copyrighted works that are
protected by digital protection mechanisms.

Links:
For this release:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20021218_eff_dmca_reply_pr.html

EFF comments to Librarian of Congress and U.S. Copyright Office:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20021218_eff_dmca_reply_comments.html

U.S. Copyright Office Notice of Rulemaking:
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/

EFF prior comments to LoC and U.S. Copyright Office in 2000:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20000331_eff_dmca_reply_comments.html

"How to Win (DMCA) Exemptions and Influence Policy" by Seth Finkelstein:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/finkelstein_on_dmca.html


* Deep Links
Deep Links features noteworthy news items, victories, and threats from
around the Internet.

~ RIAA Statisticians Have Group Hallucination?
The RIAA has been complaining about a 10% drop in profits. Gee, it's
pretty hard to squeeze a profit out of merchandise you never ship
(even when you're gauging retailers), eh Hilary?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/28588.html

~ In with the GNU Radio
Salon looks at one of the coolest, most useful, and controversial
technologies ever.
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/12/18/gnu_radio/index.html

~ ACLU Award Winners Endorse a Flat Fee for P2P
Attorneys Ken Hertz and Fred Goldring tell the content industry to
stop going after consumers and focus on the real problem: their
outdated, artist-impoverishing business models.
http://www.hitsdailydouble.com/news/rumormill.cgi

~ New Zealand May Dodge the DMCA Bullet
They're trying to get WIPO-compliant without the collateral damage of
the DMCA.
http://www.med.govt.nz/buslt/int_prop/digital/position/


* Administrivia

EFFector is published by:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation
454 Shotwell Street
San Francisco CA 94110-1914 USA
+1 415 436 9333 (voice)
+1 415 436 9993 (fax)
  http://www.eff.org/

Editor:
Ren Bucholz, Activist
  ren@eff.org

To Join EFF online, or make an additional donation, go to:
  http://www.eff.org/support/

Membership & donation queries: membership@eff.org
General EFF, legal, policy or online resources queries: ask@eff.org

Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged.
Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF. To
reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors for
their express permission. Press releases and EFF announcements &
articles may be reproduced individually at will.

To change your address, please visit http://action.eff.org/subscribe/.
 From there, you can update all your information. If you have already
subscribed to the EFF Action Center, please visit
http://action.eff.org/action/login.asp.

Back issues are available at:
  http://www.eff.org/effector

You can also get the latest issue of EFFector via the Web at:
  http://www.eff.org/effector/current.html

Please send any questions or comments to webmaster@eff.org

You received this message because monty@roscom.com is a member of
the mailing list originating from alerts@action.eff.org. To unsubscribe 
from all mailing lists originating from alerts@action.eff.org, send an 
email from monty@roscom.com to alerts@action.eff.org with 'Remove' as the
only text in the subject line.

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

From: Phil Earnhardt <pae@dim.com>
Subject: Providing DSL Service Without Any POTS?
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 01:26:57 -0700
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


Would it be reasonable to have the PUCs require the RBOCs to provide
DSL service to their customers without having POTS on the line? This
would be good for cutsomers who had cellphone service and didn't
really need an voice line into the house.

Don't the cable services offer POTS and cable modem internet access as
separate items?

Have there been any initiatives to create this class of service? It
would seem that it would be beneficial for the cell phone companies to
lobby for this ...


phil

[Who would love to have this service available.]

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

Date: 21 Dec 2002 12:02:52 -0500
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Error Paying Attention to Internet Seer
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I work for InternetSeer, a Web site monitoring company. InternetSeer
> is ...

 ... a bunch of chronic clueless spammers.  I've been complaining about
their junk for ages.

Their alleged service is worthless, since the "cannot contact" reports
are usually due to failures of their own ISP connection.


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: 21 Dec 2002 09:46:05 EST
From: Charles.B.Wilber@Dartmouth.EDU (Charles B. Wilber)
Subject: Re: More About Internet Seer Spam


 --- You wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone know anything about these
> people? It *seems* like a good offer, but I had to pull it out of my
> own spam bucket when it arrived here. I am wondering if this is going
> to get me a bunch more spam if I agree to their service?  Anyone?  PAT]

 --- end of quote ---

There's still no free lunch. Sooner or later, you will discover the catch.

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

From: sjsobol@JustThe.net (Steven J. Sobol)
Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 16:16:28 -0000
Organization: JustThe.net LLC


'A. Hackbarth <betaphihack@hotmail.com>:

> You see I am an Independent Representative for North America's Largest
> Privately Held Telecom Company ... and with that comes the leverage of
> multi million dollar telecommunications contracts.

I hate SBC AmeriBlech too, but you lost every last drop of credibility
you had with me when you told me that.

I have *really* had trouble with AmeriBlech. I suspect you've probably
never had to deal with them, and you're just making up a story in
order to make money.


Steve Sobol, CTO  JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH
http://JustTheNetLLC.com/  888.480.4NET (4638)

A practicing member of the Geek Orthodox religion!

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

From: joe@obilivan.net
Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 17:42:08 GMT
Organization: Cox Communications


Isn't this a moderated forum?  If so, why is junk like this allowed?

A. Hackbarth wrote:

> Hi,

> Because of the way that SBC Ameritech has ignored me I have now made
> it my business to put Ameritech out of its ...

> If you want to sign up for service or read my story you can go to my
> website:

> http://www.aaronhackbarth.com

> If you work for SBC Ameritech its not your fault, its the way your
> business model works.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Listen, Aaron, I'd like to help you
> out, but I am really busy right now, on the one hand trying to put the
> X back in Xmas, and on the other, trying to get Mothers who use Pulse
> Dialing out of Cheapness to put money in my Salvation Army pot this
> week and next. Maybe someone who goes to look at your site will read
> it to me and tell me what you/it are all about. PAT]

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *It is* a moderated forum, Joe; when
you send your one-line 'me too' style response, why did you have to
leave the thirty or so lines of the original message attached for me
to cut out?  Ah, but you should see how much of *his original message*
I cut out to start with before using it here. Everyone has their
failures in life. Mine is in attempting to be a *good* moderator.  PAT]

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

From: Jim Fleming <JimFleming@ameritech.net>
Subject: Re: ARPA ... The 20th Anniversary of the Internet
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:20:11 -0600


Sounds like Cerf and Clinton have a lot in common ...
http://livinginternet.com/?i/ii_cerf.htm

http://www.ietf.org//mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg18601.html
From: vinton g. cerf <vinton.g.cerf@wcom.com>
bob is correct; I left ARPA in Oct 1972 to join MCI.

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

http://www.ietf.org//mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg18602.html

 From: Bob Braden <braden@ISI.EDU>

In my recent message about the creation of the Internet by the
conversion of the ARPAnet from NCP to TCP/IP, I incorrectly named Vint
Cerf as the Responsible Parent at ARPA.  Actually, the Responsible
Parent at ARPA during conversion was Bob Kahn; Vint had left ARPA for
MCI before that date.

http://livinginternet.com/?i/ii_cerf.htm

Cerf and Stanford graduate students Yogen Dalal and Carl Sunshine
published the first technical specification of TCP/IP as an Internet
Experiment Note (IEN) as RFC 675, in December, 1974. Their design
included a 32 bit IP address, with eight bits for identification of a
network, and 24 bits for identification of a computer, which provided
support for up to 256 networks, each with up to 16,777,216 unique
network addresses.

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

Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 22:45:55 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Web Security Plan Won't Invade Privacy - White House


    By Andy Sullivan

    WASHINGTON, Dec 20 (Reuters) - Efforts to bolster Internet
security will not lead to increased government scrutiny of
individuals' online habits, the White House and industry sources said
on Friday.

    As it finalizes sweeping guidelines that aim to increase
cybersecurity, the Bush administration said individual privacy would
not be affected by efforts to prevent cyberattacks.

    "The administration is not considering a proposal to monitor what
individuals do on the Internet," a spokesman for the transition to the
newly created Department of Homeland Security said.

    High-tech companies, meanwhile, said they would resist government
efforts to get involved in the day-to-day operation of the global
computer network.

    In a set of preliminary guidelines released in September, the
White House said high-tech companies that keep an eye on the Internet
should combine their efforts and work with the government to better
defend against computer viruses, worms and other cyberattacks.

    The New York Times in its Friday edition reported the White House
is planning a bigger government role in the proposed center that could
possibly lead to surveillance of individual users.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30637009

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

Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:08:40 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Some Companies Will Release Customer Records on Request


By JOHN SCHWARTZ

Nearly a quarter of the corporate security officers in a survey to be
released today said they would supply information about customers to
law enforcement officials and government agencies without a court
order. If an investigation concerned national security, the figure
jumps to 41 percent.

"If you're a customer in somebody's database, you cannot be completely
confident that the information you've provided - whatever the business
might be - is not going to be shared with law enforcement agencies in
the course of their investigations," said Lew McCreary, the editor of
CSO magazine, which conducted the survey.

In the survey of 797 chief security officers (a title commonly
abbreviated as C.S.O.) 43 percent said they would require a court
order before providing information on customers, employees or partner
organizations.

The security officers who took part in the survey work in financial, 
retail, health care and many other fields, and the companies they 
work for range in size from fewer than 500 employees to more than 
30,000.

The survey questions do not give a sense of what information might be 
shared or under what circumstances. The results will provide further 
fuel for the controversy surrounding issues of privacy and national 
security since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.


http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/18/technology/18RECO.html

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

Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 23:40:26 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: GILC Alert v6i8


GILC Alert
Volume 6, Issue 8
20 December 2002

Welcome to the Global Internet Liberty Campaign Newsletter.

Welcome to GILC Alert, the newsletter of the Global Internet Liberty
Campaign. We are an international organization of groups working for
cyber-liberties, who are determined to preserve civil liberties and
human rights on the Internet.

We hope you find this newsletter interesting, and we very much hope
that you will avail yourselves of the action items in future issues.
If you are a part of an organization that would be interested in
joining GILC, please contact us at <gilc@gilc.org>.  If you are aware
of threats to cyber-liberties that we may not know about, please
contact the GILC members in your country, or contact GILC as a whole.
Please feel free to redistribute this newsletter to appropriate
forums.

===============================================
Free expression
[1] Chinese Net users face enhanced censorware, arrests
[2] Russian firm cleared in eBook copyright case 
[3] Australian high court ruling endangers Net speech
[4] Teen Norwegian DVD programmer faces criminal charges
[5] ICANN shuns public elections in new bylaws
[6] Finnish bill may curb Net chatboard comments
[7] Net blockers deny access to important health info
[8] Vietnamese Net dissident gets 4 year jail sentence
[9] Australian gov't ponders blocking of protest websites
[10] Google censors German & French search results
[11] Panama tries to block Internet ports
[12] Council of Europe adopts Net censorship protocol

Privacy
[13] US gov't plans Total Informational Awareness spy system 
[14] Regulators warn Verichip tracking implant maker
[15] US appeals court allows easier wiretapping rules
[16] Finland gov't data retention stance draws fire
[17] Study: British workplace Net monitoring on the rise
[18] New rules unveiled for webbug trackers
[19] TiVo digital recorder makes mistakes, stereotypes users
[20] Court strikes down US gov't virus spy attack
[21] US court allow blind police Net searches
[22] Swiss Big Brother Awards ceremony held

[23] New GILC member: AEL & EFFI

http://www.gilc.org/alert/alert68.html 

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

Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 11:30:01 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Is That a TiVo Under the Tree?


By Katie Dean

Will this be the year that TiVo catches on with a mass audience?

Not likely, say analysts.

While many users of personal video recorders say they can no longer
imagine watching TV sans TiVo, the products have yet to reach a
critical mass of consumers.

http://www.wired.com/news/holidays/0,1882,56828,00.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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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 2002 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 V22 #204
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Dec 22 16:46:20 2002
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id gBMLkKx02174;
	Sun, 22 Dec 2002 16:46:20 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 16:46:20 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200212222146.gBMLkKx02174@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #205

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 22 Dec 2002 16:46:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 205

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: How Do You INSERT CID (Alex Kasper)
    Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From Given Country? (Linc Madison)
    Ground Start and Payphones (Mark J Cuccia)
    Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even (Loonquawl)
    Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even (A. Hackbarth)
    Question about DID and Caller ID on Non-PRI T1 (Dan Bendell)
    Going Electronic, Denver Reveals Long-Term Surveillance (Monty Solomon)
    Pop-Ups Add New Twist (Monty Solomon)
    Federal Database Spy Site Fading Away (Monty Solomon)
    Sklyarov Reflects on DMCA Travails (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Providing DSL Service Without Any POTS? (Ed Ellers)
    Re: Providing DSL Service Without Any POTS? (Steven J. Sobol)
    Re: Providing DSL Service Without Any POTS? (John Hines)
    Hands-Free Headset (Need Modular to 2.5mm Adapter) (Sanjay Punjab)

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: alex@nexspace.com (Alex Kasper)
Subject: Re: How Do You INSERT CID
Date: 21 Dec 2002 13:06:28 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


This can be done pretty easily. The term you want to search for on
Google is "FSK" or "FSK Signaling." You'll find quite a bit of
literature.

A number of manufacturers offer test boxes which simulate a Central
Office and provide Dial Tone, Ring Tone, Busy, AND send Caller ID they
can be had for under $1000.00.

See Here:
http://www.linesimulators.com/telsim.shtml

If you want to do this yourself, check out Teltone.com - they make the
chipsets that support this.


AK

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

From: Linc Madison <nobody@example.com>
Subject: Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country?
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 13:28:29 -0800
Organization: LincMad.com Consulting
Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com


In article <telecom22.203.10@telecom-digest.org>, Alex Kasper
<alex@nexspace.com> wrote:

> We certainly do get incoming CLID for foreign countries. I get France,
> England, Germany -- and most of Western Europe -- anyone with an SS7
> connection.

> As for your box, it wouldn't be that hard to build, but because Caller
> ID information is so easy to spoof it wouldn't offer much security.

> I can call you 'from' anyone or any country, and if you trust that
> information for verification you need to rethink your security model.

Even if the caller ID is accurate, it would still be difficult to use
for blocking a given country, because in the US we often get the
caller ID with no indication that it's an international number. I got
a call from a Swiss cellphone that showed up as 417-xxx-xxxx-x. If the
digit count weren't off, I'd have no way to know it wasn't a call from
Missouri.


www dot LincMad dot com  / Telecom at LincMad dot com
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California

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

Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 15:46:39 CST
From: Mark J Cuccia <mcuccia@tulane.edu>
Subject: Ground Start and Payphones


In TELECOM Digest V22 #203, AK wrote:

> Another use for groundstart lines I have seen is as a cheap ACD for
> Telethon rooms. (i.e. Jerry Lewis). You just order a bunch of
> groundstart lines in circular hunt and hook them up to 500 sets.

> The operators will never get a dial tone, and on some C.O switches you
> can just stay off hook after the caller hangs up. You'll hear a clunk
> and the next caller will be there.

> I know Henry Cabot III used to do this in the 70's with an AE880
> speakerphone on his desk. He would just leave it "off hook."

> I would call the number, hear a clunk and I could yell to him wherever
> he might be in the office and he could yell back. No doubt, a very
> crude form of off-hook call announce.

I can remember when there were still SxS (Step) central offices in New
Orleans back in the 1970's and even into the 1980's, and also back
then all payphones were still coin-first, ground-start (and telco
ONLY, South Central Bell, this was before Greene and COCOT-sleaze!),
if I were at a payphone (in a Step office) and was expecting someone
to call me back (I had called them, they were in the middle of
something else, such as maybe another call, if THEY were in a 1AESS
office with Call Waiting) ... I could stay "off-hook" without having
put a nickel (it eventually went up to dime in Louisiana starting in
1979), and since it was ground-start (coin-first) I would 'hear' some
form of battery hum, but no dialtone nor sidetone.

When that person called me back, once the connecter switch in my Step
central office was "pulsed over" to my payphone's final digit, they
would just "klunk in" to me, offhook! I would have full battery and
sidetone, both me and the party calling me back would just "be there,
connected to each other" ... without any "ringing"!

I assume for the other (non-coin) uses of ground-start lines, such as
the speakerphone mentioned above, that if you needed to make an
outgoing call, there could be a "grounding button" to complete a
"ground" back to the central office and thus get a dialtone to place
the call.

I never remember trying to stay off hook on a coin-first ground-start
payphone in a #5 Crossbar office, to see if I could get an incoming
call to just "klunk in". I know that it did _NOT_ work if I stayed
offhook at a ground-start coin-first payphone in a 1AESS office
though.

New Orleans Metro began to convert to Loop-Start Dial-Tone-First
(telco) payphones beginning in December 1984, and continuing
(office-by-office) until Spring 1985. And different local area
jurisdictions began introducing 911 in Summer 1985. This was the
stated reason for converting all (telco) payphones to DTF
(Loop-Start). And except for the tiny CDO (Community Dial Office) Step
offices in the outlying "exurbs", the last few "city" SxS offices in
the New Orleans metro area were cut to 1AESS by 1983, probably just
"in time" for divestiture. The remaining CDO Step offices in the
"exurbs" were converted to digital remotes during 1990.  But even
those small "exurb" CDO offices had (telco) dial-tone-first
c.o.switch-controlled payphones (AND DTMF/touchtone), beginning in the
mid-1980's, by putting some kind of dialed-digit-registers/
pre-translation/ tone-to-pulse conversion circuit packs, between the
line-finderes and the first-selector switches.


Mark J. Cuccia
mcuccia@tulane.edu
New Orleans LA


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was a *second* message posted on
Sunday regarding the 'ground start' thread. In my clumsyness I somehow
got it erased before using it here. :(   Sorry, whoever. If you wrote
on ground start and it did not appear here today, it was lost in
processing. Please resubmit with my aologies.    PAT]

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

From: Loonquawl <news@loonquawl.com>
Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 13:53:31 -0800
Organization: Astound Broadband


Wow, I've never met anyone with phrase dyslexia before - who the hell
is SouthBell anyway?  I've never heard of such a company :D

And seeing as you're going with the pre-SBC-conglomeration RBOCs, I
love how you've also conveniently left out Southwestern Bell, Qwest,
and SNET...

Your plan, which involves switching to an alternate local service
provider, is rather flawed, seeing as you're buying Ameritech's
service resold under a different name. Unless, of course, your Excel
telco (which, for supposedly being the nation's largest privately held
telco, I've never heard of) has somehow colocated a DMS100/5ESS at
every one of Ameritech's COs ...

And my god, I should whack you over the head with books about the
fundamentals of decent web design, grammar, and spelling!

*whackwhackwhack*


Brandon Turok
http://www.loonquawl.com/
DIAL-A-MACHINE 925-288-9825
Free when you call from work

A. Hackbarth <betaphihack@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:telecom22.203.9@telecom-digest.org:


> Because of the way that SBC Ameritech has ignored me I have now made
> it my business to put Ameritech out of its ...

> You may Laugh, but I assure you that I can, and will cause a loss of
> SBC Ameritech's Revenue ... with this lost revenue I intend to finally
> pay them the money I don't owe them ... Read my letter I sent to them
> and you will see the satisfaction that will bring.

> You see I am an Independent Representative for North America's Largest
> Privately Held Telecom Company ...and with that comes the leverage of
> multi million dollar telecommunications contracts.

> I offer all Americans the chance to start a Revolution ... there are
> many others who have been wronged by Verizon, Southbell, Pacificbell SBC
> and Ameritech.  Now I can show you how to get paid, save your
> customers $$$ and get even at the same time.

> Now all Ameritech customers are eligible to become my customer. And
> since my service is cheaper and has more benefits it will be no
> problem to get people to try it for Free.

> If you want to sign up for service or read my story you can go to my
> website:

> http://www.aaronhackbarth.com

> If you work for SBC Ameritech its not your fault, its the way your
> business model works.

> Deregulation is Democracy Vote out Ameritech NOW!!

> Sincerely,

> Aaron Hackbarth

> P.S.  Carrot top Is F*CK*NG annoying, and by using AT$T you pay for
> him to annoy millions of TV viewers every day.

> DO NOT pay him, and save money for yourself, that's what I offer.

> If you don't Like Me there's a special link on my site for you
> especially if you like Ameritech.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Listen, Aaron, I'd like to help you
> out, but I am really busy right now, on the one hand trying to put the
> X back in Xmas, and on the other, trying to get Mothers who use Pulse
> Dialing out of Cheapness to put money in my Salvation Army pot this
> week and next. Maybe someone who goes to look at your site will read
> it to me and tell me what you/it are all about. PAT]

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

From: betaphihack@hotmail.com (A. Hackbarth)
Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: 22 Dec 2002 11:34:14 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Aaron has replied to his critics. I am
pleased to present his response here, and so that he can tell everyone
exactly where things are at, I have not applied my editor's pen and
eraser to his message, except to keep my finger on the red button so
that a ten second delay can be inserted as needed.  PAT]

sjsobol@JustThe.net (Steven J. Sobol) wrote in message
news:<telecom22.204.5@telecom-digest.org>:

> 'A. Hackbarth <betaphihack@hotmail.com>:

>> You see I am an Independent Representative for North America's Largest
>> Privately Held Telecom Company ... and with that comes the leverage of
>> multi million dollar telecommunications contracts.

> I hate SBC AmeriBlech too, but you lost every last drop of credibility
> you had with me when you told me that.

Do You Read Forbes magazine?? go buy this months issue and last
months issue  read them untill then You have zero credability...

  How about the wallsreet journal?? read this article
  http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/816517.asp?cp1=1

 It shows you that the company that I can give customers service from
is BETTER than all other companies researched... and get paid to do
it....

what about Money Magazine??
    Money Magazine stated: "Excel Communications is as good an example
of entrepreneurship the world will ever see."

The Secretary of State of South Carolina, Jim Miles, as quoted in
Success Magazine: "I believe that this is the finest financial
opportunity that you will ever have in your lifetime. If you do this,
you will never have to have a job job in your whole life."  He was
speaking to his 22 year old son.

> I have *really* had trouble with AmeriBlech. I suspect you've probably
> never had to deal with them,

Get up, brush yourself off and fight back 


> and you're just making up a story in
> order to make money.

I can see why you may have had this attitude towards me..I also have
been [red button BEEP!] hard by ameritech...They tried to ruin my
credit, harass me, and send me annoying letters...and they still say I
owe them $$$, and I fully intend to pay them with their own lost
revenue...

if I was looking at it from your perspective and someone was sayin
they got [BEEP!]  but can make money [BEEP!] them over I might think
that you were making up your story...so I ask you, ameritech got you
that sour?? and if they do they join my amassing army against
Ameritech...

soon I will have the bill scanned so you all can see how Ameritech
thinks
$99modem + $49.99 =275 and then some how it became a magic $488
thats some Fuzzy math

I called those [BEEP!] and they hung up on me...5 times
I even talked to a rep for 5 minutes,I explained everything, she goes
hold on let me check.....click.. that [BEEP!]...

They would NOT tell me where there DSL office was in Milwaukee so I
could go and talk to somebody that cant [BEEP!] hang up on me he would
probably try to run away.

So here I am
Mad as hell 
And I, not You, am doing something about it 
and soon you will all see
I am not full of [BEEP!]

Aaron


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Thank you, Aaron, for that explanation
and although I have not looked at your web site, I am sure it says
about the same things as above. Sorry about having to apply the red
button cut-off now and then, but this is a Family Oriented Digest with
Family Values,  and I do not want to worry about what Families who 
read Usenet together see in messages, but I did want you to say it all
in your own words.  PAT]

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

From: Dan Bendell <dbendell@assurancetech.net>
Subject: Question About DID and Caller ID on Non-PRI T1
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 20:39:46 -0500
Organization: Assurance Technology Management, Inc.
Reply-To: Dan Bendell <dbendell@assurancetech.net>


I am looking for a clear answer regarding the ability of a T1 that is
NOT a PRI to accomodate BOTH Caller ID and DID.

I am being told that both an Avaya Magix and an IP Office MUST be
connected to a PRI in order to get either of them.  I was always
pretty sure that you could get at least one at a time over a regular
T1.

I suppose the confusion could be related to the ability to get BOTH at
the same time, and that you need the out of band signaling of a PRI
D-channel to get both.

I'm so confused ... and I haven't even asked about the real differece
between DID and DNIS or ANI and Caller ID...Maybe some one could
reccomend a good resource for these questions that is more than just a
definition but also does not need an EE degree to understand.

Thanks in advance.  Happy Holidays ...


Dan

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

Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:39:19 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Going Electronic, Denver Reveals Long-Term Surveillance


By FORD FESSENDEN with MICHAEL MOSS

DENVER, Dec. 14 - The Denver police have gathered information on
unsuspecting local activists since the 1950's, secretly storing what
they learned on simple index cards in a huge cabinet at police
headquarters.

When the cabinet filled up recently, the police thought they had an 
easy solution. For $45,000, they bought a powerful computer program 
from a company called Orion Scientific Systems. Information on 3,400 
people and groups was transferred to software that stores, searches 
and categorizes the data.

Then the trouble began.

After the police decided to share the fruits of their surveillance 
with another local department, someone leaked a printout to an 
activist for social justice, who made the documents public. The mayor 
started an investigation. People lined up to obtain their files. 
Among those the police spied on were nuns, advocates for American 
Indians and church organizations.

To make matters worse, the software called many of the groups 
"criminal extremists."

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/21/technology/21PRIV.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Remember, when reading articles in 
NYT, you have to register. Most of us use the username = telecomdigest
and password = telecomdigest. You are welcome to use it also.  I guess
the Denver police got this bright idea years ago from Chicago police
who have also routinely kept track of 'trouble makers' since about 1950.
Trouble makers = 'communists', 'radical blacks', 'anarchists', war-
protestors, gay guys, anyone running for political office who is not
a Chicago-style Democrat, etc. Of course drug sellers, murderers and
really sick individuals who harm any of the first several categories
above need not fear. You cannot expect the police to do everything. I 
am *so glad* to be out of that town.    PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:54:41 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Pop-ups Add New Twist


By Stefanie Olsen
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

Pop-up advertisements, already the bane of millions of Web surfers, 
are becoming more intrusive.

Pop-up and pop-under ads open a new window when people visit many
popular Web sites, often littering the computer desktop with multiple
browser screens. Advertisers hope people will visit the promoted Web
page by clicking anywhere on the window, although many simply close it
by selecting the "X" box in the top-right corner.

But a relatively new feature may make it harder for people to avoid 
these windows. Using a technique called the "kick through," 
advertisers can direct a person to another Web site if they simply 
move their cursor across the pop-up ad -- no clicking is necessary.

Discount travel retailer Orbitz, for example, is delivering millions
of holiday-themed kick-through ads on The New York Times, ESPN.com and
CondeNast sites in addition to others. The ads feature various
animated games, and recipients who simply "mouse" over them are
shuttled to Orbitz's home page.

Many people who have encountered the ads say they overstep the
boundaries of an already intrusive and loathed form of Web
advertising.

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-978616.html

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

Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:57:34 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Federal Database Spy Site Fading Away


By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
December 20, 2002, 10:46 AM PT

Call it the incredibly shrinking government Web site.

As controversy grows over the Defense Department's shadowy Total
Information Awareness (TIA) project, the project's virtual presence is
steadily decreasing. If fully implemented, TIA would link databases
from sources such as credit card companies, medical insurers, and
motor vehicle databases for police convenience in hopes of snaring
terrorists.

First, biographical information about the TIA project leaders, 
including retired Adm. John Poindexter, disappeared from the Defense 
Department's site last month. A mirror that one activist created from 
Google's cache shows the deleted information included four resumes 
listing past work experience but no addresses or contact information.

Then, sometime in the last week, the TIA site shrank still more and 
some links ceased to work. The logo for the TIA project--a Masonic 
pyramid eyeballing the globe--vanished, a highly unusual step for a 
government agency. So did the TIA's Latin "scientia est potentia" 
slogan, which means "knowledge is power."

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-978598.html

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

Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 01:17:39 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Sklyarov Reflects on DMCA Travails


By Lisa M. Bowman
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

SAN MATEO, Calif.--Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov thinks it was
unfair of prosecutors to play his videotaped deposition at the
ElcomSoft trial rather than calling him to the stand.

But after a legal saga that's included a surprise arrest outside his
Las Vegas hotel room, three weeks in jail, and visa tangles that
almost prevented him from coming back to the United States for trial,
Sklyarov has decided not to worry about situations over which he has
no control.

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-978497.html

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

From: Ed Ellers <ed_ellers@msn.com>
Subject: Re: Providing DSL Service Without Any POTS?
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 02:06:57 -0500


Phil Earnhardt <pae@dim.com> wrote:

> Would it be reasonable to have the PUCs require the RBOCs to provide
> DSL service to their customers without having POTS on the line? This
> would be good for cutsomers who had cellphone service and didn't
> really need an voice line into the house."

AFAIK the telcos already do this for other DSL providers, but you
still have to pay something per month for the pair, so the savings may
not be great.

> Don't the cable services offer POTS and cable modem internet access as
> separate items?

All that I know of do.

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

From: sjsobol@JustThe.net (Steven J. Sobol)
Subject: Re: Providing DSL Service Without Any POTS?
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 18:08:52 -0000
Organization: JustThe.net LLC


Phil Earnhardt <pae@dim.com> wrote:

> Would it be reasonable to have the PUCs require the RBOCs to provide
> DSL service to their customers without having POTS on the line? This
> would be good for cutsomers who had cellphone service and didn't
> really need an voice line into the house.

SDSL and non-line-shared ADSL are already available, but all of the
DSL companies I've seen require a phone number to determine which CO
your DSL would be served out of.


Steve Sobol, CTO  JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH
http://JustTheNetLLC.com/  888.480.4NET (4638)

A practicing member of the Geek Orthodox religion!

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

From: John Hines <john@jhines.org>
Subject: Re: Providing DSL Service Without Any POTS?
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 13:55:19 -0600
Organization: www.jhines.org
Reply-To: john@jhines.org


Phil Earnhardt <pae@dim.com> wrote:

> Providing DSL Service Without Any POTS?

Err, my SDSL  line from DSL.net doesn't have a POTS line associated with
it.

The phone company wants to sell DSL over POTS yes, but you should be
able to get what you want.  Hint, it isn't as cheap, it is considered
business class service.

> Would it be reasonable to have the PUCs require the RBOCs to provide
> DSL service to their customers without having POTS on the line? This
> would be good for cutsomers who had cellphone service and didn't
> really need an voice line into the house.

The FCC has required the RBOCS to provide their services unbundled to
the competition, again, it is something the RBOCs are fighting tooth
and nail.

> Have there been any initiatives to create this class of service? It
> would seem that it would be beneficial for the cell phone companies to
> lobby for this ...

They have been spending millions lobbying against it.  SBC is paying
millions/mo in fines from the Illinois PUC, because they are not meeting
their obligations.

The phone companies are only interested in their profit. Unless this
class of service improves their bottom line they are not interested. And
DSL service cuts into their leased line business.

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

From: piclistguy@yahoo.com (Sanjay Punjab)
Subject: Hands-Free Headset (Need Modular to 2.5mm Adapter), Do They Exist?
Date: 22 Dec 2002 01:45:46 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


I just started working in a new office that has Nortel PBX phones.  On
the back is a module jack for a headset, yet the current headsets I
own have 2.5mm plugs. Is there an adapter I can buy to allow me to use
my current headsets with this phone? I searched the internet but
couldnt find this type of adapter. 

Thanks.

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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 2002 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 V22 #205
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Dec 23 14:12:49 2002
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id gBNJCna26446;
	Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:12:49 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:12:49 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200212231912.gBNJCna26446@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #206

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:13:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 206

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: How to Stop Telephone Harrasment by IBM? (flogi)
    Critics Weigh In on Copyright Act (Monty Solomon)
    Many Tools of Big Brother Are Up and Running (Monty Solomon)
    Repairing a Northern Telecom 2500 (Nebular)
    Avaya Conversant 8.0 (Shiva)
    Book Review: Bell Labs: Life in the Crown Jewel - A New Book (gdas)
    Number Portability; When and Where? (Sander)
    God Bless Memory Hole was Re: Federal Database Spy Site (H.E. Taylor)
    Re: Error Accessing Your Website (Marc Haber)
    Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even (Steven J. Sobol)
    Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even (Justin Time)
    Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even (Heath Doane)
    Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even (Aaron Hackbarth)

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: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 14:47:32 -0800
From: flogi <flogi@speakeasy.net>
Subject: Re: How to Stop Telephone Harrasment by IBM?


As a follow up - I am also contacting my state Attorney General office
to see if there is any way they can step in on the criminal complaint.

I'll write back when things get more interesting.

Thanks again,

JM.

Flogi wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Here is a **very disturbing** report
> to start the day's news. This occassionally happens where a large 
> company gets off in an orbit of their own, colliding with the rest
> of the world, and no one/nothing seems able to stop them. The last
> time I reported something like this, it was when First National Bank
> of Chicago was harassing a family in Germany with unwanted fax phone
> calls, and nothing would stop the bank from making their calls until
> (the old) Illinois Bell Telephone Company literally went to the bank's
> premises in downtown Chicago prepared to disconnect the phone line in
> question and carry away the fax machine. The story has been told many
> times; now today IBM is the culprit. Let's see how long it takes IBM
> to wise up or stop the harassment; if they ever do.  PAT]

>                    ===========================

> Hello,

> I'm looking for suggestions ( non-malicious please) to get the
> harrasment that has been confirmed to be coming from an IBM site to
> stop.

> I am tempted to hook up my computer to the line and see if I can get a
> terminal session.  It's like reverse hacking, instead of me trying to
> get to them, they just call me and open a terminal session.  However,
> I really just want the calls to stop.

> Any ideas?

> Any legal contacts in California that might be able to help me pursue
> this?  And by pursue -- I mean give them a deterrent that will make IBM
> listen ($$$) and one that will make me welcome a few more calls -- so
> I can keep on suing them.

> Thanks,

> JM

> <<text of email thread with a privacy rights group >>

> I'll provide a little more detail:

> The calls started in October and come up on my caller ID as "out of 
> area" with no phone number attached.

> I had this happen before when I first got the phone number, it appears
> that my number was an old billing number for Arch Wireless. Users of
> the Arch wireless service would have a computer call in their billing
> records via modem to my phone number.

> So I get 30-45 calls daily from an unknown number.  I had Pacific Bell 
> put a trace on the call and they contacted the company responsible for 
> the calls.  They would not release the company name to me directly but 
> would only do so with a police report.  The company refused to return 
> Pacific Bell's phone calls so I opened the police report.  The officer 
> was able to get the number that was showing up on Pac Bell's caller ID 
> and also the name of the company (IBM).

> The officer contacted IBM at the site where the calls were coming
> from.  They asked for one week to investigate and resolve the
> situation.  I waited two weeks.  The timeframe is now mid-November.  I
> followed up with the police officer and he called his contact at IBM.
> His contact disputed the information traced by Pacific Bell to his
> number and said that we were wrong.  I then reactivated the trace and
> explained this to Pacific Bell.  Pacific Bell confirmed that there is
> no way that the trace is incorrect and that they have re-confirmed
> that the calls are coming from IBM.

> I have logged over 300 phone calls with dates, and times.  I still get 
> 30-45 calls daily.

> My local police officer has not gotten any additional information from
> IBM.  He has provided them with the updated information and the
> confirmation that this is coming from their telephone number.  They
> have not responded to him.

> I have asked that he refer this case to the District Attorney in my
> area so that this will become a criminal harassment case.  While this
> is still a misdemeanor, it is also still harassment.

> I am also considering pursuing this in civil court.  The calls come at
> all hours of the day and night.  It is easy enough to ignore the calls
> during the day but at 2:00am, I must answer the phone each time it
> rings because it could be an emergency call from someone that I know.

> In civil court I believe I can obtain punitive damages since IBM has
> had the opportunity to resolve this and refused to do so.  I have
> contacted an attorney about a civil case and we are investigating who
> would be the defendant in this matter.

> I am also considering small claims court but need to confirm
> jurisdiction.

> I'm open to hearing about attorneys that have experience in this area
> as well as other possible solutions.  I have had my days and nights
> interrupted by this for almost 90 days and do feel some restitution is
> in order. Please feel free to pass this message along to the IBM
> privacy officer.

>    -----Original Message-----
>   From: Beth Givens [mailto:bgivens@privacyrights.org]
>   Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 2:47 PM
>   Subject: Re: Question about harassing telephone calls from IBM

> I'm very sorry for the delay in responding.

> I find this most disconcerting. Do you yourself have the phone number
> that was identified by the phone company?

> I am not at the office right now, but I'd like to contact IBM's
> privacy officer about this. In the meantime, you might want to do the
> same. If you go to their web site, you can click on their privacy
> policy, and I think you can send an email msg to the privacy officer.

> Do you know why IBM is calling you? Do they leave any messages?

> Also, I'm pretty sure IBM is a member of TRUSTe. You should file a
> complaint about them with www.truste.org and see if they can help you.

> Beth Givens

> At 04:52 PM 12/6/2002 -0500, you wrote:

>> Hi,
>> I am receiving about 40 telephone calls per day by a computer
>> auto-dialer at IBM. These calls come in at all hours of the day and
>> night; 2am, 6am, 9pm etc. I have filed a complaint with Pacific Bell
>> and they have traced the calls to one number at IBM.
>> I have filed a complaint with the Mountain View Police Department and they
>> have opened a case and contacted IBM.  IBM refuses to correct this.

>> Do you think I have any other recourse?
>> I've considered small claims court but don't know who to file a suit
>> against. Any other ideas?  I'm getting desperate here.

> Privacy Rights Clearinghouse
> 3100 - 5th Ave., Suite B
> San Diego, CA 92103
> Phone: (619) 298-3396
> Fax: (619) 298-5681
> Email: prc@privacyrights.org
> Web: www.privacyrights.org

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How typical ... corporation denies they
> are idiots and causing harassment; police and others who *could* take
> agressive action to stop it do not really comprehend what is happening
> so just shrug their shoulders and walk away from it. Corporation then
> continues harassment unmolested. In the case at First National Bank of
> Chicago (now they have changed their brand name a couple times since)
> had these German people in tears. Over and over, all night long for a
> month or two, the calls were coming in from the USA. This was back
> before the system could automatically trace calls and those things had
> to be done manually. After repeated complaints of 'phone ringing then
> dead silence when we answered' from the people, Bundespost finally got
> AT&T on the wire and asked them to investigate. It was traced back to
> Illinois Bell, who then tracked it back to the bank, a full month or
> more after the calls were going on nightly. The bank totally ignored
> requests from Illinois Bell to fix the problem. Finally a security rep
> went from Bell over to the bank with a legal notice and an ultimatum;
> 'we are turning off your phones at (whatever time was permitted under
> the law) because you will not correct this problem.' The notice was
> given by telco to the Vice President-Telecom for the bank who went
> downstairs with a vengeance to correct the problem himself. After a
> bit of rudeness by him, the problem got corrected. And the idiots have
> such short term memory problems; a month or so later when the bank got
> a phone bill with page after page after page after page of one minute
> phone calls to Germany at hours in the middle of the night when the
> bank was closed, they complained 'Bell really screwed up our phone
> bill this month' and wanted credit for all those calls.

> I finally had to complain to the State Commission here in Kansas about
> the way Southwestern Bell's alleged Privacy Manager does not work (the
> one they charge people BIG $$ for without actually providing any
> service for the money.) And guess who *my* culprit was?  A divison of
> *AT&T* who was getting around caller-ID by filling the screen with
> 'name unavailable' and ten zeros for a phone number. Do any of you
> young'uns remember when the phone company used to actually take
> seriously their obligations toward their customer's privacy and not
> just mock and humor the customers with things like Privacy Manager?
> Good luck to our latest victim from IBM. Let's see how long it takes
> to get them straightened out. I wonder if he has considered putting
> 'privacy manager' (snicker) on his phone line or call blocking?  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 17:58:42 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Critics Weigh In on Copyright Act


By Joanna Glasner

A federal agency's request for commentary on a controversial digital
copyright law drew a boatload of criticism from respondents who asked
for new limitations on the far-reaching statute.

The responses, published Friday by the U.S. Copyright Office, are the
result of a month-long inquiry concerning sections of the 1998 Digital
Millennium Copyright Act. As part of a mandate to review sections of
the statute every three years, the agency is looking into provisions
that prohibit the use of tools that undo encryption protections on
digital materials.

The copyright office said the request was intended to help determine
whether the law should make exceptions for tools that allow more
flexible use of digital files and aren't used for copyright
infringement.

Respondents, including several well-known digital rights activists, 
overwhelmingly favored carving out exceptions to the DMCA for certain 
uses of music files, text and video technologies. Many argued that 
buyers of copyrighted works should have the right to make content 
accessible on more than one device.

http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,56963,00.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although the copyright people do have
a plausible argument about wanting to protect their material, it
really is rotten when guys purchase music, text or video files and
then are unable to play it when they get home from the store with it.
Or, they are able to load it and play it on one computer, but not on
their other computers, etc. Maybe the copyright people would settle
for some arrangement where files could be copied a certain number of
times on other devices (although played indefinitly on any one device)
before shutting down the copying mechanism. Motorola cell phones used
to be fixed that way:  the user of the phone could reprogram it three
times with new numbers, etc, then the phone would lock up against any
further number changes, and the 'owner' had to take the phone back to
a dealer or the company, explain himself, and get the phone unlocked
for further programming efforts. Some people knew how to clear the
counter that locked you out after three times, but not many people. 
Maybe the DMCA could operate with that principle; do what you want
with *your paid for, personally owned* copy three or four times, then
no more allowed. That would allow most guys to put their thing on
two or three different computers, etc, allow them to personally use
the copy indefinitly, but then lock out further copies.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:47:50 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Many Tools of Big Brother Are Up and Running


By JOHN MARKOFF and JOHN SCHWARTZ

In the Pentagon research effort to detect terrorism by electronically
monitoring the civilian population, the most remarkable detail may be
this: Most of the pieces of the system are already in place.

Because of the inroads the Internet and other digital network
technologies have made into everyday life over the last decade, it is
increasingly possible to amass Big Brother-like surveillance powers
through Little Brother means. The basic components include everyday
digital technologies like e-mail, online shopping and travel booking,
A.T.M. systems, cellphone networks, electronic toll-collection systems
and credit-card payment terminals.

In essence, the Pentagon's main job would be to spin strands of 
software technology that would weave these sources of data into a 
vast electronic dragnet.

Technologists say the types of computerized data sifting and pattern 
matching that might flag suspicious activities to government agencies 
and coordinate their surveillance are not much different from 
programs already in use by private companies. Such programs spot 
unusual credit card activity, for example, or let people at multiple 
locations collaborate on a project.


http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/23/technology/23PEEK.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To read NYT articles without having to
apply for your own username and passcode, we use usernname 'telecomdigest'
and password 'telecomdigest'. You are welcome to use it also.   PAT]

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

From: Nebular <nebular@ehnetNOSPAM.org>
Subject: Repairing a Northern Telecom 2500
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 00:34:08 -0500
Organization: Bell Sympatico


I am having a bit of trouble with a Northern Telecom 2500 (or rather a
we2500 as I've read they're the same thing) I just got.

The phone for the most part works fine, however when I try to use it,
the dial tone and anything else on the other end of the line is very
faint.  It's not a problem with the receiver as the Touch-tone comes
through perfectly loud and it seems to only affect incoming signals as
I've made calls with it and the person on the other end could hear me
perfectly.

Any ideas? Any help?

I'm only a beginner hobbyist so schematics are a bit to hard to read,
however I can use a multimeter and should be able to tinker with it
easily.

I've tried checking the web for info on this but it's a vast sea of
info thus it's been tough (I feel lucky to have found this
newsgroup). If you could also email me with the info, as I'm not a
regular reader of newsgroups and it's easier for me to archive the
info after the fact.

Thanks in advance.


Neb

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No guarentees, but try first swapping
out the earpiece speaker (or the entire handset receiver if you cannot
get into the earpiece itself) and see if that helps. Many times a
problem with hearing/speaking on old phones can be traced to the
speaker/microphone in the handset. PAT]

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

From: shivabharat@yahoo.com (Shiva)
Subject: Avaya Conversant 8.0
Date: 22 Dec 2002 22:42:14 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Hi all,

I have a conversant V8 System and I would like to know has anyone has
tried monitoring a remote phone thru the IVR? If you have can you
tell me more about it?	  

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Shiva B

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

From: gdas75@hotmail.com (gdas)
Subject: Book Review: Bell Labs: Life in the Crown Jewel; Interesting Book
Date: 22 Dec 2002 22:59:20 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Silicon Press has just published Gehani's new book:

	Bell Labs: Life in the Crown Jewel -- Narain Gehani

Here is a quote from the book description:

      "Gehani's story of the greatest research lab of the 20th
      century -- America's national treasure and corporate crown
      jewel -- will keep you riveted to reading about a way of
      life possibly gone forever." 

Check out the detailed description at Silicon Press, Amazon, or
Barnes & Noble.


GDas

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

From: Sander <sstokhoes@hotmail.com>
Subject: Number Portability; When and Where?
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 15:02:56 +0100
Organization: @Home Benelux


Hi,

Does anybody know where I can find an overview of Number Portability
scheduled introduction dates, especially for European Countries?

Thanks in advance!

Sander

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

From: H.E. Taylor <het@despam.autobahn.mb.ca>
Subject: God Bless Memory Hole was Re: Federal Database Spy Site Fading Away
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:25:15 GMT
Organization: MTS Internet


In article <telecom22.205.9@telecom-digest.org>,
<monty@roscom.com> Monty Solomon wrote:

> By Declan McCullagh
> Staff Writer, CNET News.com

> Call it the incredibly shrinking government Web site.
> 
> As controversy grows over the Defense Department's shadowy Total
> Information Awareness (TIA) project, the project's virtual presence is
> steadily decreasing. If fully implemented, TIA would link databases
> from sources such as credit card companies, medical insurers, and
> motor vehicle databases for police convenience in hopes of snaring
> terrorists.

> First, biographical information about the TIA project leaders,
> including retired Adm. John Poindexter, disappeared from the Defense
> Department's site last month. A mirror that one activist created from
> Google's cache shows the deleted information included four resumes
> listing past work experience but no addresses or contact information.

> Then, sometime in the last week, the TIA site shrank still more and
> some links ceased to work. The logo for the TIA project -- a Masonic
> pyramid eyeballing the globe -- vanished, a highly unusual step for a
> government agency. So did the TIA's Latin "scientia est potentia"
> slogan, which means "knowledge is power."

> http://news.com.com/2100-1023-978598.html


Which is why we bless the Memory Hole!

2002/12/12: MemoryHole: Information Awareness Office Website 
            Deletes Staff Biographies
http://www.thememoryhole.org/policestate/iao-bios.htm 


2002/12/18: MemoryHole: Information Awareness Office Website Deletes
            Its Logo 
http://www.thememoryhole.org/policestate/iao-logo.htm


<regards>

-het

"Orwell was an optimist." -stolen .sig

TIA Links: http://www.autobahn.mb.ca/~het/terror_war/twartl.html#USA-TIA
H.E. Taylor  http://www.autobahn.mb.ca/~het/

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

From: Marc Haber <mh+usenet0236@zugschl.us>
Subject: Re: Error Accessing Your Website
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:39:31 +0100
Organization: private site, see http://www.zugschlus.de/ for details


Kathy Bradley <kathy.bradley@mail.internetseer.com> wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone know anything about these
> people? It *seems* like a good offer, but I had to pull it out of my
> own spam bucket when it arrived here. I am wondering if this is going
> to get me a bunch more spam if I agree to their service?  Anyone?  PAT]

This is one of the worst spammer services around on the Internet.
Query google for them. They switched to operating from Chinanet
because they have been removed from almost every available ISP. They
are "block-on-sight" material.


Greetings,

-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
Marc Haber          |   " Questions are the         | Mailadresse im Header
Karlsruhe, Germany  |     Beginning of Wisdom "     | Fon: *49 721 966 32 15
Nordisch by Nature  | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fax: *49 721 966 31 29

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

From: sjsobol@JustThe.net (Steven J. Sobol)
Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:25:17 -0000
Organization: JustThe.net LLC


'Loonquawl' <news@loonquawl.com> wrote:

> Your plan, which involves switching to an alternate local service
> provider, is rather flawed, seeing as you're buying Ameritech's
> service resold under a different name.

There IS a benefit. 

I'm switching to Corecomm, who resells Ameritech lines in the
Cleveland area, because as a single person, if they fail to provide
service, I have little leverage. Corecomm, on the other hand, is their
largest reseller and has clout -- and having used them before I know
they will take care of me.

Aaron, however, is still a major dork and probably a scammer.

'A. Hackbarth' <betaphihack@hotmail.com> explained to us:

> Do You Read Forbes magazine?? go buy this months issue and last
> months issue  read them until then You have zero credability.

> How about the wallsreet journal?? read this article
> http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/816517.asp?cp1=1

So what? SBC sucks. I'm a customer of SBC; I already know that. The
only reason I had SBC was so I could get DSL, and now that Adelphia
has broadband Internet service in my neighborhood and I may be closer
to jumping in on a Wireless ISP project I've been considering, there
is no reason to keep the DSL, and therefore no reason to keep the SBC
dialtone.

I'm not questioning the state of the industry. I figured you are lying
about *your* personal experiences. Although, I might be willing to
bend on that point, since you say you live in Milwaukee :)

> It shows you that the company that I can give customers service from
> is BETTER than all other companies researched ... and get paid to do
> it ...

> what about Money Magazine??
> Money Magazine stated: "Excel Communications is as good an example
> of entrepreneurship the world will ever see."

Excel Communications is an MLM, and I don't trust MLMs.

>> I have *really* had trouble with AmeriBlech. I suspect you've probably
>> never had to deal with them,

> Get up, brush yourself off and fight back 

Dude, I'm already in the process of switching to Corecomm. I will
*not* touch Excel. I have no incentive to, anyhow, as I am a customer
of Sprint PCS and have taken advantage of the special landline long
distance offer they have, and should have Corecomm dialtone by the end
of the year. It's resold Ameritech service, but Corecomm actually
gives a rat's patootie about service.


Steve Sobol, CTO  JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH
http://JustTheNetLLC.com/  888.480.4NET (4638)

A practicing member of the Geek Orthodox religion!

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

From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time)
Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: 23 Dec 2002 06:01:49 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


betaphihack@hotmail.com (A. Hackbarth) wrote in message
news:<telecom22.205.5@telecom-digest.org>:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Aaron has replied to his critics. I am
> pleased to present his response here, and so that he can tell everyone
> exactly where things are at, I have not applied my editor's pen and
> eraser to his message, except to keep my finger on the red button so
> that a ten second delay can be inserted as needed.  PAT]

>     <<I used MY red button!>>

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Thank you, Aaron, for that explanation
> and although I have not looked at your web site, I am sure it says
> about the same things as above. Sorry about having to apply the red
> button cut-off now and then, but this is a Family Oriented Digest with
> Family Values,  and I do not want to worry about what Families who 
> read Usenet together see in messages, but I did want you to say it all
> in your own words.  PAT]

Pat, you mention "Family Oriented Digest" in your summation.  Is that
abbreviated FOD?

I'm kind of curious as my son is currently on a BIG gray cruise ship
(with Norwalk-like virus also) in an unnamed sea off an unnamed
country.  Their cruise ship has a built-in airport, and they get to
walk along the "runway" and pick up any trash that may damage aircraft
engines.  The type of things they are picking up and throwing away are
referred to as FOD, for Foriegn Object Damage.  We appreciate your
picking up and discarding the FOD from posters like Aaron.  Keep up
the good work!


Rodgers Platt

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Quit picking on Aaron. He means well. I
really feel alarmed for your son and his buddies on that cruise ship.
Any day now, I expect Dubya's mental illness to deteriorate, and his
Delusions of Grandeur to get to the point that we all turn into FOD. 
All except Dubya and his buddies of course; they've all had their small-
pox vaccinations. PAT]   

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

From: Heath Doane <hdoane@gztechnologies.net>
Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 19:13:27 -0500
Organization: Bell Sympatico


Just felt the need to add a few cents worth ...

Aaron explained to us:

> Do You Read Forbes magazine?? Go buy this months issue and last
> months issue  read them untill then You have zero credability ...

> How about the wallsreet journal?? read this article
> http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/816517.asp?cp1=1

Strangely enough, I worked for a "well reviewed" startup, too -- 6
months after our glowing reviews came out, we were gone, leaving 60
million in stranded debt, and destroying the companies and people we
had interacted with ...

Long story short, this month's swan may be next month's ugly duck.

Also, while I didn't scour the posted articles, where's the connection
to your company?  I know that the RBOCs, ILECs and established CLECs
are evil... But no where did I see Excel (or whatever you're called
again) named ...

> I called those [BEEP!] and they hung up on me...5 times
> I even talked to a rep for 5 minutes,I explained everything, she goes
> hold on let me check.....click.. that [BEEP!]...

> They would NOT tell me where there DSL office was in Milwaukee so I
> could go and talk to somebody that cant [BEEP!] hang up on me he would
> probably try to run away.

If you express yourself as eloquently in person and on the phone as
you do here, no wonder they hang up on you.

There are processes to deal with the carriers when they're out of
line. Did you contact your PUC?  What about your elected officials?
Or did this just seem to be a good entrance into sales for you?

> So here I am
> Mad as hell
> And I, not You, am doing something about it
> and soon you will
> all see I am not full of [BEEP!]

Generally speaking, the more someone insists they're not full of, as
Pat put it, "BEEP!" - the more "BEEP" they contain.

Also, on a personal note, the picture of you holding the world in your
hands?  Nice touch ... Makes you seem very down to earth and
approachable.

Pat, thanks for posting this up - always love a good laugh!


Heath

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  I assumed that picture was intended
to be an artist's interpretation of Ayn Rand's book *Atlas Shrugged*
with Aaron in the role of Atlas (or maybe John Galt or Dagney Taggart)
holding things together. PAT]

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

From: betaphihack@hotmail.com (A. Hackbarth)
Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: 22 Dec 2002 22:10:45 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


> *whackwhackwhack*

Ouch my head hurts quit it...

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Thank you, Aaron, for that explanation
> and although I have not looked at your web site, I am sure it says
> about the same things as above. Sorry about having to apply the red
> button cut-off now and then, but this is a Family Oriented Digest with
> Family Values,  and I do not want to worry about what Families who 
> read Usenet together see in messages, but I did want you to say it all
> in your own words.  PAT]

Thanks for the radio edit :)  I starred out the vowels on the bad
stuff and left in the pg-18, but I now realize this is family
oriented ... so Ill keep it rated G from now on ...

If you want there is now a divx movie on my site you can watch if you
want to see more the link is
http://www.aaronhackbarth.com/english/businessmovie.avi
 ..by next weekend ill have one shot from a tripod up on the site..

and the name is Excel powered by Vartec  so check out
http://www.vartec.com  there you will find the networks and technical
side

and www.excelir.com/ahbiz  shows business side and the services I
offer from my site and excel.com is the official site..

this is the best kept 2billion + secret in the industry 


Aaron


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks again for writing to us, Aaron. 
As before, I chose not to edit your message at all, like I do
for many of these guys, and since you dropped the vulgarities from
your message, we should get along fine.  Good luck in getting lots
of people signed up for your service, and Merry Xmas to you.  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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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 2002 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 V22 #206
******************************
    
    
From sandy@ms35.hinet.net Tue Dec 24 02:52:40 2002
Received: from mintaka.lcs.mit.edu (mintaka.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.36])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) with ESMTP id gBO7qdT11127
	for <telecom-recent@massis.lcs.mit.edu>; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:52:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ms35.hinet.net (58.c167.ethome.net.tw [202.178.167.58])
	by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gBO7qYm3088862
	for <telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu>; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:52:37 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from sandy@ms35.hinet.net)
Message-Id: <200212240752.gBO7qYm3088862@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
From: sandy@LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?p0GkQKl3rW6kRrjRIQ==?=
Date: 24 Dec 2002 15:54:17 +0800
Expiry-Date: 02 Sep 2002 02:13:41 +0800
X-YahooFilteredBulk: 61.63.18.125
X-Track: 209: 20
Received: from 61-63.18-host125.kbtelecom.net.tw  (EHLO test) (61.63.18.125)
Apparently-To: <telecom-recent@LCS.MIT.EDU>

by mta119.mail.tpe.yahoo.com with SMTP; 07 Nov 2002 05: 05:42 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mail pickup service by test with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
Wed, 6 Nov 2002 19: 51:43 +0800
Subject: =?big5?B?PLyvpPGmbrFks/g+NTCkuHYucy6k4r73q8Km063oISGr3b73rsm2oaRbpFukWyE=?=
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 19:49:58 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300
Message-ID: <TESTm8OtprR0E6faZWZ00000206@test>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Nov 2002 11:51:43.0489 (UTC) FILETIME=[E04C8F10:01C2858A]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_V2Fjw8Gl_S5SWmktU_MM"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_V2Fjw8Gl_S5SWmktU_MM
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<html>
<head>
<title>�Q���D�r�k�p���J�ʸU��???</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=big5">
<script language="JavaScript">
<!--
function MM_openBrWindow(theURL,winName,features) { //v2.0
  window.open(theURL,winName,features);
}

function MM_popupMsg(msg) { //v1.0
  alert(msg);
}
//-->
</script>
<style type="text/css">
<!--
.unnamed1 {  font-size: 12px}
-->
</style>
</head>

<body bgcolor="#CCCC99" text="#000000">
<table width="100" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" align="center">
  <tr>
    <td>
      <table width="760" border="0" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0">
        <tr> 
          <td width="31" bgcolor="ABA000"><br>
            <br>
          </td>
          <td width="429" bgcolor="827B00">&nbsp;</td>
          <td width="257" bgcolor="598527">&nbsp;</td>
          <td width="38" bgcolor="ABA000">&nbsp;</td>
        </tr>
        <tr> 
          <td width="31" bgcolor="8DC63F">&nbsp;</td>
          <td width="429" bgcolor="F0ECC5" align="center"><font size="2"><br>
            �p�G���@�a�W�ӡA�A���ΥI����H�ơB���q�B�Я��B�޾P�B�i�f�B<br>
            <br>
            �X�f�B�h�f�A�u�ݭn�b�o���O��`�Ϋ~�A�N�i�H�֦��o���W�ӡA<br>
            <br>
            �zı�o�o�˪���~�Ȥ��ȱo�F��??<br>
            <br>
            ���@�ɥu���@��Ƥ��ξDzߴN��Ƿ|,�N�O���C<br>
            <br>
            ���@�ɥu���@��Ƥ����l�D�N�|�֦�,���N�O�h�a�C<br>
            <br>
            �ڭ̭n�\��h�a�N�n�Dzߤ����A�`�J�h�F�ѳo�ӨƷ~�A���ۤv�@�Ӿ��|.<br>
            </font> 
            <p>�@<br>
              <a href="http://www.card99.com.tw/people/" target="_blank"><font size="5">�F�Ѧ��@�s�@���s��~</font></a></p>
    </td>
          <td width="257" bgcolor="F0ECC5"> 
            <table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
              <tr> 
                <td>
                  <p>&nbsp;</p>
    </td>
                <td width="10"> 
                  <form action="http://www.card99.com.tw/asp/amityAddNew.asp" method="POST" name="ORDER">
                    <table width="250" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="290">
                      <tr> 
                        <td valign="middle" height="31" colspan="2" align="center"><b><font color="#666666" size="2">�A�@�w�n�ӤF��! 
                          ���K�w���A���N!</font></b></td>
                      </tr>
                      <tr> 
                        <td width="120" height="30" valign="middle" align="right"><font size="2" color="#333333"> 
                          �z���m�W�G�@</font></td>
                        <td width="170" valign="middle" align="left" height="28" class="unnamed1"  > 
                          <font color="#EEEEEE" size="2"> 
                          <input class=unnamed1 
                        maxlength=10 name=name size=15 
                        >
                          </font></td>
                      </tr>
                      <tr> 
                        <td height="30" valign="middle" align="right" width="120"><font size="2" color="#333333">�p���q�ܡG�@</font></td>
                        <td valign="middle" align="left" width="170" height="28" class="unnamed1"> 
                          <font color="#EEEEEE" size="2"> 
                          <input class=unnamed1 type="text" size=15 name="PHONE" maxlength="10">
                          </font></td>
                      </tr>
                      <tr> 
                        <td height="30" valign="middle" align="right" width="120"><font size="2" color="#333333">�z���a�}�G�@</font></td>
                        <td valign="middle" align="left" width="170" height="28"> 
                          <font color="#EEEEEE" size="2"> 
                          <input class=unnamed1 type="text" size="20" name="ADDRESS">
                          </font></td>
                      </tr>
                      <tr> 
                        <td height="30"  align="right" width="120" valign="middle"><font size="2" color="#333333">�q�l�l��H�c�G�@</font></td>
                        <td valign="middle" align="left" width="170" height="28" > 
                          <font color="#EEEEEE" size="2"> 
                          <input type="text" name="MAIL" class="unnamed1" size="20" maxlength="20">
                          <br>
                          </font></td>
                      </tr>
                      <tr> 
                        <td valign="top" align="right" width="100"><font size="2" color="#333333">��ı�o�G�@</font></td>
                        <td valign="top" align="left" width="170"> <font color="#333333"> 
                          <input type="radio" name="FAX" value="�ܦ�����">
                          <font size="2">�ܦ�����<br>
                          <input type="radio" name="FAX" value="ı�o�٤���">
                          ı�o�٤���<br>
                          <input type="radio" name="FAX" value="�Q�F�Ѧ��ݤ���">
                          �Q�F�Ѧ��ݤ���</font></font></td>
                      </tr>
                      <tr align="center"> 
                        <td colspan="2" valign="middle"> <font size="2" class="unnamed2"> 
                          <input type="submit" value=" �T�w�e�X  " name="submit" class="unnamed1" onClick="MM_popupMsg('���ߧA��X���\���Ĥ@�B!!')">
                          &nbsp;&nbsp; </font> </td>
                      </tr>
                    </table>
                    <input type="hidden" name="COMPANY" value="�W�ӫؼ�">
                    <a href="http://people.elt.com.hk/" target="_blank"><font size="4"> 
                    </font></a> 
                  </form>
                </td>
              </tr>
            </table>
          </td>
          <td width="38" bgcolor="8DC63F">&nbsp;</td>
        </tr>
        <tr> 
          <td width="31" bgcolor="827B00"><br>
            <br>
          </td>
          <td width="429" bgcolor="598527">&nbsp;</td>
          <td width="257" bgcolor="ABA000">&nbsp;</td>
          <td width="38" bgcolor="598527">&nbsp;</td>
        </tr>
        <tr bgcolor="336600"> 
          <td width="31">&nbsp;</td>
          <td width="429">&nbsp;</td>
          <td width="257">&nbsp;</td>
          <td width="38">&nbsp;</td>
        </tr>
      </table>
    </td>
  </tr>
</table>
<br>
</body>
</html>


------=_V2Fjw8Gl_S5SWmktU_MM
Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Horoscope.txt"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Horoscope.txt"

VGhpcyBhdHRhY2htZW50IGNvbnRhaW5zIHlvdXIgcGVyc29uYWwgaG9yb3Njb3BlIGZvciBU
dWVzZGF5LCBEZWNlbWJlciAyNHRoLCAyMDAyCgpZb3Ugd2lsbCB3aW4gdGhlIGxvdHRlcnku
Cg==

------=_V2Fjw8Gl_S5SWmktU_MM--

    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 24 02:54:19 2002
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id gBO7sJE11184;
	Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:54:19 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:54:19 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200212240754.gBO7sJE11184@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #207

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:55:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 207

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Microsoft Sued For Stealing Mobile Phone Secrets (Monty Solomon)
    Intertel vs. Harris 20-20 (Dave Turnbull)
    Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even (John R. Levine)
    Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even (Steven J. Sobol)
    Excel in Everything - Except Spelling (Joey Lindstrom)
    Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country? (John Galt)
    Re: Providing DSL Service Without Any POTS? (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Lucent/AT&T  4 Line Analog Phone Won't Release Hold (Frank Winans)
    Re: How Do You INSERT CID (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: Repairing a Northern Telecom 2500 (Jim Hopkins)
    www.dmcablows.com (Joey Lindstrom)
    www.dubya.com (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: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:50:20 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Microsoft Sued For Stealing Mobile Phone Secrets


    By Lucas van Grinsven

    AMSTERDAM, Dec 23 (Reuters) - British mobile phone maker Sendo
said on Monday it had filed a suit in a U.S. federal court against its
former partner Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT), accusing it of stealing its
technology and customers.

    The small British cellphone maker was Microsoft's key partner in
entering the 400 million unit a year mobile phone market until the two
companies unexpectedly cut ties last month without disclosing all the
reasons why they fell out.

    The court filings allege that Microsoft, in search of new growth
markets but lacking mobile phone expertise, extracted crucial
information about the industry from Sendo and passed it on to friendly
low-cost contract manufacturers in Asia.

    Privately owned Sendo may claim several hundred million dollars in
damages, according to people familiar with the court proceedings.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30660315

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

From: dave.turnbull@omsg.co.uk (Dave Turnbull)
Subject: Intertel vs. Harris 20-20
Date: 23 Dec 2002 14:49:46 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


We are considering replacing a Harris (Teltronics) 20-20 with an
Inter-tel Axxess solution to run a multi-site skills based call centre
with PBX functionality for each site as well as intra-site voip calls
across existing leased lines.  Does anybody have experience of this,
because the Inter-tel solution (price) seems almost too good to be
true based upon our experience with the 20-20.  I am told that
performance and capabilities of the Axxess is not on a par with the
20-20 - any comments?


Thanks,

Dave

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

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: 23 Dec 2002 14:55:49 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> But no where did I see Excel (or whatever you're called
> again) named ...

Excel is a long distance reseller offering long distance service via
an MLM pyramid.  They're like most other MLMs in that the true
believers think they're absolutely wonderfully fantastic, and the rest
of the world wishes they'd stop bugging us with eye-glazing
opportunity spiels.

The last time I checked, their rates were mediocre, nowhere near as
good as the truly low cost providers, but no worse than the heavily
advertised ones.

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

From: sjsobol@JustThe.net (Steven J. Sobol)
Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 21:18:22 -0000
Organization: JustThe.net LLC


'A. Hackbarth' <betaphihack@hotmail.com>:

> and www.excelir.com/ahbiz  shows business side and the services I
> offer from my site and excel.com is the official site..

> this is the best kept 2billion + secret in the industry 

I guess this is on-topic, since CDT *is* a telecomms newsgroup.

However, I'll be exceedingly skeptical unless you can show me some
firm proof that you can actually make money on Excel, and I want to
see proof that *you* personally are making money.

Excel is still an MLM.


Steve Sobol, CTO  JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH
http://JustTheNetLLC.com/  888.480.4NET (4638)

A practicing member of the Geek Orthodox religion!

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:50:18 -0700
Subject: Excel in Everything - Except Spelling
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Sun, 22 Dec 2002 16:46:20 EST, editor@telecom-digest.org
wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Thank you, Aaron, for that explanation
> and although I have not looked at your web site, I am sure it says
> about the same things as above. Sorry about having to apply the red
> button cut-off now and then, but this is a Family Oriented Digest with
> Family Values,  and I do not want to worry about what Families who 
> read Usenet together see in messages, but I did want you to say it all
> in your own words.  PAT]

In a recent Dilbert book, Scott Adams laments that he would dearly
love to be an NFL linebacker.  However, weighing in at 150 pounds, he
is physically unsuited for the job.  He went on to remark that,
similarly, somebody who measures their panty size by the hectare should
probably not be working in a lingerie shop.

Somebody who is trying to sell me a communication service should at
least have some mastery of the rudiments of communication, and that
starts with spelling.  This guy has about a grade-7 ability to spell
and construct sentences.  Whether it's a correct assessment or not,
this brings to mind an image of some backwards hillbilly living in a
trailer somewhere in the hills, and NOT an image of a successful sales
representative who's going to be around to (intelligently) answer my
questions when Excel starts screwing up my bill.

Sorry Aaron, but every instinct I've got tells me to run away
screaming from you and your "offer".  As for your inability to
communicate in the written medium, they're called "night classes".
Look into it.


Joey Lindstrom
Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

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

From: John David Galt <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us>
Subject: Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country?
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 17:59:31 -0800
Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society


Alex Kasper wrote:

> I can call you 'from' anyone or any country, and if you trust that
> information for verification you need to rethink your security model.

The same thing has traditionally been true on the Internet.  But after
a few denial-of-service attacks were performed on Internet sites by
flooding them with connection requests whose originating IP address
was spoofed, most reputable ISPs have started filtering their outgoing
traffic so that no one can send a packet with a spoofed originating IP
address.  Sites that won't do this will be blacklisted and wind up
effectively cut off.

It's time for LECs to similarly block their customers with PBXes from
transmitting phony Caller ID information.  And for us to start a
blacklist of LECs that won't.

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

Subject: Re: Providing DSL Service Without Any POTS?
Organization: Not Much
From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 02:21:50 GMT


In article <telecom22.205.12@telecom-digest.org>, Steven J. Sobol
<sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

> Phil Earnhardt <pae@dim.com> wrote:

>> Would it be reasonable to have the PUCs require the RBOCs to provide
>> DSL service to their customers without having POTS on the line? This
>> would be good for cutsomers who had cellphone service and didn't
>> really need an voice line into the house.

> SDSL and non-line-shared ADSL are already available, but all of the
> DSL companies I've seen require a phone number to determine which CO
> your DSL would be served out of.

One _can_ get around that.  

It takes some persistance, but it _is_ doable.

Speaking from first-hand experience.

I'm corporate tech-support, co-ordinating a DSL install for 'work from
home' for one of our employees, who had gone cellular-only more than a
year previously.

This was several years ago, and the only offerings were 'non-shared'.

The 'initial' pre-qualification was easy -- building was a two-unit
apartment building, just used the number for the 'neighbors'.

Getting the order through to completion took some effort.

The DSL company (Covad) computers wouldn't accept the order _without_
a phone number.  When they submitted it to the ILEC (Ameritech)
*their* computers rejected it *if* it had a phone number (their system
_knew_ there was no phone service at that unit).

Eventually, persistance paid off, and Covad management figured out how
to keep all the computers happy.

The *installer* was more than a little bit puzzled, though.  His work
order showed the on-site phone number as "000-0000" <grin>

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

From: Frank Winans <fwinans@airmail.net>
Subject: Re: Lucent/AT&T  Four Line Analog Phone Won't Release Hold
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:14:05 -0600
Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America


Herb Stein wrote:

> Frank Winans wrote:

>> The Lucent 854 phones, though analog, employ digital status
>> information, sent _only_ on the first line, to support the "hold" feature.

> Hey! I use 854's and am real happy with them. The DID feature is the
> best feature.

A staffer can reroute the call after picking it up, but no, I don't
think the original external caller can divert the call to a specific
extension before anyone picks up the phone, which is what I think of
as DID.  These are being used standalone, not in conjunction with any
switch or private pbx.

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

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: How Do You INSERT CID
Date: 23 Dec 2002 14:59:12 -0500
Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)


In article <telecom22.202.3@telecom-digest.org>,
Jim Thompson   <Jim-T@analog_innovations.com> wrote:

> I'd like to ring phones inside my house but also send caller-ID.  

> I'm an EE, so it'd be no problem to build up something, but surfing
> has yielded zero.

> Any ideas?

The Motorola data book lists the full CID specs on the data sheets
with the Motorola caller-ID chips.  It's just straight FSK on the line
between the first and second rings.

scott
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

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

From: Jim Hopkins <bwanajim@swbell.net>
Subject: Re: Repairing a Northern Telecom 2500
Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 20:04:22 GMT


If I understand what you're saying correctly, you can hear your own
DTMF signals when you dial perfectly fine but the voice of the far-end
party is muted. If that's the case, you might try cleaning and/or
adjusting the 'normalling' contacts on the DTMF dial. Usually the
older DTMF dials would have a set of contacts that would place a low
resistance across the receiver network when a button was pressed, in
effect swamping the incoming signal, so that your dialed digits
wouldn't be painfully loud in your ear. Possibly those contacts aren't
opening when you release the buttons.

Jim

Nebular <nebular@ehnetNOSPAM.org> wrote in message
news:telecom22.206.4@telecom-digest.org:

> I am having a bit of trouble with a Northern Telecom 2500 (or rather a
> we2500 as I've read they're the same thing) I just got.

> The phone for the most part works fine, however when I try to use it,
> the dial tone and anything else on the other end of the line is very
> faint.  It's not a problem with the receiver as the Touch-tone comes
> through perfectly loud and it seems to only affect incoming signals as
> I've made calls with it and the person on the other end could hear me
> perfectly.

> Any ideas? Any help?

> I'm only a beginner hobbyist so schematics are a bit to hard to read,
> however I can use a multimeter and should be able to tinker with it
> easily.

> I've tried checking the web for info on this but it's a vast sea of
> info thus it's been tough (I feel lucky to have found this
> newsgroup). If you could also email me with the info, as I'm not a
> regular reader of newsgroups and it's easier for me to archive the
> info after the fact.

> Thanks in advance.

> Neb

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No guarentees, but try first swapping
> out the earpiece speaker (or the entire handset receiver if you cannot
> get into the earpiece itself) and see if that helps. Many times a
> problem with hearing/speaking on old phones can be traced to the
> speaker/microphone in the handset. PAT]

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:53:04 -0700
Subject: www.dmcablows.com
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:12:49 EST, editor@telecom-digest.org
wrote:

> their other computers, etc. Maybe the copyright people would settle
> for some arrangement where files could be copied a certain number of
> times on other devices (although played indefinitly on any one device)
> before shutting down the copying mechanism. Motorola cell phones used
> to be fixed that way:  the user of the phone could reprogram it three
> times with new numbers, etc, then the phone would lock up against any
> further number changes, and the 'owner' had to take the phone back to
> a dealer or the company, explain himself, and get the phone unlocked
> for further programming efforts. Some people knew how to clear the
> counter that locked you out after three times, but not many people. 
> Maybe the DMCA could operate with that principle; do what you want
> with *your paid for, personally owned* copy three or four times, then
> no more allowed. That would allow most guys to put their thing on
> two or three different computers, etc, allow them to personally use
> the copy indefinitly, but then lock out further copies.  PAT]

I'm not sure how you'd implement something like that, Pat, at least
with current technology.  Specifically, where does this counter get
stored?  Ideally, it would be stored on the distribution media, but
most media is read-only (ie: CD's, DVD's), so how would it (the disc)
be able to keep track of how many times it's been copied, and/or where
it's been copied, etc.?

I've heard suggestions that the program doing the copying could track
this, but really -- that's a non-starter.  If my copying software
stops allowing me to copy a particular disc, I'll just take that disc
to another machine (with another copy of the copying software
installed) that hasn't yet seen that disc.  I have six computers
running at home and have access to four more at the office -- plenty
of opportunity for some serious copyright violation.  :-)

The entertainment companies are going to have to understand (and in
fact, probably do to a large degree) that while certain schemes may
make it difficult for "average" users to copy their material, the fact
that it's DIGITAL makes it inevitable that not only will copying take
place, but that the copies will be perfect duplicates of the original.
No amount of jiggery-pokery is going to stop that - anything that can
be done in software (or hardware) can be undone by a determined
hacker.  :-)

DirecTV systems have a "smart-card" with an onboard ASIC chip that
handles all of the decryption duties - so far, the hackers haven't
found a way to software-emulate that ASIC chip.  That hasn't stopped
'em from writing completely new scripts and programming them on the
card - scripts that bypass whatever security measures DirecTV is using
this week.  A CD or a DVD doesn't have access to something even as
advanced as this -- it's just a pile of data, sitting there waiting to
be read by a laser beam.  And that's why we've got bullshit laws like
the DMCA -- we can't stop people reading the data, but let's make it
illegal to even MAKE something that could, POSSIBLY, defeat whatever
feeble copy-protection measures that were included on the disc and
thus permit duplication.

I really, really hope the DMCA goes down (or at least gets greatly
modified).  It goes WAY too far.  Under its provisions, we'd never
have had the home VCR, and IBM would still be making all of our PC's
(well, and Apple).  Hell, even Coleco would never have gotten away
with their "Colecovision Atari Emulator".  :-) In the same vein, none
of the companies that got started by making game cartridges for the
old Atari VCS would have been permitted to do so.  Companies like
Activision, for example.


Joey Lindstrom
Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What would be wrong with the media
company (let's call them 'publishers') supplying TWO copies of the
media; the 'original' and the 'backup' copy. Do as you please ONE TIME
with the backup copy. I bought some computer software once from a 
company which did that; they gave you your copy to use, and a backup
copy at the same time. Another possibility is the publisher would
include a serial number with your purchase, and that serial number
entitled you to call their office for one, two or even three
additional copies. When you placed your order you could ask for one,
two or three copies (in which case the serial number would so indicate
that the order had been completely filled.) If I understand this
matter correctly, most guys are not interested in cheating and making
an infinite number of copies to use on the net, all their friends,
etc, they are mainly interested in being sure they themselves can use
the media as intended. Wouldn't including (or allowing for the
shipping of) two or three extra copies of the media still turn out 
less expensive for the publishers than the wholesale cheating which
is going on now?   PAT]

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:58:15 -0700
Subject: www.dubya.com
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:12:49 EST, editor@telecom-digest.org
wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Quit picking on Aaron. He means well. I
> really feel alarmed for your son and his buddies on that cruise ship.
> Any day now, I expect Dubya's mental illness to deteriorate, and his
> Delusions of Grandeur to get to the point that we all turn into FOD. 
> All except Dubya and his buddies of course; they've all had their small-
> pox vaccinations. PAT]   

War now, on America's timetable, or war later, on Saddam's -- once
he's got nukes.  Take your choice.  Unless you like the idea of a
nuclear September 11th, the smart money votes "war now".


Joey Lindstrom
Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If those were the only two choices, I
suppose I would agree. But I am not convinced things are that cut and
dry. All Mr. Hussein is asking for is to be left alone. I mean, he has
supplied a twelve thousand page document saying they have no nuclear
devices, which is more than Yemen or North Korea can say. How many
different ways are there for him to say he does not have nuclear
weapons?  What difference does it make in practical terms if a nuclear
war starts as a result of Mr. Hussein, or the Yemen people or the
North Korea people? Thirty years ago we were absolutely convinced that
Moscow and Nikita Krucshev were the enemy. 

A couple weeks ago when the USA intercepted those scud missiles
traveling from North Korea to Yemen and the USA 'reluctantly' allowed
the shipment to continue, Mr. Hussein spoke to Fox News, PBS and the
Christian Science Monitor and asked, 'why is it that North Korea and
Yemen can have scud missles, but Dubya says I cannot have them? I have
written twelve thousand pages attempting to 'prove' what does not
exist.' And thus far, the supposedly impartial inspectors from the
United Nations (where the USA refuses to pay its dues unless/until it
gets its way) have been unable to find any signs of weapons like that
either. And they have looked everywhere, but are afraid to quit looking
because Dubya will go spastic if they do. 

Dubya, in his rationalization of his illness, insists they must be
there 'someplace' and that by God they will be found, and confiscated. 
'Confiscated' as in what happens to guns taken by police from gang 
members in Chicago, El Lay and Washington, DC. Corrupt police officers
(and which ones are not?) put the guns back on the street in the hands
of other gang members. No Joey, its not an either/or situation like
you describe. At least, I think not. 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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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

LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson.
Copyright 2002 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 V22 #207
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Dec 26 01:54:49 2002
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id gBQ6snh04441;
	Thu, 26 Dec 2002 01:54:49 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 01:54:49 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200212260654.gBQ6snh04441@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #208

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 26 Dec 2002 01:55:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 208

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Microsoft Plans to Appeal Java Ruling (Monty Solomon)
    Penn's Specialist on Privacy Sees Her Niche Broadening (Monty Solomon)
    White House Scrambles to Defuse Privacy Concerns (Monty Solomon)
    Blogs Make the Headlines (Monty Solomon)
    ISP Chief: Spam Is 'A Thousand Times More Horrible Than ...' (M Solomon)
    U.S. Retailers Face Worst Holiday Sales in 30 Years (Monty Solomon)
    Country Road, Take Me to the Internet Superhighway (Monty Solomon)
    Verizon Blames Layoffs in Western New York on Loss of Business (J Stahl)
    Re: Critics Weigh In on Copyright Act (JDS)
    Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country? (Dave Phelps)
    Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even (Grog@lnubb.pbz)
    Re: www.dmcablows.com (Peter Dubuque)
    Importing .wav Files Into Bitware (*selah*)
    Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist (Walter Dnes)
    Re: www.dubya.com (Ed Ellers)
    My New Spy Cam Software and Web Page (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Happy Holidays (Bob)

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, 24 Dec 2002 11:26:13 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Microsoft Plans to Appeal Java Ruling


  
Sun Microsystems Inc. won a victory against the digital age
equivalent of Goliath when a judge ordered Microsoft Corp. to
clude updated Java programing language in its Windows
operating system.

Sun had argued during a three-day hearing earlier this month
that Microsoft has gained an unfair advantage by shipping
Windows _ used by more than 90 percent of the world's personal
computers _ with an outdated version of Java that's
inconsistent for its users.

U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz granted Sun a
temporary injunction Monday and said he would order Microsoft
to stop shipping the old version.

Microsoft said it will consider appealing the ruling. A
spokesman added that it was "premature" to comment on when the
latest version of Java will be included in Windows.

In asking for the injunction, Sun said that if it waited
until its $1 billion antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft was
settled, it would be too far behind to compete.

 http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30669301

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:41:52 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Penn's Specialist on Privacy Sees Her Niche Broadening


By Shari Rudavsky, Globe Correspondent, 12/22/2002

When Lauren Steinfeld attended the University of Pennsylvania, she, 
like most other college students, didn't blink when her Social 
Security number became her student ID. Now the 1989 Penn alumna 
spends her days thinking about privacy issues at the Philadelphia 
school. In January, Steinfeld, who has a law degree from New York 
University, became Penn's chief privacy officer. Although some 
schools have appointed officials to oversee compliance with new 
federal health privacy laws, Penn officials said they know of no 
other university with a post that has such a broad scope. Steinfeld 
recently spoke to the Globe about her job and its impact on higher 
education.

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/356/learning/Penn_s_specialist_on_privacy_sees_her_niche_broadening+.shtml

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:30:32 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: White House Scrambles to Defuse Privacy Concerns


By Roy Mark

The White House scrambled over the weekend to alleviate privacy
violation fears raised by its proposal to build a monitoring system as
an "early warning center" to track Internet use in the U.S. The
proposal is part of the final version of "The National Strategy to
Secure Cyberspace," expected to be released in early 2003.

According to reports last week, the Bush Administration would require
Internet service providers (ISPs) to build the system and to track
their users. Few details were released by the White House. The
proposal immediately raised concerns from privacy advocates who said
the idea may cross a line regarding current corporate and personal
privacy laws.

http://dc.internet.com/news/article.php/1560701

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:35:21 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Blogs Make the Headlines


By Noah Shachtman

It's safe to assume that, before he flushed his reputation down the 
toilet, Trent Lott had absolutely no idea what a blog was.

He may have a clue now. Internet opinion pages like Instapundit, run
by University of Tennessee law professor Glenn Reynolds, and Talking
Points Memo, from leftie political columnist Josh Marshall -- were
among the first to latch on to ABCNews.com's brief item on Lott's
racist comments during Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday bash.

And they kept focusing on Lott's hateful past -- until the national 
press corps finally had to take notice.

http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,56978,00.html

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:48:54 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: ISP Chief: Spam Is 'A Thousand Times More Horrible Than You Can


ISP Chief: Spam Is 'A Thousand Times More Horrible Than You Can Imagine'

By Mitch Wagner, InternetWeek

Go on. Ask Barry Shein about spam. But be prepared for an
earful. Shein is president of The World, a small, 10,000-user Internet
service provider in Boston. Founded in 1989, The World was a
pioneering commercial Internet service. It has survived competition
from the telecoms and weathered the dot-com meltdown, but Shein is
worried that it won't survive spam.

http://www.internetwk.com/story/INW20021219S0003

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 21:59:32 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: U.S. Retailers Face Worst Holiday Sales in 30 Years


    By Emily Kaiser

    CHICAGO, Dec 24 (Reuters) - U.S. retailers, reeling from a
lackluster holiday season that is forecast to be the weakest in
more than 30 years, may ring in the new year with steep
markdowns on clothing, accessories -- and profit forecasts.

    Analysts cut earnings estimates for retailers ranging from
sector leader Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (NYSE:WMT) to upscale jeweler
Tiffany & Co. Inc. (NYSE:TIF) on Tuesday, a day after major chain
stores reported another week of tepid sales in what was supposed
to be the biggest shopping period of the year.

    In a weekly report on Tuesday, the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi
and UBS Warburg forecast holiday sales in November and December
would be up an anemic 1.5 percent over last year, the smallest
gain since the banks began tracking weekly sales in 1970.

    That's a far cry from the 4 percent rise forecast by the
National Retail Federation, although the trade group still
believes its target is reachable. The NRF looks at total holiday
sales when calculating its forecast, while others including
BTM/UBSW focus on sales only at large chains.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30673839

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

Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 23:47:37 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Country Road, Take Me to the Internet Superhighway, and Fast


High speed access reaches rural Wash. via cable connections

By Eli Sanders, Globe Correspondent, 12/25/2002

EPHRATA, Wash. - On the lightly trafficked main street in this small,
rural town, one store is advertising something local residents had
never seen before: ''Internet Connections at the Speed of Light.''

The connections arrived due to an innovative program reminiscent of
the public power projects that brought electricity to much of the
West. With a nudge from federal, state, and local agencies, high speed
Internet service providers are reaching rural areas via extra space on
fiber-optic cables owned by public power providers. Bob Lahmann, a
transmission account executive at the Bonneville Power Administration,
said that bringing broadband to the hinterlands seemed like a natural
for the federally chartered agency.

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/359/nation/Country_road_take_me_to_the_Internet_superhighway_and_fast+.shtml

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:29:16 -0500
From: John Stahl <aljon@stny.rr.com>
Subject: Verizon Blames Layoffs in Western New York on Loss of Business


Dec. 20 -- Oil embargoes, wars, stagflation -- workers for New York's
local telephone company weathered all kinds of economic storms without
a layoff.  Until Thursday morning, when decades of job security ended.
About 180 workers throughout Western New York received pink-slips from
Verizon, most of them repair and maintenance staff.  The layoffs, part
of a 2,400 cutback statewide, were the first for blue-collar phone
workers since World War II, perhaps even before that, company and
union officials said.  

"This is the first (layoff) since we were NYNEX, Bell Atlantic and New
York Telephone," said Mary Jo Arcuri, business manager of
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 2213.  The rare
action underscores the changes sweeping the telephone industry.  Under
the 1996 Telecommunications Act, competitors are beginning to offer an
alternative to the century-old Bell monopoly.

http://telecomcareers.net/SMF/doc_hitechemploy.html?SMContentIndex=4&SMContentSet=0

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

Subject: Re: Critics Weigh In on Copyright Act
From: JDS <t111@syntelsoft.com>
Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 20:17:52 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ...

> ... Maybe the copyright people would settle
> for some arrangement where files could be copied a certain number of
> times on other devices (although played indefinitly on any one device)
> before shutting down the copying mechanism ...

Technological solutions to sociological problems never work.  For one
thing, there's always the "analog hole" which allows complete
circumvention of any copyright scheme.  And people will always find
ways to really beat the copy protection scheme -- especially when
digital media are involved, allowing software analysis and
manipulation.

But there is the larger question of what you're buying when you buy a
published work such as a musical recording or book.  By historical
practice and common agreement, you generally are purchasing a
transferrable perpetual license for the personal enjoyment of that
work.

For example, most people -- and the courts -- agree that if I bought
an LP back in 1971, I have the right to copy that to MP3 so that I can
listen to it today on my computer, and to an iPod, or a CD for my car
CD player.  I can copy it to my MP3 player on Thursdays and my iPod on
Wednesdays ... Hardware copy-protection schemes won't allow that.

I don't have or claim the right to publish it on the Internet or give
it away (unless its copyright has expired and it's moved into the
public domain -- alas nowawadays copyright protection is almost
perpetual).

But by way of preventing theft, the RIAA is going to make their
digital publications worth far less.  By analogy, most people will pay
$20 for a hardcover book that they read once and leave on the shelf
forever; how much would they pay if that book self-destructed after
that first reading, or if it worked only on that ancient computer that
you discarded many years ago?  We shall see how much people will be
willing to pay for highly restricted media licenses.

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

From: Dave Phelps <tippenring@deadspam.com>
Subject: Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country?
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:34:48 -0600


In article <telecom22.207.6@telecom-digest.org>, 
jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us says:

> It's time for LECs to similarly block their customers with PBXes from
> transmitting phony Caller ID information.  And for us to start a
> blacklist of LECs that won't.

That's an interesting idea, but if they are sending incorrect CLID info, 
what information do you blacklist? Even if you asked them who they were, 
and managed to get a real TN for them, how would you block it?


Dave Phelps
Phone Masters Ltd.
deadspam=tippenring

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  That sort of happens now when
individual customers of telco are allowed to block calls based
on the 'last call received'. I guess the only way it would work would
be if someone got blacklisted, no other telcos would agree to accept
any incoming calls from the blacklisted number. It would be hard to
keep it all straight however.   PAT]

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

From: Grog - nf3561@lnubb.pbz <uce@ftc.gov>
Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 17:09:25 GMT
Organization: Road Runner - NC


On Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:25:17 -0000, sjsobol@JustThe.net (Steven J.
Sobol) wrote:

>> what about Money Magazine??
>> Money Magazine stated: "Excel Communications is as good an example
>> of entrepreneurship the world will ever see."

> Excel Communications is an MLM, and I don't trust MLMs.

I'll second that MLM gimmick.  Danger! Danger Will Robinson!


Grog

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

From: Peter Dubuque <peterd@panix.com>
Subject: Re: www.dmcablows.com
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 16:23:22 UTC
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What would be wrong with the media
> company (let's call them 'publishers') supplying TWO copies of the
> media; the 'original' and the 'backup' copy. Do as you please ONE TIME
> with the backup copy. I bought some computer software once from a 
> company which did that; they gave you your copy to use, and a backup
> copy at the same time. Another possibility is the publisher would
> include a serial number with your purchase, and that serial number
> entitled you to call their office for one, two or even three
> additional copies. When you placed your order you could ask for one,
> two or three copies (in which case the serial number would so indicate
> that the order had been completely filled.) If I understand this
> matter correctly, most guys are not interested in cheating and making
> an infinite number of copies to use on the net, all their friends,
> etc, they are mainly interested in being sure they themselves can use
> the media as intended. Wouldn't including (or allowing for the
> shipping of) two or three extra copies of the media still turn out 
> less expensive for the publishers than the wholesale cheating which
> is going on now?   PAT]

The fundamental problem here, and one that's going to require far more
deep thought than just "give people an extra copy", is that media
companies' business model relies on scarcity.  Companies exclusively
market works by particular artists, sell higher-priced "limited
edition" works with often negligible added value, sell releases for a
limited time, etc., and control pricing by means of this scarcity.
And ultimately, works become unavailable when they stop being
profitable.

Today, however, with the easy ability for anyone to copy a recording
with a computer and distribute it without limit, there *is* no
scarcity.  "Limited edition" works are non-existent.  Packaging is
non-existent.  Costs for reproduction and distribution are
non-existent.  Costs for archiving old works are negligible, so things
need never go "out of print".  There's no reason for customers to ever
have to tolerate being told that "that item is no longer available,"
or to find it reasonable to pay high prices to subsidize an
unnecessary manufacturing, warehousing, distribution, and retail
network.

How can media companies survive in this new economic reality?  I don't
have all the answers, but I'm sure it boils down to the same rule that
has always led to successful businesses..."give your customers what
they want at a fair price."  That's not what the entertainment
industry is doing now.  Instead, their attitude is "your customers
will rob you blind if you let them, so treat them like criminals and
try to control everything they do with your product even after you've
got their money."

Why not take your entire back catalog of stuff you're not selling
anymore, put it online, and allow people to download entire albums for
a buck, with no restrictions on what they may do with them?  Price it
so that it's enough to cover your costs and make some profit (which
shouldn't be hard, since you're not making any money off it now), but
cheap enough that people aren't tempted to pirate the content.  Then
take the billions you're saving in research costs trying to implement
digital restrictions on your content, and use it to foster better
relationships with your customers?


Peter F. Dubuque - peterd@panix.com - Enemy of Reason(TM)     O-

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

From: soma@noedorsai.org (*selah*)
Subject: importing .wav files into bitware
Date: 25 Dec 2002 21:52:05 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


I'm having problems importing .wav files into bitware - they come out
sounding like they're playing on slow speed.

Would appreciate any help with this.

Thanks.

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

From: Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
Subject: Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist
Date: 26 Dec 2002 02:46:37 GMT
Reply-To: waltdnes@waltdnes.org


On Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:54:41 -0500, Monty Solomon, <monty@roscom.com> wrote:

>  But a relatively new feature may make it harder for people to
>  avoid these windows. Using a technique called the "kick through,"
>  advertisers can direct a person to another Web site if they simply
>  move their cursor across the pop-up ad -- no clicking is necessary.

Let me guess ... Javascript and yet another reason to turn it off.
Here's my checklist for installing a web browser (or using a
pre-installed browser the first time) ...

   1) *PHYSICALLY* disconnect your machine from the internet.  I.e. on
      a LAN or ADSL or cable unplug the ethernet, and on a dialup unplug
      the modem line.
   2) Start up the browser.
   3) Set startup page to "blank".
   4) Turn off cookies.
   5) Turn off Java.
   6) Turn off Javascript ("Scripting" in MS IE.  Note that MS IE has
      several entries for different kinds of scripting.  Turn off each
      and every one).
   7) Find and rename the plugin (or ActiveX) file for F***wave/Slash,
      a.k.a Shockwave/Flash.
   8) Turn off "Install" option (yes, browsers do have the ability to
      install new software on your machine ... bleagh ... I'm sure that
      some skiddie will find a security exploit in that).
   9) In MS IE, disable all ActiveX controls.
  10) Close the browser, and open it again to make sure the settings
      have taken effect.
  11) Once the browser is locked down, you can re-connect your machine
      to the net.


Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
I'm not repeating myself; I'm an X Window user, I'm an ex-Windows user
Palladium ain't done till linux won't run


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you realize how many web sites there
are -- nice, good, seemingly innocuous sites which refuse to let you
in if you do the things Walter suggests above? Yahoo is one example:
*if* your cookies are mangled or missing or your browser begins
playing games with them then they refuse to let you in at all. A few
sites at least are courteous enough to say something like 'your
browser is refusing to login' so you can take the hint and turn on
what they require if you *really* want to see the site. But many of
them -- including the bank I use, refuse to say what is wrong, you
just get the login screen back; your first inclination is that maybe
you entered your password wrong. Even Yahoo waits until after you have
tried three times to login to come back with the message 'your browser
is refusing to accept our cookies' as their reasoning. After awhile
you get tired of seeing those things and just start leaving everything
wide open and using a laundry program each time you login/logout as
I do. Even chicagotribune.com is always complaining my cookies are
messed up, and it requires me to log out completely, then log back in
so they can rebuild them.   PAT]

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

From: Ed Ellers <ed_ellers@msn.com>
Subject: Re: www.dubya.com
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 04:47:25 -0500


PAT, the TELECOM Digest Editor, noted:

> Any day now, I expect (President Bush)'s mental illness to deteriorate, and
> his Delusions of Grandeur to get to the point that we all turn into FOD."

This is really uncalled for.  But wait, it gets worse ...

> All Mr. Hussein is asking for is to be left alone.

The people of Kuwait would respectfully disagree.  So likely would a
number of the people of Iraq, some of whom were victims of attacks
with chemical weapons by Saddam's regime.

> I mean, he has supplied a twelve thousand page document saying they
> have no nuclear devices, which is more than Yemen or North Korea can
> say. How many different ways are there for him to say he does not
> have nuclear weapons?

Do you actually believe his claims, given his past record?

> What difference does it make in practical terms if a nuclear war
> starts as a result of Mr. Hussein, or the Yemen people or the North
> Korea people?

The difference is how each would be likely to use nuclear weapons;
based on Saddam's record, it seems likely that he would use them to
destroy Israel and make himself emperor of the Middle East.

> Thirty years ago we were absolutely convinced that Moscow and Nikita
> Krucshev were the enemy.

Back then, the Soviets behaved like an enemy.  See the Cuban missile
crisis as an example.

> A couple weeks ago when the USA intercepted those scud missiles traveling
> from North Korea to Yemen and the USA 'reluctantly' allowed the shipment to
> continue, Mr. Hussein spoke to Fox News, PBS and the Christian Science
> Monitor and asked, 'why is it that North Korea and Yemen can have scud
> missles, but Dubya says I cannot have them?

Because Iraq invaded Kuwait.  And it's not just the U.S. saying that,
but the UN.

> And thus far, the supposedly impartial inspectors from the United
> Nations (where the USA refuses to pay its dues unless/until it gets
> its way) have been unable to find any signs of weapons like that
> either. And they have looked everywhere, but are afraid to quit
> looking because (Bush) will go spastic if they do.

Spastic?  I have a very hard time that President Bush would exhibit
such behavior, or that *any President in reasonably recent history*
would have done so.  If he had such tendencies, they would undoubtedly
be revealed by someone, somewhere, who had an ax to grind.

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

Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 23:33:04 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: My New Spy Cam Software and Web Page


In view of all the folks who are getting into web cams these days, I
decided to try it for myself. I've seen web site advertisements for
porno web pages where there were 'secret' cams hidden away in shower
rooms, dormitory rooms, etc. I thought that would be fun, so I have
installed a web cam in my computer room, and all of you get to try it
out ... 'to check out my cam' as the guys say on Yahooo Messenger.

If you would like to look at this cam during its beta testing stage
before I put it in full time service on http://weatherforecast.n3.net
you may do so by looking at the temporary page I have established for
testing purposes only: http://patrick-townson.n3.net

I can't tell you what you are likely to see from one minute to the
next.  I have a little script which constantly pushes via FTP the
pictures to the server; you then get the pics at the above address. I
use a javascript to refresh the pictures every few seconds, just like
they do on those secret cams hidden away in dormitory rooms, and men's
locker rooms, etc.

It seems to work best if you use Internet Explorer with Javascript
enabled, but other browsers work okay, like Netscape and Opera, but if
they do not update the picture every few seconds then you need to
refresh the picture manually. Since it changes every few seconds, a
digital clock on the screen identifies each picture as it is posted.
I would appreciate feedback from those guys  who watch what I do here
in my house all day and night. I'll leave that page up a couple days
or so; it really is eating up the CPUs. http://patrick-townson.n3.net


PAT

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

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:27:07 GMT
From: Robert S Ely (Bob) <rsely74@optonline.net>
Subject: Happy Holidays
Organization: Optimum Online


All,

Just wishing all netizens Happy Holidays and a happy, prosperous New
Year.

Robert S. Ely  (Bob)
rsely74@optonline.net
New Lisbon Developmental Center
Communications Systems Technician-3
robert.ely@dhs.state.nj.us
Work Phone:      1-609-894-4057
Work FAX:        1-609-726-0357
ICQ:             33390750
Yahoo Messenger: rsely74


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And the same to you, Bob, and the rest
of the readers around here.  Here in Independence, to say we got a
white Christmas would be an understatement. How's twelve inches of
blowing, drifting snow sound to you? It began snowing around 10 AM on
Monday morning as had been predicted, and continued all day and into
the night. I was very smart, and following my Salvation Army duties
on Monday went into Marvin's and stocked up on groceries. After almost 
24 hours, it stopped snowing early Tuesday (Christmas Eve) morning. 
Marvins was absolutely swamped with shoppers Monday night and early
Tuesday; so was Walmart. Sometime mid-morning Tuesday the snow plows
started cleaning the main streets which are pretty well cleared by
now (late Wednesday) and I am told they are starting on the smaller
residential streets now. About an hour ago (11 PM Wednesday night) the
snow plow went past my house. By the weekend I suspect the streets
will be passable once again. Until then, I think I will stay here in
my house next to the fireplace with a glass of bourbon and water.
Anyway, happy holidays to one and all. 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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson.
Copyright 2002 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 V22 #208
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Dec 27 16:29:45 2002
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id gBRLTjA17286;
	Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:29:45 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:29:45 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200212272129.gBRLTjA17286@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #209

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:29:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 209

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Call Blocking Box For Numbers From a Given Country? (Richard D G Cox)
    Re: Call Blocking Box For Numbers From a Given Country? (John R. Levine)
    Re: Call Blocking Box For Numbers From a Given Country? (Alex Kasper)
    Phone Calls on the Cable Bill (Monty Solomon)
    Now Your Cellphone Can Remember Mom's Birthday (Monty Solomon)
    Cellphone Suits Targeting Firms Companies Whose Workers (Monty Solomon)
    Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even (John R. Levine)
    Cell Phone Donation Options (David L)
    Re: Critics Weigh In on Copyright Act (Hudson Leighton)
    Re: Critics Weigh In on Copyright Act (Ed Ellers)
    Re: www.dmcablows.com (73115.1041@compuserve.com)
    Announcement: No Archives Service This Weekend (Patrick Townson)

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: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 14:11:33 GMT
From: Richard D G Cox <Richard@example.com>
Subject: Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country?
Reply-To: nospam@numbering.com
Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited


At 21:34 UT on Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Dave Phelps made the valid point:

>> It's time for LECs to similarly block their customers with PBXes
>> from transmitting phony Caller ID information.  And for us to start
>> a blacklist of LECs that won't.

> That's an interesting idea, but if they are sending incorrect CLID info, 
> what information do you blacklist?  Even if you asked them who they were,
> and managed to get a real TN for them, how would you block it?

A customer-end switch which is connected by an ISDN protocol, such as
Q931 or your local flavour or variant, can reject a call on presentation.
Mine is set to do that to certain types of telemarketer (no, I will not
go into more details than that!) - however a POTS (analog) connected
customer is SOL here.

A network switch -- i.e. within a Telco's curtilege -- should be
capable of rejecting calls where the presented Caller-ID is within a
specified set of ranges.  In many cases it would do that using CCITT
Signalling System 7.  Actually implementing this is completely
impractical; many calls travel around networks with invalid caller-ID:
which the person receiving the call never sees as it's marked
"unavailable" or similar.  A string of all zeroes is quite common,
particularly on international calls, as the various discount providers
do not want any receiving or tandem telcos in the path to know how the
call was routed -- in case THEY were to decide to block that traffic
for "commercial" reasons.

The only way these calls can be blocked is by the *originating* Telco
who would need to ensure any customer-sent Caller-ID was included in
the "Call-Detail-Record" (CDR) that switches produce, and matching the
details offline against the originating *port*: this would allow them
to disconnect customers that continued to send forged Caller-ID after
they had been given suitable warning.  (Online-checking in the switch
is impractical, due mainly to the high cost of the software upgrades
that woud be needed for the switch to do that).

Now we can, of course, all visualise local telcos doing this?  Turning
OFF what are likely to be their most profitable customers?  That's as
likely as Worldcom/UUNet taking any action against their spammers ...
nobody in Telco-land is going to voluntarily throw away a customer,
particularly given the financial state of the telco industry today!

Nor -- in most cases -- will it be possible for transit and
terminating Telcos to drop calls from the rogue telcos: they cannot
use Caller-ID to block calls precisely because it is forged, and
therefore cannot be trusted ... and they cannot disconnect individual
pipes because they have interconnect contracts which specify they must
"Connect and Keep Connected" the links betwen them -- so cutting off a
rogue network is likely to lead to litigation ... there typically
being nothing in the average interconnect contract which requires
Telco to validate any Caller-ID information provided and sent forward.

Yet this same forged Caller-ID will likely ALSO be that delivered up
when the Department of Homeland Security comes asking questions about
the origin of particular calls made to their terrorist suspects: and
when that information is needed urgently to prevent another terrorist
attack (say, from Iraqi or Al-Qaeda sympathisers) will NOT the best
time to find out that Telcos have been turning a blind eye to forged
Caller-ID!

[TELECOM Digest Editor Noted:

>  ... I guess the only way it would work would be if someone got
> blacklisted, no other telcos would agree to accept any incoming
> calls from the blacklisted number.

But they would then be blacklisting a forged number -- most likely
the valid number of a different customer -- and Caller-ID forgers
could easily use a "tumbler" system to send a DIFFERENT Caller-ID
on every call.  That's what the spammers do with their spam, and
we all know we can't block spam by the sender's name, don't we?

> It would be hard to keep it all straight however.   PAT]

Too right it would!


Richard D G Cox
Penarth, UK

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

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country?
Date: 26 Dec 2002 21:47:15 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


>> It's time for LECs to similarly block their customers with PBXes from
>> transmitting phony Caller ID information.  And for us to start a
>> blacklist of LECs that won't.

> That's an interesting idea, but if they are sending incorrect CLID info, 
> what information do you blacklist?

It is my impression that CO phone switches can be programmed to know
the valid CLID number range for a PBX, and to substitute in the main
number if a call from the PBX has no CLID or CLID outside that range.
Too bad telcos are almost all too lazy to do so.


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: alex@nexspace.com (Alex Kasper)
Subject: Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country?
Date: 27 Dec 2002 02:29:54 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  That sort of happens now when
> individual customers of telco are allowed to block calls based
> on the 'last call received'. I guess the only way it would work would
> be if someone got blacklisted, no other telcos would agree to accept
> any incoming calls from the blacklisted number. It would be hard to
> keep it all straight however.   PAT]

This is actually an option in the Nortel C.O. Switches, you can
restrict a PRI Customer to sending only the numbers they control -- a
DID block for example.

However, considering the skill of some of the staff I have encountered
of late at our new mega telcos (i.e. Verizon) where I have had to
describe -- this to a network "engineer":

a) How PRI DID trunks CAN make outgoing calls.
b) The concept of SS7

 ... not to mention the hell I've gone through trying to fix some
incorrect CNAM (Caller ID Name) listings in a block of 500 DIDs ... I
said not to mention.

I doubt it will ever happen in our lifetime.

But maybe ... hey, if I set up a 900 calling card type service where a
caller could enter the number they're calling to AND FROM, would I be
breaking any laws? How long before I got shut down by the FCC or
killed by my provider?

 ... of course this would be for amusement purposes only.

Might be a fun project, just to prove a point. Might even make some
cash before I was arrested -- enough to pay my lawyers.


Alex Kasper

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

Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 00:00:50 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Phone Calls on the Cable Bill


By WILL WADE

ALL Peter Odabashian wanted was a second phone line. But when the
phone company said it needed to run new wiring into his apartment,
which would cost nearly $300 and require waiting several weeks, he
found an alternative: the cable company.

Mr. Odabashian turned to the RCN Corporation, a cable company that 
offers telephone service as well as "The West Wing" and "The 
Sopranos." "RCN said it would install the line for free and throw in 
a month of service," said Mr. Odabashian, a film editor in New York 
who previously had cable service from Time Warner. "I signed up for 
the full works. Now I have two phone lines, TV and a cable modem from 
them."

Mr. Odabashian is one of a growing number of consumers who receive 
telephone service from a cable company instead of a telephone 
carrier. Faced with the increasing success of satellite television, 
cable companies are moving to retain customers by offering services 
that satellite companies cannot match. Phone traffic is part of that 
strategy.

Cable companies have spent millions in recent years to upgrade 
equipment to carry digital television and two-way Internet traffic. 
Adding a third information stream, voice, is not difficult. Not only 
does this reduce defections to satellite services, it also generates 
a new source of income. The cable industry's long-term goal is to 
deliver digital television, high-speed Internet access through cable 
modems, and telephone service; insiders call it the triple play.


http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/26/technology/circuits/26nucabl.html

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To read articles from NYT, readers here
are invited to use the the group login name 'telecomdigest' and the
password 'telecomdigest' to avoid using a personal name/password in
this privacy-insecure world. Also, this same article was submitted by
<joeofseattle@yahoo.com> and I want to thank him for it as well.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 00:17:15 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Now Your Cellphone Can Remember Mom's Birthday


By JOE HUTSKO

HAVING all your contacts and appointments at hand is one of the most
convenient things about owning a hand-held organizer, and
synchronizing makes it easy to keep both the hand-held and your big
computer up to date. Press a button, and everything on the big
computer transfers to the pocket-size one. Add or change things on the
hand-held, and the next sync transmits the changes back to the mother
ship.

Millions of cellphone owners, on the other hand, tend to punch those
same names and numbers by hand into the phone rather than transferring
existing entries from a personal information manager like Microsoft
Outlook or Entourage on desktop or notebook computers.  As numbers are
updated on one side or the other, conflicts inevitably ensue: is my
friend's new home number the one on my computer, or the one on my
phone?

Thanks to new cellphones and to software from phone manufacturers and
others, saying goodbye to all that thumb-busting key-punching is
relatively easy. Make the connection, and the phone and computer can
exist in complete harmony. What's more, the latest cellphone
synchronization tools can also import other information like tasks and
Lotus Notes data, making it possible to leave the hand-held home and
make do with the phone, albeit with compromises.

The first consideration is how to connect your phone and computer. A
special U.S.B. cable made for your phone model is often the easiest
solution. If no cable is available at the cellphone store, check the
provider's or phone manufacturer's Web store. Such cables generally
cost $50 or less. If there is no specific cable for your phone model,
a third-party solution -- often paired with software -- may be the
answer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/26/technology/circuits/26basi.html

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To read articles from NYT, a user name
is 'telecomdigest' and the password is 'telecomdigest'.    PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 22:57:37 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Cellphone Suits Targeting Firms Companies Whose Workers Cause


Page 3A

Cellphone suits targeting firms Companies whose workers cause 
accidents face liability

By Laura Parker
USA TODAY

McLEAN, Va. -- As a 29-year-old technology lawyer on the rise, Jane 
Wagner drove a silver Mercedes and billed clients for the time she 
talked to them from her car. She routinely made as many as 40 
cellphone calls a day.

On March 8, 2000, during a call she made at 10:36 p.m., she hit and 
killed a 15-year-old girl, Naeun Yoon, on a busy highway in Fairfax 
County, Va., just outside Washington.

Now Yoon's parents have filed a civil suit against Wagner, who served 
a one-year jail term on work release after pleading guilty to leaving 
the scene of an accident. But in seeking $30 million in damages, 
Yoon's father, Young Ki Yoon, also is suing Wagner's former employer, 
the law firm Cooley Godward, based in San Francisco.

At the heart of the claim against the law firm are the cellphone 
calls that Wagner made when she was working. The suit alleges that 
the firm is partly liable for the accident because Wagner's job 
involved doing business -- in lawyers' parlance, amassing 'billable 
hours' -- by cellphone. Such calls, the suit says, were done 'with 
the expectation and acquiescence of Cooley Godward and served as a 
direct benefit to ... the law firm.'

The case, scheduled for trial in September, is part of a growing 
number of lawsuits against businesses whose employees are involved in 
car accidents while talking on cellphones. The Wagner and Cooley 
Godward trial could have costly implications for businesses across 
the nation whose productivity is tied to the hours their employees 
spend on mobile phones, which have expanded the boundaries of the 
modern office.

http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20021226/4730754s.htm

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

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: SBC Ameritech Hosed Me and Now I Get Even
Date: 26 Dec 2002 23:27:08 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


>> what about Money Magazine??  Money Magazine stated: "Excel
>> Communications is as good an example of entrepreneurship the world
>> will ever see."

It's true.  Excel took the miserable highly competitive low-margin
commodity long distance business and by adding the magic pixie dust of
MLM, persuaded hordes of math-challenged suckers, whoops, I mean
highly motivated grass-roots businessfolk that it's the opportunity of
a lifetime.


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: davidlind@my-deja.com (David L)
Subject: Cell Phone Donation Options
Date: 25 Dec 2002 21:52:11 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Ever wonder what happens to donated cellular handsets and which groups
benefit? This editorial sheds some light on handset recycling/donation.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/12/09/BU140937.DTL

NEW HOMES FOR OLD PHONES 

-- CollectiveGood 
http://www.collectivegood.com 

Independent program pays nonprofits for each mobile phone collected,
recycles unusable gear, sells working phones to Latin American
carriers. Donors can choose among 150 nonprofits, many of which cover
cost of shipping. .

-- Donate a Phone 
http://www.donateaphone.com 

Family of programs -- some for individual donors, others for
organizations and carriers -- managed by the CTIA Wireless Foundation,
an arm of the cellular industry's trade association. Call to Protect
program donates limited- function phones to victims of domestic
violence. .

-- Sprint Project Connect 
http://www.sprintpcs.com/projectconnect 

Program run by Wireless Foundation collects phones at Sprint PCS
stores, recycles some and sells others, donates 35 percent of resale
value to Easter Seals and the National Organization on Disability. .

-- Verizon Wireless HopeLine 
http://www.verizonwireless.com/hopeline 

Company-run mail-in collection program recycles or sells phones, uses
proceeds to purchase phones and donate airtime to victims of domestic
violence through human-services and law-enforcement agencies.

-- RadioShack Donate a Phone 
http://www.radioshackcorporation.com/cr/support.shtml 

Program run by Wireless Foundation will collect phones at RadioShack
stores through Dec. 31, and donate proceeds to an organization for
college students called Students in Free Enterprise.


David
DavNOlindiSPAMathotmaildotcom

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

From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton)
Subject: Re: Critics Weigh In on Copyright Act
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 08:02:41 -0600
Organization: MRRP


In article <telecom22.208.9@telecom-digest.org>, JDS
<t111@syntelsoft.com> wrote:

> But by way of preventing theft, the RIAA is going to make their
> digital publications worth far less.  By analogy, most people will pay
> $20 for a hardcover book that they read once and leave on the shelf
> forever; how much would they pay if that book self-destructed after
> that first reading, or if it worked only on that ancient computer that
> you discarded many years ago?  We shall see how much people will be
> willing to pay for highly restricted media licenses.

Check out: 

http://www.baen.com/library/

They are a Science Fiction publisher who has started putting their
older titles online for free, as HTML, RTF, and others.  No copy
protection, no nothing.

And guess what?, their older title book sales started increasing!

I bought a book of theirs, and it had a CDRom in the back with that
book and about 20 more on it.  Since I was going into the Hospital for
a week this was a godsend!


-Hudson
http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl

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

From: Ed Ellers <ed_ellers@msn.com>
Subject: Re: Critics Weigh In on Copyright Act
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 20:35:25 -0500


JDS <t111@syntelsoft.com> wrote:

> Technological solutions to sociological problems never work.  For
> one thing, there's always the "analog hole" which allows complete
> circumvention of any copyright scheme.

At the cost of some degradation of the signal.  That's why people are
getting so worked up over attempts to prevent digital copying.  (IMHO
the jury is still out over whether an analog dub from a CD really is
inferior to a digital "rip" of the same track, after both have been
encoded in MP3 at the usual 128 kbps.)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Tell the Jury that the slightly
inferior signal is actually pretty good considering what you paid
for it. There really is no difference. An audiophile which very fancy
equipment could tell the difference; almost no one else. PAT]

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

From: 73115.1041@compuserve.com
Subject: Re: www.dmcablows.com
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 08:39:13 -0700
Organization: CompuServe Interactive Services


Peter Dubuque <peterd@panix.com> wrote:

> How can media companies survive in this new economic reality?  I don't
> have all the answers, but I'm sure it boils down to the same rule that
> has always led to successful businesses..."give your customers what
> they want at a fair price."  That's not what the entertainment
> industry is doing now.  Instead, their attitude is "your customers
> will rob you blind if you let them, so treat them like criminals and
> try to control everything they do with your product even after you've
> got their money.

Agreed. If you really want to understand what the media companies are
doing and why they are so against opening their catalogs to individual
sales, you just need to look at the history of a company called
Personics,

Personics started up in the early 80s and tried to license catalogs
from the major record companies. They built kiosks and put them in
record stores around the country. The kiosks were capable of producing
licensed copies of cassettes on demand.

No inventory costs. The cassettes sold for a premimum compared to
prerecorded cassettes. The retailler made money, the record company
received license fees with no distribution costs. You'd think it was a
sure thing. Wrong.

The record companies would only allow certain songs to be included in
the machine catalog, usually obscure songs by unknown artists. And if
any of thoses songs proved to be too popular, the song was pulled from
the machine.

Why? The record companies thrive on artificial scarcity as Peter
described. But exactly the same logic applies why you can't buy
individual channels from your cable company. The media companies don't
want you to.

Their whole business model is built around selling you one or two
songs (or channels) you want and 18 that you don't want. They know
that most people rationalize the purchase of a CD by saying that it's
only a $1 or $2 per song and they would rather sell you two CDs for
$40, than 2 individual songs for $2.

The idea of individual song sales terrifies them. Personics tried to
sell mail order as well, was bought out by Warner Brothers and
eventually folded.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Did you ever notice how many of the
'Best of X Greatest Hits' albums, tapes and CDs on the market are
maybe eighty percent rehashed from prior recordings but there are
always one or two selections you have never heard before?  To get
those one or two selections, you have to buy the entire thing with
a dozen or more works you already have two or three copies of? It
is a rip off, to be sure.   PAT]

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

From: Patrick Townson <editor@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Heads Up Notice From LCS This Weekend
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 14:00:00 EST


This afternoon I got notice from the sysadmin at LCS that there will
be a planned power outage on the campus of MIT (specifically LCS) all
day on Saturday, December 28 (that's tomorrow!). All computer systems
(and other things) will be down for 10-12 hours beginning prior to or
by 7 AM Saturday morning. Expect electrical power to come back on
'late in the day' or maybe Saturday evening. After power comes back
on, an hour or two later the computer systems will be up and running
again, including massis with our archives. So, FYI, no issues of the
Digest again until *maybe* Sunday afternoon, and no looking at the
TELECOM Archives (or my machine neighbor, the Info-Mac archives if you
wish) until real late Saturday night. In the meantime, if you are 
trying to find something to look at, try http://patrick-townson.n3.net
where you can spy on me if I happen to be sitting in my computer room
here. See ya again Sunday afternoon/evening.     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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #209
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Dec 29 17:05:08 2002
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id gBTM58q10994;
	Sun, 29 Dec 2002 17:05:08 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 17:05:08 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200212292205.gBTM58q10994@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #210

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 29 Dec 2002 17:05:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 210

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    SBC Yahoo! DSL Named Preferred Product; DIRECT-TV DSL Customers (Solomon)
    New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust (Monty Solomon)
    F.C.C. Lets Convicted Hacker Go Back on Net (Monty Solomon)
    Hotel Chains to Offer Wireless Internet (Monty Solomon)
    Long-Distance Bills Headed Up in 2003; New Fees, Rate Hikes (M. Solomon)
    Re: Phone Calls on the Cable Bill (Robert Woolley)
    Re: Phone Calls on the Cable Bill (Ed Ellers)
    Re: Critics Weigh In on Copyright Act (John Higdon)
    What am I Missing Here; Calling Cards (tsingtao55@yahoo.com)
    Re: Hughes to Shut Down High-Speed Internet Service (Michael A Covington)
    Pacific Bell Central Office Names (Emt Pilot)
    Why Won't My Sprint PCS Phone Roam? (Samsung SCH-3500) (Linc Madison)
    Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist (Walter Dnes)
    Question About This Basic SBC Yahoo DSL (John Smith)
    Last Laugh! Pat's Webcam (Greg Boop)
    At the Risk of Spamming my own Newsgroup (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: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 20:49:35 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: SBC Yahoo! DSL Named Preferred Product for DIRECTV DSL Customers


SAN ANTONIO & CUPERTINO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 27, 2002--

      SBC Internet Services and DIRECTV Broadband Sign Alliance
                to Offer Easy and Efficient Transition
              for More Than 70,000 DIRECTV DSL Customers

SBC (NYSE:SBC) Internet Services and DIRECTV Broadband today announced
an agreement by which SBC Yahoo! DSL becomes the preferred product for
more than 70,000 DIRECTV DSL(TM) customers in the SBC 13-state
operating territory. The agreement follows an announcement made by
Hughes Electronics Corporation on Dec. 13, 2002, that DIRECTV
Broadband will discontinue its "DIRECTV DSL" service and transition
existing customers to alternative service providers. DIRECTV Broadband
is a subsidiary of Hughes.

Under terms of the agreement, DIRECTV Broadband will exclusively
recommend to its customers in the SBC operating territory that they
transition to SBC Yahoo! DSL, making SBC Internet Services their
Internet Service Provider.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30695448

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

Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 23:03:39 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust


By MATT RICHTEL

SAN FRANCISCO, Dec. 26 - Tom Langeland cannot hear your car radio.
But he purports to be able to figure out what you're listening to -
whether rock 'n' roll, sports, talk or news - in the privacy of your
speeding automobile.

Pursuing a business plan that has a science fiction bent but also 
some skeptics, Mr. Langeland intends to modify electronic freeway 
billboard advertisements by remote control to reflect your tastes, 
and those of thousands of other drivers.

As part of a $20 million investment, Mr. Langeland, a Sacramento-based
entrepreneur, has erected 10 billboards that can display both video
and text and can be programmed with changing messages and images. In
addition, the billboards include fledgling technology that is designed
to identify the radio frequencies of passers-by.

Mr. Langeland, chief executive of the Alaris Media Network, intends to
deduce demographic information from the radio stations drivers are
listening to and then display advertising aimed at them based on
income, sex, race and buying habit data. He said the idea was not to
single out individuals, but drivers en masse. For instance, if a
preponderance of rush-hour drivers are tuned to a radio station known
to have affluent or educated listeners, then the advertisements at
that time would be aimed at them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/27/business/media/27ADCO.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For reading NYT articles, where regis-
tration (and the resulting spam) is required, Digest readers are 
invited to login with our generic username 'telecomdigest' and the
password 'telecomdigest'. PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 00:59:01 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: F.C.C. Lets Convicted Hacker Go Back on Net


By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON, Dec. 26 (AP) - A hacker once labeled by the federal
government as "the most wanted computer criminal in U.S. history" has
won a long fight to renew his ham radio license, and next month may
resume surfing the Internet.

The hacker, Kevin Mitnick, 39, of Thousand Oaks, Calif., served five 
years in federal prison for stealing software and altering data at 
Motorola, Novell, Nokia, Sun Microsystems and the University of 
Southern California. Prosecutors accused him of causing tens of 
millions of dollars in damage to corporate computer networks.

Mr. Mitnick was freed in January 2000. The terms of his probation, 
which expires on Jan. 20, require that he get government permission 
before using computers, software, modems or any devices that connect 
to the Internet. His travel and employment also are limited.

He has been allowed to use a cellphone and received permission this 
year to type a manuscript on a computer not connected to the Internet.


http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/27/technology/27HACK.html

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See the other message in this issue for
login and password information for NYT.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 14:28:06 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Hotel Chains to Offer Wireless Internet


By Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY

The hotel industry is embarking on a new high-tech venture: bringing 
wireless Internet to lounges and conference rooms.

Marriott said last week that it will install wireless Internet in the
public areas of 400 hotels by next spring. Hilton plans to equip 200
hotels with the service. Starwood, which operates the Westin,
Sheraton, St. Regis and W brands, is studying the issue.

Wayport, a company specializing in bringing high-speed Internet to
travelers, has rigged 475 hotels with wired and so-called Wi-Fi
wireless systems.

One luxury property, The Adolphus in Dallas, expects to have wireless 
access throughout the hotel, including guest rooms, next month.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/biztravel/2002-12-26-wireless_x.htm

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

Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 14:21:21 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Long-Distance Bills Headed Upward in 2003; New Fees, Rate Hikes


Page 1A
By Andrew Backover
USA TODAY

The days of falling long-distance phone bills may be over.

More new fees and rate increases are expected next year on top of a 
bevy of recent increases by No. 2 long-distance carrier MCI and 
others.

That's because phone companies have to raise more revenue to counter 
the effect of long-distance price wars and consumers turning to 
cellphones and e-mail. "I only see continued increases in 
long-distance rates," says Rich Sayers, who runs the Web site 
10-10PhoneRates.com.

For consumers, the higher costs could amount to a few extra bucks a 
month at a time when a sluggish economy has many cutting spending. 
One way to avoid increases is to shop for 'bundles', which give 
discounts for buying multiple services from one company.

Sprint waves a $5.95 monthly fee on one long-distance plan if 
customers also buy its wireless service. WorldCom's MCI sells 'The 
Neighborhood' plan, which offers unlimited long-distance and local 
calls for $50 to $60 a month.

http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20021227/4734465s.htm

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

From: Robert Woolley <rob@home.com.see.below.com>
Subject: Re: Phone Calls on the Cable Bill
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 22:35:55 +0000


On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 00:00:50 -0500, Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
wrote:

> ALL Peter Odabashian wanted was a second phone line. But when the
> phone company said it needed to run new wiring into his apartment,
> which would cost nearly $300 and require waiting several weeks, he
> found an alternative: the cable company.

> Mr. Odabashian turned to the RCN Corporation, a cable company that 
> offers telephone service as well as "The West Wing" and "The 
> Sopranos." "RCN said it would install the line for free and throw in 
> a month of service," said Mr. Odabashian, a film editor in New York 
> who previously had cable service from Time Warner. "I signed up for 
>the full works. Now I have two phone lines, TV and a cable modem from 

In the UK, cablecos have provided a telephony alternative to BT
(British Telecom) for well over ten years.

Sadly, they tend to work on tarrifs that just undercut BT, but aren't
required to give open access in such areas as ADSL.


Rob
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk

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

From: Ed Ellers <ed_ellers@msn.com>
Subject: Re: Phone Calls on the Cable Bill
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 20:42:26 -0500


Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> Mr. Odabashian is one of a growing number of consumers who receive
> telephone service from a cable company instead of a telephone carrier.

A totally unscientific sample: Both neighbors on either side of me now
get their wireline service from Insight Communications, the cable
company here in Louisville (http://www.insight-com.com/ -- *not*
insight.com or insight-comm.com).  I would, too, just to spite
BellSouth -- and also because Insight's rates are somewhat lower --
but they don't offer call forwarding on busy, which I use to bounce
calls to my wireless phone.

For those unfamiliar with cable telephony, a quick description of how
it's provisioned: There is a box that goes on the outside wall of the
building, looking very much like the network interfaces that telcos
use these days for residential demarcs, but it contains A/D
converters, a DOCSIS modem and other goodies.  The service drop
carries 60V DC to power the unit, so the tap box (at the pole or in
the back yard) has to be set up to pass power to phone customers and
block it to those who only have TV and/or Internet services.  Like a
telco demarc, this has two access doors, one for the side where the
drop cable connects, the other for customer access.  On the customer
side there is a coaxial connector for the cable going to TV sets and
cable modems -- presumably this is locked off to block access if a
customer only takes phone service --- and screw terminals for inside
wire, with RJ11 jacks and plugs for test purposes as usual.  Insight's
boxes will support up to four lines, so if you want to add a line you
just run your inside wire to the appropriate jacks, call them to turn
on the service, and start writing larger monthly checks.

One thing I didn't like about Insight's installation was that the guy
just ran some wire (not sure if it was quad, Cat 3 or Cat 5) over from
the box to the screw terminals on the BellSouth demarc, after
unplugging the plug from the RJ11 test jack, instead of doing
something to bring the customer's inside wire over from the BellSouth
demarc to the Insight box.

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Critics Weigh In on Copyright Act
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 17:14:10 -0800


In article <telecom22.209.10@telecom-digest.org>, Ed Ellers
<ed_ellers@msn.com> wrote:

> At the cost of some degradation of the signal.  That's why people are
> getting so worked up over attempts to prevent digital copying.  (IMHO
> the jury is still out over whether an analog dub from a CD really is
> inferior to a digital "rip" of the same track, after both have been
> encoded in MP3 at the usual 128 kbps.)

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Tell the Jury that the slightly
> inferior signal is actually pretty good considering what you paid
> for it. There really is no difference. An audiophile which very fancy
> equipment could tell the difference; almost no one else. PAT]

Actually, by the time the tune is subjected to the compression of an
MP3, it doesn't matter how sophisticated the listener's equipment is.
For all intents and purposes, an analog rip of a given track will be
just as good as the digital rip. The only difference (to the person
performing the transfer) is the inconvenience of literally recording
the audio in real time, and then trimming it.

I made a private promise to myself about this. I have never downloaded
an MP3 in my life. I have never so much as given away one single rip
of any track from my library of thousands of CDs (but I rip them to
use in my iPod and in the car). Here's the promise: the first time I
am forced to make an analog rip of a so-called copy-protected CD, the
rips are all going up on a website. If I'm going to be forced to go to
extra effort just to be able to enjoy a CD I paid good money for,
others will benefit from that effort as well.

The reality is that I have pretty much given up buying CDs. I'm not
sure I want to even bother with the hassle, or the expense of buying a
CD player that can deal with the new crippled CDs.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: tsingtao55@yahoo.com
Subject: What am I Missing Here; Calling Cards
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 01:22:56 GMT


I used to have long distance service through a reseller that I thought
was cheap, $0.05/min in California after 5pm and 0.09 during peak
time.  Interstate calls were $0.09 at all times.

What ate me up were not the call charges, I really don't make that
many LD calls on my landline (use my cell mostly), but the taxes.  For
a $2.50 LD bill, I would get near $6 in taxes each month.

So, I called SBC and discontinued LD.  Now I use an AT&T calling card
purchased at Sam's Club which costs $0.0347/min with no taxes.  I even
use it to dial around SBC's exorbitant local toll rates.  I just
programmed the 800 number and the card number into speed dial.

Why does AT&T sell these cards so cheap while they "rape" their
customers who have subscribed to them with monthly fees, etc.?

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

From: Michael A. Covington <look@www.covingtoninnovations.com.for.address>
Subject: Re: Hughes to Shut Down High-Speed Internet Service
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 01:38:11 -0500


OneNetNut <onenetnut@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:telecom22.186.12@telecom-digest.org:

> Yep, they have a loving note on their website:
> http://www.directvdsl.com/ explaining why they are getting out of the
> DSL space (which I don't think they should have entered in the first
> place).

Yes ... I'm one of the people they left behind, and I'm now enjoying
my first day of service on SpeedFactory: same line, same price per
month, same data speed, and noticeably quicker DNS resolution. (Three
DNS, not two, and not all in the same place.)

My dumb question: Why is SpeedFactory making money when
DirecTVInternet wasn't making money?

One thing I suspect is that SpeedFactory doesn't try to sell to
Grandma ... they seem to target people like me, who know something
about configuring their own equipment.  (In fact I got it going even
though the DSL router arrived in a box with no documentation ... the
doc is in the mail to arrive tomorrow.)  This probably keeps their
support costs down.

Any other theories?

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

From: emtpilot@aol.com (Emt pilot)
Date: 28 Dec 2002 08:12:16 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Subject: Pacific Bell Central Office Names


Hello,

Hoping anyone might be able to help with this question.  Does Pacbell
"name" their CO's?  For example, most of their CO's are named for the
community they are located in.  For more dense areas that have more
then one office in a community or city, how does Pacbell defferentiate
between offices?  Is it a simple as San Diego CO 1 and San Diego CO 2
 ... etc, or does each CO have a specific name (street, etc)?  I have a
list of Pac Bell exchanges but for some exchanges there are many CO's
with the same exchange name just different CLLI numbers.

I know Verizon in California names their CO's if more then one in an
exchnage area.  Example: There are two CO's in the Lancaster exchange,
1 CO is named "Lancaster" while the other is named "Antelope".  Just
wondering if Pacbell did the same thing and if anyone could foward the
list or database.

Thanks for the help.

Jon Jamieson
www.sewagehistory.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I know Ameritech in Chicago, IL has all
their central office buildings geographically named in most instances
by the streets or neighborhoods they are located in. And for each
formal central office name there is also an informal (in general use)
name for the same place. For instance, the central office which serves
the University of Chicago, located at 61st and Kenwood Streets is
known informally as 'Kenwood Bell'. Another example is 'Kedzie Bell'
which is located on the west side around Roosevelt Road and Kedzie 
Avenue. Those two, and several others were named back in the 1950's
after the streets they are located on and (obviously) the company
which originally owned them. Both of those two were originally very
large Traffic Department facilities (operator centers) on their 
second and third floors with the switching equipment on the first
floor. Officially, they were 'Chicago-Kenwood' and 'Chicago-Kedzie';
along with 'Chicago-Rogers Park', 'Chicago-Edgewater', 'Chicago-Superior'
'Chicago-Illinois/Dearborn', 'Chicago-Franklin', 'Chicago-Dearborn',
'Chicago-Wabash', and 'Chicago-Lakeview' just to name a few on the
north side and downtown areas of Chicago. Chicago-Wabash for many
years had the informal name 'the Wabash CannonBall' because for many
years after the other offices had gone to crossbar switching, the
folks in 312-922, 312-939 and a few other exchanges still had the
old fashioned (and very noisy) stepping switches. Literally, when 
one walked past the 65 East Congress Parkway building, the noise at
times was deafening. I know you did not ask about Chicago, but I
decided to tell you anyway. PAT]

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

From: Linc Madison <nobody@example.com>
Subject: Why Won't my Sprint PCS Phone Roam? (Samsung SCH-3500)
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 02:27:16 -0800
Organization: LincMad.com Consulting
Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com


I've had a Sprint PCS phone, specifically a Samsung SCH-3500, for
almost three years now. In those three years, I have had two occasions
to attempt an outgoing call while outside Sprint's network. Both
times, the signal meter indicated I had a strong signal, and I did
everything the phone's manual said to do in order to make a roaming
call, but the calls never connected. I also just did a test here in
San Francisco with the same results. In addition, I also attempted an
incoming call while the phone was in analog roaming mode.

The only option I have for roaming is the analog cellular network, and
my phone doesn't display any ID for the specific carrier.

The first occasion was in early September 2002 in Susanville, CA. The
second was in mid-October near Woodbury, TN. The third test was today
in San Francisco, CA. In all three cases, I accessed the phone's menu
and changed "Roaming Mode" from "Sprint PCS only" to "Analog Roam."
The phone then searched for service and locked onto what appeared to
be a valid signal from an analog cell. I dialed the number, pressed
TALK, and pressed 1 to confirm that I really wanted to make a roaming
call.  The little telephone handset icon then blinked and blinked and
blinked, indicating that it was trying to establish a circuit for the
call. In all three cases, though, the icon just blinked, never
completing the call. I tried each call more than once, always with the
same result. On each attempt, I waited at least a full minute or two,
and in one case over six minutes. None of these calls was at any time
I would expect to be a peak usage hour.

My inference from my admittedly cursory knowledge of cellular roaming
is that my phone is not sending all the information that the analog
network needs to bill the call, and therefore the analog network is not
completing the circuit.

Does that sound like I'm on the right track? If so, what might it be
missing and how do I get it squared away? If not, what might the
problem be?

I talked to Customer Service today, and their only suggestion was to
take the phone in to a Sprint PCS retail store to see if they can
figure out what's going on. I probably will do that, but I figured I'd
start by asking people who might actually know something.


www dot LincMad dot com  / Telecom at LincMad dot com
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California

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

From: Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
Subject: Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist
Date: 29 Dec 2002 01:25:41 GMT
Reply-To: waltdnes@waltdnes.org


>  [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you realize how many web sites there
>  are -- nice, good, seemingly innocuous sites which refuse to let you
>  in if you do the things Walter suggests above? Yahoo is one example:
>  *if* your cookies are mangled or missing or your browser begins
>  playing games with them then they refuse to let you in at all.

Recent versions of Mozilla/Phoenix more granularity.  You can control
whom you do/don't allow to read/write cookies.  I believe IE can do
something similar with its "trusted-sites" zone.  This can be
acomplished manually also.  I post to two websites that require login.
They have the *OPTION* of either logging in each time, or having their
cookies. Cookies are definitely convenient there.  I opened up my
cookies, logged in, exited the browser, and set the cookie file to
read-only.  The login cookies are now safe.

With the cookie file set to read-only, I can throw the cookie
settings wide open.  All cookies will be accepted to memory while
browsing, but they will not be saved when I shut down the browser.


Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
I'm not repeating myself; I'm an X Window user, I'm an ex-Windows user
Palladium ain't done till linux won't run


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I need some help getting my cookies to
work  correctly. I use something called 'Proxomitron' which eliminates
all advertising on web pages and almost all pop-up windows. It uses
port 8080 to do its thing. My objective is to eliminate all ads and
pop up windows. I use it on my Opera browser and get the desired
results. But I like to read news on my.yahoo.com and chicagotribune.com
and my constantly scrolling ticker tape news comes from my.yahoo.com
among other places. Internet Explorer is the controlling browser on 
my Windows XP and Windows 98 machines. If I turn Proximotron on when 
using my IE browser, Yahoo and Chicago Tribune refuse to deal with me.
Yahoo just won't let me login to any department (including the
scrolling ticker-tape news headlines) and chicagotribune.com keeps
insisting my cookies are mangled up, and it wants me to completely log
out and log back in so it can reinstall its cookies. So I wound up
disconnecting Proxomitron from IE, but leaving it on Opera. So I use
the latter to read some things and I use IE for other things, and 
constantly close pop-up windows and see advertising on Yahoo. I wish
I knew how to properly set the options on Proxomitron. I also use a
'windows washer' program (like a laundry machine, with strong
detergent and lots of 'bleach') whenever I turn the computer on or
off. I've seen the 'laundry machine' grind up and sweep away as much
as ten megs worth of the filthy, foul smelling stuff each day. I 
suspect that may be tampering with the cookies also. I wish I could
use Proxomitron for IE stuff as well, but probably my computer is
all messed up internally. :(  Having had a brain aneurysm (my beloved
brain desease) doesn't help me with these matters either.   PAT]   

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

From: John Smith <anonymous@yahoo.com>
Subject: Question About This Basic SBC Yahoo DSL
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 01:10:37 -0800
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


My family friend just got basic SBC Yahoo DSL
(http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/dsl/ ). They can only connect to the
Internet from one PC (XP Home Edition OS) directly to the DSL modem as
PPPoE.  I gave them my spare used 3Com router that works with other
ISPs (RoadRunner cable, Charter Communications cable, and Verizon
DSL), the 3Com router can quickly connect as PPPoE like the XP.  For
some reason I can't ping any IP number to the outside world but SBC
DSL tech support can ping the 3Com router and I always see the
router's security audit trail log with lots of intrusion attempts into
it, port scan, etc.  If I can't ping anyone to the outside world,
neither I can surf the Internet thru this 3Com router.

So what good it is if it can't be shared to other PCs in the house?

Can the DSL provider like SBC Yahoo DSL can do something so basic
subscribers can't share the Internet to several PCs in their home?

Are the broadband provider now discouraging their subscribers to use
routers and share the Internet to several PCs in their home?

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

From: Greg Boop <gboop@nc.rr.com>
Subject: Last Laugh! Pat's Webcam
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 09:10:16 -0500


Somehow I had the image that Pat worked all day on the computer,
typing his responses to the digest while surrounded by a half-dozen
scantily clad women ... Unfortunately the web-cam has proven this
not to be true   :)


- Greg

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mostly you are correct. I say 'mostly'
because last night real late, I got a phone call from a neighbor, a
young guy about 20 or so, who wanted to bring a 'friend' over here
since the said friend would be unwelcome at his house with his mother
being there, etc. I said okay, then toddled off to bed for a good
night's sleep. When I said it was a 'secret, hidden spy-cam' I mean I
have not mentioned it to any neighbors/friends, etc. Something woke me
up around 2:00 AM and I remembered I had not shut the computer and
camera off for the night. The cam is not hidden, it is in plain sight
on my desk top -- all three of them; still the dunce and his friend
did not know what they were or how they worked. I found the two of
them slightly indisposed here in the computer room, and as I rushed
over to shut off the cams/computer I proceeded to give them both one
of my Old Fashioned Editor's Notes; fire shooting from my nostrils,
etc. Enough hell for everyone, ample-plenty twice around. They both
looked terribly hurt; I then apologized for screaming at *them*; and
hastily assured them I was not angry about their actions, just at
having my website desecrated with the see-all cams taking pics, and
faithfully FTP'ing them off to the site, every ten seconds or so. I
*don't think* anyone was watching at the time; I would have heard
something by now if there had been one or more viewers, I am
sure. They had no idea the cams were there, let alone turned on; and
properly mortified they made a hasty retreat for friend's home, where
I guess 'getting caught' by my friend's mother would have been less of
an embarassment for them. The web-cam address is 
http://patrick-townson.n3.net .  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 14:50:20 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org
Subject: At the Risk of Spamming my own Newsgroup


At the risk of spamming my own newsgroup once again, I take this 
opportunity to remind you as we approach the end of December and
the end of 2002 that the first couple days of this week are the
monthly 'Share Days'; the days each month I attempt to show you that
TELECOM Digest is 'shareware'; not 'freeware'. I've done it this
time with a bit of humor, with the 'spy cam' so you could 'supervise
my work more closely' if you wished to do so. I am also going to
take especial care this time to try and be certain that this particular
issue of the Digest does not belch and backfire on its way through
nntpxmit out to the Usenet link, so the comp.dcom.telecom readers
(and in particular the one anonymous reader last time around) do 
not have any complaints. 

Anyway, if you would like to help me insure that my bills are all
paid in a timely manner this month and I get to close out the month
and the year in a financially responsible manner, now is the time
to do it. Go to any PayPal logo on the net (mine is best, at the
very bottom of the page http://telecom-digest.org ) and make whatever
contribution you feel is best. If you prefer, send your check or
money order payable to 'Telecom' in snail mail to:

          Telecom
          PO Box 50
          Independence, KS   67301
marked to my attention. On PayPal my name is 'editor@telecom-digest.org'.

By return mail in a week or two, you will get a copy of the latest
version of the Telecom Archives CD, (all 22 years of it) whether you
send it by snailmail or by PayPal where you can also use a credit/debit 
card as desired.  As always, my thanks, and wishes for a happy and 
prosperous new year for each of you.

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #210
******************************
    
    
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200212310036.gBV0aWq25213@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #211

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:37:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 211

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "Know Your Enemy", Honeynet Project (Rob Slade)
    SBC False Advertising / Overcharge?!?!?!  HELP (Jason)
    About Panasonic 1232 (Radoslaw)
    Strange Behaviour of Your Picture Page (Colin Sutton)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (David L)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (John Higdon)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (Jeff Moss)
    Re: What am I Missing Here; Calling Cards (David L)
    Re: Question About This Basic SBC Yahoo DSL (Steven J. Sobol)
    Re: Why Won't my Sprint PCS Phone Roam? (Samsung SCH-3500) (Steven Sobol)
    Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country (joe@obilivan)
    Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist (Clarence Dold)
    FCC Grants InterLATA LD to Southwestern Bell, Bellsouth (Sam Etler)    
    Wanted: Used Gordon Kapes System 930 (Arun Mirchandani)

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: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User 
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 08:05:18 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "Know Your Enemy", Honeynet Project


BKKNYREN.RVW   20020916

"Know Your Enemy", Honeynet Project, 2002, 0-201-74613-1,
U$39.99/C$59.95
%A   Honeynet Project
%C   P.O. Box 520, 26 Prince Andrew Place, Don Mills, Ontario  M3C 2T8
%D   2002
%G   0-201-74613-1
%I   Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.
%O   U$39.99/C$59.95 416-447-5101 fax: 416-443-0948
%O  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201746131/robsladesinterne
%P   328 p. + CD-ROM
%T   "Know Your Enemy: Revealing the Security Tools, Tactics, and
      Motives of the Blackhat Community"

I have frequently said that any book with "hack," or any variant
thereof, in the title is automatically suspect.  This work helps prove
my point, first, because the Honeynet Project members have *not* used
the term (they refer to attackers as blackhats), and the text also
notes the problems with "exploit" type books: they list old and known
attacks, most of which are protected against, and say nothing about
the attackers and how they work.  Chapter one points out the value of
"knowing the enemy" and the beginnings of the Honeynet Project.

Part one describes the honeynet.  Chapter two explains what a honeynet
is, and the difference between one and the traditional honeypots.
Details on how a honeynet works, in terms of architecture, policies,
and the risks and responsibilities of operating one, are presented in
chapter three.  Building a honeynet, in chapter four, presents
specific details, although a number have already been given.

Part two concerns the analysis of data collected from the Honeynet.
Chapter five, on data analysis, points out the sources of data for
logging, much of which has already been discussed.  There is some more
information on what we can find, but limited explanation of how to
interpret it.  The discussion of analyzing a compromised system, in
chapter six, is more detailed and does a better job of explaining the
logs, but relies on a blackhat document, which, while better than most
such, still has the holes and gaps that characterize the genre.
Additional details are provided in advanced data analysis, plus some
material on data that is (and some that is not) useful in packets,
plus forensic (data recovery) considerations, in chapter seven.
(Interestingly, the Honeynet Project does not seem to be concerned
with wiping a drive in order to deny information to blackhats.)
Chapter eight examines data recovery tools and some results.

Part three explains what the project has determined about "the enemy"
by the types of attacks that have been launched and detected.  Chapter
nine is a general review of the random nature of attacks, the tools
seen, motives theorized, and trends in attacks.  The activities and
signatures of the Bymer worm are described in chapter ten.  An IRC
conversation between a group of blackhats is provided in chapter
eleven.  While there is some interest in the account, the transcript
occupies almost 100 pages (and almost a third of the total length of
the book).  Chapter twelve suggests the future activities of the
Honeynet Project.

Much of the material in the book is repeated, sometimes in a number of
places.  The text would definitely benefit from a tightening up of the
material.  In addition, the early examples are not thoroughly
explained, making the reader initially feel that only a firewall audit
log specialist would be able to understand what is being said.
However, most of the book is written clearly and well, and it is
definitely worth reading.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 2002   BKKNYREN.RVW   20020916

rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
Find book info victoria.tc.ca/techrev/ or sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/
Upcoming (ISC)^2 CISSP CBK review seminars (+1-888-333-4458):
    February 10, 2003   February 14, 2003   St. Louis, MO
    March 31, 2003      April 4, 2003       Indianapolis, IN

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

From: chillinachos@hotmail.com (Jason)
Subject: SBC False Advertising / Overcharge?!?!?!  HELP
Date: 29 Dec 2002 21:23:32 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Ok folks, I'll try to keep this one from being too long (famous last
words):

I live in Austin, Texas.
I make a lot of calls to Ireland.
I use SBC for my local / long distance and international calls.

They provided me with an SBC calling card when I switched to them a
few months ago.

I used the calling card to make calls to Ireland from my office (so my
employer would not have to pay for my calls).

The bill came in and they have billed me $215.46 for 88 minutes.
Some of the calls are 1 minute long and they charge me $7.00 for one
minute.

The SBC website says (and I quote):

"SBC's Calling Card Services eliminates telephone "sticker shock" by
protecting consumers and businesses from high rates often associated
with calls made from some public pay phones. Our calling card gives
you easy access to local, long distance, and international phone
service virtually anywhere in the world. You can also request
additional cards for business associates"

So, I figured that when it says in the small print that a "surcharge
may apply" that it would be a reasonable percentage.

Under pricing for the calling card on their website it says:

"Pricing:
SBC Calling Card Services costs nothing to set up and is
available to all customers who already have phone service. You only
pay for the calls made using the card number."

I've tried to call SBC to dispute these charges.  After 1 hour on the
phone and speaking to 5 people they finally tell me that those charges
are right and that I should really only use the card in EMERGENCIES
because they charge all kinds of connection fees ($4 per call and
$1.75 per minute)

These rates are not listed anywhere that I can find.  I feel ripped
off.  Have I any protection against this??????

By the way, The 88 minutes if made from my home phone would have cost
approx $13 (thirteen) from my calling card its an extra $200.

I never got my complaint resolved with SBC in the end because after
one hour of talking to people I finally got put on hold and then
mysteriously cut off.

Can anyone advise me on what I should do.  I feel like they falsely
advertised their service due to the quoted text above.  Check out the
links of info on their calling card service at the following address.

http://www01.sbc.com/Products_Services/Residential/ProdInfo_1/1,1973,45--6-3-,00.html#30

Thanks for any advice.


J.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My experience (mine only) is that the
ONLY thing SBC understands are commission complaints. They are terribly
fraudulent with things like Privacy Manager for example. Some other
readers may make suggestions worth trying but I will suggest you cut 
to the chase -- keep it simple -- and file a complaint with your
local consumer organization and also with your state commission. And
split from SBC to one of the resellers as soon as possible and convenient
to do so. They hit me up for $40.00 (forty dollars) last month for
using their call trace (*57) feature trying to track down the source
of literally dozens of 'wrong number' calls from AT&T (of all people!)
who were sending ten zeros and 'name withheld' as their caller-ID
on my distinctive ringing line. And their DSL service, ooh-la-la, what
mounds of spam!  My mailbox on sbcglobal.net got wedged yesterday from
two days worth of spam; when I called in I was told 'your mailbox is
120 percent of capacity; we are going to return your mail to the
senders.'  When I asked them once again why they did not instead use
some kind of filters against spam, this tech guy got very self-righteous
with me about how Southwestern Bell does not dictate what you get in
your email. So I am sort of a prisoner; if I do NOT call in and clean
out my mailbox two or three times daily, it overflows and they return
all mail to the senders. You see, I skipped Saturday this past week.

Then I got in the middle of tossing out all the spam manually a pop-up
window from SBC telling me how I could subscribe for a fee to their
mail sorting service; if I pay them more than the fifty dollars per
month I do already, they *will* sort the spam out. So tech-desk, don't
get so self-righteous with me; its all money in your case. Yeah, I
would say just file commission complaints as a routine thing. "Excuse
me. Mr. Commissioner, I hate to disturb your lunch while you are
eating out of the hand of SWB, but could you please consider my
complaint?" Say the above to the commission, they get very annoyed
by it; but you know it is largely true.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:57:46 +0100
From: Radoslaw  <no@spam.com>
Subject: About Panasonic 1232
Organization: home.pl news server


Hallo, My name is Radoslaw. I have a Panasonic KX-TD 1232. I don't
know a solutions my problem. I have a few digital line BRI. I have a
DISA. And now I calling to my office a first line, DISA is working OK,
and I want calling other connect BUT other line. ARS working correctly
and I make call from other line Analog. (CO to CO). SO Now is a
problem becouse when I outgoing call from other line analog my call is
very poor, I hear nothing, very very small signal. Please Can You help
me with this solutions ! Please.

Now I set (990) -3dB  in BIT. but still is very poor.


Regards, Radoslaw


: "TWORZAC REALIZUJEMY CELE"   ( r.w. - AD`2002 )
: ********************************************************************
: KTG o/K-�w: eMail: studio(at)post.pl : Mobile: (0-60) 988 98 98 :
: Zanim do mnie napiszesz: http://www.developer.krakow.pl/nospam

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

From: Colin Sutton <colin@sutton.wow.aust.com>
Subject: Strange Behaviour of Your Picture Page
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:37:39 +1100


When I select http://patrick-townson.n3.net I'm taken to the picture
page http://remarque.org/~ptownson/picture.page/ but there's no
picture, just a continuously changing message in the browser status
line "Downloading picture
http://remarque.org/~ptownson/picture.page/kabcam.jpg?10412263357064
 ..." where the number at the end is incrementing by somewhat over 1000
every second. In the time it's taken me to type this it's up to
10412264651418.

If I select http://remarque.org/~ptownson/picture.page/kabcam.jpg directly,
I see a picture of the top of your head, bent over a hot keyboard?


Colin Sutton

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  'patrick-townson.n3.net' is a redirect
which points to remarque.org as you discovered. If you choose to look
via the direct remarque.org address then after the picture.page/ you
should insert 'index.html' rather than 'kabcam.jpg' which is one
picture among some text on the page. After some correspondence with
Keith (author of Kabcam) I have learned some interesting and rather
dirty secrets about using USB hubs and heavy-drain devices like
cameras, and drivers for cameras, which I am getting into now. But
when I install this on my Winbook laptop with Windows 98 for the
Independence weather station I want it to work correctly.  PAT] 

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

From: davidlind@my-deja.com (David L)
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Date: 30 Dec 2002 04:23:33 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


emtpilot@aol.com (Emt pilot) wrote in message
news:<telecom22.210.11@telecom-digest.org>:

> Hoping anyone might be able to help with this question.  Does Pacbell
> "name" their CO's?  For example, most of their CO's are named for the
> community they are located in.  For more dense areas that have more
> then one office in a community or city, how does Pacbell defferentiate
> between offices?  Is it a simple as San Diego CO 1 and San Diego CO 2
>  ... etc, or does each CO have a specific name (street, etc)?  I have a
> list of Pac Bell exchanges but for some exchanges there are many CO's
> with the same exchange name just different CLLI numbers.

I'm going to hazard a guess from this older database lookup... there's
a map lookup as well.

Ratecenter name Example for Santa Rosa: 
SNRA JUNO
SNRA MAIN

Search by company name - TelcoData.us Telecommunications Database
http://www.telcodata.us/company.html?company=PACIFIC+BELL&results=1


David
DavNOLindiSPAMathotmaildotcom

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 15:10:17 -0800


In article <telecom22.210.11@telecom-digest.org>, emtpilot@aol.com
(Emt pilot) wrote:

> Hoping anyone might be able to help with this question.  Does Pacbell
> "name" their CO's?  For example, most of their CO's are named for the
> community they are located in.  For more dense areas that have more
> then one office in a community or city, how does Pacbell defferentiate
> between offices?  Is it a simple as San Diego CO 1 and San Diego CO 2
>  ... etc, or does each CO have a specific name (street, etc)?  I have a
> list of Pac Bell exchanges but for some exchanges there are many CO's
> with the same exchange name just different CLLI numbers.

The PacBell COs in the San Jose area are numbered (SJ12, SJ14, etc.)
but they have been traditionally known, at least internally, by their
first exchange names. For instance, SJ12 is known as "ALpine"; SJ14 is
known as "ANdrews". Some of the other COs: AXminster (corner of
Bellomy and Winchester in Santa Clara); CLayburn (White Road in San
Jose); CYpress (downtown).

Then there are the exceptions. The "Almaden" CO was originally an
unmanned office controlled from ANdrews. "Space Park" was added in
Santa Clara some time after the exchange names had long been
abandoned. The "Abel" CO in Milpitas has always been referred to as
such, even though it has been around since the AMhearst days. These
are all names derived from the streets or roads on which they are
located.

One of the complications for naming COs is the fact that many of them
serve more than one community. The ALpine CO serves the following
communities: San Jose, Cupertino, Campbell, and Saratoga. The ANdrews
CO serves San Jose and Campbell.

In fact, Campbell has an interesting situation. The city itself has no
CO. While it is a city large enough to have over a dozen prefixes, it
is served by two San Jose central offices. To the east of Highway 17,
it is served from ANdrews. Everyone on the west side of 17 is served
from the ALpine office. The latter office is located many miles to the
west of the Campbell city limits, and until recently DSL was out of
the question for anyone on the west side of town. SBC has been adding
fiber hubs to rectify that situation.

> I know Verizon in California names their CO's if more then one in an
> exchnage area.  Example: There are two CO's in the Lancaster exchange,
> 1 CO is named "Lancaster" while the other is named "Antelope".  Just
> wondering if Pacbell did the same thing and if anyone could foward the
> list or database.

I have poked through a number of PacBell internal databases and there
is no universal agreement among them regarding the naming of COs. My
knowlege comes from five decades of dealing with engineers and
technicians for the company.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: jeffmoss26@adelphia.net (Jeff Moss)
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Date: 29 Dec 2002 19:50:03 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


I was at my dad's office last week (they are an Ameritech Distributor)
and I threw away tons of Ameritech papers. There was a list of the
Cleveland area Central offices. I didnt keep it but I remember they
used really odd codes ex. Beachwood (30 sec away from my house) would
be BCHW1023i0 or something.

OT: Does anyone know if its possible to get a tour inside a Central
Office?

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

From: davidlind@my-deja.com (David L)
Subject: Re: What am I Missing Here; Calling Cards
Date: 30 Dec 2002 04:59:20 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


tsingtao55@yahoo.com wrote in message
news:<telecom22.210.9@telecom-digest.org>:

> I used to have long distance service through a reseller that I thought
> was cheap, $0.05/min in California after 5pm and 0.09 during peak
> time.  Interstate calls were $0.09 at all times.

> What ate me up were not the call charges, I really don't make that
> many LD calls on my landline (use my cell mostly), but the taxes.
> For a $2.50 LD bill, I would get near $6 in taxes each month.
> So, I called SBC and discontinued LD.  Now I use an AT&T calling card
> purchased at Sam's Club which costs $0.0347/min with no taxes.  I even
> use it to dial around SBC's exorbitant local toll rates.  I just
> programmed the 800 number and the card number into speed dial.

> Why does AT&T sell these cards so cheap while they "rape" their
> customers who have subscribed to them with monthly fees, etc.?

Legacy name recognition of ATT and advertising overload from non
competitive carriers leading to mass confusion, so people don't have
the time or don't think they can change.  IDT seems to be breaking the
barrier, now if IDT would just post INstate rates and taxes on their
website ... more obfiscation:(

Wish I could get around that darn SBC 12 mile "zone 3" first minute
 .05 rip off rate! Maybe if I can trick ATT to offer the expanded local
only service. Wonder if they could be forced to unbundle local toll
and LD?  Until then it's the cell phone for short zone 3 calls.

I'd bet many folks aren't capable of programming a speed dial phone or
are too impatient to set up and dial another step with a web based
calling card, even with the advanced "NO PIN" feature.

With all the included (often crappy sounding) wireless LD, people are
getting use to much better LD rates, even if it is essentially prepaid
and late night weekend weighted.

There's even better per minute rates in major metro areas, using local
access numbers instead of toll free numbers for calling cards.

You can have a discount LD carrier also handle local toll calls as
well, though there will still be taxes.

Hope the hungry tax collector doesn't take aim at untaxed calling card
revenue. The thrifty are saving loads!

David
DavNOLindiSPAMathotmaildotcom

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

From: sjsobol@JustThe.net (Steven J. Sobol)
Subject: Re: Question About This Basic SBC Yahoo DSL
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 22:27:16 -0000
Organization: JustThe.net LLC


John Smith <anonymous@yahoo.com> wrote:

> So what good it is if it can't be shared to other PCs in the house?

> Can the DSL provider like SBC Yahoo DSL can do something so basic
> subscribers can't share the Internet to several PCs in their home?

No, but they can refuse to support it, although SBC ameritech.net tech
support employees didn't seem to care about the Netopia router I had
running off my SBC DSL line when I had SBC DSL.

There's no technical reason you shouldn't be able to get the router to
work, but don't expect SBC to support it.

> Are the broadband provider now discouraging their subscribers to use
> routers and share the Internet to several PCs in their home?

My new broadband provider at home (Adelphia, with their Powerlink
cable Internet service) doesn't have a problem with multiple computers
hooked up to their service, though they officially do not allow
servers ... their literature specifies that you may hook up as many as
four PCs. It varies by provider. Many SBC resellers might allow
multiple PCs and support routers.


Steve Sobol, CTO  JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH
http://JustTheNetLLC.com/  888.480.4NET (4638)

A practicing member of the Geek Orthodox religion!

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

From: sjsobol@JustThe.net (Steven J. Sobol)
Subject: Re: Why Won't my Sprint PCS Phone Roam? (Samsung SCH-3500)
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 22:29:08 -0000
Organization: JustThe.net LLC


Linc Madison <nobody@example.com> wrote:

> I've had a Sprint PCS phone, specifically a Samsung SCH-3500, for
> almost three years now. In those three years, I have had two occasions
> to attempt an outgoing call while outside Sprint's network. Both
> times, the signal meter indicated I had a strong signal, and I did
> everything the phone's manual said to do in order to make a roaming
> call, but the calls never connected. I also just did a test here in
> San Francisco with the same results. In addition, I also attempted an
> incoming call while the phone was in analog roaming mode.

Can you give more details? Have you checked over on
alt.cellular.sprintpcs as to why this might not be working?

Have you had a Sprint tech flash the firmware on your phone and/or
update your Preferred Roaming List?

My wife has a Sprint PCS phone but we don't ever roam off Sprint's
network, so I'll not be very useful in solving this problem.


Steve Sobol, CTO  JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH
http://JustTheNetLLC.com/  888.480.4NET (4638)

A practicing member of the Geek Orthodox religion!

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

From: joe@obilivan.net
Subject: Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country?
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:59:13 GMT
Organization: Cox Communications


John R. Levine wrote:

> It is my impression that CO phone switches can be programmed to know
> the valid CLID number range for a PBX, and to substitute in the main
> number if a call from the PBX has no CLID or CLID outside that range.
> Too bad telcos are almost all too lazy to do so.

Add to "lazy" indifference and "what's in it for our LEC?"

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

From: dold@32.usenet.us.com
Subject: Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:14:08 UTC
Organization: a2i network


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: work correctly. I use something
> called 'Proxomitron' which eliminates all advertising on web pages
> and almost all pop-up windows. It uses port 8080 to do its thing. My
> objective is to eliminate all ads and pop up windows. I use it on my
> Opera browser and get the desired

I have set entries in \windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts for some of the
sites I don't want to see, pointing them to 127.0.0.1, so I still get popup
windows, but they all fail to show me anything but a little red x.
This isn't perfect, but just adding a few makes a big difference.

127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net ads.x10.com ads.monster.com
127.0.0.futuresite.register.com 1 ad.trafficmp.com

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 13:10:10 CST
From: Sam Etler <etler@cs.wisc.edu>
Subject: FCC Grants InterLATA LD to SBC in CA; Bellsouth in FL and TN


Effective 12/30/2002, the FCC has granted SBC and Bellsouth the rights
to provide interLATA services in additional states.

The decisions are summarized in the Federal Register at 67 FR 79095
(SBC, also FCC Docket 02-330), and 67 FR 79098 (Bellsouth, also FCC
Docket 02-331).

SBC can now provide interLATA services in Texas, Missouri, Arkansas,
Kansas, Oklahoma, and now California.

Bellsouth can provide interLATA services in Alabama, Kentucky,
Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Lousisiana, and now
Florida and Tennessee.

The Federal Register citation can be found linked at:

http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a021227c.html


sam

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

From: anjuman2@yahoo.com (Arun Mirchandani)
Subject: Wanted: Used Gordon Kapes System 930
Date: 30 Dec 2002 16:06:17 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


I am in the market for a used System 930 from Gordon Kapes. Do you
know where I might be able to buy such a thing? Its a T1 CO simulator.

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #211
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 31 21:38:31 2002
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h012cVi06330;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:38:31 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:38:31 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301010238.h012cVi06330@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #212

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:38:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 212

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Foreign Affairs and ICANN: Privatizing Internet's Infrastructure (Hauben)
    Prison Call Overcharging (Jeff Nor Lisa)
    A Phone That Answers When Called (Monty Solomon)
    So Many Holes, So Few Hacks (Monty Solomon)
    Parents of Slain Woman Want to Stop Internet Brokers (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (John Higdon)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (John R. Levine)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (Steven J. Sobol)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (Alex Kasper)
    Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist (Grog - nf3561@lnubb.pbz)
    Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist (john@pdj01.cinci.rr.com)
    Re: Question About This Basic SBC Yahoo DSL (Barry Margolin)
    Re: Question About This Basic SBC Yahoo DSL (John R. Levine)
    Re: Question About This Basic SBC Yahoo DSL (Clarence Dold)
    Re: Question About This Basic SBC Yahoo DSL (JDS)

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: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: Foreign Affairs and ICANN: Privatizing Internet's Infrastructure
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 18:00:10 UTC
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


There is an article about ICANN in the November/December 2002 issue of
Foreign Affairs journal. The article "Governing the Internet"(pgs
15-20) by Zoe Baird admits the failure of ICANN as a way to privatize
the Internet's infrastructure. (ICANN is the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers, an entity created by the U.S. government
to privatize the domain name system, root server system, IP numbering
system and protocol creation process. These form the public
infrastructure of the Internet. Whoever controls these controls the
Internet.)

She writes: "The rapid growth of the Internet has led to a worldwide
crisis of governance."

However, the author seems to know nothing about the development of the
Internet or does she seem to care about its development.

She writes: "In the early years of Internet development, the
prevailing view was that government should stay out of Internet
governance; market forces and self-regulation would suffice to create
order and enforce standards of behavior."

This makes one wonder what she considers as the early years of
Internet development.

This coming new year (2003) is the 30th anniversary of the birth of
TCP/IP and the 20th anniversary of the cutover from the protocol NCP
on the ARPANET to TCP/IP, a protocol which made it possible to have an
Internet.

The early development of the Internet was done under government. The
form of government, however, was a good form, (unlike much we see
since). This form of government in the U.S.was an office within the US
Dept of Defense under the leadership of computer scientists.

If Zoe Baird were interested in understanding what is wrong with
ICANN, it would be appropriate to learn this history and understand
the lessons from it with regard to the future development of the
Internet.

Instead, she has a new proposal to replace ICANN. She is currently
President of an NGO, the Markle Foundation. Not surprisingly, she is
proposing that the new ICANN be designed to include NGO's and
Government and Industry.

This is as contrary to the Internet's origins as is ICANN.

Thus she acknowledges a serious problem. But her treatment of this
problem shows disdain for the Internet and its origins.

Yet it is significant that the problem ICANN represents should be
included in an issue of a journal like Foreign Affairs. This
demonstrates that the Internet is under the foreign policy purvue of
the US government and they are planning new means of trying to forge
that policy ignoring the nature and needs of the Internet and its
users.

This is an important challenge for the new year for netizens.

May we find ways to collaborate to take on challenges like this in
2004.


Ronda
rondaatpanix.com

P.S. I have recently heard from someone I know that there is an effort
of people to propose legislation that would be helpful toward various
forms of media in the U.S. In this context he asked what kind of
legislation would people propose regarding the Internet and its
development. This is a topic that would take serious discussion and
consideration. So hopefully there will be a way to have such
discussion in the new year.

Following are some of the more recent research and writing I have done
to try to understand the nature of the government institution that
made it possible to create the Internet, and the nature of the
international collaboration that was so crucial to the development of
the international computer communications metasystem that we call the
Internet.

part 0   http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/lick101.doc
part I   http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/arpa_ipto.txt
part II  http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/basicresearch.txt
part III http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/centers-excellence.txt
part IV  http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/computer-communications.txt
part V   http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/birth_internet.txt
part VI  http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/misc/paper1031.txt

Also it is interesting that one of the laws passed by Congress
previously regarding the Internet had Netizens in its title.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although Ronda *is* correct historically
in saying the 'Interet began with ARPA' (a federal government agency)
the author of the magazine article is correct in saying things were
very loose and freewheeling in those early days. The federal employees
who were supposed to be in charge of things around here were not all
that intelligent and sophisticated about computers (remember, this was
in the late sixties and early seventies) so by default the net was
left in the hands of the 'geeks' who *did* know about it. Things were
left in that loose, relatively unorganized manner for the first
several years, probably until 1993 or so, which many netizens would
assert was the year our 'community' was pretty much run over by the
bulldozer of the web and the new crowd of people who came around. PAT]

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff Nor Lisa)
Subject: Prison Call Overcharging
Organization: Net Access BBS
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:57:01 GMT


Inmates in prison may make collect calls to their families.  However,
the family is charged very steep fees for such calls -- much more than
today's routine collect call charges.  For example, $3 for the first
minute, $1 each additional minute.

This appears to be a common practice across the U.S.

People might argue "too bad, they're in prison!", but that misses
several important points:

It's not the inmate who's paying for the calls, but the family.
Further, such families are often poor.

There is no reason collect calls from a prison should cost any more
than collect calls from regular locations.  (And remember, routine
collect calls today are very expensive).  And the actual cost to the
prison for the cost is very little -- maybe 5c a minute, since states
have bulk contracts with toll carriers.  The collect charges are pure
gravy for the state.

Another consideration is that family contact is important for an
inmate's rehabilitation.  Many inmates are imprisoned far from the
homes, and too far for families to visit.  A rehabiliated inmate won't
commit fresh crimes upon his release.

Likewise, family contact reduces stress.  Stressed inmates get into
fights and start riots which are extremely costly.  In other words,
frequent family contact is good for society.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For God sakes, Lisa! How are you doing?
You used to be in discussions here quite frequently, then just dropped
away. I dunno where you been, but welcome back!  Now to address the
points raised in your article: You are, of course, quite correct. But
to the 'corrections industry' you are a very dangerous person with
very dangerous ideas. Prisoners who are rehabilitated are less likely
to return to prison, but where would the 'industry' be in that case?
Their intake agents who work the streets (police officers and parole/
probation officers, judges) would have to work harder to keep the
joints as full and overrun as they are now.

Consider it from their perspective: inmates are scum, and by extension
so are most of their families and friends. Why would you want to give
scum any sort of even break or fair shake in life?  All you are likely
to do is rehabilitate a few more of them, and make it harder on
yourself, your government budget and *your* co-workers, friends and
family, none of whom are scum, obviously. You *have* to keep prisoners
demoralized and at each other's throats in order for your system to
work. People like you need to understand that prisons are purely 
*voluntary* places. Consider for example if prisoners were by and
large in solidarity, and simply 'offed' a guard or other prison
official on a semi-regular basis?

What does all that have to do with the cost of phone calls from
prison?  Phone calls are deliberatly kept expensive for the same
reason states like Illinois (which gets ninety percent of its
prisoners from Chicago) builds all of its newer prisons hundreds of
miles away from Chicago; to assure that all the black ladies and their
babies have to ride the Salvation Army bus on an all-day trip when
they try to go and see their men who are in prison. Six hour bus ride
to get from Chicago to the prisons, six hour bus ride to get back
home, and a *thirty minute* allowed time for visiting when there. With
some luck, the Salvation Army bus will get sideswiped by a large
semi-truck on I-55 outside of Chicago as happened two years ago at
Christmas and all the passengers get killed including the bus driver
except for one little baby who somehow survived. That day the scummy
inmates didn't get their thirty minute Christmas visitors. No, Lisa,
the phone thing is deliberate. Its all part of the cruel joke called
'prisoner rights'. Years and years ago, no phone calls were allowed at
all, then the Supremes (a very liberal bunch at the time; no need to
worry about that now) told the prisons they had to allow *some* contact
with the outside world for rehabilitation purposes. The prisons decided
to retaliate by doing what the court required, but making it prohibitively
expensive. If the scum's wife takes a second job to pay the phone bills
then they can have phone calls. 

And look at the well-known problem of homosexual rape in prisons. Why
do you suppose the corrections industry essentially turns a blind eye
to that scandal?  Any man, homosexual or heterosexual who attempts to
maintain his dignity in that way is treated as a trouble maker, not 
the guys who attacked him. Its all part of the need the corrections
industry has to maintain control and keep their joints filled up and
expanding no matter what.  Lisa, you are *one hundred percent correct*
in your feelings about phones and prisons. But get used to it, nothing
is going to change anytime soon.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 01:32:23 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: A Phone That Answers When Called


By SABRA CHARTRAND

Phone systems today commonly include features like caller
identification, call waiting and automatic redial. But what is the
point of all the bells and whistles if you cannot get to a ringing
phone in time to answer it?

It has happened to everyone. Your work phone rings when you are deep
in paperwork or have just taken a bite of lunch. The home phone rings
when you are in the shower or have just started up the stairs. You
cannot pick up the receiver before the caller gives up or the
answering machine clicks on.

It happened to David Millrod more times than he could count. So he
invented and patented a phone that can be answered with a verbal
command.

A user can shout, "Answer phone!" from across the room, and the phone 
will open the line and play a message telling the caller to hold on 
until the user can pick up the call.


http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/30/technology/30PATE.html

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

Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 01:58:13 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: So Many Holes, So Few Hacks


By Michelle Delio

Experts who discover and report security holes seem to be far more 
industrious than the malicious hackers willing or able to exploit 
those holes.

Despite the thousands of hackable holes that lurk in e-mail, on 
websites, in files and operating systems, most users' computers are 
never afflicted with more than the virtual version of a sniffle.

Few of the ominous potential traumas reported in 2002 turned out to 
have any real impact on most computer users. The Klez virus infected 
some machines and spawned spam that continues to clutter many e-mail 
inboxes. And the Linux Slapper worm made more work for some systems 
administrators for a while.

The rest of 2002's reported security holes appear to have languished, 
unexploited.

Some security experts suggest that malicious code attacks do happen 
but are dismissed by most users as just another wonky Windows 
software crash. But those same experts also cheerfully confess that 
most exploits aren't all that exploitable, and that the security 
industry profits by stirring up fear and frenzy.

Experts also wonder whether they and their colleagues devote entirely 
too much time to pouring over program code looking for possible 
exploits.


http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,56955,00.html

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

Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 02:06:01 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Parents of Slain Woman Want to Stop Internet Brokers


Parents of slain woman want to stop Internet brokers from selling 
personal information

By Holly Ramer, Associated Press, 12/30/2002 01:23

NASHUA, N.H. (AP) In the days after his stepdaughter's murder, Tim 
Remsburg funneled his fury into phone calls to anyone he thought 
might help explain her death.

"At two o'clock in the morning, I was trying to get President 
Clinton's number. I couldn't sleep. I just wanted to rattle 
everyone's cages and get some answers," he said.

His stepdaughter, Amy Boyer, was 20 when she was shot to death Oct. 
15, 1999, by a former high school classmate, Liam Youens, who had 
paid an Internet information broker to track her down.

For the three years since the murder, her parents have fought to 
protect other potential victims, most recently by suing the broker 
for negligence and invasion of privacy.

The battle has worn them out, but the couple isn't giving up.

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/364/nation/Parents_of_slain_woman_want_to:.shtml

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:52:51 -0800


In article <telecom22.211.7@telecom-digest.org>,
jeffmoss26@adelphia.net (Jeff Moss) wrote:

> I was at my dad's office last week (they are an Ameritech ...

> and I threw away tons of Ameritech papers. There was a list of the
> Cleveland area Central offices. I didnt keep it but I remember they
> used really odd codes ex. Beachwood (30 sec away from my house) would
> be BCHW1023i0 or something.

> OT: Does anyone know if its possible to get a tour inside a Central
> Office?

It is a lot harder than it used to be. For one thing, staff cutbacks
by the ILECs have left few people available to conduct such tours. I
would imagine in this post 9/11 world, security is probably another
issue.

That said, I can tell you that tours of central offices ain't what
they used to be in terms of excitement. In the electromechanical days,
there was something to see (and hear). Rotary ring generators with
mercury-wetted contacts, Strowger or crossbar switches clacking away,
and caverns of wirewrap created a mind-blowing experience, even for
the telecom-ignorant.

Today's CO is nothing more than racks and racks of nondescript
electronic equipment. A Lucent 5ESS (common modern CO switch) is a
sterile closed cabinet assembly. Its actual control and test locations
are probably off-prem at a regional maintenance center. A tour of a
modern central office is now about as exciting as a walk through a
server room.

Except ... you might want to look at the power room. This is where 
batteries that supply 48 VDC to the system live. And we're talking about 
LOTS of 48 volts ... on the order of thousands of amperes. Some of that 
power keeps the switch and ancillary equipment working. But most of it 
is providing loop current to all the subscribers as well as remote fiber 
hubs, etc.

The batteries are under constant floating charge. In the event of a
power failure, the batteries keep everything going smoothly until
local emergency power comes on line.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Date: 30 Dec 2002 22:22:39 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> OT: Does anyone know if its possible to get a tour inside a Central
> Office?

It entirely depends on the telco.  My small local ILEC has an annual
open house with CO tour.  Down the road, Verizon seems not to let
anyone into their COs ever without suitable badges.


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: sjsobol@JustThe.net (Steven J. Sobol)
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:02:50 -0000
Organization: JustThe.net LLC


Jeff Moss <jeffmoss26@adelphia.net> wrote:

> I was at my dad's office last week (they are an Ameritech Distributor)
> and I threw away tons of Ameritech papers. There was a list of the
> Cleveland area Central offices. I didnt keep it but I remember they
> used really odd codes ex. Beachwood (30 sec away from my house) would
> be BCHW1023i0 or something.

http://dslreports.com/coinfo

> OT: Does anyone know if its possible to get a tour inside a Central
> Office?

Judging by what I've seen from the one CO I've been in, it's nothing
exciting.


Steve Sobol, CTO  JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH
http://JustTheNetLLC.com/  888.480.4NET (4638)

A practicing member of the Geek Orthodox religion!

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

From: alex@nexspace.com (Alex Kasper)
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Date: 31 Dec 2002 15:29:00 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


In Los Angeles the Pac Bell (Now SBC) Central Offices are named after
the pre-1962 Exchange Names which roughly follows the surrounding
neighborhood.

For Example, in Hollywood, the office is HOllywood (323-46x) but which
now comprises 46x, 96x, 52x, and many more.

What's interesting is that the office names changed in the 40's when
dial service was introduced. Morningside, a manual exchange located on
Vermont, chnaged it's name to NOrmandy (323-66x), when they kicked out
the operators, added on to the building and filled the place with Step
equipment. (Now you can play Basketball in there - all DMS/ESS.)

Everyone still calls the office NOrmandy, but they now spell it
Normandie -- go figure.

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

From: Grog - nf3561@lnubb.pbz <uce@ftc.gov>
Subject: Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 05:58:45 GMT
Organization: Road Runner - NC


On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 17:14:08 UTC, dold@32.usenet.us.com wrote:

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: work correctly. I use something
>> called 'Proxomitron' which eliminates all advertising on web pages
>> and almost all pop-up windows. It uses port 8080 to do its thing. My
>> objective is to eliminate all ads and pop up windows. I use it on my
>> Opera browser and get the desired

> I have set entries in \windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts for some of the
> sites I don't want to see, pointing them to 127.0.0.1, so I still get popup
> windows, but they all fail to show me anything but a little red x.
> This isn't perfect, but just adding a few makes a big difference.

> 127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net ads.x10.com ads.monster.com
> 127.0.0.futuresite.register.com 1 ad.trafficmp.com

I found this recently and I see very few ads now.
http://accs-net.com/hostess/


Grog

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

From: john@pdj01.cinci.rr.com
Subject: Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:33:15 GMT
Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online -- Northeast Ohio


In article <telecom22.211.12@telecom-digest.org>,
dold@32.usenet.us.com writes:

> I have set entries in \windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts for some of the
> sites I don't want to see, pointing them to 127.0.0.1, so I still get popup
> windows, but they all fail to show me anything but a little red x.
> This isn't perfect, but just adding a few makes a big difference.

> 127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net ads.x10.com ads.monster.com
> 127.0.0.futuresite.register.com 1 ad.trafficmp.com

I handle this a different why at my house.  All the PCs are setup to
use a local UNIX machine as a name server.  I did this at first
because my ISP's name servers we very slow, they may have fixed it by
now.  What this gives me is that I cache all name lookups and avoid a
lot of traffic just translating names to address for sites we tend to
use.

Now for the real fun.  I setup the DNS server to be the master for
doubleclick.net, trafficmp.com, and about 30 other domains.  It kills
popups, and tons of other ads.  If they change to
ads2.doubleclick.net, it kills them also.

I also look at the outgoing logs on my router/firewall about once a
week and add in other domains like site-stats.com and hitztracker.com.
Both of these sites use cookies to track web visits.

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

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@genuity.com>
Subject: Re: Question About This Basic SBC Yahoo DSL
Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 02:08:46 GMT


In article <telecom22.210.14@telecom-digest.org>,
John Smith  <anonymous@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Can the DSL provider like SBC Yahoo DSL can do something so basic
> subscribers can't share the Internet to several PCs in their home?

One technique I've heard rumors of is that the ISP's router decrements the
TTL of packets all the way to 1 before forwarding it, instead of just
decrementing it by 1 like normal routers do.  Then when the Customer's
router is forwarding the packet, it decrements it to 0, and drops the
packet because of TTL exceeded.

> Are the broadband provider now discouraging their subscribers to use
> routers and share the Internet to several PCs in their home?

Some ISPs prohibit routers in their TOS.  Not all of them enforce it,
though; in many cases it's just a clause that they can use if they want to
terminate some customers who use excessive bandwidth.


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: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Question About This Basic SBC Yahoo DSL
Date: 30 Dec 2002 22:42:43 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


>> Can the DSL provider like SBC Yahoo DSL can do something so basic
>> subscribers can't share the Internet to several PCs in their home?

Well, sort of.

There are two ways that ISPs set up DSL.  One treats your PC as part
of a big LAN, and uses a scheme called DHCP to assign its network
parameters.  The other treats your PC as a glorified dialup, and uses
a different scheme called PPPoE to assign parameters.  If you have to
log in with a user name and password to connect, that's PPPoE.  If the
DSL just starts up when you boot up your computer, that's DHCP.

I was pleasantly surprised to learn that some DSL providers, such as
Verizon in New Jersey, directly support multiple PCs per connection.
That is, you can plug several PCs into a network hub, plug the DSL
modem into the hub, and each PC can log in using PPPoE and use a
remote connection.  Although it's technically possible to do this with
DHCP, I don't know of any DHCP providers who support it.

So the first answer is that if your DSL provider doesn't want to
support multiple PCs via PPPoE or DHCP, they don't have to.

On the other hand, if you get a router, which you should because
they're widely available for about $50 and include a firewall to keep
bad guys out, you plug the router into the DSL modem and all of your
PCs into the router.  If your PCs are physically all close to each
other, you can get a router with regular Ethernet jacks and run cables
to your PCs.  If not, for more money you can get a WiFi router with
antennas on top, plug WiFi cards into your PCs elsewhere in your
house, and communicate by radio.

The DSL provider only sees the router, which looks like a single DHCP
or PPPoE PC, and all the connections from the PCs appear (to the DSL
provider) to be coming from the router.  It's nearly impossible for a
DSL provider to tell how many PCs are behind your router.  So get a
router and plug your PCs into it.  Another advantage of a router
compared to separate PPPoE connections is that the router puts all of
your PCs on a LAN, so you can safely share disks and printers among
them, with the routers keeping outsiders from hacking in.

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

From: dold@94.usenet.us.com
Subject: Re: Question About This Basic SBC Yahoo DSL
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 18:46:20 UTC
Organization: a2i network


John Smith <anonymous@yahoo.com> wrote:

> DSL), the 3Com router can quickly connect as PPPoE like the XP.  For
> some reason I can't ping any IP number to the outside world but SBC
> DSL tech support can ping the 3Com router and I always see the

With my cable modem only the MAC that it was set up with is
recognized.  The router that I added had an option to "clone MAC
address" so that it appears to be the same MAC as in the PC that was
"installed".

I don't know if DSL works the same way.  I had an SMC router installed
on my DSL, and I vaguely recall doing a clone ... or maybe the PPPoE
is what I'm remembering.

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

Subject: Re: Question About This Basic SBC Yahoo DSL
From: JDS <t111@syntelsoft.com>
Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:22:16 GMT


> ... spare used 3Com router that works with other
> ISPs (RoadRunner cable, Charter Communications cable, etc
> ... I can't ping any IP number to the outside world...

Your router or client computers are set up wrong.  This should work fine.

In fact, you can do the entire SBC DSL setup without installing anything on 
a PC.  Program the router for PPPoE withL
    	userid:   dslreguser
        password: reguser

And go to Web page
        https://secure.pacbell.net/dyndsl

to get a permanent userid/password which you then put in the router
and in your news setups.

To debug your W*nd*ws client setup, you might run "ipconfig /all"
(WinNT/2K/XP) or winipcfg (95/98/ME) and see what you have - your DHCP
server, DNS server, and default gateway should all point to your
router.

Can you ping your router by its IP address?

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #212
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan  1 01:16:53 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h016GrG08437;
	Wed, 1 Jan 2003 01:16:53 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 01:16:53 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301010616.h016GrG08437@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #213

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 1 Jan 2003 01:13:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 213

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    IAS Bridge tool (vp)
    Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From Given Country? (Ivan Yurkinov)
    Re: Call Waiting Prison and Telemarketers (CB)
    A Better Telephone Company (David Esan)
    NEC NEAX 2400 E&M Card Specs (Marc A. Sonnenberg)
    Do Not Call Lists and AT&T -- Lawsuit Against AT&T? (Gene)
    Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By (William H. Bowen)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (Sam Etler)
    Christmas Carol (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: dt1649651@yahoo.com (vp)
Subject: IAS Bridge tool
Date: 31 Dec 2002 15:09:11 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Hope this tool may be useful for somebody who develops applications
using Mobitex network thru IAS server.

http://pluto.sivell.com/~vu/iasbridge/iasbridge.html

Happy New Year !!!

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

From: ivanyurkinov@yahoo.com.hk (Ivan Yurkinov)
Subject: Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country?
Date: 31 Dec 2002 15:33:43 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


alex@nexspace.com (Alex Kasper) wrote in message
news:<telecom22.209.3@telecom-digest.org>:

> But maybe ... hey, if I set up a 900 calling card type service where a
> caller could enter the number they're calling to AND FROM, would I be
> breaking any laws? How long before I got shut down by the FCC or
> killed by my provider?

>  ... of course this would be for amusement purposes only.> 

> Alex Kasper

Alex and Newsgroup Members,

Myself and business associates in Hong Kong would be interested in the
idea you have about the CLID TO and FROM.

We need this when calling into the US from HK.  We are an
international auction house and have been in business over 75 years.
We discreetly have to make calls on behalf of clients selling or
bidding on objects who desire that others not know who they are so not
as to increase bidding because others know their identity. I do not
think a 900 number call can be made from HK to US. Can you clarify
this?

Instead of calling a 900 number ... could we call a specially assigned
DID number on your Nortel Switch ... then via the outcall feature
being activated in conjunction with an IVR device we could enter the
tel number we are calling TO and any number we desire we are calling
FROM (default would be the DID number or a US based voicemail box
(VMB) accessible by tel or Internet or any other tel number such as my
US HQ Ofc in Seattle.

We would pay for this service and all calls made (service fee and long
distance charges). Payment can be made via American Express or Bank
Wire. We would also agree to post a $500 monetary deposit.

How soon could you set this up?  What would your service fees be?

I would sincerely appreciate you answering me in this group or
emailing me.


Thanks,

Ivan

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

From: CB <berry_s@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Call Waiting Prison and Telemarketers
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:34:09 -0500


Then, of course, you have Call Waiting - Caller ID so you can look and
see who is trying to reach you and then make the appropriate decisions
as to wether you should terminate the first call and take the second,
ignore the second caller, etc.

jbl <jbl@spamblocked.com> wrote in message
news:telecom22.191.2@telecom-digest.org:

> In <telecom22.187.7@telecom-digest.org>,
> PAT answers Geoffrey Welsh:

>> Where would we be without this new technology?!?

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder if it occurs to some of these
>> 'comedians' that occassionally two people are chatting about nothing
>> in particular and occassionally an important call may come in for
>> one or the other of them and they will wish to yeild their aimless
>> conversation in order to receive the important call?   PAT]

> Well, with CW at the least you know someone is trying to reach you.
> If you answer it, then you also know who.  That's what the new
> technology gets you.

> /JBL

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, really it is ideal for folks
> where one line is not enough, yet two lines is too many. This idea
> of one and a half lines works out fine. But one caveat:  If there are
> two or three guys living together in one house, but only one phone
> line with 'call waiting' (which would seem okay), then invariably,
> when the call waiting arrives, the call is going to be for one of the
> other people there, so someone has to yield the line or be imposed upon
> as a result. Call waiting only really works when you have a single
> person in a house who can realistically only talk on one call at a
> time. When you get a second or third person there in residence, or
> have heavy use on the phone (for example a modem or fax) then you
> really need to have two or three actual phone lines. Ideally they
> would be in a hunt group, so that any resident there could have the
> flexibility of overflow in calls at any time.   PAT]

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

From: david_esan@hotmail.com (David Esan)
Subject: A Better Telephone Company
Date: 31 Dec 2002 08:38:02 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


After the recent complaints about PacHell, SBC, etc., I wondered about
our local telephone company Frontier, now owned by someone else, once
part of Global Crossing, but once an independent company, Rochester
Telephone.  Well, today this article appeared in the local paper.

You will note that no one can explain, or accept blame, for the
misdialing.  But at least they are accepting responsibility.

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

AOL, Frontier to give refunds
N.Y. arranges payments to affected customers

By Michael Wentzel 
Democrat and Chronicle 

(December 31, 2002)  Frontier customers hit with shockingly high
long-distance bills while connecting to America Online will get
refunds or credits through an agreement forged by the New York state
Attorney General's Office.

See the rest at: http://www.democratandchronicle.com/biznews/1231story1_business.shtml

Happy New Year!

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

From: marcs@tushaus.com (Marc A. Sonnenberg)
Subject: NEC NEAX 2400 E&M Card Specs
Date: 31 Dec 2002 09:10:04 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


I'd like to know if anyone out there has any specs on this particular
card.  I believe the card is PN-20DTA.  I'm looking for technical
stuff (wink timing, etc), if this is possible to find.

Thanks in advance!!

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

From: Gene <gene_invalid@hotmail.com>
Subject: Do Not Call Lists and AT&T -- How to Proceed With a Lawsuit
Date: 31 Dec 2002 19:28:12 GMT
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Reply-To: Gene <gene_invalid@hotmail.com>


For years, I've told AT&T week after week not to call our home phone
number, and week after week we continue to get calls from from this
firm. The latest being this morning from their local service call
center in St. Louis.  1.800.288.2747

What I want to do is proceed with a civil lawsuit against AT&T for
damages, and to get fines applied to AT&T for continuing to make the
calls after I explicitly tell them to put us on their do not call
list.

Question: Does anyone know of any good web sites that explain similar
successful legal action against AT&T?

Question: Does anyone know the correct steps to file complaints
against AT&T?

I am in California.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Those fools kept calling me on my
distinctive ring-ring line for a month or more, passing all zeros
and 'name withheld' on the caller ID. They would always ask for some
name or person unknown to me. The first couple times I just treated
it as a wrong number. Then it began to get annoying. See my comments
in other recent issues about the fights I had with Southwestern Bell
about their 'privacy manager' service which I had gotten to try and
deal with the problem.  PAT]

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

From: William H. Bowen <bill_bowen@attbi.com>
Subject: Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 21:12:34 -0800
Reply-To: bill_bowen@attbi.com


I live in Sacramento and have driven by the billboard near the CalExpo
site off Business 80 in north Sacramento (the first of these
"intelligent" billboards put up).

For nearly all of the first 3 weeks that sign was in operation the
display itself was so screwed up one could not even read most of the
info on the billboard (looked like a TV with the horizontal sync bar
in the pix itself about 1/4 the way across from the right edge), not
to even mention the flashing and numerous dead "pixels".  Last weekend
(last time I was up that way) the sign seems to be working a bit
better, but still has a few glitches.

If this fellow is going to charge advertisers good money to display
their wares on his sign, he needs to make it a bit more reliable in
the basic sign sense. THEN he can work on the trick stuff.


Regards,

  Bill Bowen
  bill_bowen@attbi.com
  Sacramento, CA

Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> By MATT RICHTEL

> SAN FRANCISCO, Dec. 26 - Tom Langeland cannot hear your car radio.
> But he purports to be able to figure out what you're listening to -
> whether rock 'n' roll, sports, talk or news - in the privacy of your
> speeding automobile.

> Pursuing a business plan that has a science fiction bent but also 
> some skeptics, Mr. Langeland intends to modify electronic freeway 
> billboard advertisements by remote control to reflect your tastes, 
> and those of thousands of other drivers.

> As part of a $20 million investment, Mr. Langeland, a Sacramento-based
> entrepreneur, has erected 10 billboards that can display both video
> and text and can be programmed with changing messages and images. In
> addition, the billboards include fledgling technology that is designed
> to identify the radio frequencies of passers-by.

> Mr. Langeland, chief executive of the Alaris Media Network, intends to
> deduce demographic information from the radio stations drivers are
> listening to and then display advertising aimed at them based on
> income, sex, race and buying habit data. He said the idea was not to
> single out individuals, but drivers en masse. For instance, if a
> preponderance of rush-hour drivers are tuned to a radio station known
> to have affluent or educated listeners, then the advertisements at
> that time would be aimed at them.

> http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/27/business/media/27ADCO.html

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For reading NYT articles, where regis-
> tration (and the resulting spam) is required, Digest readers are 
> invited to login with our generic username 'telecomdigest' and the
> password 'telecomdigest'. PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 20:59:37 CST
From: Sam Etler <etler@cs.wisc.edu>
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names


John Higdon wrote:

> That said, I can tell you that tours of central offices ain't what
> they used to be in terms of excitement.

and Steve Sobol wrote:

> Judging by what I've seen from the one CO I've been in, it's nothing
> exciting.

I'd agree that 5ESS and DMS-100/200/250/500 offices are pretty boring.
However, if you can find a No. 1A ESS office or a No. 4 ESS office you
might find it a bit more interesting.  While these switches aren't as
fun to watch and hear as a Step-By-Step or a Crossbar, they're
sufficiently old enough to look interesting and not be in boring
cabinets for the most part.

The problem is finding one you can get into.  I've never been in a 1A
ESS office and they are getting harder and harder to find these days
(the LERG lists about 180, how many are still active is hard to say).
I've been lucky enough to tour a 4ESS office but that took being a
large AT&T customer and about half a year of begging.  And that was
pre-9/11.

So if you can find an older office, it's rather interesting.


sam

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

Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 00:27:30 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telcom-digest.org>
Subject: A Christmas Carol


Did you ever have a Christmas/New Year's Week which stood out in your
memory years later; one that you remembered over the years as one of
your memories that would not go away for whatever reason?  I've had a
few such occassions, but for various reasons, the winter of 1982-83
stands out for me.

That was the winter that was horribly cold in Chicago. Christmas and
New Years came on Saturday that year. Beginning about December 22,
the temperature dropped below zero, and stayed below  zero until
Saturday, Christmas Day. In fact, overnight low temperatures on the
23rd of December and again on Christmas Eve reached an all-time low
in Chicago -- *minus 27* below zero; I am told it reached -31 in
Lincolnwood/Niles, north suburbs. More about that in a minute, but my
memory of that year began a day or two before, around December 21 if
my memory is correct. I know it was a Monday night. I had finished 
doing something in downtown Chicago, and walked over to the subway to
get a train to go back to my home. 

As luck would have it, as I went down the stairs to the track level,
I saw a train waiting there and ran the rest of the way down the 
stairs in order to get on. I got on, the doors did not close, and
the train just sat there. Getting off and looking up the track, I
saw there were actually three trains ahead of us, all sitting and 
waiting. I 'assumed' by walking ahead to the earlier trains I could
ultimatly get home earlier, so I walked ahead to the train in the
front of the line, waiting silently, then I discovered the problem. 
Someone, in the spirit of the holidays, had *jumped* in front of the
first train. The motorman and conductor of that train were standing
there, the motorman with a ghastly look of horror on his face and 
tears in his eyes. The conductor was telling him, "well, don't feel
so upset, the dude was not doing it on account of you. He could have
chosen anyone." 

Looking down at the track, I saw a broken, very dismembered human
being. The individual on the tracks was wearing high heel shoes,
and a wig, but obviously a male, I suppose with some unresolved issues
in his troubled life. Up at the agent's booth, I saw two police 
officers approach the escalator which was running 'up'; one of the
cops took a key out his pocket, put it in the key switch and the
escalator immediatly switched gears and started running 'down'. The
police officers rode down in silence, bringing along with them a
'body bag' sort of thing. At the track level, one of the cops said
"did you get them to kill the power yet?" and the conductor talked
in his radio to someone (probably the Belmont tower) and within a
second or two, an annoucement came over the public address system
saying "power is off in the subway for a few minutes." You could
hear the hum of the train motors go silent, and see the overhead
lights in the train cars go off. Within a half second or so, the
batteries on each train kicked on and the car lights went back on,
powered by batteries. Although some people continued to sit in 
their seats on the train (no doubt pretending to read their news-
papers) most of the folks on board took advantage of this unscheduled
stop to get off the train and have a quick cigarette. 

The two police officers simply climbed down on the tracks and
began their gruesome job. In two or three minutes they were back up
on the platform with their body bag and stretcher, heading over to
the escalator, still running 'downward'. The one cop asks the other
one, "is the wagon man waiting upstairs?" The other cop assured him
it was up there waiting, and jovially tells a riddle story to the
other cop:  "Do you know why the wagon men always smoke cigars?" When 
the other cop says he has no idea, the first one tells him, "well,
that's because they want to kill the odor and stench in the back of
the wagon from the drunks they haul in."  Both cops get a big laugh 
out of that. Using the key switch once again, the cop starts the
escalator running 'upward' again, and with a jerk as it starts going
up, the one cop pushes the stretcher and cargo on it. "Be careful
going up; that stretcher got bumped" said the other cop. The first
cop replied, " I don't think the client will know the difference",
and they both laughed again and disappeared upward to the agent's
booth where they had come from. 

At track level, the conductor (who had more or less taken charge
of the scene; the motorman was still a nervous wreck by what had
happened), talked into his radio and a few seconds later the public
address system started talking again:  "At the count of ten, power
will be restored in the subway; leave the tracks now; ten -- nine --
eight -- seven --" (and backwards to zero), then after saying 'zero'
he said, "I repeat, power is being restored, better get out of the
way". The conductor said something in his radio, and we heard the
soft hum of the motors as they turned on and the lights in the train
went off of battery stand by and back on regular service. Passengers
began to crowd and push into the first train, even coming from a train
further back thinking they would get home now at last. By now there
were two more trains backed up there (five or six in total waiting)
all *mostly empty* except for the first train, which was crowded like
the poverbial can of sardines. Packed, standing/squeezing room only. 
The people who had stayed on the train during the entire affair
looked around smugly; they were the ones who still had seats, twice
or thrice as many of their fellow passengers were standing in the 
aisles or still trying to squeeze in the doorway, like frantic animals
anxious to get to their warm homes and supper. 

"All aboard, people, we are running twenty minutes late, step lively
please, I don't want to tell you twice", said the conductor, as 
people pushed each other out of the way to get on the train. 

The central dispatcher had forgotten he was still on the overhead
loud speaker; he *thought* he was talking on the telephone to the
conductor. Speaking (he thinks) to the conductor and motorman only on
the telephone in each car they use, dispatch says, "To clear things
up, train (number) run express to the end of the line at Howard. 
Conductor, repeat the annoucement to the passengers". No need for him
to say that, the passengers all heard it, and began storming back off
the train, like angry wasps whose nest had been molested. None the
less, the conductor, a true company man, repeated it in a feeble
voice through *his* loudspeaker to the passengers, 'this train will
run express to Howard ... Howard next stop' ... People who had been
sitting smugly had to get up, leave their seats and fight to get to
the door; their seats were not vacated two seconds until someone else
moved in. 

Now there is a huge crowd standing on the platform or moving toward
train number two ... the train at the front had pulled out. As to be
expected, the conductor on train two also chatted on the telephone
with dispatch, and soon came the announcement *he* would run express
to Howard Street also. Passengers who had fought and managed to get a
seat on train two had to get up and leave their seats again and find
the exit door.  The third and fourth trains in the backlog were
instructed to run express to some interim station, then the fifth or
sixth train (whichever one was the last, and in essence only a minute
or two late) ran normally. I *knew* what the routine would be by this
point and decided to sit on the bench there at track level and wait
it out. 

When the crowds waiting had thinned out by this point and all the
trains were back on schedule with intervals between them, along came
the station janitor, with his water hose and squee-jee mop. On the
radio, but to no one in particular, he mutters, "man on the tracks at
Randolph Street" and climbs down there. One would think no one had
heard him, but in fact the dispatcher on the radio did hear him and 
I suppose passed along the word over the telephone to train motormen
who would be along presently. The janitor hoses the blood and whatever
was left over from the 'incident' down the sewer there, uses his
squee-jee device to clean up a little there, then hastily gets back
up on the platform and dissappears. When the next train came through
a minute or so later, I took it home, but all the way home, I thought
about what had happened, and wondered what had been so painful to the
man that he had chosen to take the path he had. I still think about it
today sometimes. 

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

Three or four nights later was Christmas Eve. I had a part time job
as an audio/sound technician person for Chicago Temple, a rather 
grandiose, done in French provincial church downtown. They proposed
to continue their 137 year old (at that time) tradition of singing
Christmas Carols directly across the street from their building in
the Richard Daley Plaza area. They looked with much consternation as
the temperature got lower, and lower and lower the two days before
the evening of December 24. Finally, when it got to -27 degrees that
evening, a number of people said call it off, cancel it. But hardy
souls prevailed and said it *would go on as in the past*. No need to
break a tradition which had started in the 1840's and continued to
that year. The decision they reached was at 8:00 PM they would go
outside, across the street and sing *one stanza* of 'Hark the Herald
Angels Sing' then go back inside. I was outside in the cold a few
minutes longer than anyone else; I had to set up the tape recording
machine, and take it down and back inside. 

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


The next day was Christmas; some of my relatives came over for the
day to have dinner, etc. By mid-afternoon, the temperature had
actually climbed up to five degrees *above* zero. Poet Emily Dickinson
said one time that 'God gave us our relatives; thank God we can choose
our friends.' and never was there a truer message. The family all got
on the way back home by about 4 PM, and I set off to meet some friends
of mine that evening at Berghoff's Restaurant downtown. I took the
subway downtown, and got off at Adams Street, a main downtown area. 

As I came upstairs to the street level, the thing I noticed was the
entire intersection and for a block going west on Adams Street was
like a frozen lake of water. Over near the restaurant, I saw a truck
parked there which said on its side, 'City of Chicago, Water Distribution'
and next to it, a 'keep the city clean' trash can had been pulled
over, filled with lumber and trash, and set on fire. Two men were 
standing there at the fire, trying to stay warm. I found out they were
the supervisors of the men nearby who were in a *large, deep* hole in
the street; about fifteen feet deep, sort of wide. The two men who
were down there in the hole were wearing hip boots, and standing in
water which swirled around their legs. They had tools and were doing
some digging or replacing of pipe, I could not tell which. I was a 
bit fascinated by it and the supervisor noticed me there, and said
"would you like to work here?  I have a tool about the right size for
you," and he reached over to back of the truck. 

I assured him I was just watching, and asked him "How much do you pay
those guys?"  His answer was, "twenty dollars per hour, and this being
Christmas they get double-time pay from the City, and the union
requires that there be two men on the job for safety reasons." He
continued, "I guess this 'heat wave' we are having today caused the
problem. A main pipeline got frozen and broke, the City lost a million
gallons of water overnight last night." He called me 'governor'.
Very shyly, he reached inside his inside coat pocket and pulled out a
flask of whiskey. He took a swig, then handed it to his partner who
also drank deeply. Then he glanced at me, and offered the flask,
inviting me to join him and his partner there. I took a drink also,
and we stood there for a couple minutes more talking.

Then he said to me, "I want to show you something," and from the
inside of the back of their truck he pointed to a large glass jar 
filled with dollar bills and coins, etc. He continued, "our crew, and
some of the ladies in the office at Water Works have taken up a
collection; we use it every year to pay past due utility bills for
people in poor neighborhoods who are about to get service cut off.
Would you be interested in giving also?" Then he passed his flask
around again, and we all had another drink. I took a twenty dollar
bill from my purse and put it in his jar. He said, "I want to give 
you a Christmas present also," and he produced another jar with lots
of pin-on-your-coat buttons. One said, 'a resident of Chicago, and
proud of it' with  a little flag on it, another button had a flag and
said something like 'your water works because I work there.' or 
something to that effect. I took the 'resident of Chicago and proud
of it' button. 

He offered the flask again, but for me at least, the whiskey had
started lying to me, 'how good I feel and how warm I am' and I thought
it best to depart. I walked into Berghoff's restaurant where the
majority of the patrons were eating, blissfully unaware of the workmen
outside repairing the water pipe. Even my friends were a bit annoyed
because I was later than planned getting there.

So that was the Holiday Week twenty years ago for me. 

Anyway, best New Year wishes to each and everyone of you. I'll be back
on Thursday for another issue of the Digest. Please don't forget if
you want to help *me* dig out of my own holes and begin the year
in a better financial position, then use PayPal to make a donation
in any appropriate (for you) amount.

  http://telecom-digest.org    at the very bottom of the page is
a PayPal template. At any PayPal template my name is
'editor@telecom-digest.org'

If you prefer snailmail, the address is:

Telecom
PO Box 50
Independence, KS   67301-0050


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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #213
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan  2 02:16:02 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h027G2X22327;
	Thu, 2 Jan 2003 02:16:02 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 02:16:02 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301020716.h027G2X22327@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #214

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 2 Jan 2003 02:16:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 214

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Reconciling the CD Requests (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Member-Accessible DSL in a Community Rec Center? (AES/newspost)
    FCC Grants InterLATA LD to Qwest in Various States (Sam Etler)
    Re: So Many Holes, So Few Hacks (Gene)
    Free Caller ID? (John)
    AOL/Telco (Mis)Billing, was Re: Better Telephone Company (Danny Burstein)
    Requiem for the Disappearing Pay Phone (Eric De Mund)
    Broadcast School Reunion (Janet Leonard)
    Re: A Better Telephone Company (John R. Levine)
    Re: Do Not Call Lists and AT&T - How to Proceed With Lawsuit (AES/news)
    Re: Do Not Call Lists and AT&T - How to Proceed With Lawsuit (Stan)
    Re: Do Not Call Lists and AT&T - How to Proceed With Lawsuit (J Kelly)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (Jeff Moss)
    Re: A Christmas Carol (Mark Brader)

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, 1 Jan 2003 17:28:18 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Reconciling the CD Requests


On Wednesday, Joey Lindstrom and I exchanged *much* correspondence
regards the CD orders. There have been a large number of CDs sent
out, and in fact there were quite a few on Tuesday/Wednesday alone.

By now, *everyone* should have a CD who requested one, with the 
exception of people who *mailed in their requests via snail mail
up to around December 15*  or they will be arriving in the next
day or two in that 'gray area' between December 1 and 15. Mail gets
here when it gets here  although I tell Joey Lindstrom immediatly
on receipt of the mail.

Regards PayPal, orders received up to around December 20 *may* in fact
be there already, or certainly will arrive in a day or two. Basically,
any orders from anytime up to early/mid-December should be in your
hands. Anything before the Christmas mail rush.

The rest of the orders (such as the past few days) should be in your
hands if not by today or tomorrow then certainly by the fifth of the
month more or less. **Keep me posted on arrival/non-arrival, etc
please.**


PAT

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

From: AES/newspost <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Member-Accessible DSL in a Community Rec Center?
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 14:11:54 -0800


We're thinking about trying to establish an elementary broadband
internet connection that could be accessed and shared by unit owners
inside the recreation center of a vacation townhouse community.  The
community has120 units total, but only a small fraction of these might
use the service.  One proposal is the following:

*  Obtain DSL (or maybe cable modem) service into the manager's private 
office in the rec center, thus having it available for routine use by 
the manager.

*  In addition, run one or a couple of Ethernet ports (or maybe wi-fi 
service) into the adjoining public area of the rec center, thereby 
allowing unit owners who have signed up with the association to bring 
over their laptops and connect to the same service (including during 
times when the manager's office is closed).

Expected total usage would be small, both by manager and owners. This
is a largely nonresidential community; vacationing owners would
probably only drop over occasionally to check mail on their home
accounts or do a bit of web surfing.

We'd like to keep the system simple (one DSL line, one ISP account, no
individual email addresses or accounts, no usage charges, and in
general minimal bookkeeping and record keeping at all levels).

At the same time we'd like to try to limit the public access to
authorized owners only (since they'll probably be chipping in to cover
the annual costs), and not have the public ports turn into a wide open
gateway for local teenagers or computer gamers.

Any ideas on these latter points?  Are there inexpensive DSL routers, 
switches, firewalls, or gateways that could store a small set of 
passwords (maybe 20 of them) for obtaining public access from the public 
ports through to the DSL line?

(I imagine this could all be done in software within the manager's 
computer, but he's not a computer jock and it's only an elderly PC; 
something independent of the manager's machine would be desirable.)

Any ideas appreciated.  Email cc of responses appreciated.


"Power tends to corrupt.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely."  
Lord Acton (1834-1902)
"Dependence on advertising tends to corrupt.  Total dependence on 
advertising  corrupts totally." (today's equivalent)  

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

Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 14:02:38 CST
From: Sam Etler <etler@cs.wisc.edu>
Subject: FCC Grants InterLATA LD to Qwest in Various States


Effective 1/2/2003, the FCC has granted Qwest the rights to provide
InterLATA services in Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, North
Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.

The decisions are summarized in the Federal Register at 68 FR 119 (also
FCC Docket 02-332).

The Federal Register citation can be found linked from:

http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a030102c.html


sam

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

From: Gene <gene_invalid@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: So Many Holes, So Few Hacks
Date: 01 Jan 2003 20:15:51 GMT
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Reply-To: Gene <gene_invalid@hotmail.com>


They do not spend enough time on it.  If the industry doesn't do it,
our enemies will.  Being someone who manages web sites and actual
servers for multiple companies (some large and some very small), I can
definitely guarantee you that hackers routinely try the Microsoft IIS
hacks to gain access to public servers.  I even have one obscure
domain name that maybe gets 15 hits a day on average, and at least 5
of those hits each day are people trying to run Windows commands by
exploiting potential security holes.  I have much more popular servers
that are continuously bombarbed with the same exact hack attempts.  It
is almost like there are a group of people on the Internet who are
running a crawler across the entire web using their own private search
engine to try and hack every site on the web.  If you are running
Microsoft IIS on the Internet, you had better make sure whoever is
managing your server is routinely watching and analyzing log files and
double-checking and triple-checking that their sites are not being
hacked: new directories and files appearing on your servers, etc.
I've seen some public web servers that hackers quietly turned into
public file servers to distribute files.

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

From: jriker1@yahoo.com (John)
Subject: Free Caller ID?
Date: 1 Jan 2003 13:59:51 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


I live in Illinois and we have Ameritech for our local phone company.
My friend recently got one of those Panasonic 2.4 GHz phones with
caller id on it.  He did not order the service or anything, yet our
names and numbers are showing up on their phone.  Any idea why this
is?  Thanks.


JR

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Telco -- especially Ameritech -- does
not give anything for free. Telco -- especially Ameritech -- is notorious
about accounting and billing errors. Has your friend yet received any
bills at this new phone number?  If not, watch and see what the bill
reflects when it begins arriving each month. If he is already getting
bills on the number, and caller  ID is not one of the items on the
bill, then he should consider himself lucky, and hope that one of
their 'routine audits' from time to time does not eventually catch up
with the error. Needless to say, if he ever moves to new premises or
for any other reason invokes a service rep to look at and examine
his bill, his 'free ride' on caller ID may come to an end. If a
routine audit does eventually find the error, most telcos have a
policy of only back-billing for a year, and sometimes they wil write
it off and start fresh.

I had this happen to me about twenty years ago. I was living in a 
near-north side apartment hotel in Chicago with switchboard service
for the tenants. I ordered a private phone for my apartment. It took
a *full year* before Illinois Bell decided to start billing me for it.
And that was only because some damn phreak made a couple of phraud 
long distance calls which were coin-rated and they had to bill me. I
had what Bell referred to as 'unlimited extended call-pack' which
meant there were never any additional charges to anywhere in the old
area 312. I was *most careful* never to dial a long distance call on
that phone. Anyway, some phreak made a credit card call or somehow
billed my number. When the charges finally came through the accounting
department, no record of my number was found; the charges went into a
suspense ledger pending an investigator personally looking at the
charges and trying to figure them out. This time the investigator
dialed my number -- expecting to get an intercept, no such number
message -- but instead it rang open on my end (I was not at home),
so the investigator called the plant or central office and asked them
what they knew. He was told it had been in service for about a year,
and that apparently 'someone' had never sent the paperwork to the
accounting office; only to plant to get the number turned on. Lazy,
incompetent service reps!  The investigator saw to it the paperwork
got into accounting, and he personally back-billed me for service for
the eleven months the phone had been there to date. 

So you can never tell for sure about these things. Your friend may or
may not ever get a bill for the caller ID service. But better tell
him to not *ever* get into an argument with some smart-mouth service
rep who takes it on herself to review his service entirely.    PAT] 

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

From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: AOL/Telco (Mis)Billing, was Re: A Better Telephone Company
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 06:21:48 UTC
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


[ additions added at end ]

In <telecom22.213.4@telecom-digest.org> david_esan@hotmail.com (David
Esan) writes:

> After the recent complaints about PacHell, SBC, etc., I wondered about
> our local telephone company Frontier, now owned by someone else, once
> part of Global Crossing, but once an independent company, Rochester
> Telephone.  Well, today this article appeared in the local paper.

> You will note that no one can explain, or accept blame, for the
> misdialing.  But at least they are accepting responsibility.

>                    ===============

> AOL, Frontier to give refunds
> N.Y. arranges payments to affected customers

> By Michael Wentzel 
> Democrat and Chronicle 

> (December 31, 2002)  Frontier customers hit with shockingly high
> long-distance bills while connecting to America Online will get
> refunds or credits through an agreement forged by the New York state
> Attorney General's Office.

> See the rest at: http://www.democratandchronicle.com/biznews/1231story1_business.shtml

First, of course, no one's willing to push the true solution to this 
repeated problem, which is a rationalization of telco rates. In this day 
and age there's no jusitification for any sort of long distnace charges. 
(Well, aside from making money for the telcos).

Anyway, given those constraints, NYS's Attorney General did well.

Quoting from the press release:

	"Attorney General Eliot Spitzer today announced that his
office has reached an agreement with America Online, Inc. (AOL) and
Frontier Telephone Company of Rochester, Inc. (Frontier) to provide
$200,000 in refunds and credits to over 400 Rochester-area America On
Line (AOL) customers for long distance charges they incurred last
winter while using the Internet.

	http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2002/dec/dec30a_02.html

Oh, he's also got one describing a settlement in which the credit card 
company "First USA" will cut back, at least a bit, on sleaziness:

	"Attorney General Eliot Spitzer today announced a settlement
that will provide new protections against misleading telemarketing
campaigns for more than 53 million credit card holders.

	"First USA Bank N.A. - the largest issuer of Visa credit cards
- and also known as Bank One Delaware NA, has agreed to implement
broad reforms in its relationships with third-party vendors to ensure
that non-deceptive marketing campaigns are used in soliciting the
bank's credit card holders.  Specifically, under the agreement, First
USA must prohibit vendors from engaging in deceptive solicitations.

	http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2002/dec/dec31a_02.html
	

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

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

Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 00:41:57 -0800
From: Eric De Mund <ead@ixian.com>
Subject: Requiem for the Disappearing Pay Phone
Reply-To: Eric De Mund <ead@ixian.com>
Organization: Ixian Systems, Inc.


Pat,

As seen on Slashdot. Forwarded FYI.

    Requiem for the Disappearing Pay Phone
        from the endangered-species dept.
        posted by timothy[1] on Monday December 30, @21:38 (news)
        http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/31/0129208

    StarEmperor[2] writes "This Washington Post article[3] describes the
    steady disappearance of pay phones as cell phones become more
    commonplace. Many pay phones, which used to generate hundreds of
    dollars per month in revenue, are now used so infrequently that they
    cost money to operate. I wonder what kind of environmental hazard is
    posed by junking thousands of pay phones?"

    [ensuing discussion elided]

    Links:
    1. http://www.monkey.org/~timothy/
    2. http://www.starempires.com/
    3. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49017-2002Dec28.html

Happy New Year to you and yours, and thanks for another year of the
TELECOM Digest.


"Chess is a cramped game. It is like a knife fight in a phone booth." --Wayne
Folta

Eric De Mund <ead@ixian.com> | 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

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

From: jml@jagat.com (Janet Leonard)
Subject: Broadcast School Reunion
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 01:09:22 -0500


Hi Patrick,

Glad to find your website.  I'm hoping you might know some other
broadcasters that went to Grahm Jr College in Boston. Many radio
personalities attended Grahm. The college closed in 1979 and we're
trying to contact any former students for a reunion in Boston October
10-13, 2003.

You may wish to look at the website
http://hometown.aol.com/mhasson/GrahmHome.html

also checkwww.northeastairchecks.com

and    grahm.northeastairchecks.com

Hope to hear from you.

Janet Leonard
jml@jagat.com

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

Date: 1 Jan 2003 12:13:53 -0500
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: A Better Telephone Company
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> You will note that no one can explain, or accept blame, for the
> misdialing.  But at least they are accepting responsibility.

>                    ===============

> AOL, Frontier to give refunds
> N.Y. arranges payments to affected customers

Most peculiar.  This happens a lot when there's an area code split,
software that automatically selects the number to call doesn't realize
that the user's area code has changed, so it selects the closest
number in the old area code.  In this case, it was a big problem
because Rochester to Buffalo is an expensive inter-LATA call.  If this
was what happened (and I suspect it was), it's 100% AOL's fault.

On the other hand, it's just barely possible that Frontier screwed up
the reprogramming of some of its switches so that calls dialed without
an area code were misrouted to Buffalo, so they figured it was cheaper
to pay to make the problem go away than fester in court for years
trying to make sense of mountains of logs and phone bills.


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: AES/newspost <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Do Not Call Lists and AT&T -- How to Proceed With a Lawsuit
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 14:21:15 -0800


In article <telecom22.213.6@telecom-digest.org>, Gene
<gene_invalid@hotmail.com> wrote:

> For years, I've told AT&T week after week not to call our home phone
> number, and week after week we continue to get calls from from this
> firm. The latest being this morning from their local service call
> center in St. Louis.  1.800.288.2747

> What I want to do is proceed with a civil lawsuit against AT&T for
> damages, and to get fines applied to AT&T for continuing to make the
> calls after I explicitly tell them to put us on their do not call
> list.

Supports my long-held  view that Do Not Call lists are a basically 
unworkable idea, for multiple reasons, beginning with the fact that 
enforcement ends up as an expensive, time-consuming, and  mostly 
hopeless burden on the callee.

I suggest the only realistic solution for this whole problem is 
legislation requiring that all telemarketing, etc., calls be made using 
Caller ID and carrying a distinctive area code set aside for this 
purpose.  Recipients could then easily protect themselves by filtering 
and rejecting such calls, before the phone ever rings.

(This won't ever be implemented, however -- *because it would work*.)


"Power tends to corrupt.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely."  
Lord Acton (1834-1902)
"Dependence on advertising tends to corrupt.  Total dependence on 
advertising  corrupts totally." (today's equivalent)  

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

From: Stan <stanncno1spam@noispam.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Do Not Call Lists and AT&T -- How to Proceed With a Lawsuit
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 08:10:29 GMT
Organization: RoadRunner - Carolina


Gene <gene_invalid@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:telecom22.213.6@telecom-digest.org...

> Question: Does anyone know the correct steps to file complaints
> against AT&T?

Last year (2002), I filed two complaints with the FCC regarding AT&T's
blatant disregard for 'do not call' requests on my two phone
lines. The FCC took notice and action and I received some nice form
letters from both parties regarding my addition to AT&T's 'do not
call' list. Form list or no, it did finally work.

To file a complaint, use this link to the FCC web site:

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/complaints.html


-Stan

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

From: J Kelly <usenet-replies002@pileof_remove-me_monkeycrap.com>
Subject: Re: Do Not Call Lists and AT&T -- How to Proceed With a Lawsuit
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 09:33:12 -0600
Organization: pileofmonkeycrap


On 31 Dec 2002 19:28:12 GMT, Gene <gene_invalid@hotmail.com> wrote:

> For years, I've told AT&T week after week not to call our home phone
> number, and week after week we continue to get calls from from this
> firm. The latest being this morning from their local service call
> center in St. Louis.  1.800.288.2747

> What I want to do is proceed with a civil lawsuit against AT&T for
> damages, and to get fines applied to AT&T for continuing to make the
> calls after I explicitly tell them to put us on their do not call
> list.

> Question: Does anyone know of any good web sites that explain similar
> successful legal action against AT&T?

> Question: Does anyone know the correct steps to file complaints
> against AT&T?

Check out the private citizen website http://www.privatecitizen.com
They have info available to sue telemarketers.  You may have to join
or pay for their book to get the info.  I signed up with them a couple
months ago and telemarketing calls have pretty much stopped here, I
was getting 10-12 "hang-up" calls a day before joining.  About a month
after joining they seem to have stopped.

Anyone know who the hell US Telecom is?  That is one outfit that I
have had trouble with in the recent past.  Whenever I ask for a copy
of their do not call policy I mysteriously get cut off.  They seem to
have stopped calling about 3 weeks ago as well, so maybe they are on
the list Private Citizen maintains.

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

From: Tony Pelliccio <tonypo1@cox.takemeout2.net>
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 08:47:20 GMT


In article <telecom22.212.7@telecom-digest.org>, johnl@iecc.com says...
>> OT: Does anyone know if its possible to get a tour inside a Central
>> Office?

> It entirely depends on the telco.  My small local ILEC has an annual
> open house with CO tour.  Down the road, Verizon seems not to let
> anyone into their COs ever without suitable badges.

Yeah, Verizon is petrified to let anyone see those humming boxes. I
did get a chance to look at Brooks Fiber's 5ESS some times ago. It
just isn't the same as the old mechanical beauties. Yeah, they're
feature rich but they just don't make em' like they used to.

In article <telecom22.212.8@telecom-digest.org>, sjsobol@JustThe.net
says:

> Jeff Moss <jeffmoss26@adelphia.net> wrote:

>> I was at my dad's office last week (they are an Ameritech Distributor)
>> and I threw away tons of Ameritech papers. There was a list of the
>> Cleveland area Central offices. I didnt keep it but I remember they
>> used really odd codes ex. Beachwood (30 sec away from my house) would
>> be BCHW1023i0 or something.

> http://dslreports.com/coinfo

Verizon uses nice simplistic names for switches here in RI. 

PRVDRIWA is the switch on Washington Street in downtown Providence. 
PRVDRIBR is the swtich on Broad Street on the southern side of the city. 
NPRVRIMS is the switch on Mineral Spring Avenue in North Providence. 
EPRVRINB is the swtich on North Broadway in East Providence. 


Tony

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

From: jeffmoss26@adelphia.net (Jeff Moss)
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Date: 1 Jan 2003 07:16:18 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Thanks for the info.

I am guessing that the one near me is a 5ESS. They just finished
adding space to the CO so competitors could put equipment in there. I
asked a tech who was at a job I did with my dad's company.  I could
ask someone at his office if they have any contacts to get a tour.

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

Subject: Re: A Christmas Carol
Date: Wed,  1 Jan 2003 02:45:56 EST
From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader)


Pat writes:

> I saw a train waiting there and ran the rest of the way down the 
> stairs in order to get on. I got on, the doors did not close, and
> the train just sat there. Getting off and looking up the track, I
> saw there were actually three trains ahead of us, all sitting and 
> waiting. I 'assumed' by walking ahead to the earlier trains I could
> ultimately get home earlier ...

For those not familiar with the Chicago transit system, this may
sound a bit odd -- as though Pat was walking through the tunnel
between stations.  Actually, there are two subway lines in the city
center that each have a *continuous* platform alongside the tracks
for about 3,000 feet.  Normally each train makes 3 or 4 stops along
this section.

This arrangement gives the CTA maximum flexibility: street entrances
can be located all along the section, independent of the actual stops,
and the number of stops can even be changed if they think it desirable.

Thanks for the stories, Pat.

Mark Brader      |       Caution
msb@vex.net      |       Do not run on the stairs
Toronto          |       Use the hand rail
                                  -- notice at British train station

My text in this article is in the public domain.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are quite welcome, Mark. There are
all sorts of stories about the <C>hicago <T>ransit <A>trocity, for 
example what slum landlords they are regards the lack of upkeep at
their non-transit use facilities (such as buildings they own but rent
out which formerly had been transit facilities, or buildings which are
located underneath the elevated tracks in various areas.) They've had
two of their repair shops burn down under mysterious circumstances in
the past few years. Did you ever see what a dump! a complete wreck the
old 'Uptown Station' building at Wilson Avenue has become since CTA
took it over from North Shore Railroad line forty years ago?  CTA has
not put five cents worth of work in the property since. What spare
money they get (they are always crying poor-mouth since back in the
days when fares were five cents to last year when the fares got up
to a dollar seventy five cents or so.) When the legislature gives them
a little money, it immediatly goes into fancy dinners and chauffer
driven limousines for their executives, none of whom would ever be
caught dead riding on a CTA train or bus. Of course, its all just 
politics as usual in the heavily Democratic-controlled party in 
Chicago; a very corrupt organization in a very corrupt city. More 
and more citizens there are referring to it as the Chicago Transit
Atrocity rather than 'Authority'; it may soon be going the way of the
CHA -- Chicago Housing Atrocity -- into federal receivership, until/
unless they get things in order. God, I am *so glad* to be done with

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #214
******************************
    
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan  2 21:54:39 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h032sdW03220;
	Thu, 2 Jan 2003 21:54:39 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 21:54:39 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301030254.h032sdW03220@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #215

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 2 Jan 2003 21:55:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 215

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Public Interest Registry Assumes Control of .ORG Domain (Anne Shroeder)
    UCLA Winter Short Courses in Communications Engineering (Bill Goodin)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (Joel B. Levin)
    Re: Why Won't my Sprint PCS Phone Roam? (Samsung SCH-3500) (Joel Levin)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (Sam Etler)
    Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist (Phil Earnhardt)
    Re: So Many Holes, So Few Hacks (Michael A. Covington)
    Re: Call Waiting Prison and Telemarketers (Clarence Dold)
    Modular ICS + Startalk (Harry)
    Very Newbie Reboot Question (Reed Loefgren)

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 <anne@isoc.org>
Subject: Public Interest Registry Assumes Control of .ORG Domain
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 10:56:04 -0500


Contact: Julie Williams 703-464-7005, x 111; cell 703-402-6715
E-mail: JWilliams@PIR.org

PUBLIC INTEREST REGISTRY ASSUMES CONTROL OF .ORG DOMAIN NAME REGISTRY
IN HISTORIC TRANSITION Largest domain redelegation in the history of
the Internet commences

Reston, VA - January 2, 2003 - The Public Interest Registry (PIR)
today announced that it has assumed the role of registry operator for
the .ORG top-level domain in a smooth handoff from former operator
VeriSign Global Registry Services.  This historic transition, which
commenced yesterday when PIR officially assumed control of registry
operations, marks the beginning of the largest transfer of data from
one registry to another in the history of the Internet.

"We are pleased to begin the transition process," said David Maher,
chairman of the PIR board.  "We have put together a solid transition
team and are working together toward a smooth, stable transition
resulting in no interruption of service for .ORG registrants."

In order to minimize disruption, a 25-day phase-in period has begun
during which VeriSign will still provide back-end technical services.
This will allow those that sell .ORG domain names more time to prepare
for the transition.  On January 25, 2003, the technical services for
the registry will be cutover from VeriSign to Afilias Limited, PIR's
chosen back-end service provider.

The .ORG domain, which has come to be associated with noncommercial
organizations, is the Internet's fifth largest top-level domain,
housing over 2.4 million domain names worldwide.  PIR was created to
manage the .ORG registry by the Internet Society (ISOC), and is
committed to setting a new standard for registry services in its
management of .ORG that will meet the unique needs and interests of
noncommercial organizations around the world.

Earlier this year, the Board of Directors of the Internet Corporation
for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) selected ISOC's proposal from
among 11 organizations bidding to operate the .ORG top-level domain.
VeriSign's contract as registry operator for .ORG expired on December
31, 2002.  As such, it is relinquishing .ORG to comply with an
agreement entered into with the ICANN and the U.S. Department of
Commerce in May 2001.

ABOUT PIR

Public Interest Registry (www.PIR.org) is a not-for-profit corporation
created to manage the .ORG domain.  PIR's mission is to manage the
.ORG domain in a way that supports the continuing evolution of the
Internet as a research, education and communications infrastructure,
and educates and empowers the noncommercial community to most
effectively utilize the Internet.  PIR is based in Reston, VA.

PIR was created by the Internet Society (www.ISOC.org).  ISOC is a
not-for-profit, open membership organization founded in 1991 and is
dedicated to ensuring the open evolution, development and use of the
Internet for the benefit of all people.  It provides leadership in
addressing issues that confront the future of the Internet, and is the
organizational home for the groups responsible for Internet
infrastructure standards.

For additional information on PIR and the .ORG registry, please visit
www.PIR.org.

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

From: bgoodin@unex.ucla.edu
Subject: UCLA Winter Short Courses in Communications Engineering
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 11:32:09 -0800
Organization: University of California, Los Angeles


This winter, UCLA Extension will present the following communications
engineering short courses on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles.

January 6-10, 2003, "Digital Signal Processing: Theory, Algorithms,
and Implementation".  The instructor is Robert W. Stewart, PhD,
Faculty Member, Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering,
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom, $1995.

http://www.uclaextension.org/unexVirtual.cfm?d=/shortcourses/winter2003/03WiN7070.cfm

January 13-17, 2003, "Satellite Communications Networks and
Applications: Selecting the Right Technology and Methodology".  The
instructors are Bruce Elbert, MSEE, MBA, Managing Director,
Application Strategy Consulting, and David J. Bell, MSEE, Senior
Member Technical Staff, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, $1995.

http://www.uclaextension.org/unexVirtual.cfm?d=/shortcourses/winter2003/03WiN7073.cfm

January 13-17, 2003, "Digital Avionics Systems".  The instructors are
Cary R. Spitzer, MS, President, AvioniCon, Inc.; Robert P. Lyons, Jr.,
MSEE, Colonel, USAF, and Deputy Director, Air Force Material Command
Acquisition Center of Excellence; and Michael J. Morgan, Vice
President, Advanced System Development, Avidyne, Inc., $1995.

http://www.uclaextension.org/unexVirtual.cfm?d=/shortcourses/winter2003/03WiN7072.cfm

January 22-24, 2003, "Using Design Patterns, Frameworks, and CORBA to
Develop Object-Oriented Communication Systems".  The instructor is
Douglas C. Schmidt, PhD, Associate Professor, Computer Science
Department, University of California, Irvine, $1395.

http://www.uclaextension.org/unexVirtual.cfm?d=/shortcourses/winter2003/03WiN7076.cfm

January 27-30, 2003, "Practical Cryptography for Computer and Network
Security".  The instructors are Vwani P. Roychowdhury, PhD, Professor,
Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA; and P. Oscar Boykin, PhD,
Research Scientist, Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA, $1695.

http://www.uclaextension.org/unexVirtual.cfm?d=/shortcourses/winter2003/03WiN7078.cfm

February 3-6, 2003, "Satellite-Based Communications, Navigation, and
Surveillance for Air Traffic Management (CNS/ATM)".  The instructors
are Cary R. Spitzer, MS, President, AvioniCon, Inc.; Wayne Aleshire,
Captain, United Airlines; Chris Benich, Director, CNS/ATM Solutions
Center of Excellence, Honeywell Aerospace Electronic Systems; and Roy
T. Oishi, ARINC Fellow and Chairman, Airlines Electronic Engineering
Committee, ARINC, Inc., $1695.

http://www.uclaextension.org/unexVirtual.cfm?d=/shortcourses/winter2003/03WiN7080.cfm

February 10-12, 2003, "Field Programmable Gate Arrays for Digital
Signal Processing and Communications".  The instructor is Robert W.
Stewart, PhD, Faculty Member, Department of Electronic and Electrical
Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom, $1395.

http://www.uclaextension.org/unexVirtual.cfm?d=/shortcourses/winter2003/03WiN7393.cfm

February 13-14, 2003, "DSP-Based Carrier and Timing Recovery
Techniques in Digital Modems".  The instructor is Fred Harris, MS,
Cubic Signal Processing Chair Professor of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, San Diego State University, $1095.

http://www.uclaextension.org/unexVirtual.cfm?d=/shortcourses/winter2003/03WiN7079.cfm

February 20-21, 2003, "Satellite Link Budget Training Using SatMaster
Pro Software".  The instructor is Bruce R. Elbert, MSEE, MBA,
President, Application Technology Strategy, Inc., $1095.

http://www.uclaextension.org/unexVirtual.cfm?d=/shortcourses/winter2003/03WiN7828.cfm

February 24-25, 2003, "Space-Time Coding".  The instructors are
Michael P. Fitz, PhD, Professor, Electrical Engineering Department,
UCLA; Hesham El Gamal, PhD, Assistant Professor, Electrical
Engineering Department, Ohio State University, Columbus; and Giuseppe
Caire, PhD, Professor, Department of Mobile Communications, Institute
Eurecom, Sophia-Antipolis, France, $1095.  

http://www.uclaextension.org/unexVirtual.cfm?d=/shortcourses/winter2003/03WiN7394.cfm

February 26-28, 2003, "Wireless Sensor Networks and Their Tactical
Applications".  The instructors are William J. Kaiser, PhD, Professor,
Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA; William M. Merrill, PhD,
Senior Development Engineer, Sensoria Corporation; Frederic Newberg,
PhD, Senior Design Engineer, Sensoria Corporation; Greg Pottie, PhD,
Professor, Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA; and Kathy Sohrabi,
PhD, Senior Development Engineer, Sensoria Corporation, $1395.

http://www.uclaextension.org/unexVirtual.cfm?d=/shortcourses/winter2003/03WiN7436.cfm

March 3-4, 2003,  "System Modeling and Diagnostics Using Bayesian
Networks".  The instructor is Adnan Darwiche, PhD, Assistant
Professor, Computer Science Department, UCLA, $1095.

http://www.uclaextension.org/unexVirtual.cfm?d=/shortcourses/winter2003/03WiN7086.cfm

For additional information and complete descriptions of all short
courses, please visit our website, http://uclaextension.org/shortcourses/,

or:

(310) 825-3344  phone 
(310) 206-2815  fax

shortcourses@uclaextension.org 

All of these courses may also be presented on-site at company
locations.

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

From: jbl <jbl@spamblocked.com>
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 23:17:23 -0700
Organization: On the desert
Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com


In <telecom22.212.6@telecom-digest.org>, John Higdon
<no-spam@amadeus.kome.com> wrote:

> In article <telecom22.211.7@telecom-digest.org>,
> jeffmoss26@adelphia.net (Jeff Moss) wrote:

>> OT: Does anyone know if its possible to get a tour inside a Central
>> Office?

> It is a lot harder than it used to be. For one thing, staff cutbacks
> by the ILECs have left few people available to conduct such tours.
> I would imagine in this post 9/11 world, security is probably
> another issue.

> That said, I can tell you that tours of central offices ain't what
> they used to be in terms of excitement....

In the early days of the ARPAnet we at BBN were doing a lot of
business with the engineers at various long-lines facilities,
particularly in Boston at the AT&T Boston-5 test board.  My colleague
and I were interested in getting a tour of the workings, and went to
the guy who was more or less our liaison to AT&T (this was Bob Kahn)
to see if he could arrange something.  He suggested that my colleague
and I should just talk to our pals at Boston-5 directly and not
involve any higher-ups in either company.  The head engineer there
agreed, provided we would also show them what we were doing too (the
idea of being able to remotely monitor and test fifteen independent
wideband lines all around the country from one place in Cambridge was
completely new and bewildering to them in 1970-71).

We got a great tour, and they had a good time too.

Hmmm.  And now Verizon probably owns the building that Boston-5 was
in, though not of course that long-lines operation, and BBN is part of
Verizon.  Who'd 'a' thought?


JBL

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

From: jbl <jbl@spamblocked.com>
Subject: Re: Why Won't my Sprint PCS Phone Roam? (Samsung SCH-3500)
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 23:23:45 -0700
Organization: On the desert
Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com


In <telecom22.210.12@telecom-digest.org>, Linc Madison
<nobody@example.com> wrote:

> I've had a Sprint PCS phone, specifically a Samsung SCH-3500, for
> almost three years now. In those three years, I have had two occasions
> to attempt an outgoing call while outside Sprint's network. Both
> times, the signal meter indicated I had a strong signal, and I did
> everything the phone's manual said to do in order to make a roaming
> call, but the calls never connected. I also just did a test here in
> San Francisco with the same results. In addition, I also attempted an
> incoming call while the phone was in analog roaming mode.

It worked for me on my phone in New Hampshire once or twice.

In Arizona, where coverage was much sparser, I was still able to connect
to services.  However Sprint at the time did not have roaming contracts
where I was (and there were and are lots of places where Sprint had no
coverage).  Connecting to services meant that I could have dialed 911 if
I'd needed to; but when I tried to call a real number, it denied me the
privilege or, in another case offered to let me key in a credit card
number (which I didn't try as I didn't have time and it wasn't so
important anyhow).  So it's either your phone or your region that's the
problem.

[I've since dropped Sprint, partly because I needed a new phone and
someone else had good cheaper phones and at least equivalent plans (I
think Sprint would have modified my plan nicely to retain me if I'd given
them the chance), and more important, my home location, which is marginal
on Sprint, was known to me to have better coverage on the new service.]


JBL

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 02:02:00 CST
From: Sam Etler <etler@cs.wisc.edu>
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names


> Verizon uses nice simplistic names for switches here in RI. 

> PRVDRIWA is the switch on Washington Street in downtown Providence. 
> PRVDRIBR is the swtich on Broad Street on the southern side of the city. 
> NPRVRIMS is the switch on Mineral Spring Avenue in North Providence. 
> EPRVRINB is the swtich on North Broadway in East Providence. 

These are what are known as CLLI codes (Common Language Location
Identifier).  The codes above refer to the building that the switch is
in.  The switch itself will have a CLLI code such as PRVDRIWADS2.
PRVD is the city, RI the state, WA the building code, DS2 the
equipment or location within that building (I've seen where cages
within a datacenter have their own code as opposed to incidental
equipment in that cage).

So for instance at the PRVDRIWA office these are some of the codes in
use:

PRVDRIWA06T	DMS-200 Tandem
PRVDRIWA23W	No. 2 STP
PRVDRIWADS2	DMS-100 Local switch

There's others as well since most equipment in a CO will have a CLLI
code.  The last three alphanumerics can give an indication to the
general type of equipment.  nnT is often a tandem.  nnW is often a STP
or SCP.  DSn is a digital switch.  CGn is a non-digital electronic
switch (1A ESS for instance, stands for Control Group).  RSn is a
digital remote switch.  CMn is a Cellular Mobile switch.  You'll
rarely see them, but SGn was used for Step switches (Selector Group)
and MGx for Crossbars (Marker Group).

Some carriers (AT&T for instance) combine CLLI codes to create Trunk
Group identifiers.  So for instance the wonderfully cryptic
SNJSCA0241TSNTDCABXN021701 indicates:

A Location: SNJSCA0241T (San Jose, CA 4ESS)
Z Location: SNTDCABXN02 (Santa Clara, CA datacenter cage)
1701: BTFN (Base Traffic Number) of the Trunk Group on that 4ESS

CLLI codes are managed by Telcordia.  They also allocate CLEI
(Equipment Identifier) codes, CLFI (Facility Identifier) codes, CLCI
(Circuit Identifier) codes, and other various codes.


sam

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

From: Phil Earnhardt <pae@dim.com>
Subject: Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 06:45:38 -0700


On Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:54:41 -0500, Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
wrote:

> Pop-up advertisements, already the bane of millions of Web surfers, 
> are becoming more intrusive.

Mozilla (downloadable from www.mozilla.org) now allows you to
categorically disable pop-up windows.
Preferences->Advanced->Scripts&Windows has a check-box to enable
unrequested windows. By un-checking this, all JavaScript pop-ups are
gone. This is distinct from links that open a new window when you
click them. These are windows you're [implicitly] requesting; spammers
don't use this feature. Mozilla has a check-box to disable these
windows, but I see no reason to disable them.

Mozilla also has another option to change the behavior of animations
to running only once or not at all. This kills the banner
advertisements where the advertisements suck processor resources
infinitely cycling through color maps or "vibrating" the
advertisement. And you apparently stop winning the "If this box is
flashing, you're a winner!!!" advertisements. ;-)

Running with these two features has dramatically altered my browsing
experience. I forget how hostile the web is until I use a computer
that isn't configured this way.

Netscape 7, based on Mozilla, also has both of these features
available. However, they do not have the the check-box to disable the
opening of unrequested windows. Fortunately, you can still add the
preference by just adding the line:

user_pref("dom.disable_open_during_load", true);

to your user.js or prefs.js. On windows machines, this file is in a
hidden directory and it must be edited when Netscape 7 is not running.
The site http://techaholic.net/ns7.html is a good resource for info
about Mozilla/Netscape 7.

Categorically disabling pop-ups will break some sites that use them
for non-advertising purposes. My guess is that such sites will rapidly
abandon this Javascript feature precisely because users are turning
them off. If you still use sites that use pop-ups, you can run with
Mozilla and turn the feature on as you need it.

There is one "digital divide": households that have Internet access
vs. households that don't. Some point to a second divide: high-speed
digital access vs. dial-up access. I think there's a third divide that
may be more important than the second: users who know how to take
effective countermeasures against unsolicited commercial intrusions
(e.g. unsolicited commercial email, pop-up advertising, etc.) and
those who don't.


--phil

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

From: Michael A. Covington <look@www.covingtoninnovations.com.for.address>
Subject: Re: So Many Holes, So Few Hacks
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 10:56:37 -0500


Gene <gene_invalid@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:telecom22.214.4@telecom-digest.org:

> They do not spend enough time on it.  If the industry doesn't do it,
> our enemies will.  Being someone who manages web sites and actual
> servers for multiple companies (some large and some very small), I can
> definitely guarantee you that hackers routinely try the Microsoft IIS
> hacks to gain access to public servers.

Yes -- This happens to us too; many times a day, almost exactly the same
commands are tried, and they always fail.  (Microsoft's IIS Lockdown Kit
with URLSCAN does its job.)  My understanding is that we are actually
looking at viruses doing the probing automatically.  What they'd do if they
got in, I'm not sure.

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

From: dold@75.usenet.us.com
Subject: Re: Call Waiting Prison and Telemarketers
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 18:53:40 UTC
Organization: a2i network


CB <berry_s@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Then, of course, you have Call Waiting - Caller ID so you can look and
> see who is trying to reach you and then make the appropriate decisions
> as to wether you should terminate the first call and take the second,
> ignore the second caller, etc.

I had that feature in a house where three people were sharing a phone.
Technically, it is an annoyance, as you now get to hear, not only the call
waiting tone, but apparently the caller ID burst of modem data.
Nice feature, bad implementation.

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

From: harryhydro@hotmail.com (harry)
Subject: Modular ICS + Startalk
Date: 2 Jan 2003 07:01:43 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Hi:

    I hope I'm giving you enough info.  This ICS has system version
SP: 30JBM03 NAT.  In the past we've tried to put a Startalk on but had
problems that was stated to be System Version issues..  Is this ture
or is this system capable of supporting a Startalk?

Thanks!

Harry

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

From: reedl@tatteredcover.com (Reed Loefgren)
Subject: Very Newbie Reboot Question
Date: 2 Jan 2003 13:53:57 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


I have an SX-2000 Light system. I have never rebooted it except when
the power failed. I've looked in the docs I have and cannot find
mention of a command to reboot (or shutdown) except for: PROGrammed
Reboot SCHedule <blah> <blah>. I don't want to schedule a repetitive
reboot.

'spose I could issue 'reboot' but are there any systems that need to
be offline before I do this, or does reboot handle all this, like a PC
would?

Thanks for the handholding,


rl

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #215
******************************

From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan  2 22:50:41 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h033ofn04206;
	Thu, 2 Jan 2003 22:50:41 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 22:50:41 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301030350.h033ofn04206@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #216

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 2 Jan 2003 22:51:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 216

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Happy Birthday, Internet; But Which One? (Patrick Townson via Yahoo)
    FBI Nabs DirecTV-Sharing Student (Monty Solomon)
    $100K Reward for Stolen ID Data (Monty Solomon)
    Out the Door (Monty Solomon)
    There's No Place Like Home / Why American Teens Don't ... (Monty Solomon)
    U.S. TV Shows Losing Potency Around World (Monty Solomon)
    Professors Vie With Web for Class's Attention (Monty Solomon)
    Pact Lifts an Obstacle to HDTV Transition (Monty Solomon)
    Apple Releases iCal 1.0.1 and iSync 1.0 (Monty Solomon)
    TiVo, Best Buy Teamed to Deliver Short Film by Standard (Monty Solomon)
    EarthLink Announces High-Speed 'Safety Net' Program for DirecTV (Solomon)
    State Tracking Of Auto Movements By GPS Called 'Nutty' (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Free Caller ID? (joe@obilivan.net)
    Caller ID Problems (J. Kelly)
    Re: Call Waiting Prison and Telemarketers (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.

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

Date: 3 Jan 2003 02:56:08 -0000
From: Patrick Townson <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Happy Birthday, Internet; But Which One?


Did the Internet have its 20th birthday on January 1, or was it more
like its 33rd birthday as many claim?  Here is the full story, as it
appeared in Yahoo! News today.

Some Honoring Internet's 'Birthday'
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20030103/ap_on_hi_te/techbits_internet_bday


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 18:03:22 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: FBI Nabs DirecTV-Sharing Student


By Associated Press
11:46 AM Jan. 02, 2003 PT

WASHINGTON -- The FBI arrested a Russian college student Thursday who
was accused of stealing and distributing hundreds of secret documents
about new antipiracy technology from DirecTV, the nation's leading
satellite television company.

The student, identified as Igor Serebryany, 19, of Los Angeles, was
accused of sending over the Internet hundreds of sensitive documents
describing details about DirecTV's latest "access card" technology --
credit-card devices controlling which of the company's 11 million
U.S. subscribers can view particular channels.

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,57039,00.html

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 18:05:17 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: $100K Reward for Stolen ID Data


By Associated Press
01:55 PM Jan. 02, 2003 PT

PHOENIX -- A government contractor posted a $100,000 reward Tuesday 
in the theft of Social Security numbers and other personal records of 
500,000 military service members and their families in 16 states.

The theft of computer hard drives from TriWest Healthcare Alliance 
could turn into one of the largest identity thefts on record if the 
information is misused, the Federal Trade Commission said.

On Tuesday, prosecutors and TriWest jointly announced the reward for 
information leading to the arrest and conviction of thieves who broke 
into Phoenix-based TriWest's office Dec. 14 and stole the equipment.

The theft came as the Defense Department is working to computerize 
the medical records of all military personnel.

The stolen computers have no connection to the larger project, but 
Pentagon officials are "going to learn from this issue and do what's 
necessary" to protect sensitive information, spokesman Jim Turner 
said.

The stolen hard drives contained names, addresses, phone numbers, 
medical claim histories and Social Security numbers.

http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,57045,00.html

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 18:12:44 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Out the Door


By BOB HERBERT

Merry Christmas. Get lost.

That, essentially, was the message Robert Pagein received from his 
employers -- make that former employers -- at Verizon Communications.

Mr. Pagein, who is married and has a year-old son, was a field
technician who had worked for the phone company for four years. One of
the lures of the job was its stability. The pay wasn't great, but it
was steady. If you were disciplined you could pay your bills, take a
vacation every year or so, and put a little aside.

That's the way it works in theory. In reality, Mr. Pagein was one of
2,400 Verizon workers in New York who were shown the door just a few
days before Christmas. Those workers formed the bulk of a pre-holiday
wave of terminations that claimed the jobs of 3,500 Verizon employees
in the Northeast and mid-Atlantic states.

Mr. Pagein will not be destitute. His wife is working and he has a
college degree. But the cold-blooded way in which he and his fellow
workers were lopped off the employment rolls by Verizon, and the
phenomenal gap that exists between the compensation available to the
company's ordinary workers and the fabulous, multimillion-dollar
packages taken home by executives at the top of the Verizon pyramid,
has shaken his faith in a system he believed in.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/01/opinion/01HERB.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Welcome aboard, Mr. Pagein. A lot of us
have given up on the 'system' in the past few years. You are our newest
member in a growing club.  Don't forget when reading NYT articles, you
are invited to login using 'telecomdigest' with password 'telecomdigest'
to preserve your own privacy.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 18:23:51 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: There's No Place Like Home / Why American Teens Don't Want ...
There's No Place Like Home


Why American Teens Don't Want the New Cell Phones.

By Brendan I. Koerner

The past year was a thoroughly rotten one for America's wireless
industry, stung by price wars and tumbling demand. Pretty much
everyone who wants a cell phone already has one, and they're none too
eager to buy new $300-$400 handsets simply for the luxury of a sleeker
faceplate or a tidier address book. The only way for the mobile market
to grow is to get users psyched about data services, such as
downloading games, transmitting pictures, or the Short Messaging
Service, the wireless equivalent of instant messaging.  Which is why
T-Mobile hired Catherine Zeta-Jones to hawk its next-generation phones
and why Verizon's running those Euro-cool "Hello, Moto!" commercials
that trumpet cell phones as go-anywhere gaming machines.


http://slate.msn.com/id/2076197/

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 16:14:10 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: U.S. TV Shows Losing Potency Around World


By SUZANNE KAPNER

LONDON - Want to catch the latest episode of the CBS hit "C.S.I." in 
France? Tune in Saturdays at 11 p.m. How about the CBS show "Judging 
Amy" in Singapore? Try weekdays at midnight.

Those programs would have been candidates for prime time several 
years ago. But today American dramas and sitcoms -- though some 
remain popular -- increasingly occupy fringe time slots on foreign 
networks, industry executives say. Instead, a growing number of shows 
produced by local broadcasters are on the air at the best times.

"Whereas American TV shows used to occupy prime-time slots, they are
now more typically on cable, or airing in late-night or weekend
slots," said Michael Grindon, president of Sony Pictures Television
International.

The shift counters a longstanding assumption that TV shows produced in
the United States would continue to overshadow locally produced shows
from Singapore to Sicily. The changes are coming at a time when the
influence of the United States on international affairs has chafed
friends and foes alike, and some people are expressing relief that at
least on television American culture is no longer quite the force it
once was.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/02/business/businessspecial/02TUBE.html

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 17:07:15 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Professors Vie With Web for Class's Attention


By JOHN SCHWARTZ

Universities are rushing toward a wireless future, installing networks
that let students and the faculty surf the Internet from laptop
computers in the classroom, in the library or by those ponds that
always seem to show up on the cover of the campus brochure.

But professors say the technology poses a growing challenge for them:
retaining their students' attention.

In a classroom at American University in Washington on a recent 
afternoon, the benefits and drawbacks of the new wireless world were 
on display. From the back row of an amphitheater classroom, more than 
a dozen laptop screens were visible. As Prof. Jay Mallek lectured 
graduate students on the finer points of creating and reading an 
office budget, many students went online to Blackboard.com, a Web 
site that stores course materials, and grabbed the day's handouts 
from the ether.

But just as many students were off surfing. A young man looked at 
sports photos while a woman checked out baby photos that just arrived 
in her e-mailbox.

The screens provide a silent commentary on the teacher's
attention-grabbing skills. The moment he loses the thread, or fumbles
with his own laptop to use its calculator, screens flip from classroom
business to leisure. Students dash off e-mail notes and send instant
messages. A young man who is chewing gum shows an amusing e-mail
message to the woman next to him, and then switches over to read the
online edition of The Wall Street Journal.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/02/technology/02WIRE.html

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 17:07:27 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Pact Lifts an Obstacle to HDTV Transition


By ERIC A. TAUB

THE switch from analog to digital high-definition television has been 
slow and bumpy. But representatives of the consumer electronics and 
cable television industries predict that a new set of rules 
negotiated last month will accelerate the transition.

Soon purchasers of new high-definition, or HD, TV sets will be able 
to receive programming through their cable systems as easily as they 
now can with an analog set, by plugging a standard cable into the 
back of the television. Today most HDTV sets require a separate 
set-top box to receive digital cable programming, and the 
transmission standards differ from cable system to cable system.

Under an agreement between representatives of the Consumer 
Electronics Association and the National Cable and Telecommunications 
Association, new cable-ready HDTV's to be introduced in the next few 
years will be plug-and-play; they will no longer need a separate box 
to receive digital broadcasts, HDTV versions of pay services or any 
other available basic cable or pay-TV programming.

Up to now there has been no industry standard for how the cable 
companies transmit high-definition programming, so an HDTV-capable 
set-top box designed for one system may not work with another. The 
consumer electronics industry has long argued that consumers have 
delayed buying digital televisions because they did not know how to 
connect them to their cable services, did not know if they could 
record HDTV programs, did not want to use a separate converter box, 
or feared that the sets would become obsolete.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/02/technology/circuits/02teev.html

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 17:13:29 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Apple Releases iCal 1.0.1 and iSync 1.0


                  Apple Releases iCal 1.0.1 and iSync 1.0
                More Than 1 Million Copies of iCal Distributed

CUPERTINO, Calif., Jan. 2 /PRNewswire/ -- Apple(R) (NASDAQ:AAPL) today
announced the immediate availability of iCal 1.0.1, an update to
Apple's innovative calendar program that lets users manage multiple
calendars and share them over the Internet, and the release of iSync
1.0, Apple's breakthrough synchronization software.  Since the
introduction of iCal in September, more than 1 million copies of iCal
have been distributed and more than 200,000 calendars have been
published online.


http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30736310

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 17:15:18 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: TiVo, Best Buy Teamed to Deliver Short Film by Standard Film


                       Living Rooms of TiVo Households

   Best Buy Sponsored Short Film 'Waiting for Woody' Written, Starring and
    Directed by Grant Heslov and Featuring Performances by George Clooney,
       Jennifer Aniston, Richard Kind, Samantha Mathis and Tate Donovan

SAN JOSE, Calif., Jan. 2 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo
(NASDAQ:TIVO), the creator of and leader in television services for
digital video recorders (DVR), achieved yet another landmark this week
when it became the first DVR to team with an advertising partner, Best
Buy, to deliver original content that features some of the top names
in Hollywood.  "Waiting for Woody," a 30-minute short film produced by
the Standard Film Trust of Los Angeles, includes appearances from
Hollywood luminaries George Clooney and Jennifer Aniston. It made its
TiVo debut on Jan. 1.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30739068

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 17:16:56 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EarthLink Announces High-Speed 'Safety Net' Program for DirecTV


EarthLink Announces High-Speed 'Safety Net' Program for DirecTV DSL Customers

  ISP With Largest National High-Speed Footprint Announces Special Offer for
   Customers to Stay Connected and Switch to EarthLink High Speed Internet

ATLANTA, Jan. 2 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- EarthLink (NASDAQ:ELNK)
today announced a High-Speed Internet "Safety Net" program enabling
eligible DirecTV DSL customers to easily transition their service to
EarthLink high speed with no activation and equipment fees.  New,
eligible customers can transition to EarthLink DSL and pay only $21.95
a month for the first three months of service.  In addition, EarthLink
is offering customers a dial-up promotion featuring 45 days of free
dial-up Internet access, as well as special offers for new customers
opting for EarthLink's high-speed cable or satellite service.  DirecTV
DSL, which serves approximately 160,000 customers, announced in
December that it would cease operations later this month.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30739430

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 17:57:45 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: State Tracking Of Auto Movements By GPS Called 'Nutty'


By Marc Morano
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
January 02, 2003

(CNSNews.com) - If a proposal by an Oregon State task force becomes
law, the government would be able to use satellite equipment to keep
track of each driver's mileage and tax that driver accordingly in
order to pay for road repairs.

Even the state administrator who proposed the plan thinks citizens 
"should be concerned" about the possibility of civil liberties 
violations. And Chris Edwards, director of fiscal policy at the free 
market Cato Institute, told CNSNews.com, "I think it's nutty and I 
don't think it's ever going to happen.

<http://www.CNSNews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200301\POL20030102a.html>

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

From: joe@obilivan.net
Subject: Re: Free Caller ID?
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 10:00:34 GMT
Organization: Cox Communications


So, you figure because no one likes TPC that it is okay to accept "free"
services, such as Caller ID in this case, that are tariffed for sale?

Sounds like two-wrongs-make-a-right syndrome.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Telco -- especially Ameritech -- does
> not give anything for free. Telco -- especially Ameritech -- is notorious
> about accounting and billing errors. Has your friend yet received any
> bills at this new phone number?  If not, watch and see what the bill
> reflects when it begins arriving each month. If he is already getting
> bills on the number, and caller  ID is not one of the items on the
> bill, then he should consider himself lucky, and hope that one of
> their 'routine audits' from time to time does not eventually catch up
> with the error. Needless to say, if he ever moves to new premises or
> for any other reason invokes a service rep to look at and examine
> his bill, his 'free ride' on caller ID may come to an end. If a
> routine audit does eventually find the error, most telcos have a
> policy of only back-billing for a year, and sometimes they wil write
> it off and start fresh.

> I had this happen to me about twenty years ago. I was living in a
> near-north side apartment hotel in Chicago with switchboard service
> for the tenants. I ordered a private phone for my apartment. It took
> a *full year* before Illinois Bell decided to start billing me for it.
> And that was only because some damn phreak made a couple of phraud
> long distance calls which were coin-rated and they had to bill me. I
> had what Bell referred to as 'unlimited extended call-pack' which
> meant there were never any additional charges to anywhere in the old
> area 312. I was *most careful* never to dial a long distance call on
> that phone. Anyway, some phreak made a credit card call or somehow
> billed my number. When the charges finally came through the accounting
> department, no record of my number was found; the charges went into a
> suspense ledger pending an investigator personally looking at the
> charges and trying to figure them out. This time the investigator
> dialed my number -- expecting to get an intercept, no such number
> message -- but instead it rang open on my end (I was not at home),
> so the investigator called the plant or central office and asked them
> what they knew. He was told it had been in service for about a year,
> and that apparently 'someone' had never sent the paperwork to the
> accounting office; only to plant to get the number turned on. Lazy,
> incompetent service reps!  The investigator saw to it the paperwork
> got into accounting, and he personally back-billed me for service for
> the eleven months the phone had been there to date.

> So you can never tell for sure about these things. Your friend may or
> may not ever get a bill for the caller ID service. But better tell
> him to not *ever* get into an argument with some smart-mouth service
> rep who takes it on herself to review his service entirely.    PAT]

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can assure you that if it had been
the other way around -- where TPC owed me money, and that did happen
just two months ago -- TPC would have had no concern about refunding
it to me. They would have -- and in fact did -- let it go until I just
happened to review my account on line one day and saw where I had a 
new 'credit balance-do not pay' situation. Then I discovered that on
October 6 they had made the usual deduction from my bank account (I 
pay by autodraft) then again on October 26 took it out a second time. 
When *I* called to complain about it, they first tried to tell me they
would just use it for the next month's bill. When I made my usual
(almost monthly, it seems) call to the Commission offices in Topeka,
I got a call the next day from the usual flunky in the chairman's
office who said she would refund it. I didn't hold my breath waiting,
but about two weeks later I got the refund. Listen Joe, I am getting
to be *so tired* of being a service rep for my own account with those
people. If I have to audit my account on line a couple times per month
to see the lastest stunt they have pulled, then they can do the same 
for me. PAT]
------------------------------

From: J Kelly <usenet-replies002@pileof_remove-me_monkeycrap.com>
Subject: Caller ID Problems
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 09:08:08 -0600
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


Does anyone have any suggestions on resolving a problem I have been
having with Caller ID for the past 13 months?

Here's is what is happening: When I receive some *Local* calls,
generally either from a business or a county/municipal office, I only
recieve the last 4 digits of the number.  Instead of seeing
319-334-1234 I will only get 1234 on the display.  Any display, even a
brand new one plugged in all by itself, nothing else on the line.
Name appears as Unavailable.

Residential callers in the same exchange will appear correctly with
their name displayed, as do long distance and cellular calls (without
the name of course on cellular calls).  

This all started one magical day when I was switched from Qwest to
McLeod USA local service service.  Of course, McCleod being the CLEC
blamed Qwest (it is their switch after all) and Qwest of course blamed
McLeod saying they probably have a bad switch configuration, as if
McLeod had their own switch here (they don't).

I switched back to Qwest a month later to hopefully resolve that
problem, and the problem of not having any long distance service due
to McLeod/Qwest totally screwing up my line so that an invalid PIC was
selected.  That fixed nothing.  Eventually Qwest addmitted the long
distance thing was human error on their part and trasnferred me to
someone in the switch engineering group who fixed it.

Still, over a year later, they cannot seem to find a problem with the
caller id and blame McLeod USA, who is most likely the carrier of all
the callers showing up incorrectly.

Dozens of trouble tickets later, nothing has been found, each trouble
ticket results in a tech making a call from the CO and saying "look ,
it works" and closing the ticket out.

Anything suggestions to get this fixed would be appreciated.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Try not paying them for a couple months
until *they* get around to calling you to ask for it. Then when they
do, tell them you want the Caller ID fixed once and for all.   PAT]

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Call Waiting Prison and Telemarketers
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 18:59:54 -0800


In article <telecom22.215.8@telecom-digest.org>, dold@75.usenet.us.com 
wrote:

> CB <berry_s@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> Then, of course, you have Call Waiting - Caller ID so you can look and
>> see who is trying to reach you and then make the appropriate decisions
>> as to wether you should terminate the first call and take the second,
>> ignore the second caller, etc.

> I had that feature in a house where three people were sharing a phone.
> Technically, it is an annoyance, as you now get to hear, not only the call
> waiting tone, but apparently the caller ID burst of modem data.
> Nice feature, bad implementation.

Actually, I kind of like it. I used to miss the anemic Call-Waiting tone 
constantly. Ever since the passing of the 1A-ESS switches, the tone can 
be easily missed if one is not paying attention ... or talking. When the 
CID bursts started appearing with the CW tone, it could no longer be 
ignored.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #216
******************************
    
    
    
From professor@freesuccessseminar.com Fri Jan  3 21:42:43 2003
Received: from mintaka.lcs.mit.edu (mintaka.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.36])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h042ghp16081
	for <telecom-recent@massis.lcs.mit.edu>; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 21:42:43 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ns2k1.internetscience.com ([209.63.224.69])
	by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h042gdxE052043
	for <telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu>; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 21:42:40 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from professor@freesuccessseminar.com)
Received: from 172.17.17.20 (RCSMOBILE [172.17.17.17]) by ns2k1.internetscience.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2448.0)
	id C2KMQ004; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 19:56:08 -0700
From: "Tom" <professor@freesuccessseminar.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 19:40:45
To: telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu
Subject: hi
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/related;
  boundary="----=_NextPart_QEUVUQAKJC"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: PM20007:40:45 PM

This is an HTML email message.  If you see this, your mail client does not support HTML messages.

------=_NextPart_QEUVUQAKJC
Content-Type: text/html;charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<background color=red>
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR=#F0F0F0>
<CENTER>
<font Color=Blue>

<Font Size=+3>I WORK FROM HOME<BR>
AND<BR>
LOVE IT!<BR>
</Font>

<Font Size=+2><I>You Can Too!!!</I><BR>
</Font>

I have a specific plan to help you earn<BR>

$1,000 to $5,000<BR>

Each and Every week-Part time<P>

I'll PROVE IT and SHOW YOU how for<BR>

<Font Size=+2>FREE<P>

But you have to <A HREF="http://www.freesuccessseminar.com/mlmdefault.html">CLICK HERE</font></A><BR>

</font>

If you don't call, ENJOY what you're presently doing.<BR>

You'll probably be doing it <BR>

<Font Size=+2>FOREVER!</font><BR>



<BR><P><BR><P><BR>
<Font Size=1><B>Your email address was obtained from a purchased list. We sincerely apologize if you had not wished to receive this email.  We value privacy and honor ALL opt-out requests</B>.<BR>  To be removed from this mailing list ---><A HREF="http://www.freesuccessseminar.com/optout.asp">Click Here</A><---</font>


</CENTER>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------=_NextPart_QEUVUQAKJC--

    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jan  3 22:52:54 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h043qsg17149;
	Fri, 3 Jan 2003 22:52:54 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 22:52:54 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301040352.h043qsg17149@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #217

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 3 Jan 2003 22:53:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 217

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    WorldCom Ups Rates for Consumers, Not Businesses (Monty Solomon)
    Over 140,000 Join List to Block Telemarketers (Monty Solomon)
    Signup Begun to Ward Off Telemarketers (Monty Solomon)
    Government Openness at Issue as Bush Holds On to Records (Monty Solomon)
    Student Charged in DirecTV Theft (Monty Solomon)
    Companies in U.S. Sing Blues as Europe Reprises 50's Hits (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Very Newbie Reboot Question (Geoffrey Welsh)
    Re: Caller ID Problems (John Higdon)
    Re: Caller ID Problems (Paul A Lee)
    Re: Caller ID Problems (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: Free Caller ID? (Ed Ellers)
    Re: Free Caller ID? (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Free Caller ID? (joe@obilivan.net)
    Re: Prison Call Overcharging (Dave Phelps)
    Re: Modular ICS + Startalk (Dave Phelps)
    RBOCs Charging Extra $10/Month For More Than One DSL Host (P. Earnhardt)
    Re: Why Won't my Sprint PCS Phone Roam? (Samsung SCH-3500) (Linc Madison)
    Re: Out the Door (Ron Chapman)
    Re: Pact Lifts an Obstacle to HDTV Transition (John Stahl)
    Rural WV and High Speed Internet (Kim Brennan)
    Fido Operator Staves Off Bankruptcy (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: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 19:26:39 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: WorldCom Ups Rates For Consumers, Not Businesses


By Jessica Hall

    PHILADELPHIA, Jan 3 (Reuters) - Bankrupt telephone and data
services company WorldCom Inc. <WCOEQ.PK> <MCWEQ.PK> has hiked
long-distance calling rates for residential customers, but
corporate customers still can bargain for sweet deals on
large-scale voice and data contracts, analysts said on Friday.

    WorldCom has raised consumer long-distance fees four times
since it filed for bankruptcy in July, marking a reversal of
the ferocious price wars of the late 1990s that drove calling
rates down to pennies-a-minute.

    But prices in the corporate market remain flat-to-slightly
lower as WorldCom scrambles to retain its lucrative clients and
rivals swoop in to nab customers skittish over WorldCom's
bankruptcy and $9 billion accounting scandal.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30748299

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

Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 19:38:03 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Over 140,000 Join List to Block Telemarketers


By Bruce Mohl, Globe Staff, 1/3/2003

More than 140,000 people signed up for the state's do-not-call list in
its first two days of official operation, indicating that
Massachusetts consumers have a strong interest in curtailing the flow
of telemarketing calls coming into their homes.

Anne L. Collins, deputy director of the state's office of consumer
affairs, said about 20,000 Massachusetts residents signed up in the
days leading up to the official opening of the list on New Year's
Day. On Wednesday and yesterday, she said, another 140,000 signed up.


http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/003/business/Over_140_000_join_list_to_block_telemarketers+.shtml

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

Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 19:51:08 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Signup Begun to Ward Off Telemarketers


By Associated Press, 1/1/2003

Massachusetts has launched its 'Do Not Call' registry, which allows 
residents to block telemarketing calls to their homes, and state 
officials are expecting a huge response.

The registry was set up quietly over the weekend, ahead of the 
announced Jan. 1 start date, and officials said more than 10,000 
people have already signed up.

Massachusetts has about 3 million residential phone lines, and state 
officials are predicting about a million of those consumers will sign 
up within the first month.


http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/001/metro/Signup_begun_to_ward_off_telemarketers+.shtml

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

Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 21:00:01 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Government Openness at Issue as Bush Holds On to Records


By ADAM CLYMER

WASHINGTON, Jan. 2 - The Bush administration has put a much tighter
lid than recent presidents on government proceedings and the public
release of information, exhibiting a penchant for secrecy that has
been striking to historians, legal experts and lawmakers of both
parties.

Some of the Bush policies, like closing previously public court
proceedings, were prompted by the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and are
part of the administration's drive for greater domestic security.
Others, like Vice President Dick Cheney's battle to keep records of
his energy task force secret, reflect an administration that arrived
in Washington determined to strengthen the authority of the executive
branch, senior administration officials say.

Some of the changes have sparked a passionate public debate and
excited political controversy. But other measures taken by the Bush
administration to enforce greater government secrecy have received
relatively little attention, masking the proportions of what dozens of
experts described in recent interviews as a sea change in government
openness.

A telling example came in late 2001 when Attorney General John 
Ashcroft announced the new policy on the Freedom of Information Act, 
a move that attracted relatively little public attention.

Although the new policy for dealing with the 1966 statute that has 
opened millions of pages of government records to scholars, reporters 
and the public was announced after Sept. 11, it had been planned well 
before the attacks.

The Ashcroft directive encouraged federal agencies to reject requests 
for documents if there was any legal basis to do so, promising that 
the Justice Department would defend them in court. It was a stark 
reversal of the policy set eight years earlier, when the Clinton 
administration told agencies to make records available whenever they 
could, even if the law provided a reason not to, so long as there was 
no "foreseeable harm" from the release.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/03/politics/03SECR.html

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

Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 21:05:47 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Student Charged in DirecTV Theft


By JENNIFER 8. LEE

WASHINGTON, Jan. 2 - A 19-year-old University of Chicago student was
arrested in Los Angeles today and charged with stealing trade secrets
from DirecTV, the nation's leading satellite television provider.

Federal prosecutors said that Igor Serebryany of Los Angeles would be 
charged under the rarely used 1996 Economic Espionage Act with 
stealing the documents -- which described the latest technology to 
control access to DirecTV -- and releasing them on the Internet. He 
faces a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Prosecutors said Mr. Serebryany, a sophomore at the University of 
Chicago, stole confidential papers about DirecTV's latest generation 
of satellite television smart cards from the law firm of Jones, Day, 
Reavis & Pogue. Mr. Serebryany, who worked for an outside document 
preparation company, was imaging papers for a civil lawsuit over 
DirecTV's card technology.

Jones Day represents DirecTV in a lawsuit against NDS, the company 
that designs encrypted satellite cards for DirecTV. According to 
prosecutors, Mr. Serebryany sent hundreds of digital documents to 
three satellite pirate Web sites in September and October.

The confidential documents contained technical specifications for 
DirecTV's Period 4 generation of satellite smart cards, as well as 
correspondence between NDS and DirecTV discussing the card's 
architecture and design, according to DirectTV. The technical details 
about the card are valuable because the three previous generations of 
DirecTV access cards have already been hacked by pirates.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/03/technology/03PIRA.html

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

Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 21:08:14 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Companies in U.S. Sing Blues as Europe Reprises 50's Hits


By ANTHONY TOMMASINI

European copyright protection is expiring on a collector's trove of
1950's jazz, opera and early rock 'n' roll albums, forcing major
American record companies to consider deals with bootleg labels and
demand new customs barriers.

Already reeling from a stagnant economy and the illegal but widespread
downloading of copyrighted music from the Internet, the recording
companies will now face a perfectly legal influx of European
recordings of popular works.

Copyright protection lasts only 50 years in European Union countries,
compared with 95 years in the United States, even if the recordings
were originally made and released in America. So recordings made in
the early- to mid-1950's - by figures like Maria Callas, Elvis Presley
and Ella Fitzgerald - are entering the public domain in Europe,
opening the way for any European recording company to release albums
that had been owned exclusively by particular labels.

Although the distribution of such albums would be limited to Europe in
theory, record-store chains and specialty outlets in the United States
routinely stock foreign imports.

Expiring copyrights could mean much cheaper recordings for music
lovers, but they do not bode well for major record companies. (These
copyrights apply to only the recordings, not the music recorded.) The
expected crush of material entering the public domain has already sent
one giant company, EMI Classics, into a shotgun marriage with a
renegade label that it had long tried to shut down to protect its
lucrative Callas discography. The influx also has the American record
industry talking about erecting a customs barrier.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/03/arts/music/03COPY.html

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

From: Geoffrey Welsh <geoffrey_welsh@bigfoot.com>
Subject: Re: Very Newbie Reboot Question
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 15:56:27 -0500


Reed Loefgren <reedl@tatteredcover.com>:

> I have an SX-2000 Light system. I have never rebooted it except when
> the power failed.

DISCLAIMER: I do not speak for Mitel, nor for any Mitel dealer, nor have I
ever received any formal Mitel training.

After a respectable amount of downtime-free (thanks to a decent UPS
and lots of spare batteries) running time, a couple of the lines
between our SX-2000 and our Mitel Mail system started acting
unreliably.  Our dealer's technician told us to reboot it.  When
prompted for advice on how, he said just shut it off and on again.

So, long after business hours, we basically simulated a power failure
by switching off the UPS rather than flip individual switches (we have
several cabinets.)

Everything came back fine.

Of course, that's no guarantee that you'll be blessed by the same fate!

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Caller ID Problems
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 09:02:06 -0800


In article <telecom22.216.14@telecom-digest.org>, J Kelly
<usenet-replies002@pileof_remove-me_monkeycrap.com> wrote:

> Here's is what is happening: When I receive some *Local* calls,
> generally either from a business or a county/municipal office, I only
> recieve the last 4 digits of the number.  Instead of seeing
> 319-334-1234 I will only get 1234 on the display.  Any display, even a
> brand new one plugged in all by itself, nothing else on the line.
> Name appears as Unavailable.

Misconfigurations of the originating PBX can cause this. Your former 
telco apparently was "filling in" the missing data, such as area code 
and prefix and your new telco does not. 

Not sure who's responsibility this might be, but the root cause of the 
problem is associated with the callers' equipment, not your telco or 
your CID terminal equipment.

> Still, over a year later, they cannot seem to find a problem with the
> caller id and blame McLeod USA, who is most likely the carrier of all
> the callers showing up incorrectly.

> Dozens of trouble tickets later, nothing has been found, each trouble
> ticket results in a tech making a call from the CO and saying "look ,
> it works" and closing the ticket out.

I'll bet that they ultimately discover the problem in the originating 
PBXes.

John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: Paul A Lee <palee@riteaid.com>
Subject: Re: Caller ID Problems
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 10:31:04 -0500


In TELECOM Digest V22 #216, J Kelly
<usenet-replies002@pileof_remove-me_monkeycrap.com> wrote (in part):

> Here's is what is happening: When I receive some *Local* calls,
> generally either from a business or a county/municipal office, I only
> recieve the last 4 digits of the number.  Instead of seeing
> 319-334-1234 I will only get 1234 on the display.  Any display, even a
> brand new one plugged in all by itself, nothing else on the line.
> Name appears as Unavailable.

It could be that the calls are coming from a PBX via ISDN-PRI trunks,
and the originating telco expects the CPID from the PBX, which doesn't
deliver complete information. Some telcos overlook the CPID from the
PBX and send the BTN (billing telephone number) of the subscriber site
as CPID for all calls. Perhaps while you were switching telcos, some
CPID and/or trunking changes were being made at the offices you're now
seeing four digits only from.

I've dealt with a Nortel Meridian system that defaults to delivering
the extension number (last four digits) only. To get it to send
accurate, complete CPID requires some major reprogramming. Some other
PBXs may behave like the Nortel in this regard.

The agencies and businesses that you're seeing four digits and no name
from may not be aware of what's being sent with their calls. Chances
are, if they're not aware of it, there will be no way to explain it to
them, either.


Paul A Lee            <palee@riteaid.com>         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

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

From: Tony Pelliccio <tonypo1@cox.takemeout2.net>
Subject: Re: Caller ID Problems
Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company
Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 06:55:52 GMT


In article <telecom22.216.14@telecom-digest.org>, usenet-replies002
@pileof_remove-me_monkeycrap.com says:

> Does anyone have any suggestions on resolving a problem I have been
> having with Caller ID for the past 13 months?

> Here's is what is happening: When I receive some *Local* calls,
> generally either from a business or a county/municipal office, I only
> recieve the last 4 digits of the number.  Instead of seeing
> 319-334-1234 I will only get 1234 on the display.  Any display, even a
> brand new one plugged in all by itself, nothing else on the line.
> Name appears as Unavailable.

The problem he's experiencing is because the PBX's used by those 
business and government agencies are probably fed via PRI and their 
switches (More likely than not AT&T/Lucent/Avaya G3i) lets the agency 
set the outbound caller-ID information. 


Tony

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

From: Ed Ellers <ed_ellers@msn.com>
Subject: Re: Free Caller ID?
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 23:44:37 -0500


<joe@obilivan.net> wrote:

> So, you figure because no one likes TPC that it is okay to accept "free"
services, such as Caller ID in this case, that are tariffed for sale?

> Sounds like two-wrongs-make-a-right syndrome.

It's the telco's job to provision the line properly.  If they turn on
something extra by mistake, it's not my obligation to tell them.  In a
situation like this the customer is blameless (unlike, for example,
one where a cable TV customer climbs the pole to remove a trap in
order to get HBO for free).

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

From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Free Caller ID?
Date: 3 Jan 2003 10:00:57 -0500
Organization: Organized?  Me?


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 

> happened to review my account on line one day and saw where I had a 
> new 'credit balance-do not pay' situation. Then I discovered that on
> October 6 they had made the usual deduction from my bank account (I 
> pay by autodraft) then again on October 26 took it out a second time. 

This is exactly why I let NOBODY autodraft my account.  I get the
paper bill, its due date is (say) Jan 16.  It goes on a stack on my
desk, and whenever a few have accumulated I log on to electronic bill
pay from my bank and pay them.  In most cases I will set the pay-on
date to the day before the due date, Jan 15 in this example.

Haven't had a problem with it yet, takes about the same time & effort
as writing a check and mailing it, and costs $0.00 instead of $0.37.


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: joe@obilivan.net
Subject: Re: Free Caller ID?
Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 10:47:59 GMT
Organization: Cox Communications


> (I pay by autodraft)

That is a dangerous practice to permit TPC unfettered access to your
bank account.  Just imagine one of those erroneous long distance or
"enhanced" services hitting your bill, then the TPC wipes out your
bank account.  Now, you get to argue with them while they have your
money and your outstanding checks all bounce.

A lot of folks don't realize how volitile electronic debit
authorizations can be, unlike credit card charges where they don't get
your money until you decide to let them have it.  Electronic debits
should be limited to recurring charges that are fixed in amount, such
as a mortgage or car payment.

"Let the buyer beware" is really on-target with electronic debit
authorizations.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although the problems you discuss are
very real, I still find it easier for me to use autodraft for my
regular, recurring bills, such as gas and electric. Both of those
bills are fixed amounts (budget plan) so I know what they will be. The
cable bill is also a fixed amount and autodrafted. City of Independence
water/sewer/garbage pickup is also a fixed amount (with a small tolerance)
each month for a year at a time, so is also autodrafted. The only bill
which can be trouble is Southwestern Bell. But I have two things in my
favor there; or maybe three. I have numerous blocks on my line with my
okay:  no 900 calls, billed number screeing, and I make most of my
long distance calls on the cellphone or AOL-by-Phone (they are free in
most cases), but I still keep a one hundred minute package of time for
LD on my phone, which costs six dollars. So by and large, my phone and
DSL service are fixed at about $90 per month. I do not expect many
surprises there; aggravations from SWB, yes; surprises, no. Also, SWB
puts the new bill on line for review four weeks before they actually
debit it, and finally, I have a very friendly and understanding bank
manager. My bank statements are on line also. It is unimaginable to me
that anyone could make off with any money from my account, but I do
watch my balance and the various debits which go through rather closely.
When a bank only has seven or eight employees, period, and each of
them has a key to the front door, there is not a lot to worry about 
where the bank is concerned. I do understand your thoughts however,
and if I were still living in Chicago, IL or another large city where
no one cares about anything, I'd probably not do autodraft either.  PAT]  

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

From: Dave Phelps <tippenring@deadspam.com>
Subject: Re: Prison Call Overcharging
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 00:40:14 -0600


In article <telecom22.212.2@telecom-digest.org>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com 
says:

> Inmates in prison may make collect calls to their families.  However,
> the family is charged very steep fees for such calls -- much more than
> today's routine collect call charges.  For example, $3 for the first
> minute, $1 each additional minute.

> This appears to be a common practice across the U.S.

[snip]

Of course it is. These jailcell phones are being installed in jails in 
my area that charge similar outrageous amounts. The local PD gets 40-50% 
of the take. What representative, councilperson, or mayor will argue 
with that? It's much more convenient as well because an officer or 
jailer doesn't have to take a prisoner out of the cell, to a phone, dial 
the number, etc. These phones are installed in the cells, so the 
prisoner can use the phone whenever they like. 

Convenience, reduced manpower requirements, and make a profit? Seems 
like a no-brainer to our ethically-challenged politicians.


Dave Phelps
deadspam=tippenring

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now, if they could only set more
reasonable and fair rates, it would be hard to quarrel with the idea.
But they won't. That's where ethics and challenges come into it. There
are a lot of very difficult problems in corrections, not the least of
which is corrections employees who have a vested interest in keeping
their jobs, and that assurance is best met by making sure the inmate
population continues to rise month after month, year after year.
Keeping inmates out of touch with their family and friends and the
rest of society is one way to insure the return rate will continue to
stay very high. What's wrong with your final sentence, Dave, is that
corrections is not supposed to be a profit making enterprise.   PAT] 

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

From: Dave Phelps <tippenring@deadspam.com>
Subject: Re: Modular ICS + Startalk
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 00:55:29 -0600


In article <telecom22.215.9@telecom-digest.org>, harryhydro@hotmail.com 
says:

>     I hope I'm giving you enough info.  This ICS has system version
> SP: 30JBM03 NAT.  In the past we've tried to put a Startalk on but had
> problems that was stated to be System Version issues..  Is this ture
> or is this system capable of supporting a Startalk?

I don't believe the Startalk will work properly with MICS 2.0 and later.


Dave Phelps
Phone Masters Ltd.
deadspam=tippenring

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

From: Phil Earnhardt <pae@dim.com>
Subject: RBOCs Charging Extra $10/Month For More Than One Host on DSL
Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 00:33:00 -0700
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


Apparently, at least one of the RBOCs is charging an extra $10/month
to hook up multiple computers to the same DSL feed. Given that their
DSL modems have both DHCP and NAT, how could the RBOC's ISP tell that
you had more than one computer inside the modem's firewall? Even if it
could, what would keep you from having your "one computer connected to
the Internet" be a router/firewall?

$10/month sounds really steep for this, especially when routers with 4
switched ports cost around $60 to purchase.

Does anybody know the companies are thinking? If you know how to do
this yourself, do they really care?

phil

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

From: Linc Madison <nobody@example.com>
Subject: Re: Why Won't my Sprint PCS Phone Roam? (Samsung SCH-3500)
Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 02:19:27 -0800
Organization: LincMad.com Consulting
Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com


In article <telecom22.211.10@telecom-digest.org>, Steven J. Sobol
<sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

> Can you give more details? Have you checked over on
> alt.cellular.sprintpcs as to why this might not be working?

John Levine pinpointed the problem. The specific phone I have (Samsung
SCH-3500) has three roaming options: "Sprint PCS" (no roaming),
"Analog" (roaming only, on the analog cellular network), or
"Automatic" (prefer PCS, but also roam on digital or analog
networks). I was using the "Analog" setting, under the mistaken
impression that it was equivalent to "Automatic" in areas with no PCS
service. I figured it would save me the time of first trying to get a
PCS signal before dropping over onto the roaming side. It turns out I
was shutting out digital roaming options. It is also possible that the
analog network wouldn't accept my call because I was on a digital
phone in an area with digital service.

I can't test the theory right at the moment, though, because putting
the phone in "Automatic" mode here just pops it into the PCS network.
I'll give it a try the next time I'm travelling outside PCS territory.


www dot LincMad dot com  / Telecom at LincMad dot com
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California

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

Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 07:33:52 -0500
From: Ron Chapman <ronchapman@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Out the Door


In article <telecom22.216.4@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> Mr. Pagein will not be destitute. His wife is working and he has a
> college degree. But the cold-blooded way in which he and his fellow
> workers were lopped off the employment rolls by Verizon, and the
> phenomenal gap that exists between the compensation available to the
> company's ordinary workers and the fabulous, multimillion-dollar
> packages taken home by executives at the top of the Verizon pyramid,
> has shaken his faith in a system he believed in.

> http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/01/opinion/01HERB.html

You know, over the past couple of years it's become obvious to me that
the white collar worker is the new blue collar worker--and it looks
like 1920 all over again.

I'm not a union man.  I generally think that in this day and age,
unions -- as they've made themselves today -- are not necessary.  In
fact, generally it seems as if the average (autoworker, electrician,
etc.)  needs protection against union management itself.

However, as I've watched big business do its thing over the past few
years, it seems to me that the unions are missing a HUGE opportunity
here to remake themselves.  The cube-dwellers are the modern
equivalent, in the modern techno-services industry, to the machine
operators and tradesmen of the older industrial society.  And they're
being treated exactly the same way.

The unions could HUGELY increase their membership and relevance to
society by organizing these people and protecting them against the
"fabulous, multimiillion-dollar executives" and the abuses of said
executives against the common working folk down there in cubeville.

And if they did their work right, the unions could simultaneously
remake themselves into protectors of the investor and his investments.
The executive abuses are simply power and money grabs by individuals
who are in a position to do so; by protecting the union members
against that and watching over these executives very carefully, the
unions could be whistleblowers that (a) could catch problems very
early on, and (b) be untouchable in their whistleblowing, unlike
individuals who simply don't have the money or time or energy to fight
it when they see it.  Union-backed whistleblowing which protects the
workers by definition protects the investors.

And if the unions spun that right, got a good marketing angle on it,
the unions could reinvent themselves for the new economy and come out
stronger than ever.

Now, I'm not pro-union.  I'm just wondering why somebody else hasn't
thought of this over the last three years and implemented it.  It
sounds awfully logical to me.

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

Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 09:54:14 -0500
From: John Stahl <aljon@stny.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Pact Lifts an Obstacle to HDTV Transition


It seems that the behind the scenes negotiating between the TV
industry (who wants to protect their investment in programming) and
the National Cable TV Association (NCTA), will speed up the
introduction of HDTV to meet the US Government's set time table for
introduction of HDTV and also seems to be an accelerator for the end
to analog transmission of TV signals.

When the Government made this schedule some years ago, I recall that
some discussions were made on this forum but at the time many thought
that this would never happen - but it seems that it will indeed happen
but did anyone figure then what all this change would cost the
individual consumer?

So with this agreement, the issue of the existing analog TV sets is
now set for extinction. Because when all that is available - over the
air AND now on cable - is HDTV digital signals, it will be mandatory
that we all will have to spend (collectively) $ millions (perhaps $
billions) to purchase HDTV sets (and other appliances) in order to
watch (and record) any kind of US TV programming.

You will note that the article indicates that there is even a newly
agreed to limitation on the recording of TV signals, as new connection
(or connectors) standards will preclude the usage of present day VCR's
or even recordable DVD's!. Another new device (with time limitations
built-in) will be required to record, for time delay, TV shows to fit
our schedules!.

Of course all of this is a great boon to the manufacturers of TV's and
recording devices. But also more scrap (existing analog TV's, VCR's,
etc.)  generation for dumps' and scrap collectors'!

You know, Orwell might have been right in his tome, "1984":
"Big-Brother" Government is really getting involved in how we live our
lives. Wonder what ever happened here in the US to free choice and
free will of the consumer?  We will have no choice but to buy this new
technology and throw away the old.


John

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

From: kimbrennan@aol.comfrtz.com (KimBrennan)
Date: 03 Jan 2003 19:08:40 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Subject: Rural WV and high speed internet


I've a piece of property in Pendleton County WV. Dial-up Internet
services are available, but I've wanted to get something faster. Since
I don't live in the county seat (Franklin), I don't have access to
cable TV.

So for high speed internet the choices are:

1) Satellite
2) DSL
3) ISDN
4) T1/T3

Satellite. I've followed the saga of satellite internet service for
sometime, and frankly I'm less than impressed with the choices. I've
basically decided, it isn't worth the gamble.

DSL. Unavailable in my section of WV. 

ISDN. Only available for "business", not "residential" as near as I
can tell from Verizon. Also they also will only hook up the ISDN line,
if you get your internet service from Verizon. Verizon's ISDN internet
is long distance from my place not to mention being considerably more
expensive than that alternatives.  A resistance check in the past
shows that the line to my house is sufficient for ISDN.

T1/T3. Available, but prohibitively expensive due to distance from
available circuits. Last time I checked, they charged by the distance
(in feet) to the CO. Unfortunately for me, distance to the CO is
measured in miles ...

Based on the number of people in the county (approx. 8,000), I don't
fore see any of this changing anytime in my lifetime.

So that leaves me with ISDN as my only choice in an affordable
sense. A couple of years ago, I called and ordered ISDN. Everything
was going smoothly up until the local junction box was examined. At
that point they realized they didn't have any free copper (for me
 ... OR for several voice circuits that had been ordered) and my order
was cancelled.

I understand that the junction box may have been rewired in the last
year, so I may pursue this again. The only glitch is having to deal
with Verizon for the internet service. I'd rather just get the ISDN
line and then connect to the ISP of my choice (several of which are
actually local). Any ideas on how I should pursue this?


"I'm sorry, all my money is tied up in currency."
W.C.Fields

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

Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 15:26:15 -0700
From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@garynuman.info>
Subject: Fido Operator Staves Off Bankruptcy
Reply-To: joey@garynuman.info


MONTREAL (CP) -- Microcell Telecommunications (MTI.B), owner of the
Fido cellphone network, has struck a deal with lenders to eliminate
most of its $2 billion in debt in exchange for ownership of virtually
all of the company.

http://www.webfin.com/en/news/news.html/?id=29420

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #217
******************************
    
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jan  5 18:52:05 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h05Nq5b10160;
	Sun, 5 Jan 2003 18:52:05 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 18:52:05 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301052352.h05Nq5b10160@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #218

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 5 Jan 2003 18:52:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 218

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    A Nasty Surprise for Car Thieves (Monty Solomon)
    Is This the Face of a Terrorist? (Monty Solomon)
    Court Punts Sex.com Domain Case (Monty Solomon)
    Spying on Snookums With GPS (Monty Solomon)
    Do Net Cafes Provoke Bloodshed? (Monty Solomon)
    New U.S. Rules for Travelers (Monty Solomon)
    MS Java Ruling Sets IT Precedent (Monty Solomon)
    Why RIAA Keeps Getting Hacked (Monty Solomon)
    Testing the Wireless Waters With WiFi (Monty Solomon)
    Police Dragnets for DNA Tests Draw Criticism (Monty Solomon)
    U.S. Makes Airlines Give Data on Americans Going Overseas (Monty Solomon)
    For the Gadget Universe, a Common Tongue (Monty Solomon)
    Readers' Favorite Blogs (Monty Solomon)
    FCC Preparing to Overhaul Telecom, Media Rules (Monty Solomon)
    Cooling on the Cold Calling?/Some Telemarketers Changing (Monty Solomon)
    Satellite TV Orbits Closer to Cable (Monty Solomon)
    Will Your TV Become a Spy? (Monty Solomon)
    Supreme Court Backs Off DVD Case (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.

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 14:15:02 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: A Nasty Surprise for Car Thieves


By Randy Dotinga

Armed with satellite tracking technology and remote-control devices, 
police officers from Virginia to Southern California are arresting 
car thieves who have unwittingly stolen booby-trapped Camrys and 
Accords.

When a thief drives off with a "bait car" that's been left parked 
somewhere, police track its location, dispatch officers and use 
remote control to stop the vehicle in its tracks.

While some police departments don't publicize their use of the cars, 
police in San Diego and Arlington, Virginia, recently acknowledged 
putting them on the street. Police in Memphis, Tennessee; Winnipeg, 
Manitoba; Sacramento, California; and at least 100 other cities also 
use the cars, which can be outfitted for between $600 and $3,200, 
plus monthly fees and startup costs.

Unlike LoJack, which relies on homing devices to find stolen cars, 
the tracking systems use GPS software and transmit data through one 
or more communications networks.

While satellite-tracked bait cars have been around for five years, 
they now come with added technology tricks, all hidden from the eyes 
of car thieves until it's too late. Perhaps the most important device 
is a kill switch that allows police to stop the car by remote 
control, either by slowly cutting off the gas or suddenly switching 
off the engine.

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,56536,00.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 14:18:15 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Is This the Face of a Terrorist?


By Julia Scheeres

FBI investigators have traveled to Pakistan to determine whether a 
man claiming he was mistakenly included in the agency's wanted list 
is telling the truth about his identity.

But face-recognition experts said Friday they were able to back up 
the man's claim in a matter of minutes by comparing his FBI mug shot 
with photographs taken by the news media.

The confusion started earlier this week, when the FBI released the 
photos, names and birth dates of five Arab men who are allegedly 
residing in the United States after slipping over the Canadian border.

The FBI charged that the men used fake passports obtained through an 
ID and smuggling ring that has known terrorist connections.

http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,57069,00.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 14:21:10 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Court Punts Sex.com Domain Case


By Joanna Glasner

A dispute over the transfer of the domain name Sex.com may be heading 
to California's highest court.

In a decision published Friday, a panel of federal appellate judges 
asked the California Supreme Court to weigh in on the question of 
whether traditional property conversion laws should apply to Internet 
domain names.

http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,57065,00.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 14:35:57 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Spying on Snookums With GPS


By Randy Dotinga

In a rambling building that overlooks a freeway in San Diego, a bank 
of computers monitors the travels of trucks carrying hazardous 
materials, making sure they don't go anywhere near such landmarks as 
the White House and the capitol building of Arkansas.

Using GPS software, the computers also track cars for seven police 
agencies. Some of the vehicles are waiting to be stolen, while others 
are driven by unsuspecting suspects who are under surveillance.

And then there are the private citizens, some 5,000 of them, whose 
cars are tracked night and day. Finding their latitude and longitude 
is as easy as logging on to the Internet, typing in a password and 
looking at a computerized map. It's impossible, however, to find out 
how many of the customers track their spouses or partners without 
telling them.

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,56537,00.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 14:39:44 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Do Net Cafes Provoke Bloodshed?


By Reuters

LOS ANGELES -- A Los Angeles city councilman has called for an 
investigation of violence at so-called Internet cafes, a step that 
could prompt a crackdown on the popular and controversial sites for 
PC-based games.

The investigation of the cybercafes, also known as "PC bangs," came 
after a brawl erupted between rival groups playing in a tournament 
involving the online combat game Counter-Strike.

Los Angeles City Councilman Dennis Zine plans to introduce a motion 
at a hearing next week asking for a report from the Los Angeles 
Police Department on recent outbreaks of violence at cybercafes, a 
representative said on Thursday.


http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,57047,00.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 14:44:57 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: New U.S. Rules for Travelers


By Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- Millions of travelers arriving and departing the United 
States will have to submit detailed personal information this year 
under rules proposed by the federal government Friday as part of the 
war on terrorism.

The rules proposed by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 
once they are finalized, seek more information from travelers than 
under current law and for the first time extend the requirements to 
U.S. citizens and others previously exempted.

All airlines, cargo flights, cruise ships and other vessels carrying 
crew or passengers will be affected, with the exception of 
ferryboats. The information will be sent electronically to the 
government before a traveler arrives in the United States or departs 
from it, giving officials a complete manifest of exactly who is on 
board.

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,57058,00.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 14:57:14 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: MS Java Ruling Sets IT Precedent


By Associated Press

SEATTLE -- If a judge's order takes effect forcing Microsoft to 
include Sun Microsystems' Java software in the Windows operating 
system, neither the companies nor PC users will see much immediate 
impact.

Microsoft will still be the overwhelmingly dominant maker of desktop 
PC software. Sun's core business of selling servers will remain 
tough. And consumers will wonder what the fuss was all about.

Over time, observers say, the biggest consequence could be the
precedent of a judge -- and not engineers, software companies or even
users -- deciding what is installed on personal computers.

http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,57073,00.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 15:00:56 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Why RIAA Keeps Getting Hacked


By Michelle Delio
02:00 AM Jan. 03, 2003 PT

The Recording Industry Association of America may not want people to 
share digital files, but the organization certainly seems to be in 
favor of open access to its website.

On Monday, the RIAA site was hacked for the sixth time in six months.

This time, the defacement resulted in bogus press releases on the 
front door, touting the joys of cheese and interspecies romantic 
relationships.

The RIAA's role as the music industry's voice against digital piracy 
makes it an obvious target for those who are angered by what they see 
as the organization's overly vehement crusade for copyright owners' 
rights.

Since the RIAA site is such a tempting target, many wonder why the 
organization hasn't made more of an effort to secure its site. On 
Monday, access to the site's supposedly private innards was gained in 
much the same way as it was last August.

Some security experts said in no uncertain terms that the latest 
defacements indicate the RIAA is clueless about technology. They 
charge that this ignorance has resulted in the RIAA attempting to 
combat digital file sharing in ineffective, counter-productive ways.


http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,57048,00.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 15:49:59 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Testing the Wireless Waters With WiFi


Firm Sees Coasts As Internet Frontiers

By Yuki Noguchi
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 3, 2003; Page E01

The typical domains of wireless networks are college campuses, major
airports, high-end hotels, trendy coffee shops and tech-heavy
neighborhoods. But Forrest C. "Woody" Wheat sees a new horizon for
this increasingly popular technology: the near-shore waters of the
American coast.

Wheat, whose Reston-based firm has been selling high-speed wireless
service for three months after a year of building a network, said he
hopes to expand it for boaters using "every little estuary" along the
U.S. coast. Wheat sees maritime service as his way to carve a niche in
the market for the technology known as WiFi, a system that makes
high-speed Internet connections from a laptop as portable as a call
from a cell phone. He is among an expanding fleet of competitors
looking to capitalize on the technology.

Those who sell WiFi service still face technical and financial
challenges, and few firms have managed to profit from selling the
service. But analysts and market watchers expect consumers to embrace
the technology in greater numbers, even as the rest of the
telecommunications industry struggles to stay afloat.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3549-2003Jan2.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 16:05:48 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Police Dragnets for DNA Tests Draw Criticism


By DAVID M. HALBFINGER

BATON ROUGE, La., Jan. 3 - Recently, the police asked Shannon F. 
Kohler if they could swab the inside of his mouth to analyze his DNA. 
It was a request they made of 800 men in southern Louisiana as they 
searched for the serial killer who has slain four young women, 
leaving behind genetic material in each case.

It was his choice, Mr. Kohler said the officers told him, but if he 
refused, they would get a court order and that would get in the 
newspapers and then everyone would know he was not cooperating. The 
approach was heavy-handed and foolish, he said, especially since he 
has feet much bigger than the prints left by the killer and had phone 
bills that show he was at home when the murders took place.

The questions Mr. Kohler is raising about DNA testing are also being 
asked by lawyers and other experts around the country who say the 
growing use of DNA dragnets like the one here, already one of the 
largest in American history, is troubling.

The tests, supposedly voluntary, can still be coercive, critics say,
not only harassing innocent people but also potentially violating
suspects' constitutional protections against compelled
self-incrimination and unreasonable search and seizure. Future
prosecutions could be undermined, some legal scholars, defense lawyers
and even some prosecutors say. Some question whether the dragnets'
limited success justifies the effort and expense. And even those who
endorse the idea of DNA sweeps argue over whether -- and why -- the
government should keep on file the genetic profiles of those who are
proved to be innocent.

The tests trouble some for the very reason that police find them 
attractive: they offer the most incontrovertible proof of identity.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/04/national/04DNA.html

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Hey. Mr. Kohler ... welcome to RealWorld.
Police do *not* like it when a citizen thwarts them in their often
times bogus 'investigations'. Not only that, do you know *how* your
refusal to submit to the police heavy-handed tactics would reach the
newspapers? Well, because the police would tell them at the papers. 
They would each take their favorite reporter (meaning, the idiots at
the papers who treat police bulljive as Holy Scripture -- inspired
text -- and print faithfully every word the kindly police officer
told them). And there *are* reporters -- many of them -- who are too
stupid, or too lazy, or indifferent to bother thinking it through. If
a police officer said it, that makes it good enough for them. So, Mr.
Kohler, police would in a very clever and sophisticated way, and no
doubt completely legal as laws are now written, make you wish you had
taken their damn test, without arguing, or consulting an attorney or
anyone else. PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 16:08:15 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: U.S. to Make Airlines Give Data on Americans Going Overseas


By DAVID JOHNSTON

WASHINGTON, Jan. 3 - Americans traveling abroad would have to give 
the government detailed personal information before leaving or 
returning under an antiterrorism rule that the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service proposed today.

The rule would force airlines and shipping companies to collect and 
submit to the government the name, birth date, sex, passport number, 
home country and address of every passenger and crew member. The 
intent is to provide the authorities with more complete information 
about who enters and leaves the United States.

Currently, air and shipping lines are not required to provide such 
information to the government about Americans. The proposed rule 
would make it mandatory for carriers to supply the information about 
American citizens and noncitizens, immigration officials said.

Much of the information is already collected from people entering the 
country in an arrangement in which 80 percent of commercial carriers 
voluntarily give personal information about their passengers to the 
immigration service, the officials said. The added information would 
be collected while the aircraft or vessel was en route to the United 
States and electronically transmitted to immigration officials on the 
ground at the port of entry.

The rule would also require carriers to provide information about 
people who are leaving the United States within 48 hours after the 
departure of their flight or vessel, the officials said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/04/politics/04TRAV.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 16:22:30 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: For the Gadget Universe, a Common Tongue


By BARNABY J. FEDER

IT is too soon to describe the Bose family as an audio-world version
of the Bush and Kennedy clans in politics, but they are off to a good
start.

In 1964, Amar Bose, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor 
and inventor, created the renowned high-fidelity sound systems 
company that bears the family name. Now, his only son, Vanu, is 
gaining recognition for radio-design technology every bit as novel as 
the sound systems that his father pioneered.

The younger Bose's four-year old company, Vanu Inc., is a prominent 
innovator in the effort to use software rather than hardware to 
control how radios, cellphones and all other wireless communications 
devices recognize and manage signals. Early versions of the 
technology, known as software-defined radio, are beginning to be 
deployed in military communications equipment and cellular base 
stations.

The goal is to develop software and related components that recognize 
various wave forms at any frequency in the radio spectrum and choose 
the appropriate applications to process them. A single device could 
provide cellphone service no matter what the format or frequency, 
exchange wireless messages with laptop or hand-held computers, and 
communicate with walkie-talkies or emergency services.

There is another potential benefit: being able to incorporate 
improved data speeds and features simply by downloading software, 
rather than replacing the customer's hardware or the company's 
network equipment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/02/technology/circuits/02bose.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 16:35:25 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Readers' Favorite Blogs


By Cynthia L. Webb
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer

Blogs, personal Web sites featuring everything from diaries to
artwork, are bubbling up from the underground. Even America Online
reportedly may be jumping on the blog bandwagon. Sites including
Blogger.com and UserLand Software already do this, but it's no secret
that AOL is looking for ways to boost revenue. Why not latch onto this
popular trend as more people and organizations use Web logs to run
their own personal Internet soapbox?

"What blogging has brought back to the Web is that initial beauty of 
connecting to other sources of information," Tiffany Shlain, director 
of the Webby Awards and an Internet trend watcher, told The Globe and 
Mail of Toronto. There are some 500,000 blogs estimated to be online, 
according to the article.

The subject of blogs sparked a lot of interest with Filter readers. 
As proof that blogs are going mainstream, and some would argue are 
mainstream already, Filter readers submitted scores of suggestions 
for their favorite blogs. While by no means comprehensive of the 
thousands of blogs out there, here's a sampling of our readers' 
favorites:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5985-2003Jan3.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 16:46:46 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: FCC Preparing to Overhaul Telecom, Media Rules


If All Proposals Are Enacted, Major Firms in Field Will Be Less 
Regulated and More Free to Expand

By Jonathan Krim
Washington Post Staff Writer

Over the next few months, a single federal agency will begin to 
fundamentally alter the nation's communications and mass-media 
landscape, rewriting a broad swath of rules that affect the choices 
consumers have for getting online and the variety of television and 
radio programming they watch and hear.

If all of the changes being reviewed by the Federal Communications 
Commission are enacted as proposed, major telecommunications and 
media corporations will be less regulated, and more free to grow, 
than at any time in decades.

The rules in question govern how much telephone companies need to 
open their lines to competitors for local phone and high-speed 
Internet service, set restrictions on how many TV and radio stations 
can be owned by one company, and determine whether a company can own 
both newspapers and TV stations that serve the same community.

FCC officials say they expect to begin making decisions as early as 
February, after more than a year of intense debate and lobbying over 
sharply different visions of the best way to spur growth and 
competition in the country's information economy.

Opponents of the proposed rules fear that, taken together, they 
ultimately could lead to a few powerful conglomerates controlling the 
flow of electronic information, from programming of television and 
radio news and entertainment to owning the pipes that connect people 
to the Internet.

Those pushing for the changes argue that the old rules fail to 
account for emerging technologies that can provide a wealth of 
diverse information and means of communication. Burdensome regulation 
has stunted their deployment -- particularly of high-speed Internet 
access -- these people say, and this in turn has hampered recovery of 
the battered technology sector.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3541-2003Jan2.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 16:53:34 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Cooling on the Cold Calling?/Some Telemarketers Changing Strategy


By Caroline E. Mayer
Washington Post Staff Writer

When telemarketers used to interrupt his dinner hour, Douglas E.
Palley often liked to cut the call short by saying, "I'm sorry, Mr.
Palley died." He did so even though he was -- and is -- a
telemarketer, president of a local company with 2,000 employees who
handle about 20 million calls a year.

Now Palley has decided his company will no longer make the
unsolicited sales calls that irritated him. CyberRep, the Tysons
Corner firm he built with partner S. Tien Wong, terminated its last
"cold-calling" contract with a long-distance company in August.

"It is our belief that the world of outbound telemarketing has a
terminal sickness and is dying," Palley said in a recent interview,
days after the Federal Trade Commission announced plans for a
national do-not-call list to allow consumers to register to block
unwanted telemarketing calls.

With 104 million calls made a day -- nearly six times the number made
10 years ago -- "it's the industry people love to hate," Palley said,
noting that 27 states have already created do-not-call lists. So his
company will concentrate on its "inbound" call centers, taking calls
from customers inquiring about their accounts, ordering products or
seeking technical help -- and hoping to use those calls as a sales
opportunity.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8058-2003Jan3.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 18:21:53 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Satellite TV Orbits Closer to Cable


By Ben Charny
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
January 3, 2003, 12:00 PM PT

The number of cable TV subscriptions will be lower in 2002 than the 
year before, ending nine straight years of growth, the Federal 
Communications Commission predicted in a recent report.

A worsening economic climate and lower consumer spending contributed 
to what "may be the first year in which the industry as a whole has 
had a net loss of subscribers," the FCC said in its "Ninth Annual 
Report on Video Competition."

http://news.com.com/2100-1033-979128.html

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 19:08:22 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Will Your TV Become a Spy?


PRIVACY MATTERS
By Jane Black

Will Your TV Become a Spy?

Hollywood wants every new digital set to include technology that 
would stop people from putting its shows on the Net. Bad idea.

While the economy and stock markets struggled, 2002 was a golden year
for the silver screen. Thanks to blockbuster hits such as Spider-Man,
Harry Potter, and Lord of the Rings, ticket sales hit $9.3 billion
worldwide, a remarkable 13% rise over 2001's then-record receipts. So
much for claims that piracy threatens Hollywood's livelihood.

Yet studio execs remain on the warpath. As movies are increasingly
broadcast and sold in digital format, Tinseltown execs are panicked
that consumers will make infinite numbers of perfect digital copies
and share them over the Internet.

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2003/tc2003013_2538.htm

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 19:14:45 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Supreme Court Backs Off DVD Case


By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

The U.S. Supreme Court has bowed out of a long-running dispute over a 
DVD descrambling utility, dealing a preliminary defeat to Hollywood 
studios and electronics makers.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor placed a ruling by the California Supreme 
Court on hold last week, but rescinded her emergency stay on Friday.

O'Connor's decision came in response to court papers filed by lawyers 
for the defendant, Matthew Pavlovich, late Thursday. The effect is 
that Pavlovich is no longer barred from distributing the DeCSS 
descrambling utility by a court order, but he could be sued again if 
he decides to do so.

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-979197.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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #218
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jan  5 20:09:10 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0619A511310;
	Sun, 5 Jan 2003 20:09:10 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 20:09:10 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301060109.h0619A511310@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #219

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 5 Jan 2003 20:09:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 219

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    FBI Wants to Take Away Your Right to Encrypt Your Email (Chris N. Acuma)
    Re: Free Caller ID? (John)
    New Mass Telemarketing Law (John R. Covert)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (Clarence Dold)
    ARLB003 Hams Help Out During OK Telephone Emergency (John Bartley)
    Re: Prison Call Overcharging (Stanley Cline)
    Re: RBOCs Charging Extra $10 For More Than One Host on DSL (Carl Navarro)
    Re: Caller ID Problems (J Kelly)
    Vodafone Plans $20 Billion Stake Sale - Paper (Monty Solomon)
    WifiScanner, 802.11b Analyzer and Detector (Monty Solomon)
    Studios Using Digital Armor to Fight Piracy (Monty Solomon)
    Hacking Away, Long Before There Were Hackers (Monty Solomon)
    Microsoft Counts on Antipiracy Technique (Monty Solomon)
    Prairie Home Companion (Rich Greenberg)
    Last Laugh! Urgent Counter-Proposal (Neal McLain)

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, 04 Jan 2003 11:54:35 MST
From: acuma@aztec.asu.edu (CHRIS N ACUMA)
Subject: FBI Wants to Take Away Your Right to Encrypt Your Email and Data


This was taken from a FBI web site that answers 99 questions about the
FBI.
 
The FBI's position is that you should not be allowed to encrypt stuff
unless you allow the FBI to have the key to decrypt it.
 
Which is kinda like saying you should not be allowed to put a door
lock on your home unless you first give the FBI a key to the home so
they can search it if they think you're a criminal.
 
http://www.fbi.gov/aboutus/faqs/faqsone.htm 

What concerns do the FBI and the law enforcement community have
regarding the growing use of encryption products by the public, both
domestically and abroad? Law enforcement is extremely concerned about
the serious threat posed by the use of robust encryption products that
do not allow for authorized access or the timely decryption of
critical evidence obtained through lawful electronic surveillance and
search and seizure.
 
On one hand, encryption is extremely beneficial when used legitimately
to protect commercially sensitive information and communications. On
the other hand, the potential use of such products by criminals or
terrorists raises a tremendous threat to public safety and national
security.
 
In view of this, law enforcement supports a balanced encryption policy
which meets both commercial and individual needs as well as law
enforcement needs.  The FBI has found that robust encryption, combined
with a key escrow feature which permits court-authorized access to
"plain text," is the only way to achieve these two goals without
seriously jeopardizing public safety.


Chris

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. 
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the 
people against the dangers of good intentions.  They promise to be good 
masters, but they mean to be masters." -- Noah Webster

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

From: jriker1@yahoo.com (John)
Subject: Re: Free Caller ID?
Date: 4 Jan 2003 12:30:23 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Just wanted to check in this thread if my question was actually
answered?  Best I can tell from the bantering back and forth is that
Ameritech must have configured their line wrong in the first place?

Thanks.

JR

joe@obilivan.net wrote in message news:<telecom22.217.13@telecom-digest.org>:

>> (I pay by autodraft)

> That is a dangerous practice to permit TPC unfettered access to your
> bank account.  Just imagine one of those erroneous long distance or
> "enhanced" services hitting your bill, then the TPC wipes out your
> bank account.  Now, you get to argue with them while they have your
> money and your outstanding checks all bounce.

> A lot of folks don't realize how volitile electronic debit
> authorizations can be, unlike credit card charges where they don't get
> your money until you decide to let them have it.  Electronic debits
> should be limited to recurring charges that are fixed in amount, such
> as a mortgage or car payment.

> "Let the buyer beware" is really on-target with electronic debit
> authorizations.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although the problems you discuss are
> very real, I still find it easier for me to use autodraft for my
> regular, recurring bills, such as gas and electric. Both of those
> bills are fixed amounts (budget plan) so I know what they will be. The
> cable bill is also a fixed amount and autodrafted. City of Independence
> water/sewer/garbage pickup is also a fixed amount (with a small tolerance)
> each month for a year at a time, so is also autodrafted. The only bill
> which can be trouble is Southwestern Bell. But I have two things in my
> favor there; or maybe three. I have numerous blocks on my line with my
> okay:  no 900 calls, billed number screeing, and I make most of my
> long distance calls on the cellphone or AOL-by-Phone (they are free in
> most cases), but I still keep a one hundred minute package of time for
> LD on my phone, which costs six dollars. So by and large, my phone and
> DSL service are fixed at about $90 per month. I do not expect many
> surprises there; aggravations from SWB, yes; surprises, no. Also, SWB
> puts the new bill on line for review four weeks before they actually
> debit it, and finally, I have a very friendly and understanding bank
> manager. My bank statements are on line also. It is unimaginable to me
> that anyone could make off with any money from my account, but I do
> watch my balance and the various debits which go through rather closely.
> When a bank only has seven or eight employees, period, and each of
> them has a key to the front door, there is not a lot to worry about 
> where the bank is concerned. I do understand your thoughts however,
> and if I were still living in Chicago, IL or another large city where
> no one cares about anything, I'd probably not do autodraft either.  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 21:28:25 EST
From: John R. Covert <nospam@covert.org>
Subject: New Mass Telemarketing Law


There's a new law which is in effect in Massachusetts as of 1 Jan.
MGL Chapter 159C implements a state do not call list which telemarketers
(no matter where they are located) must observe, published quarterly
(with web-based and touch-tone signup for consumers).  While the first
list isn't to be published until 1 April, the other provisions of the
law which apply to all calls irrespective of the do not call list are
in effect from 1 Jan.

They are: (1) no faxes, (2) no pre-recorded calls, (3) no calls with
blocked caller-id or using a service which deliberately blocks caller
ID (which I think means that telemarketers need to get their LD
providers to send caller ID, such as a main number, on T-1 lines, etc.)
(4) all calls must provide within the first minute a disclosure that the
call is to make a sale or solicit funds, the full and correct name of
the telemarketing firm and the seller of the goods or services, and a
complete description of the goods being offered and their retail price.

Not sure how any telemarketer can do ALL of (4) in one minute!

Two calls within any 12-month period in violation of anything in the
chapter allow suit for $5,000 civil damages.  (Note that for the
pre-recorded calls, Federal law 47 USC 227 permits a $500-$1500 civil
suit in state court in response to the first pre-recorded call.)

Unfortunately, there is a major loophole in the definition of an
"Unsolicited telephonic sales call" in the Mass Do Not Call law:

It specifically exempts calls:

  in which the sale of goods and services is not completed, and payment
  or authorization of payment is not required, until after a face-to-face
  sales presentation by the telephone solicitor or a meeting between the
  telephone solicitor and customer.

In other words, they can still try to sell you aluminum siding, since the
call is to set up an appointment for a salesman to visit you.

And they can continue to call you and invite you to presentations to
sell timesharing (as long as you don't have to book a room and pay for
it during the call).

And I fear that the way the definition of "unsolicited telephonic sales
call" is worded, the definition has basically eliminated the protection
in the Law for many faxes or prerecorded calls for the reasons just
listed.

See www.state.ma.gov for info on the new law.

/john

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  A similar law was put into effect here
in Kansas. People can sign up using a touch tone phone by calling an
800 number up in Topeka, the state capitol. You call, and a voice-
response system first asks you for your number, explains all the rules
about telemarketing, and asks you to press some digit if you wish to
be added at the phone number you entered. Then you are given a chance
to add additional numbers as desired under *your control*, by entering
them one at a time, listening to the same speech about the rules, and
likewise confirming them. They started taking calls to load the database
around December 1, it took effect January 1, but enforcement will
begin in a couple more months. PAT]

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

From: dold@37.usenet.us.com
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 19:11:20 UTC
Organization: a2i network


Steven J. Sobol <sjsobol@justthe.net> wrote:

> Jeff Moss <jeffmoss26@adelphia.net> wrote:

>> I was at my dad's office last week (they are an Ameritech Distributor)
>> and I threw away tons of Ameritech papers. There was a list of the
>> Cleveland area Central offices. I didnt keep it but I remember they
>> used really odd codes ex. Beachwood (30 sec away from my house) would
>> be BCHW1023i0 or something.

> http://dslreports.com/coinfo

This doesn't give the "exchange name" of the CO.
For instance, for 510-638, I know that the exchange name is Oakland
Trinidad, which is _almost_ visible in the output of the nanpa CO
assignment, but not visible at all in the switch name.

NPA	|NXX	|Company	|RC	|Switch	
510	|638	|PACIFIC BELL	|OKLD TRNID	|OKLDCA12DS1	

http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/co_code_assignments.html
http://www.nanpa.com/nanp1/AllCodes.zip ALLCODES.MDB


Clarence A Dold - dold@email.rahul.net
                - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA.

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

From: johnbartley@email.com (John Bartley)
Subject: ARLB003 Hams Help Out During OK Telephone Emergency
Date: 4 Jan 2003 19:57:40 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


ZCZC AG03
QST de W1AW  
ARRL Bulletin 3  ARLB003

 From ARRL Headquarters  
 Newington CT  January 3, 2003
 To all radio amateurs 

SB QST ARL ARLB003
ARLB003 Hams help out during OK telephone emergency

Hams responded with emergency communication when Broken Arrow, OK, a
town of 75,000, experienced a citywide telephone outage on December
23. A request went out for amateurs to assist with emergency effort at
the local Emergency Operations Center and three area hospitals.

Several hams from the Broken Arrow Amateur Radio Club responded to the
call, staffing positions at the Broken Arrow EOC and three hospital
emergency rooms.

The operation lasted about five hours, with messages between the EOCs
and hospitals being passed. Lines of communications were also opened
with the Oklahoma State Department of Civil Emergency Management in
Oklahoma City via the HF amateur station in the Broken Arrow EOC.

The trouble with the phone system was created by the loss of SS7
signaling, a digital protocol for call routing. Unable to route a call
out of the local exchange, Broken Arrow phone customers could not call
outside the city limits. As a result, the City of Broken Arrow
implemented its Telecommunications Failure Plan.

NNNN
/EX

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

From: Stanley Cline <sc1-news@roamer1.org>
Subject: Re: Prison Call Overcharging
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 23:17:47 -0500
Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA
Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org


On Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:57:01 GMT, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff Nor
Lisa) wrote:

> Inmates in prison may make collect calls to their families.  However,
> the family is charged very steep fees for such calls -- much more
> than
<snip>

There's another issue which I've been quite quick to point out on more
than one occasion:  inmates often can't call people who have home (or
lawyers who have business) phone lines from CLECs, because most CLECs
refuse to handle billing from anyone other than themselves and
*perhaps* "selected" major IXCs.  Of course, most CLECs don't mention
that to potential customers, just like CLECs usually don't mention
that potential customers will lose any line-share DSL if they switch
away from the ILEC.  :(

IMO, the FCC should either require full disclosure of "no third party
billing" policies and their consequences, or require CLECs to handle
billing for inmate calls, if not ALL collect and third-number call
charges originating from legitimate carriers.

> There is no reason collect calls from a prison should cost any more
> than collect calls from regular locations.  (And remember, routine

I disagree *to a point* -- in most cases special switches are used to
reduce fraud.  Still, that alone doesn't justify the *outrageous*
rates most carriers charge those that accept inmate calls ...


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

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are two other categories of inmate to
outside calls which will not complete. If a person has a collect call
block on their lines (what is known as 'Billed Number Screening') then
those calls will not go through. The prison phone systems all dip the
database to see if such calls are accepted or not. And if you have an
800 number just to avoid the expense of a collect call, they get you
on that also. Prison phone systems will *not* even accept (right at 
the prison switch they are terminated) calls to toll free numbers.  You'd
think those would be okay, but oh, no ... if prisoner's wife/mother
gets an 800 number so she can receive calls from the prisoner without
having to take a second job to get the money to pay the phone bill,
she is SOL. Look, the corrections industry does *not* like inmates 
making outside contact. Under Supreme Court rules they *have* to 
allow it, but they make it as difficult and expensive as they can.  PAT] 

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

From: Carl Navarro <cnavarro@wcnet.org>
Subject: Re: RBOCs Charging Extra $10/Month For More Than One Host on DSL
Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 12:17:21 -0500
Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America


On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 00:33:00 -0700, Phil Earnhardt <pae@dim.com>
wrote:

> Apparently, at least one of the RBOCs is charging an extra $10/month
> to hook up multiple computers to the same DSL feed. Given that their
> DSL modems have both DHCP and NAT, how could the RBOC's ISP tell that
> you had more than one computer inside the modem's firewall? Even if it
> could, what would keep you from having your "one computer connected to
> the Internet" be a router/firewall?

> $10/month sounds really steep for this, especially when routers with 4
> switched ports cost around $60 to purchase.

> Does anybody know the companies are thinking? If you know how to do
> this yourself, do they really care?

I don't know.  I guess in the "old days" they expected you to rent
extensions from them and pay for each phone.  Must be the same
thinking with computers.  

I'll bet they would charge you by the byte if they could ...


Carl Navarro

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

From: J Kelly <usenet-replies002@pileof_remove-me_monkeycrap.com>
Subject: Re: Caller ID Problems
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 10:40:55 -0600
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


On Thu, 02 Jan 2003 09:08:08 -0600, J Kelly
<usenet-replies002@pileof_remove-me_monkeycrap.com> wrote:

> Does anyone have any suggestions on resolving a problem I have been
> having with Caller ID for the past 13 months?

> Here's is what is happening: When I receive some *Local* calls,
> generally either from a business or a county/municipal office, I only
> recieve the last 4 digits of the number.  Instead of seeing
> 319-334-1234 I will only get 1234 on the display.  Any display, even a
> brand new one plugged in all by itself, nothing else on the line.
> Name appears as Unavailable.

> Residential callers in the same exchange will appear correctly with
> their name displayed, as do long distance and cellular calls (without
> the name of course on cellular calls).  

> This all started one magical day when I was switched from Qwest to
> McLeod USA local service service.  Of course, McCleod being the CLEC
> blamed Qwest (it is their switch after all) and Qwest of course blamed
> McLeod saying they probably have a bad switch configuration, as if
> McLeod had their own switch here (they don't).

> I switched back to Qwest a month later to hopefully resolve that
> problem, and the problem of not having any long distance service due
> to McLeod/Qwest totally screwing up my line so that an invalid PIC was
> selected.  That fixed nothing.  Eventually Qwest addmitted the long
> distance thing was human error on their part and trasnferred me to
> someone in the switch engineering group who fixed it.

> Still, over a year later, they cannot seem to find a problem with the
> caller id and blame McLeod USA, who is most likely the carrier of all
> the callers showing up incorrectly.

> Dozens of trouble tickets later, nothing has been found, each trouble
> ticket results in a tech making a call from the CO and saying "look ,
> it works" and closing the ticket out.

> Anything suggestions to get this fixed would be appreciated.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Try not paying them for a couple months
> until *they* get around to calling you to ask for it. Then when they
> do, tell them you want the Caller ID fixed once and for all.   PAT]

None of these that I'm aware of use a PBX, all POTS lines.  Here in
the small town Independence, IA very few business or offices are large
enough to actually need their own PBX.  One office I am familar with
that exhibits this problem has a Panasonic KSU (don't recall the model
number but I've installed a couple of these myself) but it simply
interfaces with up to 3 incoming POTS lines via analog ports and has
no provisions even available for digital CO lines.

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 13:31:35 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Vodafone Plans $20 bn Stake Sale - Paper / Vodafone Not Planning


     - Jan 4, 2003 07:59 PM (Reuters)

    LONDON, Jan 5 (Reuters) - Mobile phone giant Vodafone Group Plc
(ISEL:VOD) plans to sell its $20 billion stake in U.S. joint venture
Verizon Wireless so it can fund a bid for complete control of a rival
U.S. mobile operator, the Independent on Sunday said.

    The newspaper cited U.S. sources as saying Vodafone had shown an
interest in two mobile operators: Voicestream, which is part of
Deutsche Telekom <DTEGn.DE>, and AT&T Wireless Services Inc
(NYSE:AWE), whose largest shareholder is Japanese operator NTT DoCoMo
Inc (TOKYO:9437).

    Vodafone has an option to sell its 45 percent stake in Verizon
Wireless to the majority shareholder, Verizon Communications
(NYSE:VZ). The newspaper put a $20 billion value on the option, saying
the sale of the stake would provide the financing for any bid.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30752287


     UPDATE 1-Vodafone Not Planning Verizon Stake Sale
     - Jan 5, 2003 10:08 AM (Reuters)

LONDON, Jan 5 (Reuters) - Mobile phone giant Vodafone Group Plc
(ISEL:VOD) said on Sunday it had no current intention to sell its
45-percent stake in its U.S. joint venture Verizon Wireless to
majority shareholder Verizon Communications (NYSE:VZ).

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30753735

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 13:37:00 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: WifiScanner, 802.11b Analyzer and Detector


http://www.securiteam.com/tools/5XP011F8VS.html

  WifiScanner, 802.11b Analyzer and Detector 

DETAILS

 <http://wifiscanner.sourceforge.net/> WifiScanner is an analyzer and
detector of 802.11b stations and access points which can listen
alternatively on all the 14 channels, write packet information in real
time, search access points and associated client stations, and can
generate a graphic of the architecture using GraphViz. All network
traffic may be saved in the libpcap format for post analysis. It works
under Linux with a PrismII card and with the linux-wlan driver.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

The tool can be downloaded from:
 <http://wifiscanner.sourceforge.net/> http://wifiscanner.sourceforge.net/

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 14:48:39 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Studios Using Digital Armor to Fight Piracy


By AMY HARMON

Lying dormant in virtually every digital cable box in America is 
technology that can prevent viewers from recording certain programs 
to watch them later. Soon, several Hollywood studios are planning to 
tell cable operators to flip the switch.

People who have become accustomed to recording pay-per-view and 
video-on-demand shows will probably still be able to, the studios say 
- so long as they pay an extra fee.

The move is one of a range of new restrictions Hollywood is beginning 
to impose on digital movies, music and television. After years of 
battling online piracy in court, media executives are fighting 
technology with technology, locking up their products with the same 
types of digital tools that millions of people have used to get the 
products free over the Internet.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/05/business/05CONT.html

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 14:52:42 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Hacking Away, Long Before There Were Hackers


Hacking Away, Long Before There Were Hackers
By JOHN SCHWARTZ

THE curious thing about the new film "Catch Me if You Can" is how 
contemporary it seems. Curious because this tale of Frank W. Abagnale 
Jr. - in real life a teenage con artist who cashed millions in fake 
checks while impersonating an airline pilot, a doctor and a 
prosecutor - is set in the swinging 60's.

In those days few mortals had used a computer, and Internet wasn't 
even a word. But the young Frank Abagnale seems an eery prefiguration 
of a very modern character: the hacker.

Like them, he discovered a vast and arcane system held together with 
technology - in his case, the nation's network of banks. He worked 
tirelessly to understand its every facet, from the codes used by the 
Federal Reserve system, to the special paper and ink and machines 
used to make checks. And he exploited the system with a teenager's 
limitless energy - and limited morality.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/05/weekinreview/05SCHW.html

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 02:48:59 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Microsoft Counts on Antipiracy Technique


By Joe Wilcox
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

Microsoft is set to release its first mainstream consumer software 
application protected by product activation, in what could be a first 
step toward expanding use of the antipiracy technology.

On Tuesday, Microsoft plans to officially launch Plus Digital Media 
Edition (DME), a $19.95 add-on pack for the Windows XP operating 
system. Microsoft has offered various versions of Plus since the 
release of Windows 95. But unlike earlier versions, Plus DME is 
protected by product activation, meaning that consumers will have to 
enter a 25-key code to install the software and then "activate" Plus 
DME over the Internet.

http://news.com.com/2100-1001-978913.html

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

From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Prairie Home Companion
Date: 5 Jan 2003 16:03:09 -0500
Organization: Organized?  Me?


If you missed Prairie Home Companion on NPR this weekend, there was a
great telephone releted sequence that all telecom pros would probably
enjoy.  If you go to http://phc.mpr.org/performances/20010127/index.shtml
you can hear it.  It was the Jan 4, 2003 show which was actually a
rebroadcast of the 1/27/2001 show.  You want the bit starting at 08:45
in.  (Needs the real audio player.)

Cell phones,  area code confusions, voicemail jail etc.


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

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

Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 00:51:27 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com
Organization: Ann's Garden
Subject: Last Laugh! Urgent Counter-Proposal


The following message was originally posted on the SCTE list by Rex
Porter, a frequent contributor to that list and the Editor-in-Chief of
Communications Technology magazine.  I am cross-posting it here with
Rex's permission.

 -----Original Message-----
 From: SCTE-List On Behalf Of Rex Porter
 Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 2:14 PM
 To: SCTE-List@lists.scte.org
 Subject: I'm Tired Of Receiving This Scam, So....

 URGENT COUNTER-BUSINESS PROPOSAL

 FROM:  MR. R. PORTER
 DEAR FRIEND,
 MAY ALLAH SHINE DOWN HIS BLESSINGS UPON YOU!
 I AM MR. REX PORTER, SON OF BIG BILL (THREE-FINGERS) PORTER OF
 DRY GULCH (AN OUTLAW COUNTY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS - USA).
 AT A RECENT PRAYER MEETING, I HAD A VISION IN WHICH I WAS LED
 TO CONTACT YOU IN RESPONSE TO YOUR FINE LETTER,  BELOW.
 DURING AN UPRISING ALONG THE BORDER BETWEEN TEXAS AND
 MEXICO,  MY FAMILY (MYSELF, BILLY BOB, MA, BIG BILL AND LUCY SUE)
 WAS RECENTLY FORCED TO CEDE OUR RANCH AND ESCAPE TO THE WILDS
 OF NEW MEXICO WHERE BIG BILL LATER PERISHED DURING A COMBINATION
 MUD-SLIDE AND CATTLE STAMPEDE.  HE ALMOST MADE IT TO THE TOP OF THE
 KNOLL WHEN HE SLIPPED IN THE MUD AND WAS TRAMPLED BY 400 TOP GRADE
 BULLS.  MY PAPPY WAS A FRUGAL MAN AND WAS ABLE TO SAVE CASH
 ESTIMATED TO BE IN THE TEN FIGURE RANGE.   HOWEVER, BECAUSE IT IS
 ILLEGAL
 TO TRANSPORT MORE THAN $10,000 CASH, WE LEFT ALMOST ALL OF IT IN ONE OF
 OUR TWENTYFOUR GOLD MINE SHAFTS WHEN WE ESCAPED TO NEW MEXICO. WE HAVE
 DRAWN
 UP A MAP SHOWING THE FOURTEEN HIDING PLACES.  HOWEVER, THE BUSH
 FAMILY NOW REFUSES TO LET US HAVE ENTRY BACK INTO THE STATE OF TEXAS.
 THEY HAVE SOLD OFF ALL THE CATTLE AND TURNED THE RANCH INTO A SUMMER
 HOME SO THAT GEORGE SR., GEORGE JR. AND JEB CAN HAVE THEIR DRINKING
 PARTIES AWAY FROM THE EYE OF THE NATIONAL PRESS.  THEY ALSO HUNT QUAIL
 AND KILLDEER ON THE WEEKENDS THERE.  I DID MAKE ONE SNEAK VISIT BACK
 TO OUR SPREAD LATE LAST FALL, ONLY TO FIND THAT GEORGE JR. HAD
 CONFISCATED

 LAND MINES FROM THE TEXAS NATIONAL GUARD AND SET THEM AROUND THE MINE
 SHAFTS.  I KNOW THAT NONE OF THAT FAMILY IS SMART ENOUGH TO LOCATE THE
 MONEY BUT THEY CAN KEEP US AWAY UNLESS WE GET A WRIT FROM A FEDERAL
 JUDGE (PERHAPS ONE OF THE TWO DEMOCRAT APPOINTEES). HOMELAND SECURITY
 LATER
 TRACKED US TO A SMALL TOWN IN NEW MEXICO BUT WE WERE ABLE TO ESCAPE
 AND RELOCATE IN COLORADO.  WE HAVE HIRED A FINE LAWYER WHO ASSURES US
 HE CAN ARRANGE FOR US TO SECURE SUCH A WRIT.  HOWEVER, THE LEGAL FEES
 WILL BE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF $1MM AND WILL HAVE TO BE HANDLED BY A
 BANKING ARRANGEMENT OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES.  (REMEMBER WHO IS IN
 OFFICE HERE)  WHAT I WANT YOU TO DO IS INDICATE YOUR INTEREST THAT YOU
 WILL ASSIST ME BY CONTACTING A BANK (PERHAPS IN SWITZERLAND) AND
 SECURING

 A LOAN FOR $1.5MM.  PLEASE FORWARD THAT TO ME VIA A CERTIFIED CASHIERS
 CHECK SO MY LAWYER CAN SECURE THE WRIT.  MAY I AT THIS POINT EMPHASIZE
 THE HIGH LEVEL OF CONFIDENTIALITY, WHICH THIS EFFORT DEMANDS, AND HOPE
 YOU WILL NOT BETRAY THE TRUST AND CONFIDENCE WHICH I REPOSE IN YOU.
 IN CONCLUSION, IN THE EVENT YOU ARE INTERESTED TO ASSIST ME, I WOULD
 LIKE
 YOU TO CONTACT ME.  FINALLY, I WILL SET ASIDE 20% OF THE TOTAL SUM FOR
 YOUR
 ASSISTANCE AND 10% FOR ANY EXPENSES THAT SHALL BE INCURRED DURING THIS
 TRANSACTION.  I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR CERTIFIED CASHIERS CHECK AS SOON
 AS POSSIBLE.  TELL BASHER I SAID "HEY" AND THAT I CONTINUE TO PRAY FOR
 YOU
 AND YOUR FAMILY....MR. REX PORTER

Cross-posted by Neal McLain 
nmclain@annsgarden.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A very good response for those letters.
I get three or four of them every day.  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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #219
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jan  6 16:51:38 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h06Lpc809026;
	Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:51:38 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:51:38 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301062151.h06Lpc809026@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #220

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:52:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 220

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Update (Canada) #364, January 6, 2003 (Angus TeleManagement)
    Re: RBOCs Charging Extra $10/Month For More Than One Host (John Higdon)
    Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy? (John Higdon)
    Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From Given Country? (David Clayton)
    Re: Critics Weigh In on Copyright Act (David Clayton)
    Re: MS Java Ruling Sets IT Precedent (Linc Madison)
    Re: Very Newbie Reboot Question (Benm)
    Re: "Out the door" (R Gilbert)
    Re: Last Laugh! Urgent Counter-Proposal (Jim Thompson)

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, 06 Jan 2003 10:12:49 -0500
From: Angus TeleManagement <jriddell@angustel.ca>
Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #364, January 6, 2003


************************************************************
TELECOM UPDATE
************************************************************
published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group
http://www.angustel.ca

Number 364: January 6, 2003

Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous
financial support from:
** BELL CANADA: http://www.bell.ca
** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: http://www.cisco.com/ca/letstalk
** CYGCOM INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES: http://www.cygcom.com
** ERICSSON CANADA: http://www.ericsson.ca
** JUNIPER NETWORKS: http://www.juniper.net
** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca
** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com
** TELUS: http://www.telus.com

************************************************************

IN THIS ISSUE:

** Creditors to Take Over Microcell
** Court Approves GT Reorganization
** CRTC Says Competition Did Not Advance in 2001
** CRTC Cuts CDNA Rates
** CBC Accuses Satellite Carriers of Bias
** Telesat Launches Nimiq 2
** Ottawa Proposes New PCS/Cellular Licence Rules
** WorldCom Losses Increase
** Cognicase Accepts Improved CGI Bid
** TigerTel Buys Call Centre Outsourcer
** BCE Disposes of Teleglobe Shares
** The Hidden Costs of IP Telephony

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

CREDITORS TO TAKE OVER MICROCELL: Microcell Telecom says its creditors
have approved a plan to swap their existing notes for 99.9% of the
company's shares and some new debt.  Microcell, which has filed for
bankruptcy protection during the transition, hopes to receive all
necessary approvals by the end of March. The company says it will
continue operating normally in the meantime.

** If approved, the plan will cut Microcell's debts from $2
    billion to $350 million, and reduce its annual interest
    payments by $200 million.

** Currently, Microcell's largest shareholders are Charles
    Sirois' Telesystem Ltd. (25%), T-Mobile (15%), and
    Quebec's Caisse de Depot (17%).

COURT APPROVES GT REORGANIZATION: The Ontario Superior Court has
approved Group Telecom's reorganization plan. GT expects to implement
the plan by February 15, clearing the way for its acquisition by
360networks. (See Telecom Update #363)

CRTC SAYS COMPETITION DID NOT ADVANCE IN 2001: The CRTC submitted its
report to Cabinet on the status of telecom competition and broadband
deployment on December 20.

** Industry-wide telecom service revenues grew by 10% in
    2001, to $32 billion: 79% of this was in wireline
    services, 21% in wireless.

** Wireline competitors' revenues increased from $2.6 billion
    in 1998 to $3.9 billion in 2001 (15% annual growth).
    However, competitors' EBITDA was "essentially nil" for the
    four years, while incumbents had nearly $10 billion in
    EBITDA each year.

** Competitors made little progress in local service. At the
    end of 2001 they served 591,000 business local lines and
    74,000 residential local lines (7.8% and .5% of each
    respective market). Competitors lost market share in long
    distance and in data/private-line services in the year.

** 85% of Canadians live in communities served by high-speed
    Internet access, mainly DSL and cable modem service. In
    2001, retail high-speed service revenues ($1.19 billion)
    exceeded dialup revenues for the first time.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/PolicyMonitoring/2002/gic2002.pdf

CRTC CUTS CDNA RATES: The CRTC has significantly reduced the interim
rates for Competitor Digital Network Access service, reflecting cost
studies filed by the incumbent telcos in September. Call-Net had
argued that the previous rates included a 388% markup over cost,
instead of the 15% ordered by the Commission.

** Call-Net CEO Bill Linton says this ruling, which is
    retroactive to June 1, 2002, will bring Call-Net's cost
    savings to the level envisioned by the CRTC in its May
    2002 Price Cap decision.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2002/dt2002-78.htm

CBC ACCUSES SATELLITE CARRIERS OF BIAS: A CBC submission to the CRTC
says that Bell ExpressVu carries nine CTV stations but only six CBC
English-language stations, and that Star Choice carries five TVA
stations but only two French-language CBC stations.

** The CBC says that a proposal by Bell ExpressVu to black
    out CBC network signals in favour of local stations in
    some markets would give further preferential treatment to
    CTV, which is owned by ExpressVu's parent company, BCE.

http://cbc.radio-canada.ca/htmen/submissions/docs/CRTC_2002-57_2002-71.pdf

TELESAT LAUNCHES NIMIQ 2: Telesat successfully launched Nimiq 2, a
direct broadcast satellite, on December 30. Bell ExpressVu has booked
the satellite's entire capacity and will begin using it in April.

OTTAWA PROPOSES NEW PCS/CELLULAR LICENCE RULES: Industry Canada wants
to replace the various rules and fees governing PCS and cellular
spectrum licences with a common set of principles and policies for all
licences. Comments are requested by March 5.

http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/sf05584e.html

WORLDCOM LOSSES INCREASE: Despite a 46% cut in capital spending,
WorldCom's net loss on operations nearly doubled to US$205 million in
October. The carrier has been under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection
since July.

COGNICASE ACCEPTS IMPROVED CGI BID: The directors of Cognicase have
agreed to support an improved takeover bid from CGI Group, which ups
the price per share to $4.50 from $4.25. (See Telecom Update #361)

TIGERTEL BUYS CALL CENTRE OUTSOURCER: TigerTel Communications has
agreed to purchase all outstanding shares of Universal Teleresponse
Corp, a Toronto-based contact centre company, for $2.5 million.

** In the six months ended October 31, TigerTel reported
    $4.99 million in revenue and a gross profit of $2.6
    million.

BCE DISPOSES OF TELEGLOBE SHARES: BCE has sold its 295 million shares
of Teleglobe to a subsidiary of Ernst & Young for a "nominal
consideration." Ernst & Young is the court- appointed monitor for
Teleglobe. (See Telecom Update #350, 361)

THE HIDDEN COSTS OF IP TELEPHONY: When McGill University looked at IP
telephony, it found that the cost of preparing for a voice-data
network would be much greater than anyone expected. Read full details
in an exclusive insider report, only in the January issue of
Telemanagement. Also in Telemanagement #201:

** "Converged Networks Demand Converged Management"
** "Corporate Mobile Data on the Launching Ramp"
** "Federal Government Sets Foreign Investment Review"

Telemanagement is available only by subscription. To receive this
important issue by first-class mail, subscribe now at
http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.html or call 905-686-5050 ext
500.

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

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: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: RBOCs Charging Extra $10/Month For More Than One Host on DSL
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 17:28:42 -0800


In article <telecom22.219.7@telecom-digest.org>, Carl Navarro
<cnavarro@wcnet.org> wrote:

> I don't know.  I guess in the "old days" they expected you to rent
> extensions from them and pay for each phone.  Must be the same
> thinking with computers.  

> I'll bet they would charge you by the byte if they could ...

Actually, charging by the byte makes sense. After all, it is bandwidth 
that you are paying for. But charging based upon what you do with the 
data is nonsense. Whether the data is used by one or ten computers is 
irrelevant to them; it is only the quantity that counts.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy?
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 17:43:25 -0800


In article <telecom22.218.17@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> Yet studio execs remain on the warpath. As movies are increasingly
> broadcast and sold in digital format, Tinseltown execs are panicked
> that consumers will make infinite numbers of perfect digital copies
> and share them over the Internet.

And as anyone knows, seeing grainy, jerky images on a computer screen
with audio through a couple of three-inch speakers beats nearly
perfect images projected onto a 100' screen with audio through
THX-certified sound systems any day of the week.

I guess that movie execs are justified in thinking that suddenly the
movie theaters will be empty.

"Earth to whomever..."


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: David Clayton <dcstar@acslink.net.au>
Subject: Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country?
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 13:15:43 +1100
Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd.
Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au


johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) contributed the following:

>>> It's time for LECs to similarly block their customers with PBXes from
>>> transmitting phony Caller ID information.  And for us to start a
>>> blacklist of LECs that won't.

>> That's an interesting idea, but if they are sending incorrect CLID info, 
>> what information do you blacklist?

> It is my impression that CO phone switches can be programmed to know
> the valid CLID number range for a PBX, and to substitute in the main
> number if a call from the PBX has no CLID or CLID outside that range.
> Too bad telcos are almost all too lazy to do so.

What happens if the PBX is part of a bigger private network and may
switch transit calls out on those trunks which won't have a CLID in
the local range?

I fully agree with the idea, but to implement it would be difficult, (at
least).


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: David Clayton <dcstar@acslink.net.au>
Subject: Re: Critics Weigh In on Copyright Act
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 13:15:45 +1100
Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd.
Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au


Ed Ellers <ed_ellers@msn.com> contributed the following:

> JDS <t111@syntelsoft.com> wrote:

>> Technological solutions to sociological problems never work.  For
>> one thing, there's always the "analog hole" which allows complete
>> circumvention of any copyright scheme.

> At the cost of some degradation of the signal.  That's why people are
> getting so worked up over attempts to prevent digital copying.  (IMHO
> the jury is still out over whether an analog dub from a CD really is
> inferior to a digital "rip" of the same track, after both have been
> encoded in MP3 at the usual 128 kbps.)

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Tell the Jury that the slightly
> inferior signal is actually pretty good considering what you paid
> for it. There really is no difference. An audiophile which very fancy
> equipment could tell the difference; almost no one else. PAT]

Possibly an "audiophile" under 35 who has treated his ears exceptionally
well over that time, otherwise anyone with "average" hearing would find
it hard to notice.

I personally notice that Dolby "B" noise reduction doesn't seem to
improve tape noise the way it used to 20 years ago ...       :-(

I would speculate that you could find a pattern of people noticing the
difference in quality inversely in line with their ages, (apart from
those young ones who have blasted their ears into senility with the
various types of aural abuse available these days).


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: Linc Madison <nobody@example.com>
Subject: Re: MS Java Ruling Sets IT Precedent
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 01:51:14 -0800
Organization: LincMad.com Consulting
Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com


In article <telecom22.218.7@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> By Associated Press
> <http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,57073,00.html>

> Over time, observers say, the biggest consequence could be the
> precedent of a judge -- and not engineers, software companies or even
> users -- deciding what is installed on personal computers.

That's a decidedly Microsoft spin on the story. The judge said it very
well [paraphrasing]: if Microsoft's products prevail in the
marketplace, it should be because they are better, not because
Microsoft uses its monopoly status to drive out competitors.


www dot LincMad dot com  / Telecom at LincMad dot com
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California

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

From: ben77m2000@yahoo.com (Benm)
Subject: Re: Very Newbie Reboot Question
Date: 6 Jan 2003 07:24:39 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


reedl@tatteredcover.com (Reed Loefgren) wrote in message
news:<telecom22.215.10@telecom-digest.org>:

> I have an SX-2000 Light system. I have never rebooted it except when
> the power failed. I've looked in the docs I have and cannot find
> mention of a command to reboot (or shutdown) except for: PROGrammed
> Reboot SCHedule <blah> <blah>. I don't want to schedule a repetitive
> reboot.

PROGrammed Reboot SCHedule <day of week> <hh:mm:ss> command is the one
to use.  When the reboot is finished, use this command to make sure it
doesn't happen again:

PROGrammed Reboot OFF

Ben

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 07:47:00 PST
From: R Gilbert <r_j_gilbert@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Out the Door 


I too have been saying this for some time.  The programmers and
engineers of today have become as ubiquitous as the mechanics,
electricians, and equipment operators of old.  This gives unions a new
"market" to delve into.

However, I see the unions as having to make a change in the culture -
theirs and engineers.  In reading various ethics and professional
responsibilities letters and documents regarding engineers, the issue
of "professionalism" is the biggest block to unions.  Engineers are
professionals, they work in professional environments with other
professionals, and thus do not need a union.  This is not meant to be
disparaging to anyone (i.e. I am not saying union members are not
professionals). This is the culture that makes union introduction
difficult.  The best analogy I can think of is the military one of an
officer and a gentleman.  An officer is a gentleman by definition, and
if you aren't an officer, you are not a gentleman.  The truth of the
belief is not the issue, rather the existence of the belief creates
it's own truth.

Today engineers are everywhere, as opposed to being scarce.  When
higher education was limited to fewer people, you had a small pool of
engineers available.  They would be scarce, and like any scarce
commodity, they would be of great value.  They would be their own
class, and I believe that is the source of the "professional" belief
that works against unionization.  Bolstering the union case is the
fact that everyone has engineers - heck, in you have them designing
control systems for water usage is skyscrapers (how many engineers
does it take to program a toilet?).  I will be interesting to see if
there are forays into the white collar world by unions in the future.

R

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

From: Jim Thompson  <Jim-T@analog_innovations.com>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Urgent Counter-Proposal
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 01:09:18 GMT
Organization: Cox Communications


On Sun, 05 Jan 2003 00:51:27 -0600, Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>, 
Article: <telecom22.219.15@telecom-digest.org>, Entitled: "Last Laugh! Urgent
Counter-Proposal", wrote the following:

> The following message was originally posted on the SCTE list by Rex
> Porter, a frequent contributor to that list and the Editor-in-Chief of
> Communications Technology magazine.  I am cross-posting it here with
> Rex's permission.

>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: SCTE-List On Behalf Of Rex Porter
>  Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 2:14 PM
>  To: SCTE-List@lists.scte.org
>  Subject: I'm Tired Of Receiving This Scam, So....

>  URGENT COUNTER-BUSINESS PROPOSAL

>  FROM:  MR. R. PORTER
[snip]
>  AND YOUR FAMILY....MR. REX PORTER|
> Cross-posted by Neal McLain 
> nmclain@annsgarden.com

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A very good response for those letters.
> I get three or four of them every day.  PAT]

ROTFLMAO!


|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  Jim-T@analog_innovations.com  Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |

            For proper E-mail replies SWAP "-" and "_"
             
I love to cook with wine.      Sometimes I even put it in the food.             

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #220
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jan  7 00:56:27 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h075uRe13884;
	Tue, 7 Jan 2003 00:56:27 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 00:56:27 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301070556.h075uRe13884@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #221

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 7 Jan 2003 00:56:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 221

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Help Wanted: Steal This Database (Monty Solomon)
    Tiny Cell Phone or Big Brother? (Monty Solomon)
    Tech Gadgets Galore Hit Vegas (Monty Solomon)
    Experts See Vulnerability as Outsiders Code Software (Monty Solomon)
    Security Cameras are Getting Smart -- and Scary (Monty Solomon)
    MMS: Much More Spam (Monty Solomon)
    Schneier: Counterattack (Monty Solomon)
    Verizon Wireless to Expand Operations North of Pittsburgh (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Prison Call Overcharging (Justin Time)
    Re: Prison Call Overcharging (Dave Christensen)
    Extinction (Joey Lindstrom)
    Re: Rural WV and High Speed Internet (Paul Wallich)
    Re: Rural WV and High Speed Internet (Dave Christensen)
    That's Showbiz (Eric Friedebach)
    Bells Could Win Now, Lose Later (Eric Friedebach)

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: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Help Wanted: Steal This Database
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 15:55:25 -0500


By Brian McWilliams 
02:00 AM Jan. 06, 2003 PT

Hack-proofing a website is hard enough.  But the task becomes gargantuan
when you accidentally publish the administrator's password on one of
your site's most heavily trafficked pages.

Such a security gaffe may have enabled unauthorized visitors to log in
and access files undetected for more than six months on a server
operated by Carmichael Lynch, a public relations and advertising firm
with several big-name clients.  The admin password was inadvertently
published on a page that contained online job postings.

Among the files potentially exposed to outsiders: internal documents,
including customer databases owned by two of the company's biggest
clients, Porsche and American Standard.

Experts said the incident is the latest example of how shoddy security
can undermine companies' privacy promises.

http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,57066,00.html

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Tiny Cell Phone or Big Brother?
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 15:59:04 -0500


By Lauren Weinstein (a commentary) 
02:00 AM Jan. 06, 2003 PT

You've seen the slew of commercials for them.  You may already have one
in your pocket or hanging from your belt.  New generations of cell
phones appear before you've even figured out all the features of your
current model.

There's much more to consider regarding cellular technology beyond
incomprehensible user manuals and the highly visible phone radiation
and "driving while yakking" controversies.

The latest of these tiny wireless phones (the term "cellular" is now
out of favor, we're told) sport multimedia color displays, video
camera options, precision location tracking and a host of other
heavily promoted features set to hit the mainstream this year.

Yet little thought has been given to how these advanced capabilities
could affect society.

http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,57040,00.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Lauren Weinstein, the author of this
article in wired.com has also written on several ocassions for TELECOM
Digest.   PAT]

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Tech Gadgets Galore Hit Vegas
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:03:30 -0500


By Associated Press 
03:29 PM Jan. 05, 2003 PT

NEW YORK - Panasonic, Palm, Philips and other makers of cell phones,
handheld computers and electronic doodads would have you believe the
good times are rolling now like never before.

They may have a point.

More than 2,000 such companies are trucking their newest wares to Las
Vegas' International Consumer Electronics Show this week, promising to
overwhelm the city's gargantuan convention hall.  The show, which
features keynotes by chiefs of Sony, Microsoft and Intel, has normally
pessimistic analysts abuzz with a fervor that seems alien in times of
war and uncertainty.


http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,57077,00.html

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Experts See Vulnerability as Outsiders Code Software
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:07:21 -0500


By JOHN SCHWARTZ

As American companies increasingly move their software development
tasks out of their own offices to computer programming companies here
and abroad, new concerns are being raised about the security risks
involved.

Some of these concerns over the practice, known as outsourcing, are
being raised by people with an obvious self-interest - for example,
programmers who have seen their livelihoods shift to less expensive
operations overseas.  And the companies providing outsourcing services
argue that they take all necessary precautions to limit risk.  But the
question of whether the booming business in exporting high-tech jobs
is heightening the risk of theft, sabotage or cyberterrorism from
rogue programmers has been raised in discussions at the White House,
before Congress and in boardrooms.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/06/technology/06OUTS.html

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Security Cameras are Getting Smart -- and Scary
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:11:15 -0500


By Dean Takahashi
Mercury News

 From wealthy private homes to military installations, security cameras
are going high tech.

Prompted in part by new fears after the Sept.  11, 2001, terrorist
attacks, camera makers, security specialists, hard-disk makers and chip
designers are transforming the art of video surveillance, long known for
its grainy, black-and-white images and reams of tape.

With the new smart cameras, data is recorded in a digital format on hard
disk drives so that reviewing hours of surveillance is much easier.
Solar batteries let cameras run without the risk of failing because
somebody cut the power.

Data can be sent over the Internet -- often through wireless data
networks -- directly to a company's hard drive archives.  Processing
chips inside the cameras make the images much easier to discern, and new
software analyzes faces so that the cameras can send alerts to security
guards when they spot known criminals or suspicious movements.


http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/news/local/4883623.htm

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: MMS: Much More Spam
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 18:35:15 -0500


 From circulars in the post to spam emails, unsolicited advertising has
long been the bane of all media.  And there's no reason, warns Sean
Hargrave, to suppose that mobile phone photo-messaging will fare any
better.

http://media.guardian.co.uk/mediaguardian/story/0,7558,869126,00.html

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 08:38:53 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Schneier: Counterattack


Excerpt from:

	CRYPTO-GRAM, December 15, 2002
              by Bruce Schneier

                Counterattack


This must be an idea whose time has come, because I'm seeing it talked
about everywhere.  The entertainment industry floated a bill that
would give it the ability to break into other people's computers if
they are suspected of copyright violation.  Several articles have been
written on the notion of automated law enforcement, where both
governments and private companies use computers to automatically find
and target suspected criminals.  And finally, Tim Mullen and other
security researchers start talking about "strike back," where the
victim of a computer assault automatically attacks back at the
perpetrator.

The common theme here is vigilantism: citizens and companies taking
the law into their own hands and going after their assailants.
Viscerally, it's an appealing idea.  But it's a horrible one, and one
that society after society has eschewed.

http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0212.html#1

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:04:52 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Verizon Wireless to Expand Operations North of Pittsburgh


      Company Completes Acquisition of ALLTEL Wireless Business
      Serving Sections of Lawrence, Butler and Clarion Counties

    BEDMINSTER, N.J., Jan. 6 /PRNewswire/ -- Verizon Wireless, the
nation's largest wireless provider, today announced it has acquired
ALLTEL's controlling general partnership interest in a wireless
business north of Pittsburgh.  The acquisition is a major expansion of
the company's service footprint throughout portions of Lawrence,
Butler and Clarion Counties, Pennsylvania, including the city of New
Castle.

    Verizon Wireless operations now serve the entire western section
of Pennsylvania, from Lake Erie in the north, down to the border of
West Virginia in the south.

    Financial terms were not disclosed.

    The former ALLTEL operation covers a market with a total
population (POPS) of some 136,000.  Major highways in the footprint
include Interstates 80 and 79 and Route 60.  The business, operating
today under the ALLTEL brand, will be converted to the Verizon
Wireless brand in three to four months.  The existing analog wireless
network will be quickly integrated into the Verizon Wireless national
network and upgraded to digital CDMA service.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30758615

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

From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time)
Subject: Re: Prison Call Overcharging
Date: 6 Jan 2003 08:28:10 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff Nor Lisa) wrote in message
news:<telecom22.212.2@telecom-digest.org>:

There are a great many more issues involved in this than what is being
presented in this post.  The point of this post indicates that
"collect calls from correctional facilities cost more than collect
calls from regular payphones and that is wrong."  While this is true,
there are other factors that are not addressed in this broadside that
fail to mention some of the reasons behind the high charges.

> Inmates in prison may make collect calls to their families.  However,
> the family is charged very steep fees for such calls -- much more than
> today's routine collect call charges.  For example, $3 for the first
> minute, $1 each additional minute.

The locations an inmate can call are limited.  They cannot dial, as
examples, the members of the jury that convicted them, the prosecutors
(other than their office number - and not their direct number, but the
main number which is screened), witnesses, police officers, judges or
other court officers.  They also cannot call members of witness
families or other "undesireables."  The list of numbers for each
inmate is different and the cost of maintaining the database is paid
from the revenue collected from those calls.

> This appears to be a common practice across the U.S.

This is probably one of the uncontestable statements in the broadside,
but it is also incorrect.  Most of the correctional facilities
throughout the civilized world follow the same practices.  So the high
cost of calls is not just a "U.S." issue requiring redress, it is a
world-wide issue.

> People might argue "too bad, they're in prison!", but that misses
> several important points:

> It's not the inmate who's paying for the calls, but the family.
> Further, such families are often poor.

Many facilities allow the inmate to purchase phone time from
commissary credits or from funds sent from home.  These calls are
still handled at the higher rates, but the family is not billed for
these calls.  Additionally, the family always has the opportunity to
refuse the call.  This may sound callous, but if you know the cost of
the call is going to be billed to your phonebill and you don't have
the funds to pay for the call when the bill comes in, you can refuse
to accept the call.  This is called "fiscal responsibility."  This
also tends to become much less of a problem after calls begin to be
refused.  The inmate then begins to limit calls to essential
communications and not "I was bored and thought I would call."

> There is no reason collect calls from a prison should cost any more
> than collect calls from regular locations.  (And remember, routine
> collect calls today are very expensive).  And the actual cost to the
> prison for the cost is very little -- maybe 5c a minute, since states
> have bulk contracts with toll carriers.  The collect charges are pure
> gravy for the state.

Those high call charges are not "pure gravy."  Most people don't
realize that every call from an inmate telephone in a correctional
institution is recorded.  Additionally, there are those "unallowed
number" lists that have to be maintained.  Additionally, there are
additional expenses because of the high cost of the inmate instrument,
system administration, additional phone company charges because of
special handling and limited hours of operation and many other
factors.  Inmate phones are not the same as the ubiquitous payphone
you see on the street corner.  They have special armored cases, cords
and other parts.  The access to dial tone can be turned on and off and
many other controls that are not present on other phones and must be
maintained by someone, who needs a paycheck.

There are some institutions that do charge extra for long distance,
and receive revenue from the long distance carrier for those charges,
but then there are additional costs involved in handling all the
restrictions on an inmate by inmate basis.

> Another consideration is that family contact is important for an
> inmate's rehabilitation.  Many inmates are imprisoned far from the
> homes, and too far for families to visit.  A rehabiliated inmate won't
> commit fresh crimes upon his release.

A typical strawman argument.  The incidence of recidivism (sp?) or "an
inmate that can contact their family is less likely to return to
prison" is some thing that cannot be either proved or disproved.  The
question to ask here is: "What proof can you cite to prove your
argument?"

> Likewise, family contact reduces stress.  Stressed inmates get into
> fights and start riots which are extremely costly.  In other words,
> frequent family contact is good for society.

It sure sounds good, and there may be a kernel of truth to the
statement, but again, where is your proof?  Cite some statistics that
are verifiable.  Yes, riots are costly, but what percentage of rioters
in prisons have no family contact?  What percentage of those involved
in fights and riots have regular phone privileges and use the phone
frequently?  I know from my work consulting to a department of
corrections that phone privileges are usually one of the last
privileges revoked from an inmate. 

They are often in trouble long before the privilege of using a
telephone is revoked.  And family contact is good for society?  What
about the inmate who calls a family member so they will go and attempt
to intimidate a witness?  Or the inmate who calls associates to keep
their criminal empire functioning?  These are not isolated incidents,
there are well documented cases of inmates running gangs, ordering
murders and mayhem and many other illegal activities. -- Remember, I
mentioned the calls are recorded?  The only calls that are not
reviewed are those between the client and their legal representative.
That doesn't mean the call isn't recorded, the recorder can't
discriminate to that level, but the content of the call is not
reviewed by court officials who screen the calls for illegal
activities.

The point I have been attempting to make is that there is a reason for
some of the high charges paid for telephone calls from correctional
institutions, and it is not to punish the families of the inmates but
to protect the society they harmed in the first place.


Rodgers Platt

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

Subject: Re: Prison Call Overcharging
From: dave@newrivergroup.com (Dave Christensen)
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 21:14:17 -0600


I know I am late on this topic, but I dont know if you see the entire
picture.

Most detention facilities do not have the labor for a telephone
monitor to escort inmates from their cells to another 'secure' area to
make a telephone call.  So to make these calls possible they install
phones in community areas, holding areas, even sometimes individual
cells.  An often overlooked element though is that it costs money to
install and maintain a telephone system where the physical CPE
equipment is abused and needs to be well protected (over-engineered
cords that dont come out and become used as weapons to strangle
people?) from both the users and the correctional staff.

Emotional Rant: I certainly dont want to see my taxes go up again to
support the jails and prisons, so why not have it as a 'user fee'
(Reagan was so fond of creating these mini taxes).

Yes it is a little expensive, but nobody forces them to talk on the
phone.  They can always visit or write letters like they did many
years ago.  Just another side to the story...


Dave
(Disclaimer: I work p/t as a reserve deputy with a law enforcement
organization)  

In message <telecom22.212.2@telecom-digest.org>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
(Jeff Nor Lisa) wrote:

> Inmates in prison may make collect calls to their families.
> However, the family is charged very steep fees for such calls -- much
> more than today's routine collect call charges.  For example, $3 for
> the first minute, $1 each additional minute.  > >

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 09:55:07 -0700
Subject: Extinction
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Fri, 3 Jan 2003 22:52:54 EST, John Stahl wrote:

> So with this agreement, the issue of the existing analog TV sets is
> now set for extinction. Because when all that is available - over the
> air AND now on cable - is HDTV digital signals, it will be mandatory
> that we all will have to spend (collectively) $ millions (perhaps $
> billions) to purchase HDTV sets (and other appliances) in order to
> watch (and record) any kind of US TV programming.

Horse hockey.  :-) We've discussed this one before, and the point most
people seem to be missing is that you will be able to keep your old TV
(assuming it still works - it seems 5-8 years is the average lifespan
of today's crappy TV sets) and still use it, providing you purchase a
set-top analog converter box.  Those boxes are available NOW although
they're expensive.  Five years down the road they'll be "cheap like
borscht".

Oh, but whoa is me, some consumers say.  Why should I have to pay
ANYTHING?  I already bought the TV, now you're telling me I've gotta
spend more to keep using it?

As Denis Leary once said: "Life sucks.  Get a ****ing helmet."

Or as Robert Heinlein once said (via a character in one of his
stories), "TANSTAAFL!" - or, "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free
Lunch"

It's hardly unfair, and the benefits to all of us far outweigh the
inconvenience for those who don't want to stay with the times.

I can just imagine the folks in Sweden, right around the time they
switched from driving on the left side of the road to the right side,
moaning and bitching about how they need protection for their
investments in their cars - which are now more difficult to drive
(y'ever try to execute a pass while driving a car that's on the
"wrong" side of the road?  You pretty much have to put the entire car
into the oncoming lane before you can even see if anything's coming).
The Swedes managed to do this, and cars are a much bigger investment
than TV's and VCR's.  So why are we crying so much about MAYBE not
being able to use a television set that, by the time analog signals
are phased out, will be worth maybe $40?

Can we just RELAX on this issue already?  :-)

(NOTE: before you argue that the broadcasters and studios want to
design this new digital equipment so that it CANNOT be used with
analog equipment, that is an entirely different issue - and I agree
that that would be "A Bad Thing"<tm> - but so far I don't see any
evidence that this will in fact come to pass.)


Joey Lindstrom
 -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

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

From: Paul Wallich <pw@panix.com>
Subject: Re: Rural WV and High Speed iIternet
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 13:57:33 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


In article <telecom22.217.20@telecom-digest.org>,
kimbrennan@aol.comfrtz.com (KimBrennan) wrote:

> I've a piece of property in Pendleton County WV. Dial-up Internet
> services are available, but I've wanted to get something faster. Since
> I don't live in the county seat (Franklin), I don't have access to
> cable TV.
 ...

> ISDN. Only available for "business", not "residential" as near as I
> can tell from Verizon. Also they also will only hook up the ISDN line,
> if you get your internet service from Verizon. Verizon's ISDN internet
> is long distance from my place not to mention being considerably more
> expensive than that alternatives.  A resistance check in the past
> shows that the line to my house is sufficient for ISDN.
 ...

> So that leaves me with ISDN as my only choice in an affordable
> sense. A couple of years ago, I called and ordered ISDN. Everything
> was going smoothly up until the local junction box was examined. At
> that point they realized they didn't have any free copper (for me
> ... OR for several voice circuits that had been ordered) and my order
> was cancelled.

> I understand that the junction box may have been rewired in the last
> year, so I may pursue this again. The only glitch is having to deal
> with Verizon for the internet service. I'd rather just get the ISDN
> line and then connect to the ISP of my choice (several of which are
> actually local). Any ideas on how I should pursue this?

It sounds like you will have to order internet service from Verizon (oh 
for the days when this owuld have been considered an obvious violation 
of antitrust restrictions on "tying"), but nothing says you have to use 
that service rather than connecting to another ISP. Something in the 
contract may say that if you cancel the Verizon internet service they 
will also terminate your ISDN line, in which case you'll want to factor 
that extra monthly cost into your equations.

Good luck.

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

Subject: Re: Rural WV and High Speed Internet
From: dave@newrivergroup.com (Dave Christensen)
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 21:18:33 -0600


With ISDN being a switched line type, you can use any ISP that will
support the ISDN connection type.  Most ISP's using modern DSP based
'modems' can facilitate an ISDN link.

In message <telecom22.217.20@telecom-digest.org>, kimbrennan@aol.comfrtz.com
(KimBrennan) wrote:

> I've a piece of property in Pendleton County WV. Dial-up Internet
> services are available, but I've wanted to get something faster. Since
> I don't live in the county seat (Franklin), I don't have access to
> cable TV.

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:21:20 PST
From: Eric Friedebach <friedebach@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: friedebach@yahoo.com
Subject: That's Showbiz


Peter Huber, 01.06.03, Forbes.com

Most coding schemes get cracked sooner or later. When you're talking
entertainment, they get cracked much sooner.

Can phone and cable companies save the music industry? Their wires
are being used to steal a lot of copyrighted content, and the problem
gets worse every time a household with a teenager on the premises
signs up for a high-speed internet connection. A hot new disc used to
sell well for weeks, but now sales tail off quickly. When Napster
went offline, universities saw traffic volumes drop by a third or
more on the high-speed pipes that connect their campuses to the web.
But neo-Napsters have sprung up all over. The music business is less
profitable than it used to be; the gangsta rappers are themselves
getting mugged. 

Encryption schemes can't solve the entertainment industry's problems.
Most coding schemes get cracked sooner or later, and when you're
talking entertainment, they get cracked much sooner. Music and movies
have to be delivered to eyes and ears, after all, so a crude theft of
the new Harry Potter movie can begin with a digital camera smuggled
into a theater. A movie pirated that way looks awful, but it isn't
hard to move the interception point a short distance back, into the
wires of a digital projector or player. Nothing is going to stop the
determined hacker from tapping the right wires to intercept the bits
just before they come out onstage to perform. 

http://www.forbes.com/global/2003/0106/023.html


Eric Friedebach

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 12:37:52 PST
From: Eric Friedebach <friedebach@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: friedebach@yahoo.com
Subject: Bells Could Win Now, Lose Later


Mark Lewis, 01.06.03, Forbes.com

NEW YORK - Everybody knows that breaking up is hard to do, but the
dismantling of Ma Bell must have set some sort of record. Two decades
have passed since a federal judge ordered an end to the old AT&T
monopoly, yet its four surviving Hydra heads -- better known as the
Baby Bells -- continue to dominate local phone service. 

Congress took another shot at fostering local competition in 1996,
but missed the mark. Now, it seems, the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) may hand the Bells a long-sought victory by
scrapping a rule that requires them to lease their equipment and
lines to local-service rivals at cheap wholesale rates. 

Published reports today indicate that the FCC staff is recommending
that the rule be substantially modified. The final decision would be
made next month by FCC Chairman Michael Powell and his fellow
commissioners, who are expected to go along with the proposed change.


http://www.forbes.com/2003/01/06/cx_ml_0106fcc.html


Eric Friedebach

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #221
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jan  7 18:54:27 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h07NsR624585;
	Tue, 7 Jan 2003 18:54:27 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 18:54:27 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301072354.h07NsR624585@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #222

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 7 Jan 2003 18:54:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 222

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Internet Society Announces $100,000 Grant from Qualys (Anne Shroeder)
    Book Review: Building Linux Virtual Private Networks, (Rob Slade)
    Re: Bells Could Win Now, Lose Later (joe@obilivan.net)
    Re: Prison Call Overcharging (Hank Fung)
    Re: Prison Call Overcharging (Manny Olds)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (Loonquawl)
    Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist (William Warren)
    Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist (Overyonder11)
    Re: Extinction (J Kelly)
    Re: Extinction (Mark Brader)
    Re: Member-Accessible DSL in a Community Rec Center? (William Warren)
    Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic (Michael A. Covington)
    TiVo, Brother & Aspyr Announce Rendezvous Networked Products (M. 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: Anne Shroeder - Internet Society <anne@isoc.org>
Subject: Internet Society Announces $100,000 Grant from Qualys
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 12:21:53 -0500


Internet Society Announces $100,000 Grant from Qualys
Qualys Joins Industry Leaders as Platinum Sponsor

WASHINGTON, DC - January 7, 2003 - The Internet Society (ISOC) today
announced the receipt of a generous donation of $100,000 from Qualys,
Inc., the leader in automated vulnerability assessment. With this
donation, Qualys becomes a Platinum sponsor of ISOC. The funds from
the donation will be used to support and enhance the Society's
educational activities, particularly those focused on securing the
Internet's infrastructure to grow its commercial, social and
educational value across the globe.

"Qualys' grant will allow us to broaden our education and training
efforts, which are fundamental to our mission of expanding the use of
the Internet globally," explained Lynn St. Amour, ISOC President and
CEO. "Over the past nine years, thousands of professionals have been
trained through our Network Training Workshops for Countries in the
Early Stages of Internetworking. Our graduates have performed a vital
role in setting up the Internet connections and networks in virtually
every country that has connected to the Internet."

The Internet Society is an open membership organization with over
10,000 individual and more than 150 organization members throughout
the world that make up a veritable "Who's Who" of the Internet
community. It provides leadership in addressing issues that confront
the future of the Internet, and is the organization home for the
groups responsible for Internet infrastructure standards, including
the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the Internet
Architecture Board (IAB). The Internet Society also organizes the
well-respected INET conference and numerous other workshops and forums
throughout the year.

Qualys joins a number of industry-leading companies and innovators as
a sponsor of ISOC, including Microsoft, IBM, Oracle, Hewlett-Packard,
Nokia, Cisco and others. The company brings to the Society a dedicated
focus on Internet security. Today, Qualys enables more than 750
customers to automatically audit their Internet-connected networks for
security vulnerabilities. Qualys' fully automated infrastructure
provides an ongoing picture of network exposures to help administrators
detect, prioritize and resolve vulnerabilities before they are
exploited by intruders.

According to Qualys Chairman and CEO Philippe Courtot, who also serves
on the ISOC Board of Trustees, "The decision to fund ISOC's education
and training programs complements our goal to secure the Internet,
from the protocol level to the application. It has become so apparent
in recent years that advanced security, such as new generation
Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6), Internet Security (IPsec) and
more, will be critical to the growth and development of the
Internet. We are pleased to participate in this effort with ISOC to
help continue its current education programs."

IPv6 Forum President Latif Ladid, who is also an ISOC Trustee and
Chairman of ISOC's Fundraising Task Force, explained that this grant
will allow ISOC to meet key outreach objectives. "The Internet Society
is aggressively developing new education programs to specifically
address IPv6 and IPsec for worldwide dissemination of vendor
independent knowledge. Qualys has championed this large-scale
initiative."

For additional information on ISOC's educational programs go to
www.isoc.org/educpillar/.

Contact:

Julie Williams, ISOC
tel: 703-464-7005, x 111
cell 703-402-6715
E-mail: JWilliams@isoc.org

Megan Lamb, Qualys
tel: 703-556-6300, x111

# # #

About Qualys

Qualys, Inc., the leader in automated vulnerability assessment enables
security providers, security professionals, and corporate customers to
automatically audit enterprise networks for security vulnerabilities.
Qualys' Web-based service delivers automated, scalable, and
cost-effective security auditing and risk assessment of global
networks. Founded in 1999 by a team of Internet security experts,
Qualys is headquartered in Redwood Shores, California, with offices in
France, Germany and the U.K. More than 750 customers rely upon
QualysGuard for their network security, including ABN-AMRO, Adobe
Systems, Agilent Technologies, Apple Computer, AXA, Bank of the West,
BlueCross BlueShield, Cartier, Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Credit
Lyonnais, Hewlett Packard, L'Oreal, Siebel Systems, Thompson
Financial, and TIAA-Cref. Qualys has more than 300 channel partners
worldwide including BT Ignite, Cable & Wireless, Deloitte & Touche,
Fujitsu, VeriSign and others. For more information about Qualys,
please visit http://www.qualys.com.

About ISOC

The Internet Society is a not-for-profit membership organization
founded in 1991 to provide leadership in the management of Internet
related standards, educational, and policy development issues. It has
offices in Washington, DC and Geneva, Switzerland. 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. It is the organizational home of the Internet Engineering Task
Force (IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the Internet
Engineering Steering Group (IESG) and other Internet-related bodies.

For over 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 during this time, while at the same time
working to protect the Internet's stability. 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
noncommercial presence is a key element in developing a strong social
and technical infrastructure in all nations. For additional
information see http://www.isoc.org.

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

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User 
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 08:22:50 -0800
Subject: Book Review: Building Linux Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)


BKBLVPNS.RVW   20020916

"Building Linux Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)", Oleg
Kolesnikov/Brian Hatch, 2002, 1-57870-266-6, U$44.99/C$69.99/UK#34.99
%A   Oleg Kolesnikov oleg@buildinglinuxvpns.net ok@cc.gatech.edu
%A   Brian Hatch bri@buildinglinuxvpns.net brian@onsight.com
%C   201 W. 103rd Street, Indianapolis, IN   46290
%D   2002
%G   1-57870-266-6
%I   Macmillan Computer Publishing (MCP)/New Riders
%O   U$44.99/C$69.99/UK#34.99 800-858-7674 317-581-3743 info@mcp.com
%O  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1578702666/robsladesinterne
%P   385 p.
%T   "Building Linux Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)"

Like "Practical UNIX and Internet Security" (cf. BKPRUISC.RVW) this
book so thoroughly covers its general field, in this case virtual
private networks (VPNs), that it is useful to security people
regardless of whether or not they use Linux.  There are abundant
practical considerations in this work that other volumes ignore.

Part one deals with the basics of VPNs.  Chapter one is a good,
readable, realistic introduction (and we will accept the mention of 40
bit DES in IPSec as a typo: it is listed as such in the errata at the
associated website, http://www.buildinglinuxvpns.net).  The title of
chapter two, VPN fundamentals, is oddly both true and not: the items
mentioned are not factors of VPNs as such, but aspects and
considerations of VPNs that influence network choices, and network
configurations that impel VPN architecture.

Part two covers implementing standard VPN protocols.  Chapter three
provides a detailed and clear explanation of PPP (Point-to-Point
Protocol) over SSH (Secure Shell).  PPP over SSL (Secure Sockets
Layer)/TLS (Transport Layer Security), in chapter three, outlines the
basics, increased security, and scripts for troubleshooting.
Excellent coverage of IPSec in general, plus some implementation
details in Linux, is in chapter five.  Chapter six explains FreeS/WAN
from philosophy to source to configuration.  There is good analysis of
the design and weaknesses of PPTP (Point-to-Point Tunnelling Protocol)
and how to run it on Linux, in chapter seven.

Part three examines the implementation of nonstandard VPN protocols.
Chapter eight looks at the design, options, and setup of VTun.  The
lightweight cIPe is covered in chapter nine.  Designed for user level
rather than kernel operation, as well as more modern and robust
cryptography, tinc is explained in chapter ten.

I have not found, to date, a book that does a better job of explaining
the concepts and operations of virtual private networks.  This should
become the classic text.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 2002   BKBLVPNS.RVW   20020916

rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
Find book info victoria.tc.ca/techrev/ or sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/
Upcoming (ISC)^2 CISSP CBK review seminars (+1-888-333-4458):
    February 10, 2003   February 14, 2003   St. Louis, MO
    March 31, 2003      April 4, 2003       Indianapolis, IN

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

From: joe@obilivan.net
Subject: Re: Bells Could Win Now, Lose Later
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 11:59:24 GMT
Organization: Cox Communications


It never did make sense to foster "competition" by making GM sell a
Chevrolet at a discount with Ford logos.

Eric Friedebach wrote:

> Mark Lewis, 01.06.03, Forbes.com

> NEW YORK - Everybody knows that breaking up is hard to do, but the
> dismantling of Ma Bell must have set some sort of record. Two decades
> have passed since a federal judge ordered an end to the old AT&T
> monopoly, yet its four surviving Hydra heads -- better known as the
> Baby Bells -- continue to dominate local phone service.

> Congress took another shot at fostering local competition in 1996,
> but missed the mark. Now, it seems, the Federal Communications
> Commission (FCC) may hand the Bells a long-sought victory by
> scrapping a rule that requires them to lease their equipment and
> lines to local-service rivals at cheap wholesale rates.

> Published reports today indicate that the FCC staff is recommending
> that the rule be substantially modified. The final decision would be
> made next month by FCC Chairman Michael Powell and his fellow
> commissioners, who are expected to go along with the proposed change.

> http://www.forbes.com/2003/01/06/cx_ml_0106fcc.html

> Eric Friedebach

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The *only* reason for forcing GM (Ma
Bell) to sell Chevrolets at a discount with a Ford Logo is because all
the Johnny-come-latelys in the phone business (beginning with the
original offender, MCI, followed by Sprint and God-only-knows how many
others since) is because *none* of them felt that *they* should be 
imposed on to lay wire, develop outside plant or invest in a century 
of research as Bell had to do. MCI got into business by filing a 
fraudulent application with the Illinois Commerce Commission and 
selling a bill of goods to a generally hostile (anti-Bell) public. 
With that, they were off and running. Then every 'competitor' following 
has used the same tactics, i.e. 'why should we have to do a century of
hard labor and brain power to develop a telephone network when we can
eat from Bell's table *and* force them to sell to us at a discount so
that we in turn can undercut them with the damn fools of the public
who still feel Bell is rotten.'

Judge Harold Greene, not especially known for his brilliant juris-
prudence, used his cronies in the United States 'Justice' Department
to give MCI everything they asked for on a silver platter. Or maybe
they used him ... If there had been, or is ever going to be fair
competion in the phone business, the 'competitors' will need to 
all the legwork Bell did for a century or so, then when they have
their own outside plant, wires, cables in place, a decent judge,
making a fair decision can order Bell to open their front door and
hand out a bunch of pairs for interconnection purposes, and order
Bell to be fair and equitable in number assignments and/or portability.
That is *all* that should be required of Bell.  PAT]

------------------------------
	
From: fungus@OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Hank Fung)
Subject: Re: Prison Call Overcharging
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 08:14:25 UTC
Organization: Univ. of California Berkeley Open Computing Facility



In article <telecom22.221.9@telecom-digest.org>, Justin Time
<a_user2000@yahoo.com> wrote:

[regarding PAT's argument that prisoners with contact have lower rates of 
recidivism]

> A typical strawman argument.  The incidence of recidivism (sp?) or "an
> inmate that can contact their family is less likely to return to
> prison" is some thing that cannot be either proved or disproved.  The
> question to ask here is: "What proof can you cite to prove your
> argument?"

Fortunately, there are many sources of proof for this argument.

"As perhaps one of the most important policy matters at stake, there
is abundant empirical research, as well as common sense, that informs
the Commission that encouraging family members to remain intact helps
to lower recidivism. Research findings from the Florida House of
Representatives indicate that "family and community contacts can play
a very important role in helping released offenders avoid returning to
prison."  ("Maintaining Family Contact When a Family Member Goes to
Prison: An Examination of State Policies on Mail, Visiting, and
Telephone Access," Florida House of Representatives, Justice Council,
Committee on Corrections, November 1998.) In fact, Finding No.1 of the
Florida Legislature noted the strong connection between familial
contact and reduced recidivism. (See Id. at 3)

The importance and impact of this research can not be underestimated.
Sound public policy dictates that revenue and rates for prison calls
be mitigated against the public cost of repeat offenders. The public
interest in providing affordable and accessible access to phone
contact must be recognized by the Commission as a primary mitigation
against permitting significant changes in rate regulation. (See
Attachment One for Editorial Board Article from the San Francisco
Chronicle)" http://www.ucan.org/law_policy/teledocs/prisonfcc.html

"The Corrective Services research department has indicated that the
lowest rates of recidivism are associated with the maintenance of
family ties and the ability of the outside carers to maintain the
material and the emotional basesof the prisoners 'home' (Dewdney et
al. 1978)." http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/proceedings/16/Larman.pdf

By the way, in most states, based on some quick crack research, it is the
prisoner who gives information on individuals to call, which are then 
screened and approved by the appropriate officials. Thus, it is an 
affirmative system (requires approval), not a denial system (prisoner 
can call everyone except certain groups).

>> Likewise, family contact reduces stress.  Stressed inmates get into
>> fights and start riots which are extremely costly.  In other words,
>> frequent family contact is good for society.

> It sure sounds good, and there may be a kernel of truth to the
> statement, but again, where is your proof?  Cite some statistics that
> are verifiable.  Yes, riots are costly, but what percentage of rioters
> in prisons have no family contact?  What percentage of those involved
> in fights and riots have regular phone privileges and use the phone
> frequently?  I know from my work consulting to a department of
> corrections that phone privileges are usually one of the last
> privileges revoked from an inmate. 

Legally, revoking phone privileges is difficult, because a prisoner has a 
right to contact his or her representatives.

These statistics are hard to come by, as you know, but they are out
there in the academic journals, which are not on the (public) web. If
I get time, and if others are interested, I might look them up.

> They are often in trouble long before the privilege of using a
> telephone is revoked.  And family contact is good for society?  What
> about the inmate who calls a family member so they will go and attempt
> to intimidate a witness?  Or the inmate who calls associates to keep
> their criminal empire functioning?  These are not isolated incidents,
> there are well documented cases of inmates running gangs, ordering
> murders and mayhem and many other illegal activities. -- Remember, I
> mentioned the calls are recorded?  The only calls that are not
> reviewed are those between the client and their legal representative.
> That doesn't mean the call isn't recorded, the recorder can't
> discriminate to that level, but the content of the call is not
> reviewed by court officials who screen the calls for illegal
> activities.

As I said, called parties are generally screened by the prison, in most 
states. 

Also, often funds go to the general fund. California Senate Bill 1978
(2000) stated "Billing rates for collect telephone calls from prisons
include a 33-to 43-percent commission beyond the provider's costs,
which in 1998 generated $16 million for the General Fund of the
state." Thus, funds do not go to service those costs, as is alleged.

> The point I have been attempting to make is that there is a reason for
> some of the high charges paid for telephone calls from correctional
> institutions, and it is not to punish the families of the inmates but
> to protect the society they harmed in the first place.

Maybe so, but there are organizations that are fighting it. 

Here are some links:
Equitable Telephone Charges: http://www.curenational.org/~etc/
Foreign exchange service for prison phone calls: 
http://www.prisoncalls.com


Hank Fung					   fungus@ocf.berkeley.edu
Go Bears!			       http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~fungus

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  You may be interested to know that
prisoners who have attempted to join those two organizations (and a
couple others like them, (in Chicago for example there is the
'Alliance to End Phone Call Overcharging of Prisoner Families')
are flatly refused permission to join them or recieve literature from
the organizations. Literature is refused at the PO Box for the 
prison and returned to the sender. PAT]

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

From: Manny Olds <oldsma@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: Prison Call Overcharging
Date: 7 Jan 2003 13:38:20 GMT
Organization: Persiflage Press


Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com> wrote:

> refused.  The inmate then begins to limit calls to essential
> communications and not "I was bored and thought I would call."

For calling his family, why should he need a better reason than "I felt 
like it"?


Manny Olds (oldsma@pobox.com) of Riverdale Park, Maryland, USA

"I think that, if there's one clear theme in "Star Wars," it's that
no one *has* a family.	Or not for long." -- John Kensmark


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Prisoners (in Illinois at least, and
I assume most states) are NOT permitted to 'have feelings' or
'opinions' or ideas about anything. If prisoners were allowed to
have ideas on their own, or feelings, next thing you know, they might
decide to try and act on their feelings/ideas. Where would the corr-
ections industry be in that case?  And God forbid they should actually
build a prison right in Chicago, where the wives and mothers and
children could actually hop on a local bus to get there and visit for
a few minutes every day or two. The federal government at least is
smart enough to have a prison right in downtown Chicago (about a 
block up the street from Dunkin Donuts; on the corner of Van Buren
and Clark Streets). A modern, twenty story highrise building; you 
could not even tell it was a prison if you did not know that fact.

I was downtown one day with a friend; after we had had lunch I walked
with her back to the train station where she was getting a train to
go home. This was in the days before cell phones; I wanted to make a
quick call and stopped to use a payphone in the lobby of the federal
prison. She sat in a chair in the lobby while I went in the payphone
booth. When I came out she said, "my, what a nice building this is;
is it an office building or an apartment complex?"  I told her it was
the Metropolitan Correctional Center, a federal penitentiary. She
got these big saucer like eyes, found it hard to believe. I told her
"the men who are in here are here in the custody of the Attorney 
General of the United States or his authorized representative."  I had
just said that when a door opened and a group of men came in, with
a woman (female guard) escorting them. They had all been over at the
nearby federal courthouse (across the street from Dunkin Donuts) for
the daily court hearings for prisoners. Many of them had cups of
coffee or beverages and donuts in hand. Obviously the female guard
had let them stop in Dunkin Donuts on the way back from court. 

"Stop and stand here," said the lady. The men all obediently stopped
there while she signed herself and them back in with the receptionist
in the lobby. "Go fetch the elevator and wait for me to get on with
you," she said. The handful of men walked over, called the elevator
and waited for her. 

My friend said, "aren't they afraid those guys will run off, etc"
I told her, "they wouldn't dare ... they are too smart to do that."
The feds even allow a select number of the guys to walk around 
downtown on their own to do shopping each day, or go to work. They 
have to be in and out at a certain time, *or* be treated as an
escaped prisoner. The guys know better than to try that. In many 
respects, the feds are so much more enlightened on prison reform issues
and proper care of inmates than the states are. The prisoners know
that if they cannot make do at MCC, their next stop may be Marion, IL
or Terre Haute, IN.  The feds know it also, so they all smile
graciously at each other and the prisoners stay in line.   PAT]

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

From: Loonquawl <news@loonquawl.com>
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 23:09:04 -0800
Organization: Astound Broadband


<dold@37.usenet.us.com> wrote in message
news:telecom22.219.4@telecom-digest.org:

> Steven J. Sobol <sjsobol@justthe.net> wrote:

>> Jeff Moss <jeffmoss26@adelphia.net> wrote:

>>> I was at my dad's office last week (they are an Ameritech Distributor)
>>> and I threw away tons of Ameritech papers. There was a list of the
>>> Cleveland area Central offices. I didnt keep it but I remember they
>>> used really odd codes ex. Beachwood (30 sec away from my house) would
>>> be BCHW1023i0 or something.

>> http://dslreports.com/coinfo

> This doesn't give the "exchange name" of the CO.
> For instance, for 510-638, I know that the exchange name is Oakland
> Trinidad, which is _almost_ visible in the output of the nanpa CO
> assignment, but not visible at all in the switch name.

> NPA |NXX |Company |RC |Switch
> 510 |638 |PACIFIC BELL |OKLD TRNID |OKLDCA12DS1

> http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/co_code_assignments.html
> http://www.nanpa.com/nanp1/AllCodes.zip ALLCODES.MDB

Actually, Oakland Trinidad is the rate center, not the exchange name.


Brandon Turok
http://www.loonquawl.com/
Dial-A-Machine (925) 288-9825
Free when you call from work

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

From: William Warren <v2zzkl.nospam@attbi.com>
Subject: Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist
Organization: Church of the Swimming Bullfrog
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 13:34:23 GMT


Phil Earnhardt <pae@dim.com> wrote in message
news:telecom22.215.6@telecom-digest.org:

> On Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:54:41 -0500, Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
> wrote:

>> Pop-up advertisements, already the bane of millions of Web surfers,
>> are becoming more intrusive.

> Mozilla (downloadable from www.mozilla.org) now allows you to
> categorically disable pop-up windows. [snip]

The Proxomitron* (http://www.proxomitron.org/) does a great job at this,
too, and it also prevents banner ads from being retrieved and gives me
control over cookies. I also cannot believe what a PITA it is to surf the
web without it.

> There is one "digital divide": households that have Internet access
> vs. households that don't. Some point to a second divide: high-speed
> digital access vs. dial-up access. I think there's a third divide that
> may be more important than the second: users who know how to take
> effective countermeasures against unsolicited commercial intrusions
> (e.g. unsolicited commercial email, pop-up advertising, etc.) and
> those who don't.

The divide is actually between users who are willing to have their
clicks tracked and those who don't. Someone has to pay for the
services on these machines, and advertising is the payment
mechanism. Therefore, I agree to have ads placed on my screen *when
they come from the site I'm visiting*.  However, I draw the line at
ads served from Doubleclique et al, since the associated loss of
privacy is outside of the implied agreement. Of course, one could say
that the cookies are part of the agreement, but I disagree: the ads on
TV or billboards or newspapers don't phone home and tell their
originators who looked.

FWIW.

Bill

*.std_disclaimer: I am not affiliated with the company, related to the
owner, don't get any money from it, etc. YMMV.

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

From: overyonder11@yahoo.com (Overyonder11)
Subject: Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist
Date: 7 Jan 2003 09:46:00 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


While Pop-Up Ads are sometimes a bit cumbersome, I do have to give a
hats off to Orbitz.  They are the only company that I have come across
who actually puts some fun and creativity into the Pop-Ups. For that I
would actually choose to go to Orbitz first-which does not really
matter, since they are my preferred online booking agent- I have had
such good luck with them in finding the cheapest fares.  Point being-
Orbitz makes a difference with their thoughtful pop-ups.

Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote in message
news:<telecom22.205.8@telecom-digest.org>:

> By Stefanie Olsen
> Staff Writer, CNET News.com

> Pop-up advertisements, already the bane of millions of Web surfers, 
> are becoming more intrusive.

> Pop-up and pop-under ads open a new window when people visit many
> popular Web sites, often littering the computer desktop with multiple
> browser screens. Advertisers hope people will visit the promoted Web
> page by clicking anywhere on the window, although many simply close it
> by selecting the "X" box in the top-right corner.

> But a relatively new feature may make it harder for people to avoid 
> these windows. Using a technique called the "kick through," 
> advertisers can direct a person to another Web site if they simply 
> move their cursor across the pop-up ad -- no clicking is necessary.

> Discount travel retailer Orbitz, for example, is delivering millions
> of holiday-themed kick-through ads on The New York Times, ESPN.com and
> CondeNast sites in addition to others. The ads feature various
> animated games, and recipients who simply "mouse" over them are
> shuttled to Orbitz's home page.

> Many people who have encountered the ads say they overstep the
> boundaries of an already intrusive and loathed form of Web
> advertising.

> http://news.com.com/2100-1023-978616.html

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

From: J Kelly <usenet-replies002@pileof_remove-me_monkeycrap.com>
Subject: Re: Extinction
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 10:05:32 -0600
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


On Mon, 06 Jan 2003 09:55:07 -0700, Joey Lindstrom
<joey@telussucks.info> wrote:

> (NOTE: before you argue that the broadcasters and studios want to
> design this new digital equipment so that it CANNOT be used with
> analog equipment, that is an entirely different issue - and I agree
> that that would be "A Bad Thing"<tm> - but so far I don't see any
> evidence that this will in fact come to pass.)

There has already been proposed legislation that would outlaw any DTV
receiver having any sort of Analog output as well as outlawing analog
outputs on new DVD players, or any other type of digital to analog
video convertor.  But I think (hope) you are right and it won't come
to pass.  If congress passed such a law they would never get
re-elected..

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

Subject: Re: Extinction
Date: Tue,  7 Jan 2003 14:00:19 EST
From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader)


Joey Lindstrom writes:

> I can just imagine the folks in Sweden, right around the time they
> switched from driving on the left side of the road to the right side,
> moaning and bitching about how they need protection for their
> investments in their cars - which are now more difficult to drive
> (y'ever try to execute a pass while driving a car that's on the
> "wrong" side of the road?  You pretty much have to put the entire car
> into the oncoming lane before you can even see if anything's coming).

Except that most cars in Sweden had *already* had the steering wheel
on the left for years *before* they started driving on the right.  See
<http://www.travel-library.com/general/driving/drive_which_side.html>.


Mark Brader, Toronto              "These Millennia are like buses."
msb@vex.net                                           --Arwel Parry

My text in this article is in the public domain.

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

From: William Warren <v2zzkl.nospam@attbi.com>
Subject: Re: Member-Accessible DSL in a Community Rec Center?
Organization: Church of the Swimming Bullfrog
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 13:16:17 GMT


AES/newspost <siegman@stanford.edu> wrote in message
news:telecom22.214.2@telecom-digest.org:

> We're thinking about trying to establish an elementary broadband
> internet connection that could be accessed and shared by unit owners
> inside the recreation center of a vacation townhouse community.
[snip]
> At the same time we'd like to try to limit the public access to
> authorized owners only (since they'll probably be chipping in to cover
> the annual costs), and not have the public ports turn into a wide open
> gateway for local teenagers or computer gamers.

Put a Linux box in between the cable/DSL box and your LAN. Set it for DHCP,
and change the dhcpd.conf file to give addresses only to hosts with known
MAC addresses.

If you're feeling generous, have a "guest" address that's limited to local
printing and/or CNN.COM.


HTH.

Bill

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

From: Michael A. Covington <mc@deletethisword.uga.edu>
Subject: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 11:44:01 -0500
Organization: University of Georgia
Reply-To: Michael A. Covington <mc@deletethisword.uga.edu>


What is the current law concerning unsolicited faxes?  We get one
every few days, and I understand the law has been challenged in court
and some people, at least, believe it is in doubt.  Can someone bring
me up to date?

Also, I've found a very effective way to deal with junk faxers who
give an e-mail or web address on their faxes.  Report them to their
ISP as a spammer.  To find out their ISP, I use the "tracert"
(Windows) or "traceroute" (UNIX) command.


Michael A. Covington, Associate Director
Artificial Intelligence Center / The University of Georgia / Athens, GA
30602-7415 U.S.A.
http://www.ai.uga.edu/~mc     http://www.CovingtonInnovations.com    <><

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

Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 15:07:57 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: TiVo, Brother & Aspyr Announce Rendezvous Networked Products


CES, LAS VEGAS and MACWORLD EXPO, SAN FRANCISCO-January 7, 2003-The
rapid adoption of Rendezvous� continues with TiVo, Brother and
Aspyr today announcing new products incorporating Rendezvous
networking.  Rendezvous is Apple's innovative networking technology
for automatic discovery and connection of devices over
industry-standard IP networks such as Ethernet and 802.11 wireless
networks. Using Rendezvous, consumer devices such as stereos and
digital video recorders can automatically find and "talk" to any Macs
on their local wired or wireless network, making it possible for users
to stream audio from iTunes� to their home stereo and display
iPhotos on their TVs.

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2003/jan/07rendezvous.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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #222
******************************
    

    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan  8 19:07:44 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0907iW08482;
	Wed, 8 Jan 2003 19:07:44 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 19:07:44 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301090007.h0907iW08482@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #223

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 8 Jan 2003 19:08:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 223

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy? (Paul Wallich)
    Re: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic (Jim Thompson)
    Re: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic (jbl)
    Re: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic (John R. Levine)
    Anyone Know of Web Site That Covers Server Hosting/Colocation? (Al Dykes)
    Cyberspace Artists Paint Themselves Into a Corner (Monty Solomon)
    Apple Ramps up Wireless in Notebooks (Monty Solomon)
    ExtendAIR AirPort Antennas (Monty Solomon)
    Wireless TiVo Connection (Monty Solomon)
    Help Wanted With HDLC NRM, SNRM (Diego Morelli)
    Re: Extinction (Joey Lindstrom)
    What is Relation Between DTMF, v.22, Hayes Commands? (Valentin Thimirov)
    Re: Prison Call Overcharging (Justin Time)
    Re: Phone Calls From Prison (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.

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

From: Paul Wallich <pw@panix.com>
Subject: Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy?
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 19:14:38 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


In article <telecom22.220.3@telecom-digest.org>, John Higdon
<no-spam@amadeus.kome.com> wrote:

> In article <telecom22.218.17@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
> <monty@roscom.com> wrote:

>> Yet studio execs remain on the warpath. As movies are increasingly
>> broadcast and sold in digital format, Tinseltown execs are panicked
>> that consumers will make infinite numbers of perfect digital copies
>> and share them over the Internet.

> And as anyone knows, seeing grainy, jerky images on a computer screen
> with audio through a couple of three-inch speakers beats nearly
> perfect images projected onto a 100' screen with audio through
> THX-certified sound systems any day of the week.

> I guess that movie execs are justified in thinking that suddenly the
> movie theaters will be empty.

Free (marginal cost) plus an illicit thrill beats $10 for the ticket,
$5 for the soda and snacks and the knowledge that you're lining the
pockets of people you believe to be despicable.

It's amazing to watch the proprietors of an almost entirely
discretionary industry working so hard to make their customers wish
them ill. It's as if McDonalds hired greeters at every franchise to
shout at people, "We think you're stupid for eating our food! Go
away!"


paul    oh, wait

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

From: Jim Thompson  <Jim-T@analog_innovations.com>
Subject: Re: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 00:20:03 GMT
Organization: Cox Communications


On Tue, 7 Jan 2003 11:44:01 -0500, Michael A. Covington 
<mc@deletethisword.uga.edu>, in comp.dcom.telecom, <telecom22.222.12@
telecom-digest.org>,  "Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic",
wrote the following:

> What is the current law concerning unsolicited faxes?  We get one
> every few days, and I understand the law has been challenged in court
> and some people, at least, believe it is in doubt.  Can someone bring
> me up to date?

> Also, I've found a very effective way to deal with junk faxers who
> give an e-mail or web address on their faxes.  Report them to their
> ISP as a spammer.  To find out their ISP, I use the "tracert"
> (Windows) or "traceroute" (UNIX) command.

I received a junk fax with no CSID.

The fax did, however, have a number to fax your *order* to.

So I set my scanner on "photo" and scanned the back of a paper pad.

I sent five pages of this ... took 35 minutes at 14,400 ;-)


|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  Jim-T@analog_innovations.com  Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |

            For proper E-mail replies SWAP "-" and "_"
             
I love to cook with wine.      Sometimes I even put it in the food.             
------------------------------

From: jbl <jbl@spamblocked.com>
Subject: Re: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 23:22:13 -0700
Organization: On the desert
Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com


In <telecom22.222.12@telecom-digest.org>, Michael A. Covington
<mc@deletethisword.uga.edu> wrote:

> What is the current law concerning unsolicited faxes?  We get one
> every few days, and I understand the law has been challenged in court
> and some people, at least, believe it is in doubt.  Can someone bring
> me up to date?

Since 1991 the Telephone Consumers Protection Act (TCPA) has
prohibited these, or more specifically, "the transmission of any
material advertising the commercial availability or quality of any
product, service or property to any person without that person's prior
express permission or request."

The law is 47 USC 227 and the FCC regulations that implement the law
are 47 CFR 64.1200.

Links to these as well as other FCC and Congressional documents may be
found at http://www.junkfaxes.org/ - click on the "Federal Law" button.
Other buttons will lead you to various state laws and actions you can
take.  

> Also, I've found a very effective way to deal with junk faxers who
> give an e-mail or web address on their faxes.  Report them to their
> ISP as a spammer.

Can't hurt.


JBL

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

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic
Date: 7 Jan 2003 21:32:53 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> What is the current law concerning unsolicited faxes?

Same as it's been since 1991.  Unsolicited faxed ads are completely
illegal, and you can sue the sender for $500 per fax.

> I understand the law has been challenged in court.

There is one decision by Judge Limbaugh in Missouri that has found the
law to be unconstitutional.  But the law has been upheld in many
appeals courts, his decision is currently under appeal, and he's
apparently well-known for peculiar decisions that don't stand up on
appeal, so few if any other courts are treating it as a precedent.

People win junk fax suits all the time.  For lots more info see
http://www.junkfaxes.org/


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

PS: Since you asked, he's Rush Limbaugh's uncle.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does that also apply where you have no
actual fax machine, but contract with a service (like  e-fax) to take
incoming faxes and convert them to email and send them out like  .tif
files to your Outlook Express?  Anyway, I suppose the sender would
claim (as they do with much email spam) that what they did was not
'unsolicited'; that you had signed up at one time or another, in some
place or another, to get their dream vacation faxes, etc.  PAT]

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

From: adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes)
Subject: Anyone Know of Web Site That Covers Server Hosting Colocation?
Date: 7 Jan 2003 19:59:04 -0500
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.


I'm looking for information about remote hosting a business
application. Is there a web site that covers this business?

Thanks. 

Al Dykes
adykes@panix.com

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

Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 22:44:56 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Cyberspace Artists Paint Themselves Into a Corner


By MATTHEW MIRAPAUL

In a 1950's horror movie the Thing was a creature that killed before
it was killed. Now in a real-life drama playing on a computer screen
near you, the Thing is an Internet service provider that is having
trouble staying alive. Some might find this tale equally terrifying.

The Thing provides Internet connections for dozens of New York 
artists and arts organizations, and its liberal attitude allows its 
clients to exhibit online works that other providers might 
immediately unplug. As a result the Thing is struggling to survive 
online. Its own Internet-connection provider is planning to 
disconnect the Thing over problems created by the Thing's clients. 
While it may live on, its crisis illustrates how difficult it can be 
for Internet artists to find a platform from which they can push the 
medium's boundaries.

Wolfgang Staehle, the Thing's founder and executive director, said the
high-bandwidth pipeline connecting the Thing to the Internet would be
severed on Feb. 28 because its customers had repeatedly violated the
pipeline provider's policies. While the exact abuses are not known,
they probably involve the improper use of corporate trademarks and
generating needless traffic on other sites.

If Mr. Staehle is unable to establish a new pipeline, the 100 Web
sites and 200 individual customers, mostly artists, that rely on the
Thing for Internet service could lose their cyberspace homes. In a
telephone interview from the Thing's office in Chelsea, Mr. Staehle
(pronounced SHTAW-luh) said, "It's not fair that 300 of our clients
will suffer from this and I might be out of business."

The Thing's pipeline is currently supplied by Verio Inc. of Englewood,
Colo., which declines to comment on its troubles with the
Thing. Mr. Staehle said that he had not received official word from
Verio, but that the company's lawyers told the Thing the service would
be cut off because of the violations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/23/arts/design/23ARTS.html

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

Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 01:25:24 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Apple Ramps up Wireless in Notebooks


By Ephraim Schwartz

SAN FRANCISCO -- Apple not only introduced an industry first notebook
with a 17-inch display, it also became the first major company to
deploy as yet unapproved technology for Wi-Fi access.

Although the aircraft aluminum packaging, the screen size, the backlit
keyboard and the 800Mbps Firewire port are innovative, the use of what
is called IEEE 802.11g is just plain daring. It underscores Apple's
willingness to take a calculated risk on a nascent technology that has
to date not been ratified as a standard by the IEEE Wi-Fi committee.

Approval of IEEE 802.11g is expected. It has the unique feature of
using the same bandwidth as B -- 2.4GHz -- thus making it backward
compatible with B while giving the same performance of the far faster
IEEE 802.11a standard which runs at 55Mbps.

There are two levels of risk in deploying a G product, according to 
Brian Grimm, a spokesperson for the Wi-Fi Alliance.

http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/03/01/07/030107hnwifig.xml

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

Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 01:47:40 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: ExtendAIR AirPort Antennas


ExtendAIR Omni

Dr. Bott's ExtendAIR Omni is an Apple-certified external antenna that 
expands the range of Apple's AirPort Extreme Base Station (antenna 
port required).

http://www.drbott.com/prod/db.lasso?code=9141-QUSO

ExtendAIR Direct

Dr. Bott's ExtendAIR Direct is an external directional antenna that 
expands the range of Apple's AirPort Base station. ExtendAIR was 
developed in cooperation with Apple Computer Inc. and incorporates 
proprietary technology to provide the maximum range for AirPort 
clients.

http://www.drbott.com/prod/db.lasso?code=9142-QUSD

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

Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 16:11:03 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Wireless TiVo Connection


Wireless TiVo Connection

How to set up a Series 2 TiVo with an Apple AirPort (802.11b) Wireless Network

http://www.alexking.org/index.php?content=technology/tivo.php

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

From: Diego Morelli <diego.morelli@trs.it>
Subject: Help Wanted With HDLC NRM, SNRM
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 12:21:03 +0100

Hello,

I need to reproduce this situation:

1- There is one primary station;
2- There are 2 secondary stations (01, and 02);
3- The primary station set an NRM communication to both secondary stations
in sequence (with the commands: XID, SNRM having the secondary station
address);
4- The primary station send data (Information Frame, numbered) to both
tributary stations simultaneously using the broadcast address FF;
5- The primary station is linked to both the secondaries stations by the
mean of the same serial port.

I wish to get a PCI board and the correspondent software drivers that can
permit me to handle the protocol programmatically by the mean of a certain
language like the C language.
The Operative System is Windows2000.

Can you suggest me a product for reach my goal, please?


Regards,

Diego Morelli
T.R.S. S.p.A.
Via della Bufalotta, 378
00139 Rome - Italy
Fax  +39 0687281550
e-mail: diego.morelli@trs.it

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 11:09:01 -0700
Subject: Re: Extinction
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Tue, 7 Jan 2003 18:54:27 -0500 (EST), Mark Brader wrote:

>> I can just imagine the folks in Sweden, right around the time they
>> switched from driving on the left side of the road to the right side,
>> moaning and bitching about how they need protection for their
>> investments in their cars - which are now more difficult to drive
>> (y'ever try to execute a pass while driving a car that's on the
>> "wrong" side of the road?  You pretty much have to put the entire car
>> into the oncoming lane before you can even see if anything's coming).

> Except that most cars in Sweden had *already* had the steering wheel
> on the left for years *before* they started driving on the right.  See
> <http://www.travel-library.com/general/driving/drive_which_side.html>.

This actually strengthens the analogy.  Prior to the change, those who
bought left-hand drive cars knew what they were getting into.  Perhaps
they knew the Big Change was coming, but regardless: they knew at the
time of purchase that the car they were buying had a disadvantage
today (but might have an advantage tomorrow).

Once the Big Change occured, there were still some people with
right-hand drive.  These people are in exactly the same position that
the analog TV people will be in once 2009 or whatever date they
eventually settle on comes to pass - except that there'll be cheap
equipment available to overcome the disadvantage (I'm sure converting a
car from right hand drive to left hand drive can't be a cheap or easy
proposition!)

Dragging and kicking some people will be dragged into the 21st century.
 :-)

The point here is that the move to DTV is not change for the sake of
change.  DTV is a huge, HUGE improvement over NTSC - it's progress,
pure and simple, and I don't think such a tremendous improvement in
the overall quality of television should be held back (or held off
completely) because of a few people who won't want to spend fifty
bucks on a converter when the time comes - again, assuming their
existing analog sets still work at all when the time comes.

And anyone buying an expensive analog TV today, knowing what's coming,
is a complete idiot who gets what he/she deserves.  If you're
convinced that analog is doomed and that converter equipment will
never be made available, fine - either make do with what you've got
for now (and buy new in 2009), or if your current set is pretty much
toast now, buy something just good enough to get you through the next
six years.  A $5000 bigscreen that isn't digital/HDTV is a stupid,
stupid purchase right now - especially since, when it comes to big
screens, HDTV's are not really much more expensive than analog and are
"future proof".


-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

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

From: valentin tihomirov <valentin@abelectron.com>
Subject: What is Relation Between DTMF, v.22 and Hayes Commands?
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 20:58:07 +0200


Can anyone on this list explain this to me?


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

From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time)
Subject: Re: Prison Call Overcharging
Date: 8 Jan 2003 08:21:46 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Manny Olds <oldsma@pobox.com> wrote in message news:<telecom22.222.5@telecom-digest.org>...

> Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> refused.  The inmate then begins to limit calls to essential
>> communications and not "I was bored and thought I would call."

> For calling his family, why should he need a better reason than "I felt 
> like it"?

> Manny Olds (oldsma@pobox.com) of Riverdale Park, Maryland, USA

Pat, you gave an excellent answer and then illustrated it with a
wonderful example from your time in Chicago.  What a great many people
do not understand, or refuse to understand, is that a person in a
correctional institution is there for a specific purpose.  That
purpose is punishment for harming society.  The mistaken idea that
making telephone calls whenever you want is a right and not a
privilege is forgotten by someone who never had a reason to be
severely punished for an aggravated wrong against society.

People in prisons are there because they have proven themselves
incapable of acting in a normal society.  Because they have been put
away from society as punishment, certain privileges -- which a lot of
people confuse with rights -- have to be resticted.  The use of a
telephone is not a right, it is not one of the rights guaranteed under
the constitution.  If it was a right, then why do I have to pay for
the telephone I have in my office or at my home.  If it is a right,
then the government should provide it to me.  Freedom of speech is a
right, and the restrictions on telephones in correctional institutions
does not abridge that right.  What is the difference between a
prisoner's right to criticize the government than any other citizen's?
Absolutely none.  Prisoners can criticize the government or other
institutions just as freely as you or I, but their ability to
broadcast that criticism is limited because of circumstances of their
own choosing.  No one forced them to take action against society.  It
was their own free choice to perform an act or acts that society has
ruled is not in its interest.  Because of their choice, and their
actions, they have put themselves in a position where the state,
society, has limited their ability to perform acts against society.

Being able to do something because they want to do it is not a right,
it is a privilege.  Prisoners can't drive cars.  Even if they still
hold a valid driver license they can't drive.  Is this a right that
has been taken from them?  No, it is a privilege that has been
revoked.  If you can't abide by the rules society has placed on your
ability to exercize a privilege, then that privilege should be taken
away until you demonstrate your ability to abide with the rules.

As Joey Lindstrom would probably say if he joined in the thread -
"Horse Hockey!"  Using a telephone from a correctional facility is a
privilege and not a right.  If you are going to use a telephone that
can conceivably connected to any other telephone, then there have to
be restrictions on that telephone if you have proven yourself
incapable of abiding by the restrictions society has placed on
behavior.  Someone has to pay for maintaining those temporary
restrictions, and currently it is the person or persons who accept
calls from correctional institutions.

While the thread is interesting, it is serving no real purpose than to
perpetuate the illogical premise that a person who has proven
themselves incapable of operating within the bounds set by society
deserves the same rights and privileges of a person who does operate
within the set bounds.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As the recent television commercial
says in promoting Walgreen's Drug Stores, what you say is correct in
the town called 'Perfect'. You seem to be forgetting however that most
of us live in what is becoming an increasingly corrupt society where
(among other things) police officers and prosecutors put much pressure
on forensic technicians to 'adjust' the evidence to give them a
'favorable' conclusion. Consider the scandalous affair in Oklahoma
City last year where the two bit prostitute who had a job working for
police -- as a forensic technician, mind you, (her name was Joyce
something, guys in Oklahoma can fill in the blanks here) openly
admitted she had been pressured by police to claim the DNA evidence
matched in *five* rape cases police were working on -- it did not.
In two other cases, semen found in the victim of the rape matched up
but that was false also. There were a half-dozen or so other more
'insignificant' crimes where Joyce fingered the perps incorrectly. 
Joyce claimed her police supervisors had promised to give her a raise
in pay if she would 'work along with them'. The Oklahoma governor
wound up letting about a dozen guys out of prison who had been falsely
put there based on the forensic technician's word. 

In Chicago, in 1999, after the Chicago Tribune ran a five part series
on 'prosecutorial misconduct' detailing how prosecutors thought
nothing of making up all sorts of lies -- and in two cases were
disbarred because of their behavior -- the prosecutor's screamed
bloody murder: didn't the Tribune realize how important their work
was at getting scum off the streets and into prison? The Illinois
governor wound up releasing **23** men from 'death row' who were not
guilty. Gee, said police, we sure hope there were no hard feelings
in this matter. 

In New York City -- one of the most corrupt police forces in the
nation, where an entire police precinct had to be demolished and
rebuilt from scratch after not a single honest police officer could be
found there -- in another precinct five police officers take a dislike
to an immigrint person in custody and proceed to sodomize him with a
broom stick. Then the other police officers in that facility decide 
to honor their bizzare 'blue code' and not confess what was done. 

These examples are not exceptions to the rule in this make-believe
town of 'Perfect'; this is how things are getting to be. Police
are no better than anyone else; they just get away with what they do
because they have a badge and uniform. So please pardon me if I take
the little guy's side in this matter. The real victims are the people
who got robbed, looted, sexually assaulted and beaten up of course,
and then assumed the Keystone Kops of America the Beautiful would
protect them and prosecute the wrong-doers. Instead, the Keystone Kops
sit down to connive, make up lies and stories about it, select at
random the weak people who can do little or nothing to defend them-
selves, define them as 'scum', lock them up often times for the rest
of their lives, and tell their friends at the newspapers, look what
a great job we are doing.  

And you suggest the little guys have no right to stay in touch with
their representatives without imprimatuer from the prison??? I would
sort of expect that kind of response from one of the bottom feeders
who makes a living with money from the corrections industry.   PAT]

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 10:52:05 -0700
Subject: Re: Phone calls from prison
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Tue, 7 Jan 2003 18:54:27 -0500 (EST), Manny Olds wrote:

> Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> refused.  The inmate then begins to limit calls to essential
>> communications and not "I was bored and thought I would call."

> For calling his family, why should he need a better reason than "I felt 
> like it"?

Hey, y'know, I think I can come up with a pretty powerful argument
against allowing such calls, or at least stringently limiting them. 
It's such a wild, "out there" idea that you may have trouble grasping
the concept, but try to stay with me on this.  OK?  Here goes.

BECAUSE HE'S IN FREAKIN' PRISON!!!

It's not a damned country club.  It's PRISON.  We as a society have
decided that there are a certain group of people that we just can't
live with, at least until they clean up their acts.  Sure, in an ideal
world it might be nice if everybody could be treated absolutely equally
no matter what, but let's face it: some people renege on their
membership dues.

Then our Esteemed Moderator goes on to say:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Prisoners (in Illinois at least, and
> I assume most states) are NOT permitted to 'have feelings' or
> 'opinions' or ideas about anything. If prisoners were allowed to
> have ideas on their own, or feelings, next thing you know, they might
> decide to try and act on their feelings/ideas. Where would the corr-
> ections industry be in that case?  And God forbid they should actually
> build a prison right in Chicago, where the wives and mothers and
> children could actually hop on a local bus to get there and visit for
> a few minutes every day or two.

Pat, let me ask you this.  If the prison system were changed the way
you would have them change it, exactly what would be the incentive for
people to want to avoid coming back to prison after their release? 
Even as it stands now, with colour TV's, weight rooms, conjugal visits,
etc., many prisoners now enjoy a standard of life as good as, or
better, than they had outside.  Isn't the idea to:

A) Punish, and
B) Encourage better future behaviour (by making people not want to
return to prison)?

Boy, I'll bet you're a real fan of Sheriff Joe down there in Arizona
huh?  :-)

> I was downtown one day with a friend; after we had had lunch I walked
> with her back to the train station where she was getting a train to
> go home. This was in the days before cell phones; I wanted to make a
> quick call and stopped to use a payphone in the lobby of the federal
> prison. She sat in a chair in the lobby while I went in the payphone
> booth. When I came out she said, "my, what a nice building this is;
> is it an office building or an apartment complex?"  I told her it was
> the Metropolitan Correctional Center, a federal penitentiary. She
> got these big saucer like eyes, found it hard to believe. I told her
> "the men who are in here are here in the custody of the Attorney 
> General of the United States or his authorized representative."  I had
> just said that when a door opened and a group of men came in, with
> a woman (female guard) escorting them. They had all been over at the
> nearby federal courthouse (across the street from Dunkin Donuts) for
> the daily court hearings for prisoners. Many of them had cups of
> coffee or beverages and donuts in hand. Obviously the female guard
> had let them stop in Dunkin Donuts on the way back from court. 

> "Stop and stand here," said the lady. The men all obediently stopped
> there while she signed herself and them back in with the receptionist
> in the lobby. "Go fetch the elevator and wait for me to get on with
> you," she said. The handful of men walked over, called the elevator
> and waited for her. 

> My friend said, "aren't they afraid those guys will run off, etc"
> I told her, "they wouldn't dare ... they are too smart to do that."
> The feds even allow a select number of the guys to walk around 
> downtown on their own to do shopping each day, or go to work. They 
> have to be in and out at a certain time, *or* be treated as an
> escaped prisoner. The guys know better than to try that. In many 
> respects, the feds are so much more enlightened on prison reform issues
> and proper care of inmates than the states are. The prisoners know
> that if they cannot make do at MCC, their next stop may be Marion, IL
> or Terre Haute, IN.  The feds know it also, so they all smile
> graciously at each other and the prisoners stay in line.   PAT]

This all just makes me feel really, really nauseous.  To quote Dennis
Miller, "it's not supposed to be fun.  It's supposed to be unpleasant. 
IT'S PRISON!"

And now I'll turn the microphone over to Dennis himself.  Please visit:

http://www.telussucks.info/prison.mp3

The download is just under 4 megs and the file plays for just under six
minutes.  It's VERY enlightening (also entertaining - Dennis is a
funny, funny man).

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  At this point, Joey sent in a
corrected URL for his message.  He continues:

  Subject: Oops
  Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info

In my last post I gave a URL to download a particular MP3.  I've found
that in some circunstances, this can foul up and/or crash IE.  So
instead, try this:

http://www.telussucks.info/mp3/

Then click on the "prison.mp3", or right-click it to save to your local
disk.


-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When Joey gets over his nausea, maybe
he will continue his work getting the Telecom Archives 2nd Edition CD
out in the mail. More were recently mailed, a half-dozen orders which
were received by me this past week have been transmitted to him, and I
understand everything recieved in the past couple days will go in the
mail tomorrow. After this weekend, let me know if you are still
lacking your copy if you made a donation.   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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #223
******************************
    
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan  9 15:55:10 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h09KtA021595;
	Thu, 9 Jan 2003 15:55:10 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 15:55:10 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301092055.h09KtA021595@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #224

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Jan 2003 15:55:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 224

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Verizon Building at Ground Zero Returns to Life (Greg Monti)
    Book Review: Internet and Intranet Security Management (Rob Slade)
    Nationwide Paging Service (John Beaman)
    Alcatel Phone Switch Reseller (pds)
    Re: What is Relation Between DTMF, v.22 and Hayes Commands? (Sam Etler)
    Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy? (John Higdon)
    Central Office/Exchange Name Project (Alex Kasper)
    Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names (Clarence Dold)
    Re: Extinction (John Higdon)
    Re: Extinction (Ron Chapman)
    Re: ExtendAIR AirPort Antennas (John R. Levine)
    Re: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic (John R. Levine)
    Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country? (Alex Kasper)
    Motorola and Pioneer Work Together to Speed Transition (Monty Solomon)
    Sprint, Warner Offer Music Service on Cell Phones (Monty Solomon)
    Consumer Groups Seek Action on Cable Rate Hikes (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: Greg Monti <gmonti@mindspring.com>
Subject: Verizon Building at Ground Zero Returns to Life
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 01:23:00 -0500


On Monday, January 6, 2003, The New York Times published an article
"Herculean Effort to Restore a Landmark Battered on 9/11".

Article at http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/06/nyregion/06VERI.html

The gist of the story:

The Verizon building at 140 West Street in Manhattan, New York City,
was built as The New York Telephone Building in 1926.  It was a
central office as well as an office building, and was the corporate
headquarters for New York Telephone for a while (not recently).

The building was built to withstand the great weight of the mechanical
switching equipment of the 1920s, which put the building in a good
position to limit damage from the terrorist attack at the World Trade
Center across the street.  Steel beams from the collapsing Trade
Center flew into the Verizon building, some of which tore off 8
stories of an outside wall and pounded through several concrete floor
slabs.  The slabs were designed to bear 250 to 300 pounds per square
foot.

Switching equipment was exposed to the elements for many months.  In
some cases the floor had fallen away under computer equipment which
was found hanging from power cables from above.

The building lost commercial power and its generators became useless
when the generator rooms in some of the five basement levels flooded.
Battery power held up most of the equipment until 10:21 PM on the day
of the attack.

To restore service to Wall Street area buildings, including the
exchanges, new cables were run at street level to other central
offices.  Cables entering the vault of 140 West Street were cut off
with chain saws and spliced to new cables.

The CO supported 300,000 POTS lines and 4.5 million data curcuits.
Not all of those needed to be restored: 35,000 of the POTS lines
served the WTC and did not need to be re-established.  There are now
34,000 POTS lines being served from restored switches at 140 West
Street and the building is again earning revenue for Verizon.  Office
staff won't move back in until late 2003.

Bronze work of whales, pelicans and sea horses that ornaments an
entranceway on the side facing 7 World Trade Center was mostly
destroyed.  Restorers are copying the bronze work from a second
entrance to restore the destroyed one.

The article in the printed newspaper is accompanied by a photo of a
broken terra-cotta cinder block wall facing out onto the site of the
collapsed 7 WTC.  There is also a photo of a portion of a magical
mural showing a candlestick-style telephone on a sunburst background
on a blue field with a gold surround.  And a photo of linen murals on
the ceiling of a vaulted lobby.  They will be cleaned and restored,
too.  The web version only has the first photo.


Greg Monti, New York, New York, USA
gmonti@mindspring.com
greg.monti@verizon.net

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

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User 
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 08:05:44 -0800
Subject: Book Review: Internet and Intranet Security Management


BKIISMRS.RVW   20020825

"Internet and Intranet Security Management", Lech Janczewski, 2000,
1-878-28971-3, U$69.95
%E   Lech Janczewski
%C   1331 E. Chocolate Ave., Hershey, PA   17033-1117
%D   2000
%G   1-878-28971-3
%I   IRM Press/Idea Group
%O   U$69.95 800-345-432 fax: 717-533-8661 cust@idea-group.com
%O  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1878289713/robsladesinterne
%P   302 p.
%T   "Internet and Intranet Security Management: Risks and Solutions"

There is a heavy emphasis, in the preface, on the book's being up to
date.  Yet the very first article relies on survey data that was three
years old at the time the essay was written.

Part one supposedly talks about the state of the (security, one
assumes) art.  Chapter one is a vague and superficial look at random
topics and technology related to security, plus results of the
aforementioned opinion poll.  A list of Internet security problems,
and solutions that are not connected to the difficulties, make up
chapter two.

Part two deals with managing Internet security.  Chapter three has
terse descriptions of a number of theories of trust, related to some
generic security concepts.  There are brief overviews of the TCSEC
(Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria), Common Criteria, and
not-really-the-BS7799 in chapter four.  Out of thirty three pages in
chapter five, three discuss the general subject of Web security, while
there is almost nothing on the titular topic of management of Web
security.

Part three reviews cryptographic and technical security standards. 
(There are a great many grammatical errors, and the authors use
almost-but-not-quite standard terminology.)  Chapter six is an
opinionated piece, but does touch on some basic cryptographic ideas. 
Myths and limitations of cryptography are listed in chapter seven. 
Chapter eight has descriptions, that are both overly technical and
incomplete, of ISO cryptographic standards.

Part four talks about law and security.  Chapter nine discusses
privacy, but only in regard to employer monitoring of employee email. 
The weaknesses of the New Zealand privacy law are commented on in
chapter ten.

It is difficult to say that any audience would benefit from this vague
collection of unfocused ideas.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 2002   BKIISMRS.RVW   20020825

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

rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
Find book info victoria.tc.ca/techrev/ or sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/
Upcoming (ISC)^2 CISSP CBK review seminars (+1-888-333-4458):
    February 10, 2003   February 14, 2003   St. Louis, MO
    March 31, 2003      April 4, 2003       Indianapolis, IN

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

Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 10:49:47 -0600
From: John Beaman <JBeaman@good-sam.com>
Subject: Nationwide Paging Service


Pat,

  I am in need of a quality paging service that is able to provide:

- National coverage;
- A toll-free number to call to page (preferably no PIN numbers);
- One-way paging to a numerical pager (no frills).

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.


John Beaman
Telecom Specialist
Voice Telecommunications Services Department.
Good Samaritan National Campus
605-362-3331

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

From: shanep00@yahoo.com (pds)
Subject: Alcatel Phone Switch Reseller
Date: 9 Jan 2003 05:56:11 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


I am looking for Alcatel reseller (phone switches) on the East Coast
(USA).  The only one I know of is Verizon.  Know any others?

Thanks.

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

Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 18:29:20 CST
From: Sam Etler <etler@cs.wisc.edu>
Subject: Re: What is Relation Between DTMF, v.22 and Hayes Commands?


> Can anyone on this list explain this to me?

Entirely different beasts all of them.

DTMF: Dual-Tone Multifrequency.  This is a set of tones used by customer
equipment to signal information to the Public Switched Telephone Network
in an inband fashion.  The grid of tones in Hz is:

	1209	1336	1477	1633
697	 1	 2	 3	 A
770	 4	 5	 6	 B
852	 7	 8	 9	 C
941	 *	 0	 #	 D

The A through D tones were used in the US Military's Autovon system.
When you dial a phone number and hear musical tones as you press the
buttons, that's DTMF.

V.22: ITU-T (formerly CCITT) standard for transmitting 1200 bit per
second duplex data over the PSTN or leased lines.  It's compatible
with the Bell 212A standard.  V.22 bis covers 2400 bps, V.32 covers
9600 bps, V.32 bis covers 14400 bps and lower, V.34 covers up to 28800
bps, V.34 bis covers up to 33600 bps, etc.

Hayes commands: A cryptic command set (that every old BBSer still probably
has memorized) that was developed in 1981 by Hayes to control their
modems.  Quickly was picked up by most of the rest of the industry.  The
commands start with AT which stands for Attention.  A command like ATA
makes the modem go into answer mode.  A command like ATDT*67,14144761989
makes your modem dial 1-414-476-1989 and prepend it with *67 to block
caller ID.  There's literally a hundred or more commands that eventually
made it into the more featured modems.  I'm sure a quick Google search
would come up with many lists.


sam

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy?
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 16:40:44 -0800


In article <telecom22.223.1@telecom-digest.org>, Paul Wallich
<pw@panix.com> wrote:

> Free (marginal cost) plus an illicit thrill beats $10 for the ticket,
> $5 for the soda and snacks and the knowledge that you're lining the
> pockets of people you believe to be despicable.

I have a hard time seeing that. I am a total Hollywood junkie. I
regularly attend movies at Bay Area theaters. I have thousands of DVDs
(all duly purchased) that I view on a 120" screen (and suitably
matching sound system) at home. I have never had the slightest desire
to download a movie off the Internet to watch on my computer.

> It's amazing to watch the proprietors of an almost entirely
> discretionary industry working so hard to make their customers wish
> them ill. It's as if McDonalds hired greeters at every franchise to
> shout at people, "We think you're stupid for eating our food! Go
> away!"

On this point, we are in full agreement. I have never seen an industry
treat its own customers like potential criminals like the
entertainment industry does. If it would do what it does best (produce
entertainment) and stop worrying about this control freak obsession
from which it suffers, it would go on making bucket-loads of money
 ... just as it always has.

I have always maintained if the public knew that it could buy a
reasonably-priced high-quality DVD of a film within a short period
after its theatrical release that the bootleg industry would be dealt
a serious blow. So far, reality confirms that. Furthermore, studios
are discovering that the DVD market is pure gold.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: alex@nexspace.com (Alex Kasper)
Subject: Central Office/Exchange Name Project
Date: 8 Jan 2003 17:12:49 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Found it. This guy has spent much time categorizing old exchange
names, but it is interesting.

On the site you can find the entire office Bell System exchange list
for most number combination as well as scads of letters from people
who want to explain their own bit of history.

Check it out if you have time.

http://ourwebhome.com/TENP/TENproject.html

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

From: dold@37.usenet.us.com
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Central Office Names
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 03:19:44 UTC
Organization: a2i network


Loonquawl <news@loonquawl.com> wrote:

> Actually, Oakland Trinidad is the rate center, not the exchange name.

Oops.  I knew that ;-)

After I posted it, I was thinking there was something wrong with what I had
done ... that was my dad's exchange, and there was something that
bothered me about it, lingering after the post.  Then I remembered, his
exchange was Mullberry, or something like that, which I found in
I-don't-know-what source, but I happened to see on the side of an
abandoned Southern Pacific railroad station not far from his house.
It was so long ago that I found that bit of trivia, that I had forgotten
that it wasn't the NANPA that revealed it to me.


Clarence A Dold - dold@email.rahul.net
                - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA.

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Extinction
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 16:26:39 -0800


In article <telecom22.223.11@telecom-digest.org>, Joey Lindstrom
<joey@telussucks.info> wrote:

> The point here is that the move to DTV is not change for the sake of
> change.

Correct. The FCC saw all that valuable spectrum in the VHF TV bands
and realized that it could get a really nice price for it from telecom
companies. But first it had to dump the TV broadcasters ... and get
the public to approve of the deal in the bargain. The elixir: DTV
 ... or more precisely, HDTV. Wow!

> DTV is a huge, HUGE improvement over NTSC - it's progress,
> pure and simple, and I don't think such a tremendous improvement in
> the overall quality of television should be held back (or held off
> completely) because of a few people who won't want to spend fifty
> bucks on a converter when the time comes - again, assuming their
> existing analog sets still work at all when the time comes.

And how about the TV stations that simply use the digital spectrum for
several low-res programs rather than HDTV? Or worse, how about the
stations that just sell the high-speed data stream to outside parties
and only use a portion of it for TV broadcasting per se? I think you
will find that the issue is a little more complex than spending fifty
bucks on a converter.

> And anyone buying an expensive analog TV today, knowing what's coming,
> is a complete idiot who gets what he/she deserves. 

Anyone buying a digital set today may find himself in exactly the same 
situation. As we speak, those same folks who are pushing for "closing 
the analog hole" are also pushing for a re-design of the digital 
standards to include the "broadcast flag" and many other "rights 
management" features that will make today's system completely obsolete.

> If you're convinced that analog is doomed and that converter
> equipment will never be made available, fine - either make do with
> what you've got for now (and buy new in 2009), or if your current
> set is pretty much toast now, buy something just good enough to get
> you through the next six years.

That would be a wise choice for everyone at this stage of DTV 
development, especially with the copyright industry pushing long and 
hard to make sure that the public is hamstrung at every turn. There are 
many in Congress who listen very hard to major campaign contributors in 
Hollywood.

> A $5000 bigscreen that isn't digital/HDTV is a stupid,
> stupid purchase right now - especially since, when it comes to big
> screens, HDTV's are not really much more expensive than analog and are
> "future proof".

That anything one buys today with regard to DTV is "future proof" relies 
on a very shaky premise indeed.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 20:27:57 -0500
From: Ron Chapman <ronchapman@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Extinction


In article <telecom22.223.11@telecom-digest.org>, Joey Lindstrom
<joey@telussucks.info> wrote:

> The point here is that the move to DTV is not change for the sake of
> change.  DTV is a huge, HUGE improvement over NTSC - it's progress,
> pure and simple, and I don't think such a tremendous improvement in
> the overall quality of television should be held back

Joey,

Do you really, *really* believe that DTV is about quality?

I mean, that's what they're trying to sell it to you based on.  But do you
REALLY believe that?

It's not about quality.  Tossing aside the obvious advantages of
digital with respect to the control it gives the content providers,
DTV is all about QUANTITY.  That's right; it won't be HDTV when it all
shakes out.  It'll be SDTV, and it'll be 4 times as much.  The average
American doesn't want quality, he wants quantity.  And let's face it:
nobody wants to see the hairs on Roseanne Barr's face in all their
glory.

No, Americans want MORE CHANNELS.  And the industry will be happy to
take the bandwidth they have and shove 4 times as many COMMERCIALS
down our throats.

Ah, the glory of not giving a damn.  I don't really care; I won't buy
a converter box, because I've hated converter boxes since before you
were born.  I have TVs and VCRs with perfectly good tuners, thank you.
I don't need a clunky box in the middle to prevent me from using those
tuners.

And I really don't need those commercials, either.  Hollywood is
wondering why I'm not watching TV anymore.  Maybe it has to do with
commercial time creeping up into the 20 minutes per hour range.  (I
watched the Carol Burnett special a couple years ago, and taped it in
case I wanted to keep it.  I paused during the commercials.  Including
opening and closing credits, the total amount of actual program time
was 40 minutes.  That's right -- forty minutes.)

My cable company raised their rates a couple bucks this past November.
I called them and started asking questions about how much I pay, and I
told her right up front: I'm looking around.  I told her that I was
unhappy with paying more money for the privilege of seeing these
commercial stations that are shoving more and more minutes per hour of
commercials down my throat.  She immediately -- IMMEDIATELY -- offered
to rescind the increase for me for the next 12 months.

I do get tired of the commercial channels charging the cable companies
more per subscriber every year, only to then increase the commercial
content.

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

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: ExtendAIR AirPort Antennas
Date: 8 Jan 2003 21:33:29 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Dr. Bott's ExtendAIR Omni is an Apple-certified external antenna that 
> expands the range of Apple's AirPort Extreme Base Station (antenna 
> port required).

PC users, on the other hand, save time and money by making a WiFi
antenna out of an old Pringles can.  See, for example:

http://www.netscum.com/~clapp/wireless.html


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: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic
Date: 8 Jan 2003 21:40:43 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Same as it's been since 1991.  Unsolicited faxed ads are completely
> illegal, and you can sue the sender for $500 per fax.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does that also apply where you have no
> actual fax machine, but contract with a service (like  e-fax) ...

The FCC said quite a while ago that a PC with a fax modem is a fax
machine for the purpose of the TCPA, and nobody hates junk faxes as
much as someone with a virtual fax farm with a range of DID numbers
attached to fax modems to give all the users their own numbers, which
a junker sequences through dumping junk into each number.

There's no case law I know about fax-to-email systems.  I don't know
whether eFax or the subscriber would have standing to sue.  eFax
certainly doesn't like junk faxes, and they have a web page where you
can report the junk fax, attest that it's indeed junk from someone you
don't know, but I haven't heard about any court cases yet.

> Anyway, I suppose the sender would claim (as they do with much
> email spam) that what they did was not 'unsolicited'; that you had
> signed up at one time or another, in some place or another, to get
> their dream vacation faxes, etc.  PAT]

Of course.  But they'd better have documentation that will persuade a
judge that they're not blowing smoke.  Particularly after they've
heard a few cases, judges get pretty sceptical about anything that
junk faxers say.


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: alex@nexspace.com (Alex Kasper)
Subject: Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country?
Date: 8 Jan 2003 19:11:26 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Yep, or what if your outbound call center is in Arizona but you want
customers to always call your office in New York? It's easier to send
the New York number and not have to deal with it.

Eventually comsumers will understand that Caller ID was intended
merely as advice and they should always take it with a grain of salt -
especially if it's someone calling from "your bank" with a weird
request.


AK

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

Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 23:57:53 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Motorola and Pioneer Work Together to Speed Transition


Motorola and Pioneer Work Together to Speed Transition to Basic
             Digital-Cable Ready Television

Companies Announce Plans to Begin Testing in 2003 of Independently 
             Developed POD/Host Technology

    LAS VEGAS, Jan. 8 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Motorola,
Inc. (NYSE:MOT) Broadband Communications Sector and Pioneer
Electronics (USA) Inc. today announced that they will begin testing
procedures to assure compatibility between Motorola's MediaCipher(R)
conditional access system and Pioneer's plasma (flat screen)
High-Definition (HD) compatible TVs. The test is the first of its kind
to bring together independently developed POD (point of deployment)
and plasma HD compatible TV Host technology, and marks the beginning
for establishing a real framework for support of DTV receivers,
digital recorders with secure interfaces, and other devices for cable
systems.  

Motorola recently expanded its MediaCipher conditional access system
to include an OpenCable(TM) POD module, in adherence to the FCC
requirements to offer completely separable security for consumer
electronics devices. Pioneer has developed a basic digital cable ready
television that targets compatibility with OpenCable POD modules such
as the Motorola MediaCipher POD.  The two companies' engineering
efforts will be in compliance with CableLabs OpenCable Host
specification and proposed technical standards currently under review
by the Federal Communications Commission.  

The OpenCable compatibility testing will begin at the Motorola
MediaCipher integration lab in San Diego, CA as the first step towards
the anticipated rollout of compliant consumer TVs in 2003, based on
FCC approval of technical standards.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30782463

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

Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 23:58:56 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Sprint, Warner Offer Music Service on Cell Phones


LOS ANGELES, Jan 8 (Reuters) - Sprint Corp (NYSE:FON) and Warner Music
Group on Wednesday announced a deal to offer a streaming music clip
subscription service on Sprint cell phones, underscoring the growing
trend of joint ventures between recording companies and wireless
firms.

Under the agreement, Sprint customers can now download ringtone and
animated ringtone versions of songs, have an artist announce incoming
calls, or sample clips of new music via the wireless streaming music
clip subscription service on Sprint PCS Vision phones.

 - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30782731

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 00:00:08 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Consumer Groups Seek Action on Cable Rate Hikes


By Jeremy Pelofsky

    WASHINGTON, Jan 8 (Reuters) - Consumer advocates on
Wednesday slammed the latest round of rate hikes for cable
television service and said they would push Congress to
intervene to protect consumers.

    The Federal Communications Commission last week reported
that cable rates skyrocketed 6.3 percent during the 12 months
ended June 30, 2002, almost six times the 1.1 percent rate of
inflation and cable operators over the last several weeks have
unveiled a new round of price hikes.

    Consumers Union and the Consumer Federation of America
rejected assertions by cable operators that the rate hikes are
due to rising programming costs as well as upgrading their
networks since their operating margins are widening.

  - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30784994

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #224
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan  9 16:38:53 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h09Lcr322369;
	Thu, 9 Jan 2003 16:38:53 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 16:38:53 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301092138.h09Lcr322369@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #225

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Jan 2003 16:38:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 225

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Extinction (J Kelly)
    Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy? (John Meissen)
    Re: What is Relation Between DTMF, v.22 and Hayes Commands (joe@obilivan)
    McRotten's (Joey Lindstrom)
    Garmin Unveils Global Positioning Device With Palm (Monty Solomon)
    Sony's New Products For 2003 Put The User in Charge (Monty Solomon)
    Wireless Internet Group Sets Standard for Service (Monty Solomon)
    Bill Gates Showcases New Technology for 'Smart Living' (Monty Solomon)
    Lexmark Invokes DMCA in Toner Suit (Monty Solomon)
    Anti-Telemarketing Law Under Fire (Monty Solomon)
    Apple: There's no "a" in Wi-Fi (Monty Solomon)
    Microsoft Presents Smart Personal Objects Technology (Monty Solomon)
    Liberty Media Eyes DirecTV (Monty Solomon)
    Keystone Kops & Kollect Kalls (Joey Lindstrom)
    Re: Keystone Kops & Kollect Kalls (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: J Kelly <usenet-replies002@pileofmonkeycrap-removethis.com>
Subject: Re: Extinction
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 13:39:02 -0600
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 11:09:01 -0700, Joey Lindstrom
<joey@telussucks.info> wrote:

> The point here is that the move to DTV is not change for the sake of
> change.  

That's right, they sold off the now out of core analog tv spectrum so
Slick Willy Clinton could balance the federal budget.  That is what
the change was all about, now they are crying because it turns out
nobody wants that previously overvalued spectrum due the the telecom
bubble bursting.

> DTV is a huge, HUGE improvement over NTSC - it's progress,
> pure and simple, and I don't think such a tremendous improvement in
> the overall quality of television should be held back (or held off
> completely) because of a few people who won't want to spend fifty
> bucks on a converter when the time comes -- again, assuming their
> existing analog sets still work at all when the time comes.

I have seen no such converters yet, and the deadline for ALL stations
(even non commercial) to be digital is only a few short months away on
May 1, 2003.  In fact, Congress is being pressured to outlaw ANY new
device with an analog video output from being sold.  So much for these
cheap DTV convertors if this actually happens.

> If you're convinced that analog is doomed and that converter
> equipment will never be made available, fine - either make do with
> what you've got for now (and buy new in 2009), or if your current
> set is pretty much toast now, buy something just good enough to get
> you through the next six years.

2006 is the current cutoff.  Some talk has been made about making it
2007 instead.  Also, until (H )DTV is available to 85% of people in a
given market, analog wont go away, but they are trying to eliminate
that rule now also which can be accomplished by making cable carry
(H)DTV since 80%+ of viewers are on cable anyway.  These viewers will
use the set top box the cable company gives them to convert to analog.
That just forces the remaining <20% of viewers who use OTA to buy the
recievers.  

> A $5000 bigscreen that isn't digital/HDTV is a stupid, stupid
> purchase right now - especially since, when it comes to big screens,
> HDTV's are not really much more expensive than analog and are
> "future proof".

Very true, although most (H)DTV sets I've seen do NOT include an 8VSB
tuner, which maybe isn't so bad since tuners are constantly being
improved over the earlier generations which seemed to have some
problems.

The High Def will not improve anything I see on TV.  Most of what is
on TV is crap and will remain crap whether in NTSC or High Def. The
average viewer only cares who Aly McBeal is sleeping with this week,
not the quality of the picture.  Most places I walk into have a
terrible quality picture and the viewer doesn't seem to notice.  I'm
used to seeing broadcast quality video so I do notice (I'm a
transmitter man for a TV station).

I put the "H" in parenthesis because there is no FCC requirement for
any broadcaster to use High Definition, only DTV.  There are 18
different formats of DTV, only a few of which are High Def.

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

From: jmeissen@shell1.aracnet.com (John Meissen)
Subject: Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy?
Date: 9 Jan 2003 19:52:29 GMT
Organization: Aracnet Internet


In article <telecom22.218.17@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> Yet studio execs remain on the warpath. As movies are increasingly
> broadcast and sold in digital format, Tinseltown execs are panicked
> that consumers will make infinite numbers of perfect digital copies
> and share them over the Internet.

I can believe that studio and theater executives would like to have
total control over who can view movies and where they can view them.
A significant amount of revenue is being generated by selling
advertising that must be viewed by the captive theater audience.
People who went to the theater have generally been treated to various
screen advertising while waiting for the movie to start. However, now
the operators are forcing patrons to sit through additional
advertising after the appointed starting time, after the lights have
dimmed.

While this has traditionally been a time for showing previews of
coming attractions it's more often now a series of commercials for
Coke, local businesses, etc.

A few minutes of sponsorship is certainly nothing to complain
about. But during a recent trip to the theater to watch the latest
James Bond movie we had to sit through a full 20 minutes of
commercials (not previews!) after the designated start time before the
feature film actually started. A friend who saw it at a different
theater said his ordeal was a full 30 minutes!  When I complained to
the theater manager they told me the corporate office was pressuring
them because they weren't running more commercials.

This is a windfall for the theaters. They have a completely captive
audience. There is no easy way for people to avoid the commercials
because they aren't going to gamble on the length of the spots and
possibly miss the beginning of the movie, and arriving early is the
only way to guarantee a decent seat at popular showings.

Obviously this is an abuse of the vendor-customer relationship. The
second Lord of the Rings episode is 3 hours long. Can you imagine the
stress on your bladder if you have to endure an additional half hour
of unanticipated commercials on top of the 3 hour feature? Not to
mention the outrage over being subjected to that many commercials
after spending ~$20 per person for some popcorn, a soda and a seat in
the theater.

Because of this screw the customer attitude I decided not to see three
of the four new releases I had planned on seeing last month. If I have
to put up with that crap I'll just wait for them to come out on DVD and
rent them to watch on my home theater setup for a fraction of the cost 
and none of the hassle.

I wrote a letter to the theater corporate office telling them as much.
However, I'm sure they're already aware of that potential reaction.
Obviously it's in the best interests of their corporate pocketbook to
have total and complete control over viewing abilities. It's
absolutely imperative for you to have to watch the movies in a manner
under their total control. Even DVD's will eventually fall to their
greed.... already they are including commercial content in the
portions that you are not allowed to skip. But at least with a DVD you
can (currently) put it in the player and then go off to make popcorn
or do something productive while it advances to the menu.


john-

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  John, you won't get off that easily. 
They're going to put commercial messages on the DVDs also. Not thirty
minutes' worth, but a few. Those commercial messages are a nuisance,
especially after you bought a ticket to go in and watch the movie in
peace. Our local movie house here (the Independence Cinema) has four
screens. In addition to the expected images on the screen ('no smoking
allowed', 'turn off cell phones/pagers', 'enjoy *our* refreshments',
[which you bought and paid for at inflated prices]), they are now
showing blurbs for Marvin's Grocery (but not Walmart!), all the
various car dealers in Montgomery County, K-Mart, and more. Our
theatre prices are not bad however, six dollar tickets, reduced to
five dollars for afternoon matinees, etc. Where they really get you
are the three dollar little boxes of popcorn and small cokes.  PAT]

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

From: joe@obilivan.net
Subject: Re: What is Relation Between DTMF, v.22 and Hayes Commands?
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 10:08:51 GMT
Organization: Cox Communications


There isn't any relationship.  DTMF is "touch tone" for inband telephone
audio signalling, the other two deal with commands and signalling for
analog modems.

valentin tihomirov wrote:

> Can anyone on this list explain this to me?

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 08:25:17 -0700
Subject: McRotten's
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 19:07:44 EST, Paul Wallich wrote:

> It's amazing to watch the proprietors of an almost entirely
> discretionary industry working so hard to make their customers wish
> them ill. It's as if McDonalds hired greeters at every franchise to
> shout at people, "We think you're stupid for eating our food! Go
> away!"

Didn't McD's in France recently do exactly that?


Joey Lindstrom
Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 00:02:53 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Garmin Unveils Global Positioning Device With Palm


NEW YORK, Jan 8 (Reuters) - Garmin Ltd. (NASDAQ:GRMN) on Wednesday
unveiled a handheld computer that combines its global satellite
positioning technology with Palm Inc.'s (NASDAQ:PALM) personal
information software.

    Garmin's iQue 3600 personal digital assistant (PDA) with built-in
Global Positioning System (GPS) capabilities, is expected to begin
sales in the 2003 second quarter, and will be sold at large
electronics retailers, such as Circuit City Stores, for about $590.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30791645

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 00:04:47 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Sony's New Products For 2003 Put The User in Charge


            Sony's New Products For 2003 Put The User in Charge;
                   Company Focused on A 'World About U'

New Generation of Mobility and Broadband-Networked Products Take Center Stage

    LAS VEGAS, Jan. 8 /PRNewswire/ -- CES, Booth #N109 -- Highly
customized entertainment networks designed by users to meet the
demands of their individual lifestyles is the common thread for the
dozens of new audio, video and IT devices unveiled by Sony here today.

    At a conference highlighting strategic advancements in the
delivery and creation of high quality, versatile entertainment, Sony
Electronics President Fujio Nishida reported: "For more than 50 years,
we've strived to hold the consumer spellbound ... to create products
that empower you as a consumer to follow your heart.  This new
generation of Sony hardware and technology can be enjoyed by consumers
everywhere."

    Among the key products Sony demonstrated on the eve of the annual
Consumer Electronics Show were:

   ...

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30793345

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 00:05:42 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Wireless Internet Group Sets Standard For Service


CHICAGO, Jan 8 (Reuters) - As high-speed wireless Internet
access begins to spread in hotels, cafes and airports, a trade
group is trying to establish a global standard for service in the
emerging industry.

    Wi-Fi Alliance on Thursday unveiled a new brand called "Wi-Fi
ZONE" that will allow users to recognize service providers that
meet and maintain certain requirements in offering wireless Web
access using the Wi-Fi standard.


     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30793409

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 00:08:05 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Bill Gates Showcases New Technology for 'Smart Living'


Bill Gates Showcases New Technology for 'Smart Living' in the Digital Decade

 2003 CES Keynote Highlights Smart, Connected Devices and Services That Help
    People Keep in Touch and Be Entertained; Unveils Watches From Leading
           Manufacturers Built on Smart Personal Objects Technology

    LAS VEGAS, Jan. 8 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- In his keynote address
at the 2003 International Consumer Electronics Show (CES), Microsoft
Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) Chairman and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates
outlined his vision for "Smart Living" in the Digital Decade,
showcasing innovations that included a new generation of wristwatches
based on Microsoft's Smart Personal Objects Technology (SPOT). 

In addition, Gates discussed strong progress on the company's
cornerstone products -- including Microsoft(R) Windows(R) XP, the
MSN(R) network of Internet services and the Xbox(TM) video game system
 -- and highlighted a growing number of alliances with the consumer
electronics and media industries. From demonstrating a portable media
player device platform code-named "Media2Go" to providing a visionary
glimpse of the home of the future, Gates revealed how smart, connected
devices and services will simplify people's daily lives and
revolutionize how they keep in touch and have fun.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30794045

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 00:36:54 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Lexmark invokes DMCA in toner suit


By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
January 8, 2003, 7:28 PM PT

Printer maker Lexmark has found an unusual weapon to thwart rivals 
from selling replacement toner cartridges: the Digital Millennium 
Copyright Act.

A federal judge in Kentucky has scheduled a hearing for Thursday in 
the case, which Lexmark filed against Static Control Components in an 
effort to slam the brakes on the toner cartridge remanufacturing 
industry. Lexmark is the No. 2 printer maker in the United States, 
behind Hewlett-Packard, and manufactures printers under the Dell 
Computer brand.

This lawsuit is the latest of several recent DMCA cases -- both civil
and criminal -- that have tested the limits of the 1998 copyright law,
which Congress intended to limit Internet piracy. Eight movie studios
wielded it to force 2600 magazine to delete a DVD-descrambling utility
from its Web site, but the Justice Department lost a case last month
against a Russian firm that created a program that cracked Adobe's
electronic books.

Lexmark claims that Static Control violated the DMCA by selling its
Smartek chips to companies that refill toner cartridges and undercut
Lexmark's prices.


http://news.com.com/2100-1023-979791.html

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 00:43:36 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Anti-Telemarketing Law Under Fire


WASHINGTON -- A federal plan to stop unwanted telemarketing calls this
year with a national "do-not-call" list may be delayed because of
opposition from key lawmakers.

Rep. Billy Tauzin, (R-La.), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce
Committee, said Wednesday that he and other committee members were
wary of approving the permanent funding sought by the Federal Trade
Commission.

Tauzin said he was interested in supporting the registry as a pilot 
program that would be renewed if it appeared to work.


http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,57142,00.html

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 00:46:20 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Apple: There's no "a" in Wi-Fi


By Ben Charny
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
January 8, 2003, 1:51 PM PT

Apple Computer joined a growing band of companies giving the cold 
shoulder to 802.11a, marking another setback for the wireless 
standard designed to replace 802.11b as the dominant way to create 
home and office wireless networks.

The Mac maker has no plans to make wireless networking equipment 
using the 802.11a standard, Greg Joswiak, Apple's vice president of 
worldwide hardware product marketing, said Wednesday. Instead, it 
plans to add 802.11g technology into the next generation of its 
laptops, he said.


http://news.com.com/2100-1033-979748.html

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 08:43:22 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Microsoft Presents Smart Personal Objects Technology (SPOT)-Based


      Microsoft Presents Smart Personal Objects Technology (SPOT)-Based
                             Wristwatches at CES

  Leading Watch Manufacturers Citizen, Fossil and Suunto Unveil Wristwatches
      That Make Personalized, Web-Based Information Available at a Flick
                                 Of the Wrist

    LAS VEGAS, Jan. 9 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Wristwatches designed
to receive and display continuous, up-to-date information through the
use of a new nationwide wireless communication technology will be
available in the fall of 2003, announced Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT)
Chairman and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates last night in his
keynote address at the 2003 International Consumer Electronics Show
(CES). The watches, created with the world's leading watch brands and
manufacturers including Citizen Watch Co., Fossil Inc. and Suunto, are
being built using Microsoft(R) Smart Personal Objects Technology
(SPOT). Wristwatches incorporating SPOT constitute the first
incarnation of truly "smart" objects: everyday devices whose core
purposes are enhanced through easy-to-use software.

    As demonstrated during Gates' keynote address, the new SPOT-based
watches are fashionable timepieces with enhanced timekeeping
characteristics such as customizable watch faces and automatic
time-adjustment based on location. In addition, the watches receive
and display convenient, timely, personalized Web content from a
variety of sources using Microsoft's new DirectBand wireless
technology, which enables tiny, low-cost, very-low-power, integrated
radio receiver solutions.


http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30796738

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 00:01:30 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Liberty Media Eyes DirecTV


Liberty Media Corp. and News Corp. are nearing a joint bid
for DirecTV parent Hughes Electronics Corp.

"Given our history of relationships and our history of
transactions with News Corp., we're reasonably optimistic that
we'll be able to work that out," Liberty chief executive Robert
Bennett said Tuesday at a conference in La Quinta, Calif.

 - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30786578

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 08:47:22 -0700
Subject: Keystone Kops & Kollect Kalls
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 19:07:44 EST, editor@telecom-digest.org
wrote:

> These examples are not exceptions to the rule in this make-believe
> town of 'Perfect'; this is how things are getting to be. Police
> are no better than anyone else; they just get away with what they do
> because they have a badge and uniform. So please pardon me if I take
> the little guy's side in this matter. The real victims are the people
> who got robbed, looted, sexually assaulted and beaten up of course,
> and then assumed the Keystone Kops of America the Beautiful would
> protect them and prosecute the wrong-doers. Instead, the Keystone Kops
> sit down to connive, make up lies and stories about it, select at
> random the weak people who can do little or nothing to defend them-
> selves, define them as 'scum', lock them up often times for the rest
> of their lives, and tell their friends at the newspapers, look what
> a great job we are doing.  

And yet if you sit down and ask the cons in the pen whether or not
they did the thing that got them put away, the VAST, VAST majority
would admit, probably sheepishly, "yeah, I did it".  Many, in fact,
boast of their dubious achievements.

The examples you cited are horrific and the perpetrators of such
corruption themselves need to spend some time unable to make phone
calls, unable to come and go as they please, and maybe get sodomized
with broomsticks.  But I contend (and I know you and I will disagree
here) that these cases are the exception, whereas you seem to contend
that they are (or at least are becoming) the rule.

Each and every man (and woman) in prison has been found guilty by a
judge and/or jury (do you have trials by judge alone in the US?  In
Canada, the accused can elect for such a trial).  It is therefore
inappropriate to assume their innocence until proven otherwise -- it
already has been proven otherwise.  We now assume their guilt -- and
thus the appropriateness of punishing them and otherwise restricting
their rights, ie: the right to make cheap phone calls -- until their
innocence is otherwise proven.  That's the way it works, that's the way
it's always worked, and until someone can devise a better system,
that's the way it's always going to work.

Corruption in the justice system is indeed A Bad Thing<tm>.  But
taking some isolated cases and using it as the foundation to argue for
cheaper phone calls for inmates is, in my opinion, way too much of a
stretch.  YMMV.


-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 14:15:18 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Keystone Kops & Kollect Kalls


> trials by judge alone ...

Yes, we have those. A defendant can ask for (or be pressured into) a
'bench trial' in front of a judge without a jury. The vast majority 
of cases in large cities are that way. In the United States at
least, jury trials and the attornies to conduct them cost way to
much money for the 'average' defendant. Five thousand dollars is a
very cheap jury trial; ten-twenty thousand in lawyer fees is more
typical. *If you were arrested, being held in a dungeon jail on a
fifty thousand dollar bond ('merely' five thousand to get out on
bond pending trial) and have to hire a lawyer to defend yourself, 
could YOU afford to do it?*

Or would you settle for a bench trial (judge only) and a lawyer who
agreed to handle it for four or five thousand dollars?  Could you 
afford that?  Remember now, we are talking about the 90-95 percent
of the inmates awaiting trial who are young black guys (at least here
in the USA in the larger cities). 

If you cannot afford any lawyer at all (that's the idea) then you get
the public pretender -- oops I mean defender -- who is, himself/herself
an *employee* of the prosecutors office assigned to handle 'indigent'
cases. A judge has to agree to appoint a public defender, you do not
just get one automatically. And if you could somehow 'afford' to raise
the bail money to get out on bond while awaiting trial, then the court
says you can also 'afford' to hire your own attorney.

It makes things a lot easier for the system here in the United States
if they can work it assembly line style. Your first contact with
'your lawyer' (the public defender) is through the bars of the cell
in jail while waiting court. Typically overcrowded, anywhere from 30-40
other men in the same cell, and his interview/consultation lasts 2-3
minutes. When your turn comes to go in the courtroom, deputies take
you in handcuffed and stand next to you while the judge reviews the
'application' for public defender.

If the public defender is appointed  to you, then you get another 5-10
minute interview with him/her. I  have never yet met a public defender
who advised  the client  to get  a jury trial.  They *always*  say you
should settle for a bench trial and the public defender offers to talk
to  the prosecutor  and attempt  to 'resolve'  the matter.  Usually it
comes down  to 'if you  agree to a  bench trial and plead  guilty, the
state  will settle  for six  months or  a year  behind bars'  in minor
cases. If you  have the audacity to demand a jury  trial and FORCE the
state/police officers to get up  in court and testify, then the stakes
go  much higher. Expect  the state  will ask  for a  twenty/thiry year
sentence. So a smart person  usually decides (as Charles Brown, former
AT&T chairman during divestiture decided  to do) to cut his losses and
make a guilty  plea. I am talking now about  the situation in Chicago,
Cook County, Illinois but certainly in many other towns as well.

Things are *not* as you see on television, where the noble and honest
prosecutors/police officers go through these long, drawn out jury
trials.  The typical, average trial in Cook County/Chicago lasts all
of ten minutes or so. And they have three or four dozen of those on a
daily basis. Cook County Jail has an inmate population of about nine
thousand inmates daily. They do not give you the simplest courtesies
of paper, and pen to write out your case, let alone access to computer
terminals to research your defense, etc. The assumption is you are 
guilty from the get-go. After all, if you were not guilty, the noble
and honest police officers would never have brought you there, would
they?  

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #225
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jan 10 01:56:06 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0A6u6s28215;
	Fri, 10 Jan 2003 01:56:06 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 01:56:06 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301100656.h0A6u6s28215@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #226

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 10 Jan 2003 01:56:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 226

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Hacker Gay Porn Hits 'Army Newswatch' (Monty Solomon)
    Recordable DVD Council Delivers 'Real DVD' at CES 2003  (Monty Solomon)
    Lexmark DMCA Lawsuit Temporary Restraining Order (Monty Solomon)
    Timeshare Telemarketing Fraud Scam (Monty Solomon)
    TeleNav GPS Navigation Service for Nextel Phones (Monty Solomon)
    DIRECTV & TiVo Introduce High-Definition Digital Video Recorder (Solomon)
    TiVo Unveils New DVR Design That Supports HDTV (Monty Solomon)
    TiVo Home Media Option (Monty Aolomon)
    Go-Video DV6430 DVD/VCR With 10 Minutes of Live TV (Monty Solomon)
    Sony Vs. Microsoft/Showdown In The Digital Rights Corral (Monty Solomon)
    Errata (Joey Lindstrom)
    Re: Extinction (Greg Hennessy)
    Re: Extinction (J Kelly)
    Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy? (Barry Margolin)
    Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy? (Ron Chapman)
    Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy? (Dave Horsfall)
    What the Heck is Going on Here (CDMA2000 1xRTT PCS Sprint) (news.alltel)

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: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Hacker Gay Porn Hits 'Army Newswatch'
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 22:34:06 -0500


John Kohlstrand 
Rochester Democrat and Chronicle 

WEBSTER, NY - The town of Webster is investigating how gay
pornographic material was aired on its cable access channel Monday
night. 

According to town officials, a show on Webster cable access channel 12
about the U.S. Army was interrupted by roughly 20 minutes of explicit
pornography.

Mike Auger, who oversees cable television operations for town
government, said he can find no evidence of gay-themed video on the
computer system that digitally stores programming for the station and
manages what goes on the air. 

"How it got through and on the air, I don't know," Auger said. "That's
what we're investigating now."


http://www.rochesterdandc.com/news/0108story8_news.shtml

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Recordable DVD Council Delivers 'Real DVD' at CES 2003 
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 22:44:09 -0500


          RDVDC Highlights Leadership in Hot DVD Recordable Industry
    With Products from CE Powerhouses and Forecasts from Leading Analysts

    LAS VEGAS, Jan. 9 /PRNewswire/ -- The Recordable DVD Council
(RDVDC) rallied consumers to demand "Real DVD" as they launched a new
DVD Recordable awareness campaign today during the RDVDC press
conference at the Consumer Electronics Show.  Staying one step ahead
of the hottest industry in Consumer Electronics history, RDVDC is
dedicating 2003 to helping consumers understand and embrace recordable
DVD technology through feature-rich, easy-to-use cutting edge products
from CE giants including Hitachi, Matsushita (Panasonic), Samsung, and
Toshiba.

    Generating momentum behind "Real DVD" -- products that support the
reliable formats of the DVD Forum -- Hitachi, Panasonic, and Samsung
launched exciting new recordable DVD products, showcasing the best in
Recordable DVD with unmatched compatibility for both the AV and PC
worlds. In addition to product introductions, RDVDC chairman Bon-Guk
Koo, Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd., highlighted industry trends,
while Andy Parsons, senior vice president of sales and marketing,
Pioneer U.S., discussed DVD-R's market penetration and technology
advantages.

In addition, Danielle Levitas, director, consumer devices and
technologies and interactive services, IDC, and Rick Doherty, director
of Envisioneering, delivered their third-party insight into the market
today and for the future.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/01-09-2003/0001869534&EDATE=

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Lexmark DMCA Lawsuit Temporary Restraining Order
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 22:47:12 -0500


Lexmark lawsuit seeks to defend intellectual property rights while
preserving customers' rights to choose.

    LEXINGTON, Ky., Jan. 9 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- As a result of a
Lexmark International, Inc. (NYSE: LXK) lawsuit against Static Control
Components, Inc., for violation of the Copyright Act and the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act, the federal district court in Lexington,
Ky., issued a temporary order - agreed to by Static Control -
requiring Static Control to immediately cease making, selling, or
otherwise trafficking in the "Smartek(TM)" microchip for the toner
cartridges developed for the Lexmark T520/522 and T620/622 laser
printers.

    The order is in effect until Lexmark's motion for a preliminary
injunction is heard by the Court.

    Lexmark's complaint alleges that the Smartek(TM) microchips
incorporate infringing copies of Lexmark's copyrighted software and
are being sold by Static Control to defeat Lexmark's technological
controls, thereby allowing the unauthorized access to Lexmark's
protected software programs and the unauthorized remanufacturing of
Lexmark "Prebate(TM)" toner cartridges.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/01-09-2003/0001869517

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Timeshare Telemarketing Fraud Scam
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 22:54:14 -0500


Cape Cod Real Estate Broker Sentenced to Three Years Imprisonment
for His Role in Timeshare Telemarketing Fraud Scam, Reports U.S. Attorney 

    BOSTON, Jan. 9 /PRNewswire/ --  A Cape Cod real estate broker was
sentenced today to a term of federal imprisonment for his role in defrauding
10,000 timeshare owners out of over $4.5 million.  ...

    According to the evidence presented at trial, Gonczy, Joel
Epstein, and their co-conspirators, established a complex network of
more than a dozen companies designed to persuade timeshare owners who
were interested in selling their timeshares to purchase a $399
"appraisal" of their timeshare.  The scheme passed timeshare owners
through a series of boiler rooms to complete the fraud.  First, the
defendants established a number of purported "buying companies" based
in Florida and Texas which contacted timeshare owners and made a host
of misrepresentations, including that they would buy the person's
timeshare if the owner obtained an appraisal and that they would
reimburse the owner for the appraisal fee at the time of closing. 

The buying companies falsely claimed that they received no fees from
the appraisal companies and had no part in the appraisal process.
Once the buying company persuaded the timeshare owner into selling the
timeshare, the buying company referred the timeshare owner to a
purportedly independent service, Multi-State Listing Service ("MLS"),
which in fact was a second boiler room.  The timeshare owner would be
told that the MLS would put the timeshare owner in touch with
"independent and internationally recognized" appraisal companies.

 ...

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/01-09-2003/0001869453&EDATE=

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: TeleNav GPS Navigation Service for Nextel Phones
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 22:57:04 -0500


Televigation Launches North America's First GPS Navigation Service for
Wireless Phones

TeleNav(TM) Runs on Nextel's Java(TM) Technology-enabled Handsets to Offer
                         Turn-by-Turn GPS Navigation

    LAS VEGAS, Jan. 9 /PRNewswire/ -- Televigation, the leader in
wireless motion-based technology, today announced the debut of
TeleNav(TM), North America's first location-based navigation service
available on a wireless phone.  At a fraction of the cost of expensive
Global Positioning System (GPS) car navigation solutions, TeleNav(TM)
subscribers now can use their Nextel Java(TM) technology-enabled
handset with GPS capabilities, as a navigation system to direct them
 -- visually and audibly -- turn-by-turn to most addresses or locations
in the United States.

 ...

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/01-09-2003/0001869449&EDATE=

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: DIRECTV & TiVo Introduce New High-Definition Digital Video Recorder
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 23:06:54 -0500


         DIRECTV and TiVo to Demonstrate New DIRECTV HDTV DVR at CES

    LAS VEGAS, Jan. 9 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- DIRECTV, Inc. and TiVo
(NASDAQ:TIVO) announced today that they will introduce a new
DIRECTV(R) HDTV DVR that will enable consumers to record and playback
DIRECTV high- definition, as well as standard-definition DIRECTV(R)
programming and terrestrial ATSC broadcasts.  The companies will
demonstrate the new receivers this week at the International Consumer
Electronics Show in Las Vegas (DIRECTV Booth 13525, TiVo Booth N208).

    The DIRECTV(R) HDTV DVR is expected to be available to consumers
by year-end.  The DIRECTV(R) DVR with TiVo(R) service will apply all
the familiar TiVo functions to DIRECTV and ATSC high-definition
programming -- including the ability to record, pause, instant replay
and rewind live television. The new DIRECTV(R) HDTV DVR will feature a
larger recording capacity than existing DIRECTV(R) DVRs, and will
feature component and digital video outputs for enhanced audio and
video. Manufacturers and pricing will be announced at a later date.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?symbols=NASDAQ:TIVO&story=30813153

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: TiVo Unveils New DVR Design That Supports HDTV
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 23:12:21 -0500


New Platform Expands TiVo Licensing Portfolio into Fast Growing, High Demand
                                 HDTV Format

    CONSUMER ELECTRONICS SHOW, LAS VEGAS, Jan. 9
/PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo (NASDAQ:TIVO), the creator of and
leader in television services for digital video recorders (DVR), today
announced it has developed the first DVR platform that supports
recording in High Definition Television formats. The reference design
will be licensed to leading CE manufacturers who are expected to offer
the new DVR to consumers by the end of the year. In a related
announcement, today DIRECTV and TiVo announced they would develop a
new DIRECTV(R) HDTV Digital Video Recorder with TiVo(R).

    The new design offers viewers the flexibility of a DVR that is
equipped to record today's analog broadcasts along with the capability
for recording the rapidly expanding programming offerings in HDTV. The
company said the HDTV format DVR is one of the new products most
frequently requested by technology licensing partners as well as TiVo
subscribers.

 ...

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?symbols=NASDAQ:TIVO&story=30813165

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: TiVo Home Media Option
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 23:15:50 -0500


  TiVo's New Home Media Option(TM) Transforms DVR Into Entertainment Center,
              Bringing Control and Simplicity to Home Networking

Service Option Lets Subscribers Record Entertainment in the Living
 Room, Watch It in the Bedroom; Store Tunes on the PC, Listen to Them
 in the Family Room

    CONSUMER ELECTRONICS SHOW, LAS VEGAS, Jan. 9
/PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo (NASDAQ:TIVO), the creator of and
leader in television services for digital video recorders (DVR), today
introduced the TiVo Home Media Option(TM). The new service option
promises to transform TiVo from a digital recording device to an
entertainment center that allows entertainment lovers to effortlessly
enjoy video, music and photos throughout the home.

 ...

    Once the TiVo Home Media Option(TM) has been downloaded to the DVR
and activated at the TiVo website, the DVR will be capable of linking
over a network with either Apple or Windows PCs. Applications
necessary for completing this network link to the PC can be downloaded
from the TiVo website (www.tivo.com) once a subscriber has completed
the TiVo activation process.

 ...

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?symbols=NASDAQ:TIVO&story=30813183

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Go-Video DV6430 DVD/VCR With 10 Minutes of Live TV
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 23:22:15 -0500


SONICblue Introduces World's First DVD/VCR Combo That Allows Users
to Control Live TV; New Go-Video DV6430 DVD/VCR Allows Users to
Pause, Rewind and Instant Replay Live TV 

SANTA CLARA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 9, 2003--SONICblue(TM)
Incorporated (Nasdaq:SBLU), introduced the Go-Video(R) DV6430, the
first product of its kind to incorporate live TV control with a
DVD/VCR combo. The unit combines all the convenience of a DVD+VCR
unit, with up to 10 minutes of Live TV control, giving users the
ability to pause, rewind, instant replay, and slow-motion live
television.

 ...

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?symbols=NASDAQ:SBLU&story=30800676

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Sony Vs. Microsoft / Showdown In The Digital Rights Corral
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 00:25:20 -0500


by Lisa DiCarlo

NEW YORK - Its name is decidedly unsexy, but digital rights management
will be the hottest topic in personal computing and digital
entertainment in coming years.  Sony and Microsoft are two companies
at the forefront, setting the stage for a potential clash of titans.

It took Napster, the pioneering but now defunct free music-swapping
service, to bring digital rights front of mind for the entertainment
and technology industries.  In simple terms, DRM aims to control the
distribution of digital content whether online or off.  The
implications for consumers are enormous, as is the potential revenue
stream for companies that provide digital rights technology.

The market right now is tiny--less than $100 million in 2001, the most
recent year for which figures are available--but International Data
Corp.  estimates 55% compound annual growth through 2006, or about
half a billion dollars, says IDC contributing analyst Joshua Duhl.

 ...

http://www.forbes.com/2003/01/09/cx_ld_0109drm.html

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 14:32:27 -0700
Subject: Errata
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


My Fave Guy John Higdon wrote:

>> The point here is that the move to DTV is not change for the sake of
>> change.

> Correct. The FCC saw all that valuable spectrum in the VHF TV bands
> and realized that it could get a really nice price for it from telecom
> companies. But first it had to dump the TV broadcasters ... and get
> the public to approve of the deal in the bargain. The elixir: DTV
> ... or more precisely, HDTV. Wow!

Yeah?  So what took them so long to do this?  You'd think if it was
simply about cash, this'd been done back when HDTV was first proposed
(1986 wasn't it?).

>> DTV is a huge, HUGE improvement over NTSC - it's progress,
>> pure and simple, and I don't think such a tremendous improvement in
>> the overall quality of television should be held back (or held off
>> completely) because of a few people who won't want to spend fifty
>> bucks on a converter when the time comes - again, assuming their
>> existing analog sets still work at all when the time comes.

> And how about the TV stations that simply use the digital spectrum for
> several low-res programs rather than HDTV? Or worse, how about the
> stations that just sell the high-speed data stream to outside parties
> and only use a portion of it for TV broadcasting per se? I think you
> will find that the issue is a little more complex than spending fifty
> bucks on a converter.

SDTV is still a big improvement over analog.  And as a consumer, I
couldn't give a rat's ass if a station leases bandwidth to an outside
party.  I care only about what, and how much, is on the screen in
front of me.

But as HDTV becomes more and more common, I believe the market will
decide.  If consumers really prefer HDTV-quality images over
SDTV-quality images, the TV ratings (along with responses to surveys)
will reflect that.  Broadcasters that cater to the demands of
consumers will make higher profits.  But if consumers prefer having a
choice of several SDTV channels over a single HDTV channel, again, the
broadcaster that caters to it is going to win.  It's the invisible
hand of Adam Smith in action.

> Anyone buying a digital set today may find himself in exactly the same 
> situation. As we speak, those same folks who are pushing for "closing 
> the analog hole" are also pushing for a re-design of the digital 
> standards to include the "broadcast flag" and many other "rights 
> management" features that will make today's system completely obsolete.

I think there'll be tremendous resistance to these things -- at least,
to any scheme that obsoletes existing HDTV sets.  Resistance possibly
in the form of class-action lawsuits on the part of consumers who were
told "this set complies with the coming standard".


Then Ron Chapman added:

> Joey,

> Do you really, *really* believe that DTV is about quality?

Only?  No.  Primarily?  Yes.  Sorry if I sound naive to you -- I guess
I just haven't quite reached the "cynical ol' bastard" stage of my
life yet.  (Odd, because being a Limbaugh conservative I'm often
accused of just that.)

> It's not about quality.  Tossing aside the obvious advantages of
> digital with respect to the control it gives the content providers,
> DTV is all about QUANTITY.  That's right; it won't be HDTV when it all
> shakes out.  It'll be SDTV, and it'll be 4 times as much.  The average
> American doesn't want quality, he wants quantity.  And let's face it:
> nobody wants to see the hairs on Roseanne Barr's face in all their
> glory.

> No, Americans want MORE CHANNELS.  And the industry will be happy to
> take the bandwidth they have and shove 4 times as many COMMERCIALS
> down our throats.

Ah, I begin to see.  Yes, it all makes sense now.  The 90% of
Americans (and I expect the numbers are similar here in Canada) that
receive their television via cable or satellite are going to
immediately disconnect those superior delivery methods in favour of
getting maybe 20 or 30 over-the-air channels.  Yes, I can see that
happening just about overnight.

(I'm not up to date on the technical side of things here: I thought I
read, some moons ago, that one HDTV channel can be partitioned into as
many as six SDTV channels -- has this been changed or do I remember it
wrong?)

> Ah, the glory of not giving a damn.  I don't really care; I won't buy
> a converter box, because I've hated converter boxes since before you
> were born.  I have TVs and VCRs with perfectly good tuners, thank you.
> I don't need a clunky box in the middle to prevent me from using those
> tuners.

I seem to recall an announcement very recently in this here Digest
saying that some agreement has been reached that will allow
manufacturers to build "cable-ready" HDTV sets that won't require any
sort of converter.  This seems to be the opposite of what the
nay-sayers here are predicting.  Granted, this comes too late for me -
I've already got my HDTV set and I'm not buying another one, nor is
there any guarantee this "standard" will also be adopted in Canada, so
it's a set-top box for me (or, in my case, a Bell Expressvu satellite
receiver).

> And I really don't need those commercials, either.  Hollywood is
> wondering why I'm not watching TV anymore.  Maybe it has to do with
> commercial time creeping up into the 20 minutes per hour range.  (I
> watched the Carol Burnett special a couple years ago, and taped it in
> case I wanted to keep it.  I paused during the commercials.  Including
> opening and closing credits, the total amount of actual program time
> was 40 minutes.  That's right -- forty minutes.)

Ironic, ain't it?  The more channels we get, the fewer eyeballs each
station gets and thus the more commercials it has to run to make up
for the revenue shortfall.  Again, though, as long as the market
(that's us) is prepared to put up with it, and don't stampede to any
broadcaster that offers an alternative, this trend will continue.  The
invisible hand strikes again.

> My cable company raised their rates a couple bucks this past November.
> I called them and started asking questions about how much I pay, and I
> told her right up front: I'm looking around.  I told her that I was
> unhappy with paying more money for the privilege of seeing these
> commercial stations that are shoving more and more minutes per hour of
> commercials down my throat.  She immediately -- IMMEDIATELY -- offered
> to rescind the increase for me for the next 12 months.

I just got a similar two-buck increase in my satellite bill.  It's
still cheaper than the local cable provider -- then again, it's given
me thoughts of dusting off my ol' grey-market DirecTV receiver and
looking around to see if I can find somebody with "connections" to
smart card codes.  ;-)

> I do get tired of the commercial channels charging the cable companies
> more per subscriber every year, only to then increase the commercial
> content.

I will rush to the first provider -- cable, satellite, whatever --
that realizes that no matter how many channels they stuff into a
package, I can only watch ONE AT A TIME.  If I have the basic 100 or
so channels, I pay about $20 per month.  For the package I'm on (over
240 channels), it's $40 per month.  I CAN STILL ONLY WATCH ONE AT A
TIME.  I should be charged the same rate for TV viewing no matter how
many choices are on the menu.  I don't expect to pay twice as much for
food when I vacation in the US and stop at a Jack In The Box, just
because they've got twice as many items on the menu as McDonald's
does.  (Then again, I'd be willing to pay a premium at JITB for the
simple reason that, unlike McDonald's, their food doesn't taste like
boiled masking tape).

We're moving into a digital age.  I'd love it if some provider
realized that they could TRACK my viewing habits and direct pro-rated
portions of my monthly fees to the stations that I ACTUALLY WATCH -
and give sweet bugger all to the ones I shun.  I'd switch VERY quickly
to such a provider - but, until Adam Smith's hand moves in that
direction, I'm SOL.  (That's "Short On Luck", for those easily
offended)


-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

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

From: greg.hennessy@cox.net (Greg Hennessy)
Subject: Re: Extinction
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 22:01:05 UTC
Organization: A poorly-installed InterNetNews site
Reply-To: greg.hennessy@cox.net


In article <telecom22.225.1@telecom-digest.org>, J Kelly
<usenet-replies002@pileofmonkeycrap-removethis.com> wrote:

> The High Def will not improve anything I see on TV. 

I got HDTV a month ago via Cox cable, and the few shows that are
actually broadcast in HDTV look very nice.

I'll find out more when the NFL playoffs this weekend are broadcast in
HDTV. :)

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

From: J Kelly <usenet-replies002@pileof_remove-me_monkeycrap.com>
Subject: Re: Extinction
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 20:38:38 -0600
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 13:39:02 -0600, J Kelly
<usenet-replies002@pileofmonkeycrap-removethis.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 11:09:01 -0700, Joey Lindstrom
> <joey@telussucks.info> wrote:

>> DTV is a huge, HUGE improvement over NTSC - it's progress,
>> pure and simple, and I don't think such a tremendous improvement in
>> the overall quality of television should be held back (or held off
>> completely) because of a few people who won't want to spend fifty
>> bucks on a converter when the time comes

I recieved in the mail today, TV Technology Magazine.  In it CBS has
announced its plan to drop all Prime Time HDTV programming after this
season.  So much for progress.

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

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@genuity.com>
Subject: Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy?
Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 21:54:54 GMT


In article <telecom22.220.3@telecom-digest.org>, John Higdon
<no-spam@amadeus.kome.com> wrote:

> In article <telecom22.218.17@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
> <monty@roscom.com> wrote:

>> Yet studio execs remain on the warpath. As movies are increasingly
>> broadcast and sold in digital format, Tinseltown execs are panicked
>> that consumers will make infinite numbers of perfect digital copies
>> and share them over the Internet.

> And as anyone knows, seeing grainy, jerky images on a computer screen
> with audio through a couple of three-inch speakers beats nearly
> perfect images projected onto a 100' screen with audio through
> THX-certified sound systems any day of the week.

There's lots of technology to play these movies back on real TV's, not
just tiny computer screens.  The experience would be the same as
watching the original broadcasts or DVDs.

> I guess that movie execs are justified in thinking that suddenly the
> movie theaters will be empty.

It seems that the entertainment industry has always been paranoid
about new technologies.  In the 40's and 50's the film industry
worried that television would erode their audience, in the 70's they
fought against VCRs, and in the past few years the music industry has
been battling against Napster-style services.  Yet in the end, they
eventually embrace the technologies and learn how to turn them around
to make money (many movies make more for the studios in video sales
than they do in the theatres).

What I think causes this behavior is that it takes them a while to
figure out *how* to make money off the technology (unless it fits
easily into an established infrastructure, e.g. DVD rental/sales at
video stores).  While they're working it out, they don't want to lose
control of their product to outsiders.


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.

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 20:45:42 -0500
From: Ron Chapman <ronchapman@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy?


In article <telecom22.224.6@telecom-digest.org>, John Higdon
<no-spam@amadeus.kome.com> wrote:

> I have a hard time seeing that. I am a total Hollywood junkie. I
> regularly attend movies at Bay Area theaters. I have thousands of DVDs
> (all duly purchased) that I view on a 120" screen (and suitably
> matching sound system) at home. I have never had the slightest desire
> to download a movie off the Internet to watch on my computer.

That's funny.  I have never had the slightest desire to purchase
thousands of DVDs and/or a 120" TV viewing system with suitable
matching sound system.

I guess it takes all kinds, eh, John?

>> It's amazing to watch the proprietors of an almost entirely
>> discretionary industry working so hard to make their customers wish
>> them ill. It's as if McDonalds hired greeters at every franchise to
>> shout at people, "We think you're stupid for eating our food! Go
>> away!"

> On this point, we are in full agreement. I have never seen an industry
> treat its own customers like potential criminals like the
> entertainment industry does. If it would do what it does best (produce
> entertainment) and stop worrying about this control freak obsession
> from which it suffers, it would go on making bucket-loads of money
> ... just as it always has.

You've never seen an industry treat its own customer like potential
criminals?  You've never been in the DTP industry, then, where Quark
treats its paid customers as if they were ACTUAL criminals.  Quark has
even come out and said as much, publicly.

John, you need to get out more -- or else stop making blanket
statements like that.  Realize that the world is a bit bigger than you
know.

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

Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:28:42 +1100 
From: Dave Horsfall <daveh@ci.com.au>
Subject: Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy?


[ Rejoining the flock after too many years away ]

On 9 Jan 2003, John Meissen wrote:

> Obviously this is an abuse of the vendor-customer relationship. The
> second Lord of the Rings episode is 3 hours long. Can you imagine the
> stress on your bladder if you have to endure an additional half hour
> of unanticipated commercials on top of the 3 hour feature? Not to
> mention the outrage over being subjected to that many commercials
> after spending ~$20 per person for some popcorn, a soda and a seat in
> the theater.

Wasn't a problem for me...  I had a cooked snack before I departed,
took a small bottle of water with me from which I sipped occasionally,
and laughed (inside) at everyone taking bladder breaks at all sort of
times (yes, during the movie).  And I'm 50, when bladder control is
supposed to be a problem :-)


Dave Horsfall DTM VK2KFU daveh@ci.com.au Ph: +61 2 9906-7866 
Fx: 9906-1556
Corinthian Engineering, Level 1, 401 Pacific Hwy, Artarmon, NSW 2064, 
Australia

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

From: news.alltel.net <tongaloa@alltel.net>
Subject: What the Heck is Going on Here (CDMA2000 1xRTT PCS SPRINT Flavor)
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 21:44:09 GMT


I was running a security port scan against one of my servers from the
laptop which is on the PCS wireless network of SPRINT aka PCS. After
the scan was complete, something in their infrastructure continued to
scan for a full 15 minutes (I was talking to an associate who was
watching the scan on the scanned machine).

We were amazed. At first we thought some nefarious process on my
laptop. I yanked the Merlin card and the scans continued for another
13 minutes with the source IP that had been assigned to my laptop.

What the hell are they doing at SPRINT????

As an aside, SPRINT compresses every image and if one bops to a few
dozen sites with a lot of images, the connection slows to a
crawl. Something is not scaling but again, what the hack are they
doing over there? They appear to continue compressing images from a
site as long as one's IP is active rather than as long as the HTTP
connection persists. This does not make sense to me ...

Do folks know their copyrighted images are being compressed by this
particular ISP? I do and I don't like it ...

-Bob

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #226
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Jan 11 01:38:48 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0B6cmL12340;
	Sat, 11 Jan 2003 01:38:48 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 01:38:48 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301110638.h0B6cmL12340@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #227

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 11 Jan 2003 01:39:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 227

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy? (John Higdon)
    New HP Digital Media Receiver Extends Digital Music & Photo (M. Solomon)
    Nokia Color and Java TDMA Handsets (Monty Solomon)
    Sony Vs. Microsoft / The Fight For Interactive Television (Monty Solomon)
    California Disclosure Law Has National Reach (Monty Solomon)
    FCC's Powell Calls TiVo 'God's Machine' (Monty Solomon)
    I was here. (Doug Faunt)
    Re: Bells Could Win Now, Lose Later (Geoffrey Welsh)
    Re: Anti-Telemarketing  (Chuk Gleason)
    Re: Nationwide Paging Service (Paul Erickson)
    Re: TiVo Unveils New DVR Design That Supports HDTV (Seth Brundle)
    Connecting to a T1 Demarc: Need Help (Bill B)

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: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy?
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 07:51:51 -0800


In article <telecom22.226.14@telecom-digest.org>, Barry Margolin
<barmar@genuity.com> wrote:

> There's lots of technology to play these movies back on real TV's, not
> just tiny computer screens.  The experience would be the same as
> watching the original broadcasts or DVDs.

First, downloading ten GB of DVD-quality video is not a trivial
matter, even with a broadband connection. Second, even the cheapest
way of storing that much data (a burnable DVD) begins to swamp the
cost of just buying the studio's commercial DVD. Third, last I
checked, there is a considerable difference between watching a movie
on any home video screen and a giant theater screen.

As far as studios being paranoid about new technologies because they
don't know how to make money from them, that is right on the mark.

In article <telecom22.226.15@telecom-digest.org>, Ron Chapman
<ronchapman@earthlink.net> wrote:

> That's funny.  I have never had the slightest desire to purchase
> thousands of DVDs and/or a 120" TV viewing system with suitable
> matching sound system.

Are you bragging or complaining? I'm not quite sure what your point is
here. Are you saying that your lack of interest should apply to
everyone? Do you download movies illegally, instead?

> You've never seen an industry treat its own customer like potential
> criminals?  You've never been in the DTP industry, then, where Quark
> treats its paid customers as if they were ACTUAL criminals.  Quark has
> even come out and said as much, publicly.

No, I said that I have never seen an industry do it like the
entertainment industry does. I stand by that statement. Hollywood and
the RIAA have come out many times and accused patrons of being
criminals. There have been notable actions such as the Betamax case,
issues surrounding taping off the air, and the current MP3 debate, to
name just a few. That's not to mention the flap over the DVD
encryption as it pertains to non-approved players. In sum, the
entertainment industry's attacks on its customers makes any action by
Quark pale in comparison.

> John, you need to get out more -- or else stop making blanket
> statements like that.  Realize that the world is a bit bigger than you
> know.

I get out plenty and my comparison was not a blanket statement. It was a 
valid comparison, which you failed to refute. Being in the entertainment 
industry myself, I think I know how big its world is.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 03:17:57 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: New HP Digital Media Receiver Extends Digital Music and Photos


     New HP Digital Media Receiver Extends Digital Music and Photos to
     Consumers' TV and Stereo Systems

PALO ALTO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 9, 2003--For people looking
for a way to better enjoy the digital music and photos stored on their
PCs, HP (NYSE:HPQ) today announced a breakthrough solution: the HP
Digital Media Receiver 5000 series.

    Using a standard remote control, the receiver enables consumers to
browse through their favorite music and photos and choose what they
want to view or listen to without having to access their PC using a
typical mouse and keyboard.

    Sporting a compact, sleek design that fits in any home
environment, the easily set up and easy-to-use HP Digital Media
Receiver provides access to digital content from a PC on a user's
wired Ethernet(1) or wireless 802.11b home network(1). With the
receiver, consumers can play digital music and view photos typically
stored and accessed on their PC onto their TV and stereo systems,
creating a new and entertaining way to interact with and enjoy their
digital content.


     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30799468

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

Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 03:21:34 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Nokia Color and Java TDMA Handsets


    Nokia Unveils World's First TDMA Handsets With Full-Color Displays
- New Nokia 3560 and 3520 Phones Bring Color Displays and Java Technology To
                           TDMA Customers -

    LAS VEGAS, Jan. 9 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Nokia (NYSE:NOK) today
announced the world's first TDMA handsets with full-color displays,
continuing a tradition of Nokia firsts in the TDMA market, including
the world's first dual mode IS-136 TDMA/AMPS handset, the Nokia 2160
phone, and the world's first GAIT compliant TDMA/GSM/AMPS phone, the
Nokia 6340 handset.  With features such as Java capability, custom
color wallpapers, MIDI ring tunes and two-way text messaging with
e-mail support, the color-screen Nokia 3560 and 3520 phones allow TDMA
operators to offer many of today's most-wanted features on their
existing networks.  

Shipments are expected to begin during the second
quarter of 2003.  With support for MIDP 1.0 Java technology, the
dual-mode Nokia 3520 phone (TDMA 800MHz/AMPS) and the tri-mode Nokia
3560 phone (TDMA 800MHz/1900MHz/AMPS) allow users to customize their
phones by downloading new applications, such as games or productivity
applications, to their phones using the built-in WAP 2.0 mobile
Internet browser.  Nokia 3520 and 3560 phone owners can also use the
mobile Internet browser to further customize their handsets by
downloading new multi-channel MIDI polyphonic ring tunes to
personalize their call alerts and SMS notification sounds.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30806446


     Nokia Imaging Phone Selected as Innovations 2003 Winner at
     International CES
     - Jan 9, 2003 11:00 AM (PR Newswire)
     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30806449

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

Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 08:47:48 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Sony Vs. Microsoft / The Fight For Interactive Television


Victoria Murphy

NEW YORK - Whatever the programming they deliver, the entertainment
devices of the future -- souped-up set-top boxes, interactive
televisions, PCs that talk to TVs and vice versa -- will all have two
elements: software and hardware.

Microsoft is the software giant, but has had little success selling
hardware. Sony is the leading TV manufacturer and one of the top five
makers of VCRs, but has traditionally relied on others for the
software that fills its boxes. Now each is trying to elbow the other
out of the race to persuade consumers to pay more to set up custom
programming, download movies or store family photos. Shouldn't they
just agree to work together?

 ...

http://www.forbes.com/2003/01/10/cz_vm_0110tv.html

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

Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 03:00:41 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: California Disclosure Law Has National Reach


By Kevin Poulsen, SecurityFocus Jan 6 2003 4:38PM

A new California law requiring companies to notify their customers of 
computer security breaches applies to any online business that counts 
Californians as customers, even if the company isn't based in the 
Golden State.

So warned Scott Pink, deputy chair of the American Bar Association's 
Cybersecurity Task Force, in a conference call Monday organized by an 
industry trade group and attended by approximately 50 representatives 
of technology companies and law firms concerned about the scope of 
the new law, which will take effect on July 1st of this year.

 ...

http://online.securityfocus.com/news/1984


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Kevin Poulsen has written articles for
TELECOM Digest in the past.   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 19:04:31 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: FCC's Powell Calls TiVo 'God's Machine'


The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission is a new 
convert - to the personal digital video recorder faithful.

"My favorite product that I got for Christmas is TiVo," FCC chairman 
Michael Powell said during a question and answer session at the 
International Consumer Electronics Show. "TiVo is God's machine."

If Powell's enthusiasm for digital recordings of TV broadcasts are 
reflected in FCC rulings, the entertainment industry could find it 
difficult to push in Washington its agenda for technical restrictions 
on making and sharing such recordings.

Powell said he intended to use the TiVo machine to record TV shows to 
play on other television sets in his home, and even suggested that he 
might share recordings with his sister if she were to miss a favorite 
show.

 ...

http://news.lycos.com/news/story.asp?section=Technology&storyId=621318

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

Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 23:44:52 -0800
From: Doug Faunt  <n6tqs@arrl.net>
Subject: I was Here
Organization: at home, in Oakland, CA, USA


Hi Pat,

I used to read the Telecom-Digest way back when.

Has the subject of calling Tokelau, country code 690, come up here
recently?

73, doug

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No Doug, it has not. Maybe we should
take this as a suggestion you want to begin a discussion on same. I
do know there were a couple of Pacific Ocean territories of the USA
(Guam and another one come to mind) whose 'country codes' were con-
verted in place, using the same numbers as their new 'area codes'. 
Was Tokelau one of these?    PAT]

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

From: Geoffrey Welsh <geoffrey_welsh@bigfoot.com>
Subject: Re: Bells Could Win Now, Lose Later
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 11:06:53 -0500


Eric Friedebach <friedebach@yahoo.com> wrote on Monday, January 06,
2003 3:37 PM:

> Mark Lewis, 01.06.03, Forbes.com
> [...]
> Two decades have passed since a federal judge ordered an end to the
> old AT&T monopoly, yet its four surviving Hydra heads -- better
> known as the Baby Bells -- continue to dominate local phone service.

As I recall, the breakup wasn't specifically designed to break the 'baby
Bell' ILECs' dominance of local phone service, but rather to separate the
regulated monopoly operations (the ILECs) from the operation that wanted to
compete in unregulated markets (specifically, computers.)

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

From: Chuk Gleason <kb4mdz@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Anti-Telemarketing 
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 17:50:51 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


I already posted this to a completely separate forum, but couldn't
resist it here too:

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

Here's another one to try; tho it takes some preparation and
dedication beforehand; but I've got that part sewn up:

Speak Ubby-Dubby to the telemarketers!

I first became aware of this 'language' watching the kid's TV show
"ZOOM" back in the 70's; In Ubby Dubby, each vowel is preceded by
"ubb":

Hubbere ubbis subbome Ubbubbubby Dubbubbubby. 

So 'hello' becomes 'hubellubo' ; Uband nubow thubis; 
   
Hubappuby Bubirthdubay tubo yubou,
Hubappuby Bubirthdubay tubo yubou,
Hubappuby Bubirthdubay dubear Frubiend,
Hubappuby Bubirthdubay tubo yubou!

It's easy enough to start to learn to translate the simple words you
hear, like "Hub-i" and "Hub-ow", but anything longer than 2 syllables
to begin with becomes hopelessly complicated for the mind to work on
with any speed.

Fortunately, my teenage daughter has managed to become fluent enough
in ubby-dubby; next time we get a telemarketer calling in the evening,
we're gonna put her on as the 'lady of the house'.  She can put us on
the floor in short order when she starts doing it; It should reduce
the most sensitive telemarketers (oxymoron?) to tears; it'll probably
bring out the beast in the strong ones!

"Ubb-oh!! Thubbanks fubbor cubballubbing!! Ubb-I've bubbeen
wubbantubbing yubbour prubbodubbect/subbervubbice fubbor subbome
tubbime, nubbow!!"

So, find a teenager who loves a challenge and has a bit of mean
streak, and let 'em go to town!

Here's a translator, to help you get along:
http://pbskids.org/cgi-registry/zoom/ubbidubbi.cgi

Chuk Gleason
Cary, NC

1/10/03 8:20:35 AM, PrivateWirelessForum@yahoogroups.com wrote:

>      1. RE: Tired of telemarketers? 
> Message: 1
>   Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 09:24:59 -0500
>   From: Laura Smith <LSmith@ita-relay.com>
> Subject: RE: Tired of telemarketers? Read this....and "express" your self

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So this 'language' seems to have many
of the same 'rules' as Pig Latin, doesn't it?  Let us know if you have
any practical experience in using it in calls.    PAT]

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

From: Paul Erickson <paule@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Nationwide Paging Service
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:17:34 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


SkyTel has exactly what you want.  We've used them for the past few
years, no troubles.  You can also page via a web interface.

 www.skytel.com


Paul

John Beaman <JBeaman@good-sam.com> wrote in message
news:telecom22.224.3@telecom-digest.org:

> Pat,

>   I am in need of a quality paging service that is able to provide:

> - National coverage;
> - A toll-free number to call to page (preferably no PIN numbers);
> - One-way paging to a numerical pager (no frills).

> Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

> John Beaman
> Telecom Specialist
> Voice Telecommunications Services Department.
> Good Samaritan National Campus
> 605-362-3331

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

From: brundlefly76@hotmail.com (Seth Brundle)
Subject: Re: TiVo Unveils New DVR Design That Supports HDTV
Date: 10 Jan 2003 15:08:45 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Good lord we will need some honkin big hard drives.

Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote in message
news:<telecom22.226.7@telecom-digest.org>:

> New Platform Expands TiVo Licensing Portfolio into Fast Growing, 
> High Demand
>                                  HDTV Format

>     CONSUMER ELECTRONICS SHOW, LAS VEGAS, Jan. 9
> /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo (NASDAQ:TIVO), the creator of and
> leader in television services for digital video recorders (DVR), today
> announced it has developed the first DVR platform that supports
> recording in High Definition Television formats. The reference design
> will be licensed to leading CE manufacturers who are expected to offer
> the new DVR to consumers by the end of the year. In a related
> announcement, today DIRECTV and TiVo announced they would develop a
> new DIRECTV(R) HDTV Digital Video Recorder with TiVo(R).

>     The new design offers viewers the flexibility of a DVR that is
> equipped to record today's analog broadcasts along with the capability
> for recording the rapidly expanding programming offerings in HDTV. The
> company said the HDTV format DVR is one of the new products most
> frequently requested by technology licensing partners as well as TiVo
> subscribers.

> http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?symbols=NASDAQ:TIVO&story=30813165

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

From: shreddedw@hotmail.com (Bill B)
Subject: Connecting to a T1 Demarc: Need Help
Date: 10 Jan 2003 21:15:21 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Verizon just installed a Quest T1 circuit at my house and I now need
to extend the line into the house.  I have never done this with a T1
line before and could use some help.

At the outside demarc, there are 4 sets of 4 terminal posts.  Each set
has a Yellow, Black, Red & Green wire from a jumper cable connected to
it.  The jumper cables are plugged into what looks like a RJ45 jack in
the demarc.  The verizon label says that Circuit 1 is the line, and no
other circuits are labeled.

I need to know how to connect to these terminal posts and whith what
wires.  I am planning to use standard CAT5 UTP to extend the circuit. 
I know that I will need to wire up pins 1 & 2 for one pair and 4& 5
for another at the plug, but I am not exactly sure how the CAT5 color
codes should line up with the Yellow, Black, Red, & Green at the
posts.

Thanks for any help.


-BB

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #227
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jan 12 01:33:32 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0C6XW925296;
	Sun, 12 Jan 2003 01:33:32 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 01:33:32 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301120633.h0C6XW925296@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #228

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 11 Jan 2003 01:32:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 228

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Bells Could Win Now, Lose Later (John Higdon)
    Re: Nationwide Paging Service (Roy)
    Re: Connecting to a T1 Demarc: Need Help (Dave Phelps)
    Re: Connecting to a T1 Demarc: Need Help (Kelly Daniels)
    Re: Connecting to a T1 Demarc: Need Help (Greg T. Knopf)
    Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy? (Ron Chapman)
    Re: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic (Robert Bonomi)
    Now: Tokelau, Country Code 690 was Re: I was Here (Doug Faunt)
    News on TiVo, "God's Machine" (Monty Solomon)
    Microsoft Resolves Class-Action Suit (Monty Solomon)
    TiVo Wants to Join the Home Network (Monty Solomon)
    When the Athlete's Heart Falters a Monitor Dials for Help (Monty Solomon)
    So Near Yet So Far: A Cellphone Roamer in Latin Lands (Monty Solomon)
    Gadget Takes iTunes to the Living Room (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: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Bells Could Win Now, Lose Later
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 01:26:06 -0800


In article <telecom22.227.8@telecom-digest.org>, Geoffrey Welsh
<geoffrey_welsh@bigfoot.com> wrote:

> Eric Friedebach <friedebach@yahoo.com> wrote on Monday, January 06,
> 2003 3:37 PM:

>> Mark Lewis, 01.06.03, Forbes.com
>> [...]
>> Two decades have passed since a federal judge ordered an end to the
>> old AT&T monopoly, yet its four surviving Hydra heads -- better
>> known as the Baby Bells -- continue to dominate local phone service.

> As I recall, the breakup wasn't specifically designed to break the 'baby
> Bell' ILECs' dominance of local phone service, but rather to separate the
> regulated monopoly operations (the ILECs) from the operation that wanted to
> compete in unregulated markets (specifically, computers.)

Yes, that lasted about six months ... just like all the other failed
ventures the ILECs tried to pull off after 1984. Let's see: we had
"phone stores" and "computer stores" and "cellular stores" and a
number of other schemes that fell flat on their faces.

Somewhere along the line, well after divestiture, someone decided that
"local phone service" was not really a natural monopoly after all and
the CLECs were born. The ILECs have been fighting that tooth and nail,
both before and after the Communications Act of 1996, which contained
rules to govern the new competition. The ILECs have declared that they
cannot possibly live with those rules, even though they helped write
them.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: Roy <garlic@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Nationwide Paging Service
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 12:01:09 -0800
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


http://www.arch.com

I have had them for years.

John Beaman wrote:

> Pat,

>   I am in need of a quality paging service that is able to provide:

> - National coverage;
> - A toll-free number to call to page (preferably no PIN numbers);
> - One-way paging to a numerical pager (no frills).

> Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

> John Beaman
> Telecom Specialist
> Voice Telecommunications Services Department.
> Good Samaritan National Campus
> 605-362-3331

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

From: Dave Phelps <tippenring@deadspam.com>
Subject: Re: Connecting to a T1 Demarc: Need Help
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:08:49 -0600


In article <telecom22.227.12@telecom-digest.org>,
shreddedw@hotmail.com says:

> Verizon just installed a Quest T1 circuit at my house and I now need
> to extend the line into the house.  I have never done this with a T1
> line before and could use some help.

> At the outside demarc, there are 4 sets of 4 terminal posts.  Each set
> has a Yellow, Black, Red & Green wire from a jumper cable connected to
> it.  The jumper cables are plugged into what looks like a RJ45 jack in
> the demarc.  The verizon label says that Circuit 1 is the line, and no
> other circuits are labeled.

> I need to know how to connect to these terminal posts and whith what
> wires.  I am planning to use standard CAT5 UTP to extend the circuit. 
> I know that I will need to wire up pins 1 & 2 for one pair and 4& 5
> for another at the plug, but I am not exactly sure how the CAT5 color
> codes should line up with the Yellow, Black, Red, & Green at the
> posts.

> Thanks for any help.

If you have a T1, you should have a smartjack placed somewhere beyond
the demarc. The smartjack is usually placed inside the building, but
can be outside. The smartjack will have a few lights, to indicate
circuit status, and an RJ45 jack for you to connect to.


Dave Phelps
Phone Masters Ltd.
deadspam=tippenring

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

From: Kelly Daniels <telco@teleport.com>
Reply-To: telco@teleport.com
Organization: Kelly Daniels
Subject: Re: Connecting to a T1 Demarc: Need Help
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 03:51:07 GMT


Bill B wrote:

> Verizon just installed a Quest T1 circuit at my house and I now need
> to extend the line into the house.  I have never done this with a T1
> line before and could use some help.

> At the outside demarc, there are 4 sets of 4 terminal posts.  Each set
> has a Yellow, Black, Red & Green wire from a jumper cable connected to
> it.  The jumper cables are plugged into what looks like a RJ45 jack in
> the demarc.  The verizon label says that Circuit 1 is the line, and no
> other circuits are labeled.

> I need to know how to connect to these terminal posts and whith what
> wires.  I am planning to use standard CAT5 UTP to extend the circuit. 
> I know that I will need to wire up pins 1 & 2 for one pair and 4& 5
> for another at the plug, but I am not exactly sure how the CAT5 color
> codes should line up with the Yellow, Black, Red, & Green at the
> posts.

> Thanks for any help.

Hello Bill,

The The last part of your question is the easiest, I am not familiar
with the terminal block arrangment that Verizon provided.

The Cat 5 wire can be wires White/Blue to Green.  The Blue/White to Red, 
the White/orange to the black, the orange white to the yellow.  

Will you be terminating to terminal posts or modular plug?  There is a
difference between DS-1 as opposed to DSX and T-1.  I am more familiar
with DSX and T-1.  I will have to go look-up my cheat sheet
references.

Kelly

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

From: Greg T. Knopf <gtknopf@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Connecting to a T1 Demarc: Need Help
Date: 11 Jan 2003 22:31:38 GMT
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Reply-To: gtknopf@concentric.net


Bill,

I believe that you will want to wire your extended demarc this way to
provide yourself with what I would call a 568B or rj48C jack near your
equipment:


telco incoming ---->---->---->----> jack at equipment


black ----- white/orange ----- T2 ----- 1
                                         |- customer receive
yellow ---- orange/white ----- R2 ----- 2

            white/green --------------- 3

red ------- blue/white ------- R1 ----- 4
                                         |- customer transmit
green ----- white/blue ------- T1 ----- 5

            green/white --------------- 6

            white/brown --------------- 7

            brown/white --------------- 8


At this jack you would use a straight through cable to
you equipment.


Bill B wrote:

> Verizon just installed a Quest T1 circuit at my house and I now need
> to extend the line into the house.  I have never done this with a T1
> line before and could use some help.

> At the outside demarc, there are 4 sets of 4 terminal posts.  Each set
> has a Yellow, Black, Red & Green wire from a jumper cable connected to
> it.  The jumper cables are plugged into what looks like a RJ45 jack in
> the demarc.  The verizon label says that Circuit 1 is the line, and no
> other circuits are labeled.

> I need to know how to connect to these terminal posts and whith what
> wires.  I am planning to use standard CAT5 UTP to extend the circuit. 
> I know that I will need to wire up pins 1 & 2 for one pair and 4& 5
> for another at the plug, but I am not exactly sure how the CAT5 color
> codes should line up with the Yellow, Black, Red, & Green at the
> posts.

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

Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 16:08:43 -0500
From: Ron Chapman <ronchapman@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy?


In article <telecom22.227.1@telecom-digest.org>, John Higdon
<no-spam@amadeus.kome.com> wrote:

>> That's funny.  I have never had the slightest desire to purchase
>> thousands of DVDs and/or a 120" TV viewing system with suitable
>> matching sound system.

> Are you bragging or complaining? I'm not quite sure what your point is
> here.

It was simply that "it takes all kinds".  The original exchange to which I
referred to:

In article <telecom22.224.6@telecom-digest.org>, John Higdon
<no-spam@amadeus.kome.com> wrote:

> In article <telecom22.223.1@telecom-digest.org>, Paul
> Wallich <pw@panix.com> wrote:

>> Free (marginal cost) plus an illicit thrill beats $10 for
>> the ticket, $5 for the soda and snacks and the knowledge
>> that you're lining the pockets of people you believe to be
>> despicable.

> I have a hard time seeing that.

We know that you have a hard time seeing things outside your world,
John.  And your world involves a 120" screen and suitably matching
sound system.

I, on the other hand, can't see buying anything like that.  My point
was, it takes all kinds.  You can't see people downloading crap and
viewing it on a computer screen or whatever, but that doesn't mean
it's not happening and that people aren't happy with it.  I can't see
putting money out for a 120" screen and suitably matching sound
system, but that doesn't mean it's not happening and that people
aren't happy with it.

>> You've never seen an industry treat its own customer like potential
>> criminals?  You've never been in the DTP industry, then, where Quark
>> treats its paid customers as if they were ACTUAL criminals.  Quark has
>> even come out and said as much, publicly.

> No, I said that I have never seen an industry do it like the
> entertainment industry does. I stand by that statement.

John, you truly need to understand that there's a HUGE world outside
yours.  If you stand by that statement, and ignore someone else in
another profession coming in and giving you the facts, then I can't
help you.

On the other hand, I'm sure you do stand by your statement that you've
never seen any other industry do it like the entertainment industry.
I've said it before, John, and I'll say it again: you need to get out
a little and experience the rest of the world.  It's a LARGE place out
there, larger than you can imagine -- and stranger, too.  Trust me:
Quark is worse than the entertainment industry with regard to treating
its customers like criminals, and yet it owns the desktop publishing
industry.

Now, unless you can counter either of those facts with actual facts of
your own regarding Quark and the DTP industry.

>> John, you need to get out more -- or else stop making blanket
>> statements like that.  Realize that the world is a bit bigger than you
>> know.

> I get out plenty and my comparison was not a blanket statement. It was a
> valid comparison, which you failed to refute.

I didn't refute anything because there's nothing to refute.  I don't
deny that the entertainment industry behaves like you say.  But you
contend that it's the worst offender in behaving like that -- and I
*do* refute that.  But you refuse to listen.

Of course, John, you have shown that you have a very narrow mind.  And
once it's made up, nothing will make you change it -- not even the
facts.

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

Subject: Re: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic
Organization: Not Much
From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi)
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 01:59:08 GMT


In article <telecom22.224.12@telecom-digest.org>, John R. Levine
<johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

>> Same as it's been since 1991.  Unsolicited faxed ads are completely
>> illegal, and you can sue the sender for $500 per fax.

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does that also apply where you have no
>> actual fax machine, but contract with a service (like  e-fax) ...

> The FCC said quite a while ago that a PC with a fax modem is a fax
> machine for the purpose of the TCPA,

Minor correction -- the FCC ruling was that a PC with a fax modem is
considered a fax machine, for purposes of 47 USC 227, and the
corresponding CFRs, when, and *ONLY*WHEN* it is being used for
faxsimile communications.  Specifically, it is -not- a "fax machine"
when it is being used for other purposes, including "data"
communications, e.g. connecting to your ISP for e-mail..


> and nobody hates junk faxes as much as someone with a virtual fax
> farm with a range of DID numbers attached to fax modems to give all
> the users their own numbers, which a junker sequences through
> dumping junk into each number. 

> There's no case law I know about fax-to-email systems.  I don't know
> whether eFax or the subscriber would have standing to sue.

It would be eFax, if anybody.  They are the owner of the telephone
line, and the equipment.

There *IS* another problem too, because to qualify as a fax machine
under the statute, the equipment must have the capability to
"transcribe text or images ... onto paper."  Absent a 'print'
capability, it's not a "legal" fax machine.

A close reading of the statute seems, to me, to imply that the "print"
capability needs to be 'real-time', *not* after-the-fact.  This from
"transcribe ... from an electronic signal received over a phone line
onto paper". Arguably_, if you can *only* print from a file stored on
disk, the statutory requirement is not satisfied.

> eFax certainly doesn't like junk faxes, and they have a web page
> where you can report the junk fax, attest that it's indeed junk from
> someone you don't know, but I haven't heard about any court cases
> yet.

>> Anyway, I suppose the sender would claim (as they do with much
>> email spam) that what they did was not 'unsolicited'; that you had
>> signed up at one time or another, in some place or another, to get
>> their dream vacation faxes, etc.  PAT]

> Of course.  But they'd better have documentation that will persuade a
> judge that they're not blowing smoke.  Particularly after they've
> heard a few cases, judges get pretty sceptical about anything that
> junk faxers say.

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

From: Doug Faunt N6TQS <n6tqs@arrl.net>
Subject: Now: Tokelau, Country Code 690 was Re: I was Here
Date: 11 Jan 2003 17:44:54 -0500
Organization: at home, in Oakland, California


Doug Faunt  <n6tqs@arrl.net> writes:

> Has the subject of calling Tokelau, country code 690, come up here
> recently?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No Doug, it has not. Maybe we should
> take this as a suggestion you want to begin a discussion on same. I
> do know there were a couple of Pacific Ocean territories of the USA
> (Guam and another one come to mind) whose 'country codes' were con-
> verted in place, using the same numbers as their new 'area codes'. 
> Was Tokelau one of these?    PAT]

Tokelau has only been connected for a few years, through satellite
systems that New Zealand funded.  It's a dependency of New Zealand.

The item of interest here is that ATT long distance will not allow one
to dial Tokelau, and, according to the information operator, claims it
doesn't exist.  It does exist, and according to the manager of the
telephone system there, the US is the only place that doesn't allow
direct calls to Tokelau.

After complaints to the FCC, and the California PUC, I find that,
while ATT doesn't admit the existence of the country, MCI does.  The
representative from ATT said that "MCI owns the lines" and ATT has no
access to them.  This last sounds bogus to me, and I am hoping that
people have more information about the reality.


73, doug
who is not, after all, going to Tokelau this spring.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Had ATT said in effect 'the cables and
lines to that point are controlled by New Zealand (or some other national
telecom authority) and USA phones are only permitted to use it for X
hours on X days of the week' I could sort of find that an acceptable 
story. After all, that's how it was for many, many years when USA phones
attempted to call certain point in northern and central Africa. For
hisotrical reasons, many of those countries (in Africa) had been French
possessions; their telecom cables were controlled by the French telecom
department; cables were limited and in short supply; and all incoming/
outgoing calls to those points were handled by the overseas operators
in Paris. It was very common -- even until in the 1960-70's -- to attempt 
to make a call to -- let's say, Stanleyville in Congo, or some point
in the Sahara Desert area and have the Overseas operator in Paris tell
White Plains, NY (your overseas operator) something like, 'I can book
your call for next Tuesday at 9 AM, will that be okay?'. And you, the
end user either cooled your heels until next Tuesday at 9 AM, or you
could say forget it and disconnect. And if you chose to accept the
'booking' then when your phone rang next Tuesday at 2 AM USA time, 
better take the call; the French-speaking operator would not call back
to reach you over and over again. It did 'improve' a little over the
years; instead of White Plains, NY ringing over there and letting it
ring fifty or a hundred times *before* gay Paree would answer and 
put your call through, AT&T switched the IOC (international operating
center to Pittsburgh, PA) and the French people switched to an 
automated operator who would answer like this:

(in a very crisp British English male-speaking voice), "You have reached
Tel-eee-com. All international positions are engaged right now. Please
hold, your call will receive response as soon as possible." That three
or four second recorded message was followed by ten seconds or so of
bouncy music, then the entire thing would repeat. Three or four seconds
of the message again, the music again, etc. Three or four of those
recitations every minute; for five, ten or even fifteen minutes. Over 
and over. Eventually, the recording would stop and a voice cut in on
the line saying 'oui?'  and your call proceeded. When the operator in
France discovered (usually early on) that the racially diverse operator
in Pittsburgh very likely could not speak French, then she would
change to English. If you had your booking ticket number, then the
call could proceed. If not, then move to the back of the line and we
will try you again next week. French Telecom did not have a lot of
love lost for AT&T, I don't think, and considering how short they were
on lines to Africa, anyone could use them except AT&T customers (which
in those days meant *any* USA caller.)

A friend of mine (a bit older) was in Cuba back in the 1950s prior to
the embargo. *He* tried to call Chicago one day when calls had to
go through the AT&T overseas operator in Miami. He asked for the
Chicago number; Havana attempted to reach Miami AT&T, it rang for 
about ten minutes, finally she told him "I am sorry sir, the United
States is not answering the telephone today ... (!)" 

*Be careful* about *anything* an AT&T representative tells you regards
international calls. Like yourself, I think 'MCI owns the lines' sounds
like a pretty lame excuse. We know all about AT&T and lame excuses, or
downright lies. Try being in an inner city neighborhood in Chicago for
example, and use a payphone and a AT&T calling card to call to Israel
or Nigera. Depending on the operator you get handling the call, you 
will be told any number of excuses, ranging from 'your calling card
seems not to work' to 'Israel does not accept AT&T calling cards.'
(and that, mind you, despite the fact that you are placing a PAID
call to that country.) They'll tell you everything except the truth:
our corporate security policies do not permit calling card calls from
payphones in X neighborhood to Y country. Usually 'X' is a black or
otherwise minority/third-world inner city neigborhood and 'Y' is a 
country where English is not the predominant language. In other words,
anywhere AT&T percieves they will have a problem collecting the bill,
either from you or the recipient. 

Go back to the FCC complaint department and tell then you are not
satisfied with that answer that AT&T bluffed them with.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 16:24:53 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: News on TiVo, "God's Machine"


Posted by jamie on Saturday January 11, @10:30AM
 from the waiting-for-tivot dept.

Brace for incoming TiVo news! rtphokie pointed out that FCC chair
Michael Powell got a TiVo for Christmas and calls it "God's machine."
Powell also said he wanted to share TV shows with his sister -- but he
might have to violate the DMCA to do it: TiVo wants to join the home
network (thanks Insomniac), but parr pointed us to TiVo's Thursday
press release in which they assure us that "every TiVo Series2 DVR
contains a unique public/private key pair," so only "designated" units
within your home can share programs, you "cannot send content outside
the home," and transfers over your home network will be encrypted (no
sniffing!). Meanwhile, on the WB (part of AOL-TW), everything old is
new again, as producers and advertisers work to create a live variety
show with built-in commercials (free reg. req.) (thanks
eternal_software). And if you missed our earlier TiVoesque stories,
check 'em out: TiVo-radio wanted, HDTV TiVo, and TiVo
Rendezvous. Whew!

http://slashdot.org/articles/03/01/11/1513223.shtml?tid=129

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

Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 16:27:32 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Microsoft Resolves Class-Action Suit


By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

Update: Microsoft said late Friday that it has settled a California 
class-action lawsuit for up to $1.1 billion, a move that would end 
the largest suit of the kind against the giant software company.

The settlement, which arose from claims that Microsoft unlawfully 
wielded its Windows monopoly to overcharge consumers for the 
operating system, allows individuals and businesses in California who 
bought Microsoft products during a five-year period to apply for 
vouchers with values of $5 to $29. The vouchers can be used to buy 
most hardware or software products from any manufacturer.

Although the maximum value of the settlement is $1.1 billion, 
Microsoft could end up paying as little as $367 million in cash to 
California public schools. If all vouchers are claimed, Microsoft 
pays the maximum.

The payout depends on how many customers make claims.

http://news.com.com/2100-1001-980269.html

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

Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 16:46:16 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: TiVo Wants to Join the Home Network


By Richard Shim

LAS VEGAS, Jan. 9 - TiVo couldn't beat the PC, so it's joining it.
Abandoning its quest to be the center of home networks, TiVo wants
recorders using its service to simply be a part of the network. The
digital video recording service company announced Thursday at the
Consumer Electronics Show here new software that essentially allows
recorders to access and share content on home networks.

 ...

http://www.msnbc.com/news/857364.asp

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

Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 16:51:25 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: When the Athlete's Heart Falters, a Monitor Dials for Help


By ANNE EISENBERG

THE American Heart Association advises people to dial 911 at the 
first warning signs of a heart attack. "The faster you get help," one 
of its ads says, "the better your chances of survival and complete 
recovery."

Soon, machines may be able to do some of this emergency dialing on 
their own. Manufacturers are working on wearable heart monitors 
linked to cellphones that can sound an alert automatically, 
contacting a doctor, family member or Web site when trouble beckons.

Some of the monitoring devices keep track of heart rate, so in the 
future, for instance, a cellphone tucked into a runner's pocket could 
call a doctor if the runner's heart rate exceeded a preset limit. 
Another system collects more extensive electrocardiogram data and 
sends the information by cellphone to a Web site or pager.

Monitoring systems like these might be useful one day not only for 
emergency alerts, but also for the remote collection of more benign 
information: statistics on the performance of members of a cycling 
team, for example, or the heart rates of dozens of people enrolled in 
clinical trials.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/09/technology/circuits/09next.html

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

Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 16:55:15 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: So Near Yet So Far: A Cellphone Roamer in Latin Lands


By SIMON ROMERO

A BREEZE of dry tropical heat greeted me after my plane touched down 
in Bras��lia, a futuristic capital of wide avenues and sprawling 
concrete monuments. Then my American cellphone rang. It was my editor 
calling from New York with a few questions.

I later marveled at how easily I was reached by someone dialing a New 
York phone number. The crystal-clear quality of the service I used 
was delightfully deceptive, Bras��lia's remoteness notwithstanding.

If only international roaming was always so easy in the developing 
world. Unfortunately, judging from my own recent experience, roaming 
has a way to go before carriers in the United States and Europe can 
confidently market worldwide roaming capabilities to their customers.

Most large American wireless companies offer some sort of roaming 
abroad, but only one, T-Mobile (formerly VoiceStream), a unit of 
Deutsche Telekom, has aggressively started to advertise such a 
service. But the international roaming offered by carriers in Europe 
and much of Asia is more advanced because they adhere to a single 
wireless standard, the global system for mobile communications, or 
GSM.

The wireless industry in the United States developed differently, 
with a variety of standards allowed to compete: code division 
multiple access, or CDMA; time division multiple access, or TDMA; 
Nextel's iDEN and, increasingly, GSM.

Latin America's wireless industry has been influenced by American 
carriers that invested heavily in the region, resulting in a similar 
mixture of standards. So when I recently traveled to Mexico and 
Brazil I took two phones capable of roaming in both countries, a TDMA 
phone from Cingular and an iDEN phone from Nextel.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/09/technology/circuits/09roam.html

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

Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 17:01:59 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Gadget Takes iTunes to the Living Room


By Ian Fried
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

SAN FRANCISCO--Many Macintosh fans have been hoping Apple Computer
would introduce a device that would allow music stored on a Mac in the
den to be played on a home stereo in the living room.

Such a device did debut at this week's Macworld Expo, but it didn't
come from Apple. One had to walk well past the massive Apple booth,
past even the massage chairs and a memory reseller, to find the new
gadget, which is dubbed the HomePod wireless stereo.

 ...

The device, which resembles a wireless base station with a couple of 
added buttons and a small LCD (liquid-crystal display) screen, uses a 
built-in wireless networking technology called Wi-Fi to connect to a 
wireless-equipped Macintosh or PC. A small Java program on the 
computer scours the PC or Mac for music and sends that information to 
the HomePod. The device can even receive playlists created with 
iTunes digital music software. The HomePod downloads songs one at a 
time and plays them either through a stereo or by connecting directly 
to speakers. The back of the HomePod has a FireWire port, allowing it 
to connect directly to a hard drive, and, perhaps at some point, to 
Apple's iPod digital music player.

http://news.com.com/2100-1040-979988.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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #228
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jan 12 15:56:22 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0CKuMs02417;
	Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:56:22 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:56:22 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301122056.h0CKuMs02417@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #229

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:56:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 229

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Officials Say Troops Risk Identity Theft After Burglary (Monty Solomon)
    Expert: Alleged Wi-Fi Risks Are Nonsense (Monty Solomon)
    MPEG-4 Backers Protest Microsoft License (Monty Solomon)
    For Verizon, no Baby Steps (Monty Solomon)
    Where Hi-Fi Meets Wi-Fi: A Wireless Music System (Monty Solomon)
    Need Contact (Daniel Baker)
    Start-up Marries Blogs and Camera Phones (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy? (John Higdon)
    Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911 (Danny Burstein)
    Re: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic (jbl)
    Controls for Smart Antennas? (TI)
    Re: Now: Tokelau, Country Code 690 (Richard D G Cox)
    Re: Connecting to a T1 Demarc: Need Help (Al Dykes)
    Illinois Death Row is Empty Today (Patrick Townson)

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: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:11:01 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Officials Say Troops Risk Identity Theft After Burglary


By ADAM CLYMER

WASHINGTON, Jan. 11 - Thousands of military personnel facing 
deployment for a possible war with Iraq are also confronting a threat 
on the home front -- the risk of identity theft after burglars stole 
computerized records from a health care company in Phoenix last month.

The names, addresses, telephone numbers, birth dates and Social
Security numbers of about 562,000 troops, dependents and retirees were
on laptops and computer hard drives stolen from a nondescript building
in an industrial park on Dec. 14, company officials said.  Some
medical claim records for people on active duty were also stolen from
the company, TriWest Healthcare Alliance.

Even without the medical records, the information stolen is enough for
criminals to use in creating false identities. TriWest, a Pentagon
contractor handling medical claims for military personnel and
dependents, warned the 562,000 customers in 16 Mountain and Western
states that their identities might be stolen. It also posted a
$100,000 reward.

TriWest advised the potential victims, of whom 183,000 are on active
duty, to ask for free credit reports and flag their credit records.
Within about 10 days, said David J. McIntyre Jr., the company's
president, customers will only have to notify TriWest that they want
this done, and TriWest will take care of the details.

Thus far, TriWest and the federal authorities say, none of those whose
records were stolen have had their identities stolen. But Betsy
Broder, an identity theft expert at the Federal Trade Commission,
warned that it often takes weeks or months for such thefts to become
apparent.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/politics/12PRIV.html

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 14:49:50 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Expert: Alleged Wi-Fi Risks Are Nonsense


By Mitch Wagner

A popular technology Weblogger says warnings about the supposed 
security risks of Wi-Fi networking are nonsense.

Law-enforcement officials and telecommunications and networking 
companies have issued several warnings about supposed security risks 
from 802.11b or Wi-Fi wireless networks.


http://www.internetweek.com/story/INW20030109S0001

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 14:52:02 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: MPEG-4 Backers Protest Microsoft License


By Stefanie Olsen
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

Proponents of MPEG-4 are decrying Microsoft's new licensing fees for
rival technology, saying that the pricing poses unfair competition and
threatens consumer choice.

In a first-ever move for Microsoft, it set pricing this week for
licensing of its audio and video compression technology, or codecs,
for use on non-Windows operating systems. The company says it will
charge 10 cents per decoder, 20 cents per encoder, and 25 cents for
both.

In comparison, MPEG LA -- a consortium of companies holding patents
attached to implementations of the MPEG-4 standard -- charges 25 cents
per encoder and decoder, or 50 cents for both -- a fee structure
finalized in November. MPEG-4 is an emerging standard for the delivery
of digital media on PCs, DVDs and consumer electronics.

By undercutting the price, critics say, Microsoft is threatening the
industry's natural tendency to migrate to open standards that allow
many companies to work together seamlessly to service mass media with
better choice. MPEG-2, for example, MPEG-4's predecessor, is the
standard currently used by most digital cable providers and DVD
manufacturers.


http://news.com.com/2100-1023-980007.html

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 01:14:37 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: For Verizon, no Baby Steps


Telecom giant nimbly rides convergence wave, towering above its Baby 
Bell Siblings

By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 1/12/2003

Back in the mid-1990s, as multiple revolutions began to sweep through
the telecommunications industry, not many people would have predicted
that the old-line Bell System heirs then known by such names as New
England Telephone and New Jersey Bell would by now emerge as the king
of the hill.

Today's Verizon Communications was supposed to be one of the doddering
dinosaurs flattened by emerging wireless and Internet carriers and a
wave of nimble start-ups spawned by the landmark 1996 federal
Telecommunications Act.

It turns out Verizon has managed to not only ride but dominate the
wave. Wall Street now values Verizon at $109.8 billion as of Friday's
stock market close, well more than the stripped down AT&T Corp.,
BellSouth, Sprint, Qwest, now-bankrupt MCI WorldCom, and a half-dozen
surviving landline competitors combined.

Along with the other Bells, Verizon's stock has jumped by nearly 50
percent from lows this summer, getting an extra bump last week from
President Bush's proposal to end taxes on stock dividends, which phone
companies generally offer.

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/012/business/For_Verizon_no_baby_steps+.shtml

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 14:53:22 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Where Hi-Fi Meets Wi-Fi: A Wireless Music System


By ROY FURCHGOTT

The big hurdle to wiring a home stereo system to play music in every
room is the wiring. But today, Yamaha will unveil a server that can
provide music wirelessly to as many as five locations at a distance of
150 feet.

Called MusicCast, the system is essentially a server with an
80-gigabyte hard drive and a built-in CD-R drive, which can load up to
1,000 CD's compressed as MP3's or 120 uncompressed CD's into an
onboard music library. The server can also play music from external
sources like a CD, tape or record player, or a computer connected to
the Internet.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/09/technology/circuits/09yama.html

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

Reply-To: Daniel Baker <dabc1@worldnet.att.net>
From: Daniel Baker <dabc1@mybluelight.com>
Subject: Need Contact
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 13:54:50 -0600


Do you know the e-mail addresses of the webmasters at
www.areacode-info.com ?  I have a website
(www.telephoneservicedirectory.com), which would be a great link
listing for their site.


Thanks,

Dan Baker

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:09:27 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Start-up Marries Blogs and Camera Phones


A Dublin-based start-up is to offer software to mobile operators that 
will enable mobile phone users to create and maintain Weblogs or 
"blogs" using only their phones.

NewBay Software, a privately funded company headed by former 
Baltimore Technologies executive Paddy Holahan, is aiming to 
capitalise on the explosive growth in weblogs over the past year. It 
is estimated that over 500,000 have been created over the past 18 
months and are now starting up at the rate of about 5,000 daily.

The content of Weblogs can range from personal diaries and opinion 
sites to amateur publishing on sports, politics, events and reviews. 
Weblogs are created using PCs and blogging software that is available 
both commercially and for free over the Internet.

NewBay Software is hoping to capitalise on the ubiquity of mobile 
phones and particularly the MMS capabilities of the latest generation 
of camera phones to market its FoneBlog software product. Using 
FoneBlog, network operators provide Web addresses for customers who 
can then update their personal Web sites by sending text and images 
from their phone. If the user's phone does not have MMS, a text only 
site can be created.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/64/28773.html

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Will Your TV Become a Spy?
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 22:43:49 -0800


In article <telecom22.228.6@telecom-digest.org>, Ron Chapman
<ronchapman@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Trust me:
> Quark is worse than the entertainment industry with regard to treating
> its customers like criminals, and yet it owns the desktop publishing
> industry.

It is a matter of scope. What percentage of the world's population deals 
with Quark? What percentage of the world's population deals with the 
entertainment industry?

> Of course, John, you have shown that you have a very narrow mind.  And
> once it's made up, nothing will make you change it -- not even the
> facts.

I don't believe we've met. You know me well enough to make that
sweeping statement? I'm sorry you have to resort to ad hominem to
emphasize your arguments. Tell you what: demonstrate to me that Quark
influences a comparable number of people as the entertainment and
media industry does, and I'll concede to your logic right readily. I
won't even ask what Quark does to its customers that is so horrible
(you haven't seen fit to volunteer that in the discussion). I'll take
your word that it is bad enough to qualify in the same league as the
Betamax, Tivo, Napster, and coutless other actions that affect
millions of people.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 03:57:59 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


The magazine acknowledges that cell phones are radios and there will
always be some intrinsic problems, but then points out the very real
concern that phones locked onto one system -- either through
programming or through technical limitations -- often won't kick over
to a good signal on an alternate carrier. Oh, and that in many cases
(depending on the phone and network) that's an FCC violation.

"In Steuben County [NY], we made 14 test calls on 12 different phones
with accounts from Sprint and Verizon. In Sullivan County, we made 7
test calls on 6 phones with accounts from AT&T and Cingular. Overall,
of the 18 phone-and-service combinations tested, 9 calls failed to
connect to 911.  In every instance, there was a strong signal from
another carrier the phones could have used. "

( long url... lines split for readability )

http://www.consumerreports.org/main/
detailv2.jsp?CONTENT%3C%3Ecnt_id=299615&FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=
162691&bmUID=1041969879516

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

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

From: jbl <jbl@spamblocked.com>
Subject: Re: Junk Fax - A Question and a Tactic
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 11:30:04 -0700
Organization: On the desert
Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com


In <telecom22.228.7@telecom-digest.org>, bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi)
wrote:

> In article <telecom22.224.12@telecom-digest.org>, John R. Levine
> <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

>> The FCC said quite a while ago that a PC with a fax modem is a fax
>> machine for the purpose of the TCPA,

> Minor correction -- the FCC ruling was that a PC with a fax modem is
> considered a fax machine, for purposes of 47 USC 227, and the
> corresponding CFRs, when, and *ONLY*WHEN* it is being used for
> faxsimile communications.  Specifically, it is -not- a "fax machine"
> when it is being used for other purposes, including "data"
> communications, e.g. connecting to your ISP for e-mail..

I will note a comment by an expert who testifies and files a lot of
briefs for plaintiffs in TCPA and related actions.  He says that
courts have held that under the law, e-fax, PDAs, fax-to-email,
etc. are fax machines.  Since I don't have permission to quote the
gentlemen out here in the wide world of Usenet, I'll simply say that
the fruits of his and of a number of other legal minds are available
via http://www.junkfaxes.org/ and the mailing list available therein.


JBL

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

From: anglomont@yahoo.com (TI)
Subject: Controls For Smart Antennas?
Date: 12 Jan 2003 10:34:09 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


What can you please tell about application of estimation and controls
with smart antennas (for CDMA); ie what other knowledge one must have?

Thanks,

MA

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 13:01:53 GMT
From: Richard D G Cox <Richard@example.com>
Subject: Re: Now: Tokelau, Country Code 690
Reply-To: nospam@numbering.com
Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited


At 22:44 UT on 11 Jan 2003  Doug Faunt N6TQS <n6tqs@arrl.net> wrote:

> The item of interest here is that ATT long distance will not allow
> one to dial Tokelau, and, according to the information operator,
> claims it doesn't exist.  It does exist, and according to the manager
> of the telephone system there, the US is the only place that doesn't
> allow direct calls to Tokelau.

There are reports that numbers in the +690 range are to be used for
Telesleaze (900 bypass): and given how _few_ real telephone numbers
(less than 3000) there are likely to be in Tokelau, the majority of
calls to +690 would statistically be then likely to be Telesleaze.

> while ATT doesn't admit the existence of the country, MCI does.
> The representative from ATT said that "MCI owns the lines" and
> ATT has no access to them.  This last sounds bogus to me, and
> I am hoping that people have more information about the reality.

AT&T may well be protecting themselves against claims of fraud -- and,
given the unusual way that Telcos do settlements for this type of call,
although AT&T could carry and hand over the call there would be little
profit for them in doing so, and therefore equally little incentive!


Richard Cox

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If both Tokelau *and* Telesleaze are
assigned to use 690, whose fault is that?  AT&T plays a big role in
both international number assignments (working through ITU) and 
Telesleaze number assignments, don't they?  There should *never* be
a country -- no matter how small it is -- on the same number, or
else the Telesleaze should somehow be restricted. On the other side
of the coin however, no one at AT&T seemed to complain very much when
the country code for Guyana was hijacked and used for that gay sex
thing AT&T was partnered on for a couple years.  PAT]

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

From: adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes)
Subject: Re: Connecting to a T1 Demarc: Need Help
Date: 12 Jan 2003 08:52:44 -0500
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.


In article <telecom22.228.3@telecom-digest.org>, Dave Phelps
<tippenring@deadspam.com> wrote:

> In article <telecom22.227.12@telecom-digest.org>,
> shreddedw@hotmail.com says:

>> Verizon just installed a Quest T1 circuit at my house and I now need
>> to extend the line into the house.  I have never done this with a T1
>> line before and could use some help.

>> At the outside demarc, there are 4 sets of 4 terminal posts.  Each set
>> has a Yellow, Black, Red & Green wire from a jumper cable connected to
>> it.  The jumper cables are plugged into what looks like a RJ45 jack in
>> the demarc.  The verizon label says that Circuit 1 is the line, and no
>> other circuits are labeled.

>> I need to know how to connect to these terminal posts and whith what
>> wires.  I am planning to use standard CAT5 UTP to extend the circuit. 
>> I know that I will need to wire up pins 1 & 2 for one pair and 4& 5
>> for another at the plug, but I am not exactly sure how the CAT5 color
>> codes should line up with the Yellow, Black, Red, & Green at the
>> posts.

>> Thanks for any help.

> If you have a T1, you should have a smartjack placed somewhere beyond
> the demarc. The smartjack is usually placed inside the building, but
> can be outside. The smartjack will have a few lights, to indicate
> circuit status, and an RJ45 jack for you to connect to.

It's an RJ45 jack, but what is the correct name for the cable assembly?

I've always had my smartjacks right next to the equipment rack and
been able to use a short Cat5 patch cord, but I have no idea if that
would work if it had to be 100 feet long.

What are the pinouts, and for that matter what is the distance limit
in the specification?

Thanks,


Al Dykes
adykes@panix.com

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:11:19 EST
From: Patrick Townson <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Illinois Death Row is Empty Today


In a *very courageous* move on Saturday, Illinois governor Jim Ryan
totally vacated the state's 'death row', saying that there were too
many inconsistencies and problems with the way in which the prisoners
got there. All the inmates were commuted to much lesser sentences;
four (that makes about 12 in total) were totally pardoned as a result
of police/prosecutor misconduct in their trials. A few of the more than
108 residents of death row were commuted to life in prison. A few others
were commuted to 40 year sentences. 

Mr. Ryan began his speech to the people of Illinois (which lasted over
an hour) by thanking Northwestern University and the students in its
Journalism School for their diligence in investigating those cases,
and bringing them to his attention. He also thanked the Chicago
Tribune staff for its reporting. He then apologized to the victims of
the crimes and their families, saying they had been victimized twice,
once by the 'original crime' then a second time by police and
prosecutors who 'did not give a damn about them; only get they could,
and wherever they could get them.' 

"It is really ugly when innocent victims and their families are preyed
upon twice; once by a rapist/murderer/serial killer, then again by the
police/prosecutors and their staffs who the people assumed would protect
them." Governor Ryan had very little good to say about police and
prosecutors in Illinois, noting that 'this sort of thing seems to
happen all too frequently.'  He then named each of the men who were on
death row, and briefly told the circumstances of each case. 

Four of the men, who were mentally challenged had claimed that police
had coerced 'confessions' from them with various promises. They were
all found to have rock-solid alabies police had chosen to ignore in 
their haste to get a conviction. Two of the four also had been
represented by public defenders who had 'encouraged' them to confess
and get 'deals' cut for them by prosecutors. They were pardoned
entirely straight from death row; their families/friends went to the
prison on Saturday to retrieve them. Two of the men were met by
Salvation Army representatives who promised to help them get restarted
in life. (One of these latest inmates had been on death row seven
years after 9-10 years in prison.) With these four men, newly released
DNA tests showed they had nothing to do with the crime for which they
were charged at all. 

Quite a few of the now-former death row inmates had 'inconclusive
evidence' about the exact roles they had played, and in most of those
cases there had been 'co-conspirators' who had snitched on their
partners in an effort to 'cut a deal' and save themselves from death.
Where the prosecutors had 'taken the deal' and given them shorter
terms in prison, Governor Ryan matched it with commutations for the
death row guys, giving them the same sentences; often times 40 years
instead of death which the prosecutors had asked for, occassionally
less. Whatever the co-conspirators got, they got also. 

Police around Chicago area are today gunning for the governor, to say
the least. They hate him. Police do not like DNA testing either,
except when the results go the way they want.  

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2002 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 V22 #229
******************************
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jan 13 18:13:51 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0DNDpW19407;
	Mon, 13 Jan 2003 18:13:51 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 18:13:51 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301132313.h0DNDpW19407@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #230

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 13 Jan 2003 18:13:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 230

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Update (Canada) #365, January 13, 2003 (Angus TeleManagement)
    Hotmail: A Spammer's Paradise? (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Now: Tokelau, Country Code 690 (Richard D G Cox)
    Re: Now: Tokelau, Country Code 690 (John R. Levine)
    Re: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911 (John R. Levine)
    Re: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911 (Jack Hamilton)
    Calling 800 Numbers From Pay Phone: Now Many 24-Cent Charges? (Earnhardt)
    Can I Send Bulk Faxes Through SuperFax/ Bitware? (Dhirender)
    Glitch Bungles Amazon Orders (Monty Solomon)
    SonicBlue Says Development of New Devices on Track (Monty Solomon)
    EFF Blasts Controversial Copyright Law (Monty Solomon)
    Samsung SCH-V310 Camcorder Phone (Monty Solomon)
    US Radio Companies Prepare To Launch Digital Broadcasting (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.

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

Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 10:41:06 -0500
From: Angus TeleManagement <jriddell@angustel.ca>
Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #365, January 13, 2003


************************************************************
TELECOM UPDATE
************************************************************
published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group
http://www.angustel.ca

Number 365: January 13, 2003

Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous
financial support from:

** BELL CANADA: http://www.bell.ca
** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: http://www.cisco.com/ca/letstalk
** CYGCOM INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES: http://www.cygcom.com
** ERICSSON CANADA: http://www.ericsson.ca
** JUNIPER NETWORKS: http://www.juniper.net
** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca
** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com
** TELUS: http://www.telus.com

************************************************************

IN THIS ISSUE:

** Foreign Investment Review Begins Jan 27
** Microcell Cuts Back Business Sales
** SaskTel Seeks Higher Business Rates
** Call-Net Says Telus Violating Bundling Rules
** 360networks Sues to Recover Payments to Nortel
** Quebecor Seeks Cabinet Review of ExpressVu
** Videotron, RDS Settle Dispute
** Aliant Company Cuts Jobs
** Cygnal to Lay Fibre for Peel Schools
** Rogers AT&T Adds 150,000 Subscribers
** Telus and TWU Extend Talks
** GT Restructuring Approved in U.S.
** Northern Tel Status Challenged
** Fixed Wireless Sold for Local Phone Service
** Canadian Software Mergers Still Low
** Voice Mobility Raises $1.8 Million
** Speakers Sought for Consultant Meeting
** BCE Shuffles Board
** Price Caps Explained
** Corporate Mobile Data Prepares for Liftoff

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

FOREIGN INVESTMENT REVIEW BEGINS JAN 27: The House of Commons Standing
Committee on Industry, Science, and Technology will begin its review
of foreign investment restrictions in the telecom industry on January
27 (see Telecom Update #359). To participate, contact the Clerk of the
House of Commons "at the earliest opportunity."

http://www.ic.gc.ca/cmb/welcomeic.nsf/261ce500dfcd7259852564820068dc6d/85256a220056c2a485256cad004cd6e3!OpenDocument

MICROCELL CUTS BACK BUSINESS SALES: A January 6 SEC filing from
Microcell Telecommunications reveals that its recovery plan includes
cutting back on efforts to sell business accounts, wholesale services,
and wireless data. The company, which is currently operating under
bankruptcy protection, will focus on consumer PCS voice services.

** Microcell predicts its service revenues will grow from
    $561 million to over $1 billion in five years, and that
    only 3% of its 2008 revenue will be from data.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1018350/000101835003000004/mict20030106mt.htm

SASKTEL SEEKS HIGHER BUSINESS RATES: SaskTel has applied to the CRTC
to increase rates for business local service by up to 10% in all
locations outside Regina, Saskatoon, Yorkton, Swift Current, Moose
Jaw, Estevan, Weyburn, Prince Albert, and North Battleford, and to
raise optional SmartTouch rates for all customers. SaskTel has
requested February approval for the new rates.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2003/s22.htm#40

CALL-NET SAYS TELUS VIOLATING BUNDLING RULES: Call-Net claims that
Telus is providing untariffed bundled services to at least five
customers: BC Ferries, Crystal Glass, Indigo, Insurance Corp of BC,
and Petro Canada. Call-Net wants the CRTC to order Telus to file full
information on these services and any other bundles, and to allow
Call-Net to prosecute Telus for violating section 25 of the Telecom
Act.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2002/8661/c25-06.htm

360NETWORKS SUES TO RECOVER PAYMENTS TO NORTEL: The U.S. wing of
360networks has sued Nortel Networks to recover US$101 million it paid
Nortel in the 90 days before it filed for bankruptcy. Under U.S. law,
pre-bankruptcy payments can in some cases be recovered for
distribution to all creditors.

QUEBECOR SEEKS CABINET REVIEW OF EXPRESSVU: Quebecor CEO Pierre Karl
Peladeau says he has asked the federal Cabinet to hold a public
inquiry into BCE's ownership of Bell ExpressVu.  Peladeau argues that
the satellite broadcaster has an unfair advantage over Quebecor-owned
Videotron because it is subsidized from Bell Canada's profits. (See
Telecom Update #353)

VIDEOTRON, RDS SETTLE DISPUTE: The CRTC has cancelled this week's
hearing into a royalty dispute between Quebecor Media and RDS. CTV's
French-language sports channel says it has reached agreement with
Videotron on overdue and future fees.  (See Telecom Update #361)

ALIANT COMPANY CUTS JOBS: Saint John-based Xwave, Aliant's IT services
unit, laid off 87 employees January 10, after cutting 101 jobs since
October. Xwave now has 2,500 employees.

CYGNAL TO LAY FIBRE FOR PEEL SCHOOLS: Hydro One Telecom has granted
Cygnal Technologies a $3.6 million contract to build a 1 Gbps fibre
optic network linking 110 public and separate schools in Peel Region
west of Toronto. (See Telecom Update #338)

ROGERS AT&T ADDS 150,000 SUBSCRIBERS: Rogers AT&T Wireless added a net
146,800 subscribers in the fourth quarter, 19% fewer than a year
ago. Postpaid net additions rose 66%; prepaid additions declined
78%. Postpaid monthly churn fell to 2.1%.

** Rogers Communications added a net 45,000 Internet
    subscribers in the quarter, 20% fewer than a year ago. It
    also added 9,400 cable subscribers, but expects to lose up
    to 1% of cable customers during the coming year.

TELUS AND TWU EXTEND TALKS: On the recommendation of federal
conciliators, Telus Corp and the Telecommunications Workers Union have
agreed to extend efforts to reach a new contract beyond the January 13
deadline. Conciliators plan 20 to 30 more meetings, followed by a new
60-day conciliation period.

GT RESTRUCTURING APPROVED IN U.S.: On January 2, a U.S. court approved
the plan to reorganize Group Telecom previously accepted by the
Ontario Superior Court. (See Telecom Update #364)

NORTHERN TEL STATUS CHALLENGED: O.N.Telcom has asked the CRTC to
require Northern Telephone to comply with the ILEC- affiliate
procedures in Decision 2002-76 (see Telecom Update #362), saying the
company is "not only under the common control of Bell Canada, but
 ... is now so inextricably integrated with Telebec as to be one
company."

FIXED WIRELESS SOLD FOR LOCAL PHONE SERVICE: Montreal-based SR Telecom
says it has sold fixed wireless systems to Bell Canada and
Northwestel, to provide local voice and data services in remote
communities.

CANADIAN SOFTWARE MERGERS STILL LOW: The Canadian Advanced Technology
Alliance reports that the value of mergers and acquisitions in the
Canadian software and computer services industry in 2002 was $1.7
billion, down 15% from 2001 and down 85% from 2000.

http://www.cata.ca/cata/news/Jan082003.cfm

VOICE MOBILITY RAISES $1.8 MILLION: Vancouver-based unified messaging
supplier Voice Mobility has secured $1.8 million in line-of-credit
financing.

SPEAKERS SOUGHT FOR CONSULTANT MEETING: The Canadian
Telecommunications Consultants Association has issued a Call for
Speakers for its Spring Conference, scheduled for April 3-5 in
Montreal. Submissions are due by January 17.

http://www.ctca.ca/PDFs/CTCACallforSpeakersSpring2003.pdf

BCE SHUFFLES BOARD: BCE has added three new directors: Andre Berard
(Chair, National Bank), Edward Lumley (Vice-Chair, BMO Nesbitt Burns),
and Thomas Burns (former Chair, PwC Consulting). Two directors, Edward
Newall (Nova Chemicals) and Guy Saint-Pierre (Royal Bank), will leave
the Board in May, reducing the number of BCE directors linked to Royal
Bank from four to two.

PRICE CAPS EXPLAINED: The CRTC's 2002 decision on price cap regulation
continues to arouse heated discussion and has been appealed to
Cabinet. Lis Angus's analysis of this decision is now posted in the
Reports and Tutorials section of the Angus website.

http://www.angustel.ca/

CORPORATE MOBILE DATA PREPARES FOR LIFTOFF: In the January issue of
Telemanagement, Gerry Blackwell describes the significant efforts now
under way to develop higher-speed applications for corporate wireless
data. Also in Telemanagement #201:

** Calculating the Hidden Costs of IP Telephony
** Sept. 11 Showed Internet's Strength and Vulnerability
** Are Independent Consultants an Endangered Species?

Telemanagement is available only by subscription. To receive this
important issue by first-class mail, subscribe now at
http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.html or call 905-686- 5050 ext
500.

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

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: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 16:20:44 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Hotmail: A Spammer's Paradise?


By Michelle Delio
02:00 AM Jan. 09, 2003 PT

If so many spam offers weren't totally bogus, Hotmail users would be
incredibly well-endowed, slim people with plenty of hair who make big
money working at home when they aren't having great sex provoked by
free porn and herbal Viagra.

Many users of the free e-mail service offered by Microsoft's MSN.com 
say that within a day of creating a new Hotmail account the spam 
starts flowing in, almost as if spammers have sunk a tap directly 
into Hotmail's user database and are slurping up a free-flowing 
torrent of e-mail addresses.

And according to Steve Linford, of the anti-spam Spamhaus Project, 
that's almost exactly what's happening.

Spamhaus has proof that at least one spammer has been conducting a
massive dictionary attack against the mail servers of both Hotmail.com
and MSN.com, at the rate of three to four tries per second, 24 hours a
day, continuously for the last five months.


http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,57132,00.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The same thing happens at AOL. I have
used my *legimate* AOL account to establish new screen names, and
within <seconds> the first spam started arriving. I know all about
'dictionary style attacks', etc. None the less, I really do not think
spammers even with dictionary programs could get in there and work it
that fast without some help from AOL.  PAT] 

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 21:20:51 GMT
From: Richard D G Cox <Richard@example.com>
Subject: Re: Now: Tokelau, Country Code 690
Reply-To: nospam@numbering.com
Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited


On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:56:22 -0500 (EST), editor@telecom-digest.org wrote:

> If both Tokelau *and* Telesleaze are assigned to use 690, whose fault
> is that?

Fault?  As with all the other countries whose numbering ranges have
been partially hijacked for Telesleaze, the allocations for Telesleaze
have been deliberately made behind the same country code as "ordinary"
subscribers - when the necessary conditions for the fraud have been met:

[1]  The country concerned has little or ineffective regulation;
[2]  The country concerned has poor connectivity, leading to high
     settlement rates and low risk of their being negotiated down;

> There should *never* be a country -- no matter how small it is -- on
> the same number, or else the Telesleaze should somehow be restricted.

The idea is that most networks will not block calls numbers in those
ranges since calls "could" equally be genuine calls to those
countries.  It's the same rationale as was used by the spamhaus that
put Peacefire on an IP address in the same block as their most
prolific spam sources.


Richard D G Cox
Penarth, UK

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

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Now: Tokelau, Country Code 690
Date: 12 Jan 2003 17:10:55 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If both Tokelau *and* Telesleaze are
> assigned to use 690, whose fault is that?

Tokelau's.  They're the only ones who can set up rebates to call
recipients.  It seems a little odd, though.  My long distance carrier,
which resells Qwest, charges only 18 cents/minute to call Tokelau, and
that doesn't offer much room to rebate a commission, while my
dial-around carrier Cognidial charges a plump $2.97.

> no one at AT&T seemed to complain very much when the country code
> for Guyana was hijacked and used for that gay sex thing AT&T was
> partnered on for a couple years.

Nobody hijacked the Guyanese country code.  GT&T is controlled by
Atlantic Tele-Network, a company in the USVI that briefly controlled
the USVI phone company and has investments in other minor phone
properties like the Cell One franchise in the Bahamas, the major ISP
in the USVI, and a paging company in Haiti.

When ATN bought GT&T, they got a decrepit third-world telco with
ridiculously low domestic rates, e.g., 24 cents a month for a
residential line, and only 13,500 lines.  (My family owned rural telco
in upstate NY has more than that.)

For political reasons they couldn't raise rates, so in 1993 they
decided to get into the "international audiotext" business a/k/a
telesleaze, and used the revenue to upgrade the system with new
switches and satellite stations for both international calls and
access to the remote swampy interior, and more than tripled the number
of lines to 55K.  They say that in 1997 the porn business tanked so
they went back to the government and finally got some reasonable rate
increases.

Read all about it at http://www.atni.com/co.html.


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: 12 Jan 2003 16:54:00 -0500
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> "In Steuben County [NY], we made 14 test calls on 12 different
> phones with accounts from Sprint and Verizon. In Sullivan County, we
> made 7 test calls on 6 phones with accounts from AT&T and
> Cingular. Overall, of the 18 phone-and-service combinations tested,
> 9 calls failed to connect to 911.  In every instance, there was a
> strong signal from another carrier the phones could have used. "

These are worst case scenarios.  Sullivan county in the Catskills is
hilly and rural, and has spotty coverage from both the systems
licensed there and spillover from other systems in adjacent counties.

The vendors probably thought they were doing their customers a favor,
since most of them charge expensive roaming fees when they roam into
other systems, but I suppose that it might be worth a software hack so
that calls to 911 ignore the usual system preference list and use the
strongest signal.

I have Cingular TDMA service in Tompkins county, which is between
about 100 miles west of Sullivan, and the coverage with my Nokia 5165
phone is pretty good, particularly with the car kit's external
antenna, except in some narrow valleys that are such bad dead spots
that the FM radio fades out, too.


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: Jack Hamilton <jfh@acm.org>
Subject: Re: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 20:53:52 -0800
Organization: Copyright (c) 2003 by Jack Hamilton.  Reproduction without attribution and archiving without permission are not allowed.
Reply-To: jfh@acm.org


Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:

> The magazine acknowledges that cell phones are radios and there will
> always be some intrinsic problems, but then points out the very real
> concern that phones locked onto one system -- either through
> programming or through technical limitations -- often won't kick over
> to a good signal on an alternate carrier. Oh, and that in many cases
> (depending on the phone and network) that's an FCC violation.

Are you saying that it would be a violation of an FCC regulation to
make an emergency call on the wrong carrier?

The Amateur Radio service is regulated by the FCC and by international
treaty, but one of the regulations says "No provision of these rules
prevents the use by an amateur station in distress of any means at its
disposal to attract attention, make known its condition and location,
and obtain assistance" (FCC rules part 97.405).  I'd be surprised if
similar rules don't apply to other services in the case of a real
emergency.

Or are you saying that it's a violation for those phones *not* to
switch to another network?


Jack Hamilton
jfh@acm.org
Sacramento, CA 

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

From: Phil Earnhardt <pae@dim.com>
Subject: Calling 800 Numbers From Pay Phone: How Many 24-cent Charges?
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 23:18:56 -0700


Today, I used my MCI prepaid calling card for the first time. I called
the service from a pay phone, entered my account number, and called
two different numbers. (MCI uses ## to terminate calls).

During this one 800 number call, MCI charged me the 24 cent pay-phone
fee twice -- once for each completed call. 

What does the federal tariff say? I'm guessing that MCI is probably
reiembursing the pay phone owner for a single call and keeping the
second 24-cent charge.

If MCI only has the right to charge me one 24-cent fee, I'd like to
know who to complain to.

URLs on the appropriate tariff and, presuming MCI is in the wrong, how
to complain would be appreciated.

Thanks,


--phil

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

From: nirwani@rediffmail.com (Dhirender)
Subject: Can I Send Bulk Faxes Through SuperFax/ Bitware?
Date: 13 Jan 2003 07:09:31 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


The non-profit I work for regularly sends out quite a large number of
bulk faxes i.e. its the same fax, to a number of different recepients.
I wanted to shift it across from the fax machine and use a software to
send the faxes. Would the free versions of Bitware of Supervoice
support sending about 400 numbers at one time?  Is there any other
free software that could do that? Is there any other alternative?
Would appreciate any help.  Thanks.


Dhirender

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:27:20 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Glitch bungles Amazon orders


By Alorie Gilbert
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

Online retailer Amazon.com this week canceled thousands of orders for
a high-end cell phone that because of a technical glitch had appeared
to be free, an Amazon representative said Friday.

The glitch mistakenly allowed people to order the PCS Phone 
Handspring Treo 300 at no charge. The phone normally costs $200 after 
rebate on Amazon. It features a built-in Palm organizer, a color 
display and a miniature keyboard.

Amazon sent e-mail to affected customers Friday, notifying them of 
the mistake and that it had canceled the orders.

The problem, which Amazon fixed Thursday, affected only orders placed
through Web sites participating in the Amazon Associates program, not
orders made directly through Amazon.com, said company spokeswoman
Patty Smith. The Associates program gives some 900,000 Web sites the
ability to link to products sold on Amazon and lets people buy
products from Amazon via an associate's site.

Smith said she didn't know which associates sites nor how many
associates were involved in the bad orders. She also didn't know
whether the problem affected cell phone models other than the PCS
Phone Handspring Treo 300.


http://news.com.com/2100-1017-980273.html

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:29:02 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: SonicBlue Says Development of New Devices on Track


By Ben Berkowitz

    LAS VEGAS, Jan 11 (Reuters) - A slow holiday shopping
season had a serious impact on consumer electronics sales, but
development of new devices connecting digital media and home
entertainment centers is still on track, according to the chief
executive of consumer electronics maker SonicBlue Inc.

    In an interview with Reuters on Friday at the Consumer
Electronics Show in Las Vegas, SonicBlue's Greg Ballard said
the holiday season weakened as people spent less money on
things for the home and more on relaxation.

 ...

    Ballard said the main impact of the suit has been to keep
the company from adding some features to devices in development
that he said would have been legal but may have invited further
legal action.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30848806

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:35:31 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFF Blasts Controversial Copyright Law


By Lisa M. Bowman
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
January 10, 2003, 9:35 AM PT

A controversial digital copyright law is quashing free speech and
choking innovation, according to a new study by longtime critics of
the measure.

In its new "Unintended Consequences" report released Thursday, the
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) lists a variety of cases
triggered by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a law passed in
1998 designed to bring copyright law into the digital age.

Hollywood studios, record labels and other intellectual property
holders lobbied hard for the law, fearing that the Internet would
become a forum for rampant piracy because it allows people to easily
copy and distribute digital products. Unlike analog copies, which lose
resolution with each replication, digital copies of products maintain
their high quality.

In its report, the EFF said aggressive applications of the law have
reached beyond the intention of the measure. The EFF said the DMCA has
had a threefold effect: chilling free expression and scientific
research; jeopardizing fair use; and impeding competition.


http://news.com.com/2100-1023-980112.html

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:40:28 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Samsung SCH-V310 Camcorder Phone


Samsung unveil new 3G camcorder phone
http://www.3gnewsroom.com/3g_news/jan_03/news_2906.shtml


Samsung Electronics Ushers in the Camcorder Phone 
http://www.samsung.com/press/news_finder_read.cgi?lidx=20030106021110

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:45:37 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: U.S. Radio Companies Prepare To Launch Digital Broadcasting


By ANNA WILDE MATHEWS
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Radio companies will begin transmitting digital programming in 40
markets early this year, the industry's first move to introduce the
technology, which will offer clearer sound to listeners.

The rollout is set to be announced Friday by iBiquity Digital Corp., a
closely held company, backed by broadcasters, that licenses
digital-radio technology. At the same time, the company said,
manufacturers are expected to begin offering digital-radio receivers
to retailers, which can begin selling them to consumers this spring.
"You've seen every other consumer-electronics application go digital,"
said Robert Struble, chief executive of iBiquity.

Major radio companies including Clear Channel Communications Inc. and 
Cox Radio Inc., majority owned by Cox Enterprises Inc., are expected 
to begin broadcasting stations digitally in markets including New 
York, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco. According to iBiquity, 
about 100 stations are expected to launch digital versions in the 
first quarter of the year.

The digital stations are received at the same spot on the dial as 
they are in analog form, but with far better sound. Broadcasters will 
be able to send text information such as song names or sports scores. 
"For us, this will be an opportunity to enhance our listener 
experience and bring radio into the digital age," said David Field, 
chief executive of Entercom Communications Corp, which will initially 
offer digital stations in Seattle and Boston.

 ...

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/0,,SB1042148364672006544,00.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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #230
******************************

    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jan 14 23:47:49 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0F4lns18981;
	Tue, 14 Jan 2003 23:47:49 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 23:47:49 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301150447.h0F4lns18981@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #231

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 14 Jan 2003 23:48:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 231

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: Network Security, Kaufman/Perlman/Speciner (Rob Slade)
    Re: Calling 800 Numbers From Pay Phone: How Many 24-cent Charges (Weiss)
    Re: Calling 800 Numbers From Pay Phone: How Many 24-cent Charges (joe)
    Re: Calling 800 Numbers From Pay Phone: How Many 24-cent Charges (Wilson)
    Re: Calling 800 Numbers From Pay Phone: How Many 24-cent Charges (Cline)
    Re: Calling 800 Numbers From Pay Phone: How Many 24-cent Charges (Linc M)
    Request Recommendations For Integrated Access (Voice/Data) - MI (ZZZupan)
    Re: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911 (jbl)
    Re: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911 (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911 (Steven J. Sobol)
    Re: Can I Send Bulk Faxes Through SuperFax/ Bitware? (Ray Normandeau)
    Re: Now: Tokelau, Country Code 690 (Doug Faunt N6TQS)
    How to Detect an 'Invasive' MAC (Jared)
    Caller ID on CFWD No Answer (luvencl@potmail.com)

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: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User 
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 08:03:56 -0800
Subject: Book Review: Network Security, Kaufman/Perlman/Speciner


BKNTWSEC.RVW   20021106

"Network Security", Charlie Kaufman/Radia Perlman/Mike Speciner, 2002,
0-13-046019-2, U$54.99/C$85.99
%A   Charlie Kaufman ckaufman@usibm.com
%A   Radia Perlman radia@alum.mit.edu
%A   Mike Speciner ms@alum.mit.edu
%C   One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ   07458
%D   2002
%G   0-13-046019-2
%I   Prentice Hall
%O   U$54.99/C$85.99 201-236-7139 fax 201-236-7131 mfranz@prenhall.com
%O  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0130460192/robsladesinterne
%P   713 p.
%T   "Network Security: Private Communication in a Public World, 2e"

For communications security, this is the text.  As well as solid
conceptual background of cryptography and authentication, there is
overview coverage of specific security implementations, including
Kerberos, PEM (Privacy Enhanced Mail), PGP (Pretty Good Privacy),
IPsec, SSL (Secure Sockets Layer), AES (Advanced Encryption Standard),
and a variety of proprietary systems.  Where many security texts use
only UNIX examples, this one gives tips on Lotus Notes, NetWare, and
Windows NT.

Chapter one is an introduction, with a brief primer on networking,
some reasonable content on malware, and basic security models and
concepts.

Part one deals with cryptography.  The foundational concepts are
covered in chapter one.  Symmetric encryption, in chapter three, is
presented in terms of the operations of DES (Data Encryption
Standard), IDEA (International Data Encryption Algorithm), and AES. 
Chapter four details the major modes of DES.  The algorithms for a
number of hash functions and message digests are described in chapter
five.  Asymmetric algorithms, such as RSA (Rivest-Shamir-Adleman) and
Diffie-Hellman, are explained in chapter six, although one could wish
for just slightly more material, such as actual numeric computations,
that might reach a wider audience.  The number theory basis of much of
modern encryption is provided as well, in chapter seven.  More,
including a tiny bit on elliptic curves, is given in chapter eight.

Part two covers authentication.  The general problems are outlined in
chapter nine.  Chapter ten looks at the traditional means of
authenticating people: something you know, have, or are.  Various
problems in handshaking are reviewed in chapter eleven.  Chapter
twelve describes some strong protocols for passwords.

Part three examines a number of security standards.  Kerberos gets two
whole chapters, since we are provided with not only concepts but
actual packets: version 4 in thirteen and 5 in fourteen.  PKI (Public
Key Infrastructure) terms, components, and mechanisms are outlined in
chapter fifteen.  The basic problems in real-time communications
security are delineated in chapter sixteen.  Chapter seventeen
examines the authentication and encryption aspects of IPsec, while
chapter eighteen deals with key exchange packets.  SSL and TLS
(Transport Layer Security) are described in chapter nineteen.

Part four concentrates on electronic mail.  Chapter twenty lays out
the major concerns and problems.  Chapter twenty one discusses PEM and
S/MIME (Secure Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions).  PGP is covered
in chapter twenty two.

Part five contains miscellaneous topics.  Chapter twenty three looks
at firewalls, twenty four at a variety of specific security systems,
and twenty five at Web issues.  Folklore, in chapter twenty six,
briefly lists a number of simple "best practices" that aren't
generally part of formal security literature.

The explanations are thorough and well written, with a humour that
illuminates the material rather than obscuring it.  The organization
of the book may be a bit odd at times (the explanation of number
theory comes only after the discussion of encryption that it
supports), but generally makes sense.  (It is, sometimes, evident that
later text has created chapters that are slightly out of place.)  The
end of chapter "homework" problems are well thought out, and much
better than the usual reading completion test.  If there is a major
weakness in the book, it is that the level of detail seems to vary
arbitrarily, and readers may find this frustrating.  Overall, though,
this work provides a solid introduction and reference for network
security related topics and technologies.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996, 2002   BKNTWSEC.RVW   20021106

rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
Find book info victoria.tc.ca/techrev/ or sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/
Upcoming (ISC)^2 CISSP CBK review seminars (+1-888-333-4458):
    February 10, 2003   February 14, 2003   St. Louis, MO
    March 31, 2003      April 4, 2003       Indianapolis, IN

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

From: Pete Weiss <pete-weiss@psu.edu>
Subject: Re: Calling 800 Numbers From Pay Phone: How Many 24-cent Charges?
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 09:24:38 -0500
Organization: Penn State University -- Administrative Information Services


On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 23:18:56 -0700, Phil Earnhardt <pae@dim.com> wrote:

> During this one 800 number call, MCI charged me the 24 cent pay-phone
> fee twice -- once for each completed call. 

What [MCI] charges YOU is governed by your contract with them; what
they re-emburse the owner of payphone is governed by the applicable
tariff.


Pete

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

From: joe@obilivan.net
Subject: Re: Calling 800 Numbers From Pay Phone: How Many 24-cent Charges?
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 14:22:20 GMT
Organization: Cox Communications


Try the FCC.  You might get an answer in 6 months, or so.  The stamp will
cost you 37 cents.

Phil Earnhardt wrote:

> Today, I used my MCI prepaid calling card for the first time. I called
> the service from a pay phone, entered my account number, and called
> two different numbers. (MCI uses ## to terminate calls).

> During this one 800 number call, MCI charged me the 24 cent pay-phone
> fee twice -- once for each completed call.

> What does the federal tariff say? I'm guessing that MCI is probably
> reiembursing the pay phone owner for a single call and keeping the
> second 24-cent charge.

> If MCI only has the right to charge me one 24-cent fee, I'd like to
> know who to complain to.

> URLs on the appropriate tariff and, presuming MCI is in the wrong, how
> to complain would be appreciated.

> Thanks,

> --phil

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

From: Sam Wilson <sam.wilson@hotmail.spamfree>
Subject: Re: Calling 800 Numbers From Pay Phone: How Many 24-cent Charges?
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 22:56:02 -0500


Phil Earnhardt wrote:

> Today, I used my MCI prepaid calling card for the first time. I called
> the service from a pay phone, entered my account number, and called
> two different numbers. (MCI uses ## to terminate calls).

> During this one 800 number call, MCI charged me the 24 cent pay-phone
> fee twice -- once for each completed call.

> What does the federal tariff say? I'm guessing that MCI is probably
> reiembursing the pay phone owner for a single call and keeping the
> second 24-cent charge.

> If MCI only has the right to charge me one 24-cent fee, I'd like to
> know who to complain to.

> URLs on the appropriate tariff and, presuming MCI is in the wrong, how
> to complain would be appreciated.

When the payphone surcharge was first installed, I remember a calling card
co saying that you could avoid subsequent fees by using the ## (it wasn't
MCI but most cards have something similar) to start a new call without
redialing the tollfree access number.  It may be the case however that
they must charge the fee each time, because the surcharge is supposed to
compensate the phone owner for calls made from the phone.


"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an
intellectual could ignore or evade it." -- Thomas

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

From: Stanley Cline <sc1-news@roamer1.org>
Subject: Re: Calling 800 Numbers From Pay Phone: How Many 24-cent Charges?
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 00:39:55 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA
Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org


In article <telecom22.230.7@telecom-digest.org>, Phil Earnhardt wrote:

> During this one 800 number call, MCI charged me the 24 cent pay-phone
> fee twice -- once for each completed call. 

> What does the federal tariff say? I'm guessing that MCI is probably

The FCC rules regarding payphone owner compensation are very clear -- they
require that payphone owners be compensated the same for "each and every"
completed call.  Hence, you are charged the "payphone surcharge" on each
call placed and completed, even if you sequence-call.

 From http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1996/fcc96439.txt :

> 54.  Completed Calls.  Because it would be an interpretation 
> inconsistent with our responsibility under Section 276, we deny the 
> request by Cable & Wireless that the Commission allow carriers to treat 
> calls re-originated within the carrier's platform as a single 
> compensable call.  We concluded in the Report and Order that, to comply 
> with our statutory mandate that "each and every completed intrastate 
> and interstate call" be compensated, "multiple sequential calls made 
> through the use of a payphone's '#' button should be counted as separate 
> calls for compensation purposes."  Although Cable & Wireless states that 
> this approach is technically difficult, we note that the requirement 
> that carriers track individual calls does not become effective for one 
> year.  Carriers will be able to use this period to address these types 
> of technical difficulties with respect to their tracking obligations.


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: Linc Madison <nobody@example.com>
Subject: Re: Calling 800 Numbers From Pay Phone: How Many 24-cent Charges?
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 17:53:14 -0800
Organization: LincMad.com Consulting
Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com


In article <telecom22.230.7@telecom-digest.org>, Phil Earnhardt
<pae@dim.com> wrote:

> Today, I used my MCI prepaid calling card for the first time. I called
> the service from a pay phone, entered my account number, and called
> two different numbers. (MCI uses ## to terminate calls).

> During this one 800 number call, MCI charged me the 24 cent pay-phone
> fee twice -- once for each completed call. 

> What does the federal tariff say? I'm guessing that MCI is probably
> reiembursing the pay phone owner for a single call and keeping the
> second 24-cent charge.

You were charged correctly, and, if MCI is following the rules
correctly, it will pay 48 cents to the payphone owner. Since we all
know that MCI is a paragon of accounting honesty and efficiency, I'm
sure that's exactly what will happen, give or take 48 cents.

The flip side of the coin is, if you dial MCI's access number, but do
not complete a call, neither you nor MCI owe the payphone owner
anything.

The FCC wrote the payphone compensation rules on the basis of "per
completed call." In the case of ordinary toll-free numbers, the meaning
is direct. However, in the case of calling cards, the call from the
payphone to the carrier doesn't count, only the completed calls
outbound from the carrier.

You can find reference to this issue here:
<http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1996/fcc96439.txt>

That's the original FCC order on payphone compensation, but be warned,
it's a long document mostly in legalese.

www dot LincMad dot com  / Telecom at LincMad dot com
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California

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

From: nomail@ascendhosting.com (ZZZupan)
Subject: Request Recommendations for Integrated Access (Voice/Data) - MI
Date: 14 Jan 2003 18:57:56 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


I have some clients that use Allegiance and XO for integrated
voice/data solutions.

I am *not* a specialist in this area and would like to know who the
other IT Consultants are recommending.


TIA,
Frank

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

From: jbl <jbl@spamblocked.com>
Subject: Re: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 18:42:26 -0700
Organization: On the desert
Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com


In <telecom22.230.6@telecom-digest.org>, Jack Hamilton <jfh@acm.org>
wrote:

> Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:

>> The magazine acknowledges that cell phones are radios and there will
>> always be some intrinsic problems, but then points out the very real
>> concern that phones locked onto one system -- either through
>> programming or through technical limitations -- often won't kick over
>> to a good signal on an alternate carrier. Oh, and that in many cases
>> (depending on the phone and network) that's an FCC violation.

I would presume the CR engineers are smart enough to check and
appropriately set the networking options in each phone and not depend
on how the phones arrived out of the box (for instance on my SprintPCS
phone my coverage was marginal enough I turned roaming OFF to avoid
roaming when I really didn't want to, i.e. most of the time.

> Or are you saying that it's a violation for those phones *not* to
> switch to another network?

I think immediate access to 911 via any available means is the goal,
hence they should switch if they can.


/JBL


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

Subject: Re: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911
Organization: Not Much
From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 02:39:08 GMT


In article <telecom22.230.6@telecom-digest.org>, Jack Hamilton
<jfh@acm.org> wrote:

> Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:

>> The magazine acknowledges that cell phones are radios and there will
>> always be some intrinsic problems, but then points out the very real
>> concern that phones locked onto one system -- either through
>> programming or through technical limitations -- often won't kick over
>> to a good signal on an alternate carrier. Oh, and that in many cases
>> (depending on the phone and network) that's an FCC violation.

> Are you saying that it would be a violation of an FCC regulation to
> make an emergency call on the wrong carrier?

No.

He's saying it may be a FCC violation *NOT* to kick over to the alternate
carrier.

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

From: Steven J. Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 23:35:39 -0000
Organization: JustThe.net LLC


In article <telecom22.230.6@telecom-digest.org>, Jack Hamilton wrote:

> Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:

>> The magazine acknowledges that cell phones are radios and there will
>> always be some intrinsic problems, but then points out the very real
>> concern that phones locked onto one system -- either through
>> programming or through technical limitations -- often won't kick over
>> to a good signal on an alternate carrier. Oh, and that in many cases
>> (depending on the phone and network) that's an FCC violation.

> Are you saying that it would be a violation of an FCC regulation to
> make an emergency call on the wrong carrier?

No, it's an FCC violation for the carriers not to accept 911 calls
from people who aren't their customers, or for a carrier to prevent
its phones from using other networks to dial 911. IOW, "in many cases,
the phones not kicking over is an FCC violation."

I believe that's what Danny meant.

> Or are you saying that it's a violation for those phones *not* to
> switch to another network?

I think that's it.


Steve Sobol, CTO  JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH
http://JustTheNetLLC.com/  888.480.4NET (4638)

A practicing member of the Geek Orthodox religion!

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

From: rayta@msn.com (Ray Normandeau)
Subject: Re: Can I Send Bulk Faxes Through SuperFax/ Bitware?
Date: 14 Jan 2003 10:56:21 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


I am the Press Secretary for a community group.

We have been doing this since 1987 w/DOS and a JT Fax card.

We are now considering doing this from a Windows ME box and it seems
that the commercial fax program Winfax Pro 10.02 is what we would
want. It allows faxing from two phone lines at the same. We would put
an external fax/modem on a serial port.

I have been watching PriceWatch.com for prices.

Invalid Email above, but you may reach me via
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hudnycha/

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

From: Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 <faunt@panix.com>
Subject: Re: Now: Tokelau, Country Code 690
Date: 14 Jan 2003 14:38:20 -0500
Organization: at home, in Oakland, California


Richard D G Cox <Richard@example.com> writes:

> At 22:44 UT on 11 Jan 2003  Doug Faunt N6TQS <n6tqs@arrl.net> wrote:

>> The item of interest here is that ATT long distance will not allow
>> one to dial Tokelau, and, according to the information operator,
>> claims it doesn't exist.  It does exist, and according to the manager
>> of the telephone system there, the US is the only place that doesn't
>> allow direct calls to Tokelau.

> There are reports that numbers in the +690 range are to be used for
> Telesleaze (900 bypass): and given how _few_ real telephone numbers
> (less than 3000) there are likely to be in Tokelau, the majority of
> calls to +690 would statistically be then likely to be Telesleaze.

I don't understand how a valid country code can be abused as you
suggest.  I'd appreciate a further explanation.

And if MCI has no problem, why does AT&T have this problem?

BTW, I've now found that the Pitcairn Islands, country code 64, (with
less than 20 subscribers), has the same problem.  AT&T doesn't
acknowledge their existence, MCI will place a call for a reasonable
rate.

These are not academic discussions, BTW.  I was considering going to
Tokelau, but have postponed that trip, since I am going to Pitcairn.


73, doug

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

From: jared@hwai.com (Jared)
Subject: How to Detect an 'Invasive' MAC
Date: 14 Jan 2003 08:02:03 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


I am setting up my first WLAN.

I have decided that I can't really stop warsniffers from discovering
my network, eventually sniffing out my WEP keys and cracking their way
in.  However, if they're using my network, it strikes me that their
MAC's should be visible and I can use a built-in filtering rule to at
least make them keep acquiring NIC's on a regular basis.  Does anyone
know of any tools to do this, or should I expect my vendor (SMC) to
provide this info (I didn't see it in the manual) from the AP itself?


TIA -

Regards,

jh

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

From: luvencl@potmail.com
Subject: Caller ID on CFWD No Answer
Reply-To: luvencl@potmail.com
Organization: AT&T Broadband
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 02:49:14 GMT


I am getting ready to convert a LUCENT Legend Release 7.0 to T1 PRI,
and I have a couple of questions.

The local operating company BellSouth is going to supply a Fractional
PRI with internet data on DS0's 11-23.  Ch 24 is of course the B
channel.

And DS0's 1-10 will be dedicated to the Lucent Legend switch.  I am
looking for someone that has actually seen this done successfully, and
also would like to find out if caller ID on DOD calls has the options
of displaying the actual DID extension's phone number?  And finally,
on a call forward no answer (Lucent call this FWD with delay) will the
incoming called ID info be passed on through the DOD call?  Example,
someone on PSTN calls 555-555-1001, (which will DID to ext 101 on the
PBX). Ext 101 does not answer, call gets routed to another outside
line via two-way trunk over PRI. What will the destination end get for
caller ID?  Will it be the originating end's called ID or the
extension's called ID?

To reply, please note I have anti spam setup.  Please change the p to
an h as in hotmail.  Thanks very much for your time and help in
advance!  luvencl@potmail.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can tell you my experience with SBC
and  forward on busy/no answer is that the eventual recipient of the
call (my cell phone, usually) gets the number of my house line, rather
than the caller's number. That's a nuisance, since my answer phrase
would change according to the number of the caller *if I knew what it
was*. Telco explained it to me this way: YOU are making the call to
your cell phone. We are simply automating the process. But oddly
enough, if I use immediate call forwarding on my home line, the number
of the original caller gets forwarded also. In other words, just the
opposite process. Any explanations for that?    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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #231
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 15 01:42:06 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0F6g6O21227;
	Wed, 15 Jan 2003 01:42:06 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 01:42:06 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301150642.h0F6g6O21227@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #232

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 15 Jan 2003 01:42:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 232

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Ellacoya Lands New Customers, Funding (Monty Solomon)
    Alliance to Offer an Alternative to Passport (Monty Solomon)
    Nextel to Expand 'Direct Connect' (Monty Solomon)
    PBS Airs the (Long) History of Chicago (Monty Solomon)
    Time to Rethink Digital Copyright Act (Monty Solomon)
    RFID Tags: Big Brother in Small Packages (Monty Solomon)
    Music, Tech Groups OK Copyright Plans (Monty Solomon)
    Sued for Following Suit in TV-Land (Monty Solomon)
    Regulatory Future? More Uncertainty (Monty Solomon)
    Is the RIAA "Hacking You Back"? (Monty Solomon)
    Samsung Pressure Gives Motorola Insomnia (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Keystone Kops & Kollect Kalls (Henry E Schaffer)
    Re: Illinois Death Row is Empty Today (Linda Davis)

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, 13 Jan 2003 18:16:21 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Ellacoya Lands New Customers, Funding


By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 1/13/2003

What looks to be breathing new life into Ellacoya is the booming
traffic on Napster-inspired systems for sharing digital music and
video such as Kazaa, Morpheus, and Gnutella. The file-sharing systems
are creating big traffic headaches for commercial and college
broadband network operators.

Ellacoya chief executive Ron Sege, a former senior executive of Web
portal Lycos.com, said peer-to-peer file sharing 'is probably 10
times more popular now than it was at Napster's peak' before federal
courts shut down the pioneering service in the summer of 2000, ruling
that it faciliated massive theft of copyrighted content. But today,
network operators are finding 5 or 10 percent of their users are
hogging 70 percent of the network usage by sharing music and video
files over Napster successors.

Ellacoya's system enables broadband network operators to 'look 
into' data packets that are flowing over the network and give the 
highest priority to legitimate e-mail and Web surfing while making 
peer-to-peer traffic 'fly coach or standby instead of first-class,' 
Sege said.

While the underlying issue of the legality of content-sharing systems 
is still being sorted out, Sege said, network operators can use 
Ellacoya systems to push subscribers' multi-hour downloads of movie 
or music files to non-peak periods when the network has capacity -- or 
block them if the services are shut down.

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/013/business/Ellacoya_lands_new_customers_funding+.shtml

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

Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 18:18:07 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Alliance to Offer an Alternative to Passport


By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff, 1/13/2003

The effort to construct an alternative to Microsoft Corp.'s Passport
network authentication system takes a step forward today, as Sun
Microsystems Inc. releases a software component that lets people
identify themselves to multiple computer systems in an organization.

The Sun ONE Identity Server is a vital component of a plan to create 
a service to let Internet users gain access to all of their online 
resources with the use of a single password, while protecting the 
users' privacy. Microsoft's Passport already provides a similar 
service, but Sun and many other corporations have been reluctant to 
become dependent on Microsoft to gain access to their customers. 
These partners, which include United Airlines, American Express, 
Sony, and General Motors, joined with Sun to form the Liberty 
Alliance, and to create an alternative to the Passport system.

Passport is already in use at Microsoft's own Internet sites and a 
few others, such as the eBay auction site and the Expedia online 
travel agency.

But the Liberty Alliance has yet to offer services to the public, 
mainly because the necessary software is still under development. 
That's the significance of the Sun ONE Identity Server, said Andy 
Eliopoulos, director of business management for Sun's network 
identity program.


http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/013/business/Alliance_to_offer_an_alternative_to_Passport+.shtml


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mr. Bray has written in TELECOM Digest
in the past on a couple occassions.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 21:35:21 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Nextel to Expand 'Direct Connect'


Widens use outside home calling markets

By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 1/13/2003

Wireless carrier Nextel Communications is announcing today plans for 
a major regional and national expansion of its 'direct-connect' 
walkie-talkie feature that has earned it a lucrative business-market 
niche in the highly competitive wireless industry.

Beginning this week, the company said, millions of Nextel subscribers
will be able to use the direct-connect feature outside their home
calling markets to have the equivalent of instant walkie-talkie
conversations with other Nextel users when they are both on the road.

Since Nextel launched the service ten years ago, it has been limited 
to users talking within their home service area, such as Eastern 
Massachusetts.

The first stage of the expansion will let Nextel subscribers use 
direct connect with subscribers from their home area when they travel 
with them in other service areas throughout the Northeast and parts 
of the Southwest, or with subscribers based in the home service area 
to which they have traveled.

Two Nextel subscribers or a group from Boston traveling to New York, 
Washington, or Los Angeles, for example, could direct connect with 
each other in those markets or with Nextel subscibers based in those 
markets.


http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/013/business/Nextel_to_expand_direct_connect_+.shtml

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

Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 21:37:47 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: PBS Airs the (Long) History of Chicago


Pat,

FYI

Monty

TELEVISION REVIEW

By Sam Allis, Globe Staff, 1/13/2003

If you don't know much about the astonishing rise of Chicago in the 
19th century, or if you're a Chicago chauvinist, 'Chicago: City of 
the Century' is rich gruel. If, however, you're remotely familiar 
with that piece of American history, these 4 1/2 hours will present 
more than you probably ever want to know about the place at the time. 
This 'American Experience,' which begins tonight on WGBH-TV (Ch. 
2), would have been a feast at two hours.

This latest entry in the PBS nonfiction roster (it continues tomorrow
night and Wednesday; each 90-minute segment begins at 9 p.m.) is ably
written, produced, and directed by Austin Hoyt, the veteran
documentarian who did superb profiles of Ronald Reagan, Douglas
MacArthur, and Andrew Carnegie. The reporting here is excellent, the
detail illuminating, the writing clean.


http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/013/living/PBS_airs_the_long_history_of_Chicago+.shtml

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Of course, Monty, I am no longer a
resident of Chicago, IL. Much of the material on the show I know about
already, since I produced a radio show called 'Traces of Chicago'
which aired every Sunday afternoon/Tuesday overnight on CRIS Radio,
the station maintained by the Chicago Public Library. I did 'Traces'
for 13 years. Each episode was originally produced by myself. Bill
Pfeiffer got me that job, back around 1980. 'Traces' dealt with the
history of Chicago over 150 years more or less, 1837 to the present 
time. It was aired every Sunday afternoon, and repeated on tape every
Tuesday overnight. I guess I did about 700 shows in the overall
series.  <C>hicago <R>adio <I>nformation <S>ervice is intended for
visually- or print-handicapped persons; you receive it on an SCA
reciever, served on a sub-carrier of station WNIZ. For many years,

I worked as a volunteer for the Chicago Public Library, for close to
twenty years. My first position for them was 'sysop' for an Apple ][+
BBS they started in 1980 at my suggestion. CPL had the first computer
bulletin board system at a library anywhere in the world; it was quite
innovative in my opinion. I think CRIS radio was also the first
reading service of its kind in the world as well.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 21:41:15 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Time to Rethink Digital Copyright Act


UPGRADE

By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff, 1/13/2003

A lovely state, Kentucky, but not a place that's generally in the 
forefront either of law or technology. As a matter of fact, it may 
just have taken a giant step backward.

Lexmark International Inc. of Lexington, Ky., is one of the world's 
leading makers of computer printers. It's a robust business, but one 
with a curious pricing model. Most printers are relatively cheap; 
it's the replacement ink or toner cartridges that cost a fortune, and 
enable companies like Lexmark to turn a profit.

Inevitably, consumers griped about the high cost of replacement 
cartridges from Lexmark and other printer firms. And the used 
cartridges were perfectly good, except for needing a refill. So an 
industry was born - companies that collected the old cartridges, 
refilled them, and resold them for much less than the printer 
companies.

This enraged the printer makers, who can't turn a profit without the 
extortionate revenues derived from cartridge sales. So they've tried 
to stifle the makers of aftermarket cartridges. Their ultimate weapon 
is a microchip built into the cartridges that cause them to 
malfunction if any attempt is made to reuse the cartridge. Some 
companies use chips that cause certain features of the printer to 
stop working. But Lexmark goes further, using a feature known to its 
critics as the 'killer chip.' Use an unauthorized cartridge in some 
of their laser printers, and it just won't work.

Unless the remanufactured cartridge has a replacement chip that works 
just fine with the printer. Static Control Components Inc., of 
Sanford, N.C., supplies such chips to cartridge recyclers. And for 
that, the company has fallen foul of a very foul law. Yes, once 
again, it's that bane to technological innovation: the Digital 
Millennium Copyright Act.


http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/013/business/Time_to_rethink_digital_copyright_act+.shtml

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 07:36:51 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: RFID Tags: Big Brother in Small Packages


By Declan McCullagh

Could we be constantly tracked through our clothes, shoes or even our 
cash in the future?

I'm not talking about having a microchip surgically implanted beneath 
your skin, which is what Applied Digital Systems of Palm Beach, Fla., 
would like to do. Nor am I talking about John Poindexter's creepy 
Total Information Awareness spy-veillance system, which I wrote about 
last week.

Instead, in the future, we could be tracked because we'll be wearing, 
eating and carrying objects that are carefully designed to do so.

The generic name for this technology is RFID, which stands for radio 
frequency identification. RFID tags are miniscule microchips, which 
already have shrunk to half the size of a grain of sand. They listen 
for a radio query and respond by transmitting their unique ID code. 
Most RFID tags have no batteries: They use the power from the initial 
radio signal to transmit their response.

You should become familiar with RFID technology because you'll be 
hearing much more about it soon. Retailers adore the concept, and 
CNET News.com's own Alorie Gilbert wrote last week about how Wal-Mart 
and the U.K.-based grocery chain Tesco are starting to install "smart 
shelves" with networked RFID readers. In what will become the largest 
test of the technology, consumer goods giant Gillette recently said 
it would purchase 500 million RFID tags from Alien Technology of 
Morgan Hill, Calif.

http://news.com.com/2010-1069-980325.html

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 11:29:53 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Music, Tech Groups OK Copyright Plans


(AP Online)

The leading trade associations for the music and technology
industries, which have been at loggerheads over consumers downloading
songs on the Internet, have negotiated a compromise they contend will
protect copyrights on movies and music without new government
involvement.

Lobbyists for some of the nation's largest technology companies will
argue under the new agreement against efforts in Congress to amend
U.S. laws to broaden the rights of consumers, such as explicitly
permitting viewers to make backup copies of DVDs for personal use or
copy songs onto handheld listening devices.

The agreement, expected to be announced Tuesday in Washington,
attempts to head off government intervention in the rising debate over
what consumers can do with copyrighted material they have
purchased. The battle over copyrights, pitting Hollywood against
Silicon Valley, has emerged as a central policy question for this
Congress.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30893278

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 12:23:48 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Sued for Following Suit in TV-Land


POWER LUNCH
By Ron Grover

Hardly flattered, Les Moonves and CBS are suing ABC over what they 
contend is a show that consciously mimics CBS's Survivor.

No one likes combat sport more than Leslie Moonves. In his Los Angeles
office, the CBS president even keeps a punching bag, which no doubt
came in handy for relieving stress when poor ratings sunk his new
sitcom, Bram & Alice, after only four episodes this fall. More often
than not, though, it has been Moonves standing over the TV fallen.
This year, in fact, CBS is the only one of the four largest networks
to have seen its audience grow. As of January, it's also the top-rated
net in the land.

And Moonves doesn't mind putting up his dukes when it comes to the 
competition. Last year, the one-time actor came out swinging against 
ABC, which tried to lure away CBS's late-night talk-show host David 
Letterman. Now he's at it again, this time taking on one of the most 
time-honored of Hollywood traditions: The Great Pretender.

If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, Hollywood must be the
most sincere place on earth. Think about it. How many times have you
flicked on the tube and thought you've seen a show before? Well, heck,
you have! Despite all the creative geniuses who belly up to their
tables at Spago, what Hollywood does best is repackage the same few
concepts over and over.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan2003/nf20030113_0543.htm

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 13:29:26 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Regulatory Future? More Uncertainty


As the FCC conducts its triennial review of rules for the
telecommunications industry, glimpses into the secretive process give
hints of deep ideological and political divides within the commission,
with little apparent room for agreement or compromise.

by Alex Goldman
ISP-Planet Associate Editor
[January 10, 2003]

http://www.isp-planet.com/politics/2003/uncertainty.html

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 13:45:45 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Is the RIAA "Hacking You Back"?


By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco
Posted: 14/01/2003 at 00:29 GMT

The RIAA is preparing to infect MP3 files in order to audit and
eventually disable file swapping, according to a startling claim by
hacker group Gobbles. In a posting to the Bugtraq mailing list,
Gobbles himself claims to have offered his code to the RIAA, creating
a monitoring "hydra".


http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/28842.html

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: FEATURE-Samsung Pressure Gives Motorola Insomnia
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 18:17:45 -0500


By Yukari Iwatani

    CHICAGO, Jan 14 (Reuters) - If executives at the world's
second-largest mobile phone maker, Motorola Inc. (NYSE:MOT), are
having trouble sleeping, it could be because they are getting a
wake-up call from Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (KOREA:05930)

The South Korean cell phone maker is known for the aggressive ways in
which it gains and keeps contracts.

Last year it flew 400 engineers halfway around the world from Korea to
Kansas, where they worked round-the-clock with colleagues back home to
produce a new phone for U.S. wireless telephone operator Sprint PCS
Group (NYSE:PCS).

That kind of determination has helped Samsung double its market share
in two years, overtaking both Germany's Siemens AG and Sony Ericsson
(SWED:ERIC.B)(TOKYO:6758). The Korean handset maker vaulted into the
world's No. 3 position in 2002 from No. 6 in 2000, and is now knocking
on the doors of market leaders Nokia (HELS:NOK1V) and Motorola.

Wireless industry analysts expect Samsung to boost its global share to
15 percent by 2004 from 10.6 percent at the end of last year's third
quarter. At that rate it could overtake Motorola, which according to
Gartner Dataquest had 14.4 percent market share at the end of the same
period.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30904512 

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

From: hes@hes01.unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E Schaffer)
Subject: Re: Keystone Kops & Kollect Kalls
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 15:44:13 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: North Carolina State University


In article <telecom22.225.14@telecom-digest.org>,
Joey Lindstrom  <joey@telussucks.info> wrote:

> Each and every man (and woman) in prison has been found guilty by a
> judge and/or jury (do you have trials by judge alone in the US?  In
> Canada, the accused can elect for such a trial).  It is therefore
> inappropriate to assume their innocence until proven otherwise -- it
> already has been proven otherwise.  

Well, except for the ones who are awaiting trial -- sometimes for a
time period approaching or exceeding a year.

> We now assume their guilt -- and thus the appropriateness of
> punishing them and otherwise restricting their rights, ie: the right
> to make cheap phone calls -- until their innocence is otherwise
> proven.  ...

Is keeping them from making phone calls cheaply really an intentional
punishment?  If so, why not just keep them from making any phone calls
 -- or perhaps restricting them to one call a month? (not to exceed
three minutes.)

I thought that there also is supposed to be an aim of rehabilitation
along with punishment -- and keeping prisoners from talking to their
families might actually be counter productive.


henry schaffer
hes@ncsu.edu

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Henry, your *theory* is quite correct.
One thing that Joey Lindstrom did not realize when he wrote his screed
(and I neglected to respond on) was the large number of people locked
up in dungeon-like jails (Cook County in Chicago -- the largest jail
in the world -- for one example) who are treated *as though they are
already guilty* even though they have not been to court; oftentimes
not even once at that point. It is quite common for an arrested person
being held at Cook County Jail to not even be allowed to contact his
lawyer or family for the first three or four days of his arrival; then
when he *can* get to a phone, it has to be one of those (pardon me!)
God-damned collect calls for several dollars. They do everything in
their power to work around the requirement that inmates be allowed to
notify family and attornies of their whereabouts, all in the name of
institutional administrivia of course. Even the payphones in the
police lockups in Chicago are on the same system. From the *very
instant* one of the fine, noble, honest police officers in the
'Chicago system' (i.e. Chicago, and any of the suburbs) puts his
sights on you, forget about any phone calls until *he* decides you
should be allowed to make one, and then it will be at a payphone which
is set to only make collect outgoing calls, using an automated
operator-voice which informs the recipient of the call that 'this is a
collect call from an inmate in a correctional institution, will you
accept the charges? Press one to accept, two to decline.' And God help
you if you do decide to accept it. If you do not press one or two, but
simply stand there trying to make sense of it all, the message will
repeat itself a couple times, then assume you said 'no' and disconnect,
telling the arrested party the charges were declined. 'Rehabilitation'
is not a word in the vocabulary of a police officer or other correctional
employee in Chicago. Oh, for a few very young, very liberal social 
workers running around in the jail it is, but they soon grow out of
it also. And yes, there are many jail inmates who are there for a year
or more awaiting trial. Often times, if the police/prosecutor case is
weak or non-existent, they know the only punishment you will get at
all is the administrivia they can dish out, so they put you on a back
burner and let you stew for a year or so before a trial is set up. PAT]

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

From: Linda Davis <linda.davis@hotmail.com.nospam>
Organization:
Subject: Re: Illinois Death Row is Empty Today
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 19:35:39 -0500


Patrick Townson wrote:

> In a *very courageous* move on Saturday, Illinois governor Jim Ryan
> totally vacated the state's 'death row', saying that there were too
> many inconsistencies and problems with the way in which the prisoners
> got there. All the inmates were commuted to much lesser sentences;
> four (that makes about 12 in total) were totally pardoned as a result
> of police/prosecutor misconduct in their trials. A few of the more than
> 108 residents of death row were commuted to life in prison. A few others
> were commuted to 40 year sentences.

So you think that the prisoners might be innocent or unfairly punished by
juries and the next rounds of appeals.   But you were in such hurry to
celebrate excusing brutal murders that you don't care at all that the
convicts who Ryan commuted to life or 40 years in prison just lose their
future appellate review process.  While they were on death row, they were
awaiting their right to further appellate review.  That's gone.  What could
be more arbitrary then removing the right to an appeal that these convicts
no longer have?  If these convicts were really innocent, tough luck now.

With a stroke of the pen Mr. Ryan overruled the decisions of 167 judges and
juries.  He complained that the death penalty is arbitrary, yet there is
nothing more arbitrary then across the board executive orders.

So who were these nice people Mr. Ryan just excused?  "In 1999 with
the help of his girlfriend, Fedell Caffey shot and killed a
28-year-old pregnant mother, her 10-year-old daughter and her
7-year-old son. If that weren't horrific enough, the two then carved a
nearly full-term unborn child from the mother's body with a pair of
scissors.

Then there's Howard Bean, who disguised himself as a priest and then
handcuffed and shot 81-year-old Dorothy Polulach inside her home. Or
Lenard Johnson, who murdered an 11-year-old boy he'd been babysitting
and was holding a knife to the throat of one of two girls he'd raped
when the police arrived. "As far as the evidence goes, it's pretty
overwhelming against my client," Johnson's public defender was quoted
as saying.

There's also the odor of bad faith. Barely a month ago, Governor Ryan
met with families of the people raped or killed or attacked by these
inmates and told them he was leaning against a blanket reprieve. "They
have a right to feel betrayed," the Governor admitted after his
speech."  -excerpt from "Wall St Journal"

> Police around Chicago area are today gunning for the governor, to say
> the least. They hate him. Police do not like DNA testing either,
> except when the results go the way they want.

It is interesting you can stereotype all "Police" and tell us what
"Police" hate and what "Police" want.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ms. Davis, I can stereotype all police
in the same way you can stereotype all death row inmates. One good stereo-
type deserves another, wouldn't you agree? You say death row inmates
are all guilty as hell; I suggest many/most Chicago area prosecutors
and police officers are going to the same place. They don't even begin
to deal in good faith. All the truly guilty people on death row are
not worth one innocent person there. And Ryan found not one; not two, 
but *four* totally innocent men on death row, to say nothing of the 
*13 other cases* of innocence there which your beloved system got
around to discharging without so much as a single 'we are sorry for
this' over the past few years. Ryan only totally released four, the
system in its good time released 13 others before he got involved. 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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #232
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 15 18:25:22 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0FNPME09660;
	Wed, 15 Jan 2003 18:25:22 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 18:25:22 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301152325.h0FNPME09660@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #233

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 15 Jan 2003 18:25:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 233

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: Web Security, Privacy and Commerce (Rob Slade)
    FCC's Powell Concerned by Media Concentration (Monty Solomon)
    Orange SPV MS Smartphone Cert Security Cracked (Monty Solomon)
    Microsoft Announces Government Security Program (Monty Solomon)
    Swearing Off (and at) My Yahoo (Monty Solomon)
    Dish 921 PVR Info From AVS Forum (Monty Solomon)
    Phreakers Target Texas A&M (Monty Solomon)
    Vatican Warns Against On-Line Confession (Monty Solomon)
    West Point Establishes Secure Wireless Network (Monty Solomon)
    Re: How to Detect an 'Invasive' MAC (Andy Finkenstadt)
    Re: How to Detect an 'Invasive' MAC (Mark Atwood)
    Re: How to Detect an 'Invasive' MAC (Linc Madison)
    Re: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911 (John R. Levine)
    Re: Is the RIAA "Hacking You Back"? (Brian Inglis)
    Re: Can I Send Bulk Faxes Through SuperFax/ Bitware? (january2003)
    Caller ID on CFWD No Answer on Merlin Legend (No Spam)

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: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User 
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 08:03:00 -0800
Subject: Book Review: Web Security, Privacy and Commerce, Garfinkel/Spafford


BKWBSPCM.RVW   20021106

"Web Security, Privacy and Commerce", Simson Garfinkel/Gene Spafford,
2002, 0-596-00045-6, U$44.95/C$67.95
%A   Simson Garfinkel simsong@aol.com
%A   Gene Spafford spaf@cs.purdue.edu
%C   103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA   95472
%D   2002
%G   0-596-00045-6
%I   O'Reilly & Associates, Inc.
%O   U$44.95/C$67.95 800-998-9938 707-829-0515 nuts@ora.com
%O   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596000456/robsladesinterne
%P   756 p.
%T   "Web Security, Privacy and Commerce"

Anyone who does not know the names Spafford and Garfinkel simply does
not know the field of data security.  The authors, therefore, are well
aware that data security becomes more complex with each passing week. 
This is, after all, the second edition of what was originally
published under the title "Web Security and Commerce," and, while it
is still recognizable as such, the work is essentially completely re-
written.  The authors note, in the Preface, that the book cannot hope
to cover all aspects of Web security, and therefore they concentrate
on those topics that are absolutely central to the concept, and/or not
widely available elsewhere.  Works on related issues are suggested
both at the beginning and end of the book.

A greatly expanded part one introduces the topic, and the various
factors involved in Web security.  Chapter one is a very brief
overview of Web security considerations and requirements, with some
material on general security concepts and risk analysis.  The
underlying architecture of the Web is examined in chapter two,
although this is basically limited to Internet structures.  (While the
material is quite informative, perhaps some examples of HTTP
[HyperText Transfer Protocol] would add value.)  Cryptography is
explained reasonably well in chapter three: there is no in-depth
discussion of cryptographic algorithms, but these details can be
readily found in other works.  Chapter four deals with cryptographic
uses, and also with legal restrictions.  The concepts and limitations
of SSL (Secure Sockets Layer) and TLS (Transport Layer Security) are
given in chapter five, although the operational details are not
covered.  Chapter six starts out with a general discussion of
identification and authentication,but then gets bogged down in the
details of using PGP (Pretty Good Privacy).  The coverage of digital
certificates, in chapter seven, is likewise constricted by a
dependence upon system technicalities.

Part two concerns the user.  

Chapter two looks at the various possible problems with browsers, not
all of which are related to Web page programming.  Chapter eight looks
analytically at the possible invasions of privacy that can occur on
the Web.  Some non-technical techniques of protecting your privacy,
such as good password choice, are described in chapter nine, with
various technical means listed in chapter ten.  Chapter eleven reviews
backups and some physical protection systems.  ActiveX and the
limitations of authentication certificates, as well as plugins and
Visual Basic, are thoroughly explored in chapter twelve.  Java
security is only marginally understood by many "experts," and not at
all by users, so the coverage in chapter thirteen is careful to point
out the difference between safety, security, and the kind of security
risks that can occur even if the sandbox *is* secure.

Part three details technical aspects of securing Web servers.  Chapter
fourteen looks at physical security and disaster recovery measures. 
Traditional host security weaknesses are reviewed in chapter fifteen. 
Rules for secure CGI (Common Gateway Interface) and API (Application
Programmer Interface) programming are promulgated in chapter sixteen,
along with tips for various languages.  More details on the server-
side use of SSL is given in chapter seventeen.  Chapter eighteen looks
at specific strengthening measures for Web servers.  You legal options
for prosecuting a computer crime is reviewed in chapter nineteen.

Commercial and societal concerns in regard to content are major areas
in Web security, so part six reviews a number of topics related to
commerce, as well as other social factors.  Chapter twenty discusses a
number of technical access control technologies, by system.  Obtaining
a client-side certificate is described in chapter twenty one. 
Microsoft's Authenticode system is reviewed yet again in chapter
twenty two.  Censorship and site blocking are carefully examined in
chapter twenty three.  Privacy policies, systems, and legislation are
reviewed in chapter twenty four.  Chapter twenty five looks at current
non-cash payment systems, and the various existing, and proposed,
digital payment systems for online commerce.  Having already studied
criminal problems earlier, the book now turns to civil and
intellectual property issues, such as copyright, in chapter twenty
six.

Although it has almost nothing to do with Web security as such, I very
much enjoyed Appendix A, Garfinkel's recounting of the lessons learned
in setting up a small ISP (Internet Service Provider).  (I suppose
that this could be considered valid coverage of Web commerce.)  The
other appendices are more directly related to the topic, including the
SSL protocol, the PICS (Platform for Internet Content Selection)
specification, and references.

Although the material has been valuably expanded and updated, some of
the new content is less worthwhile.  The extensive space given to
specific products will probably date quickly, although the surrounding
conceptual text will continue to provide helpful guidance.  Certainly
for anyone dealing with Web servers or running ISPs, this is a
reference to consider seriously.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1998, 2002   BKWBSPCM.RVW   20021106

======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
   Backups?  We doan *NEED* no steenking baX%^~,VbKx  NO CARRIER
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 02:25:06 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: FCC's Powell Concerned by Media Concentration


    By Andy Sullivan

    WASHINGTON, Jan 14 (Reuters) - U.S. officials will probably not
radically lift ownership limits on television stations, newspapers and
other media when they take up the issue this year, the top
telecommunications regulator told Congress on Tuesday.  Federal
Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell said the agency
would not allow one company to dominate local airwaves or other media
outlets when it revisits the long-standing rules under court order.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30905021

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 02:33:06 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Orange SPV MS Smartphone Cert Security Cracked


By John Lettice

The Orange SPV has achieved the dubious distinction of being the first
Microsoft smartphone to have its security cracked. Orange as set the
phones up so they will only run Orange-certified applications, but as
yet hasn't got much further than promises when it comes to telling
people how you develop for it, get apps certified, get development
systems and so on.

http://212.100.234.54/content/59/28857.html

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 02:27:39 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Microsoft Announces Government Security Program


        Program Allows for Robust Security Audits of Windows Platform

    REDMOND, Wash., Jan. 14 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- National
governments and their principal agencies face more serious security
threats than other technology consumers do. In matters ranging from
national defense to protection of citizens' personal data, national
governments must place security at the forefront of their information
technology requirements.  

Recognizing this, Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) today announced the
Government Security Program (GSP), a global initiative that provides
national governments with controlled access to Microsoft(R) Windows(R)
source code and other technical information they need to be confident
in the enhanced security features of the Windows platform. The GSP is
one integral element in Microsoft's efforts to address the unique
security requirements of governments and international organizations
throughout the world.  Russia and NATO have already signed GSP
agreements with Microsoft, and the company is in discussions with more
than 20 countries about their interest in the program.  Participation
in the GSP will be disclosed at the discretion of each government
signatory, and Microsoft is committed to honoring confidentiality
where necessary.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30908352

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 08:00:05 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Swearing Off (and at) My Yahoo


by Marc Hedlund

Recently, I logged into My Yahoo! and saw the following:

http://www.precipice.org/idiots.gif

(I've obscured the username.) Yeah, it was my birthday. Yahoo knew it 
was my birthday -- how? Well, see, when you register for an account 
on Yahoo, they ask you your date of birth so that, as they say, "If 
you forget your password, we [can] identify you with this 
information."

Yahoo, you IDIOTS! WHAT are you thinking!? If you use birthdate as a 
means of password recovery, why would you put that information right 
on a user's home page? If it's supposed to be a shared secret, don't 
you think you ought to keep it secret?!

(Ahem. Excuse me.)


http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/2597

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 10:46:24 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Dish 921 PVR Info From AVS Forum


http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=469ec07b391b56000b3a5e1e4cd18836&threadid=210910

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 10:01:18 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Phreakers Target Texas A&M


Excerpt from
	SANS NewsBites Vol. 5 Num. 02
	http://www.sans.org/newsletters/newsbites/vol5_2.php

10 January 2003 -- Phreakers Target Texas A&M

Texas A&M University's telephone system was hit by phone phreakers who
guessed voice mailbox passwords and altered messages to accept charges
for long distance calls. Everyone at the University has been advised
to change voice mailbox passwords.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Southwest/01/10/university.phones.reut/

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 10:02:09 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Vatican Warns Against On-Line Confession


Excerpt from
	SANS NewsBites Vol. 5 Num. 02
	http://www.sans.org/newsletters/newsbites/vol5_2.php

10 January 2003 Vatican Warns Against On-Line Confession

The Vatican has warned against using the Internet to hear confessions,
as hackers could potentially use the private information to blackmail
people.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-538079,00.html

[Editor's Note (Grefer): It would be just as easy to bug a church's
confessional.]

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In fact that was done a few times. The
confessional at St. Peter's Church in Chicago was bugged by police a
few years ago when the police were trying to catch someone. Police did
not have authority to do this from the Pope, the Cardinal (in Chicago),
or any of the priests assigned to hear confessions at St. Peter's
Church. They just did it ... after all, we are police, we don't need
to get any permission to do our thing. It was the old 'Red Squad' unit
in the Chicago Police. When the bug was found, and exterminated, Chicago
Police were asked about it: Their only comment, a very lame one at
that was, 'we sure hope there were not any hard feelings'. Oddly, or
maybe not so odd, that was the same thing they said after Governor
Ryan pardoned and released uneqivically four men from death row this
past week, whose innocence was firmly established.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 10:03:07 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: West Point Establishes Secure Wireless Network


Excerpt from
	SANS NewsBites Vol. 5 Num. 02
	http://www.sans.org/newsletters/newsbites/vol5_2.php


West Point has established what it believes to be a highly secure
wireless network on its campus. The security measures, which include
a virtual private network (VPN) and sixty access controllers, cost the
school five times what it paid for the wireless network itself. Because
its network is connected to the Defense Department's network, West
Point wanted to make sure every security precaution was taken.

http://chronicle.com/free/2003/01/2003010801t.htm

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

From: Andy Finkenstadt <kahuna@panix.com>
Subject: Re: How to Detect an 'Invasive' MAC
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 05:01:10 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Reply-To: kahuna@panix.com


In <telecom22.231.13@telecom-digest.org> jared@hwai.com (Jared) writes:

> However, if they're using my network, it strikes me that their
> MAC's should be visible and I can use a built-in filtering rule to at
> least make them keep acquiring NIC's on a regular basis.  Does anyone
> know of any tools to do this, or should I expect my vendor (SMC) to
> provide this info (I didn't see it in the manual) from the AP itself?

Actually I think they can change their MAC address at any time, even
faking other vendors' cards.

You might be better off accepting connections in the AP only from the
listed MAC, and even that doesn't protect you under all circumstances
from the war-rider impersonating your MAC address and grabbing your
traffic.

Andrew Finkenstadt (http://www.finkenstadt.com/andy/)

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

From: Mark Atwood <mra@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: How to Detect an 'Invasive' MAC
Date: 14 Jan 2003 21:17:26 -0800
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


jared@hwai.com (Jared) writes:

> I have decided that I can't really stop warsniffers from discovering
> my network, eventually sniffing out my WEP keys and cracking their way
> in.  However, if they're using my network, it strikes me that their
> MAC's should be visible and I can use a built-in filtering rule to at
> least make them keep acquiring NIC's on a regular basis.  Does anyone
> know of any tools to do this, or should I expect my vendor (SMC) to
> provide this info (I didn't see it in the manual) from the AP itself?

Pointless.  When they are cracking their way in, expect to see them
duplicate your own MAC address, as many APs now have MAC access list control.


Mark Atwood   | Well done is better than well said.
mra@pobox.com | 
http://www.pobox.com/~mra

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

From: Linc Madison <nobody@example.com>
Subject: Re: How to Detect an 'Invasive' MAC
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 02:41:21 -0800
Organization: LincMad.com Consulting
Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com


In article <telecom22.231.13@telecom-digest.org>,
Jared <jared@hwai.com> wrote:

> I am setting up my first WLAN.

> I have decided that I can't really stop warsniffers from discovering
> my network, eventually sniffing out my WEP keys and cracking their
> way in.  However, if they're using my network, it strikes me that
> their MAC's should be visible and I can use a built-in filtering rule
> to at least make them keep acquiring NIC's on a regular basis.  Does
> anyone know of any tools to do this, or should I expect my vendor
> (SMC) to provide this info (I didn't see it in the manual) from the
> AP itself?

I have an Apple AirPort setup. The config software for the base station
allows me as one of the security options to restrict connections to a
white list of permitted MACs. You have to have both a known MAC address
and the password. If your MAC isn't on my list, you're out of luck.

I would expect that my packets will still be out there for the world to
sniff, but at least strangers can't inject any packets into my network.

I don't know of any stronger measures you can take; if someone just
passively eavesdrops on your packets, it's nearly impossible to detect,
let alone prevent.

[Of course, it happens that my MACs are associated with Macs, but
that's a coincidence.]


www dot LincMad dot com  / Telecom at LincMad dot com
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California

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

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Article by Consumer Reports on Cellular and 911
Date: 15 Jan 2003 01:13:27 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> He's saying it may be a FCC violation *NOT* to kick over to the
> alternate carrier.

If you'd clicked on the link and read the full article on the CU web
site, it claims that there's an FCC rule that requires analog cell
phones to use the strongest available system for 911 calls, but the
rule apparently hasn't been extended to digital and dual-mode phone.


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: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 08:13:28 +0000 (GMT)
From: Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@SystematicSw.ab.ca>
Subject: Re: Is the RIAA "Hacking You Back"?
Organization: Systematic Software


On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 13:45:45 -0500, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco
> Posted: 14/01/2003 at 00:29 GMT

> The RIAA is preparing to infect MP3 files in order to audit and
> eventually disable file swapping, according to a startling claim by
> hacker group Gobbles. In a posting to the Bugtraq mailing list,
> Gobbles himself claims to have offered his code to the RIAA, creating
> a monitoring "hydra".

> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/28842.html

So it looks like viruses, worms, trojans, etc. attached to
copyrighted material are no longer illegal in the US? 
Or does this law apply only to the RIAA and members? 

Thanks. Take care, 

Brian Inglis 	Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Brian.Inglis@CSi.com 	(Brian dot Inglis at SystematicSw dot ab dot ca)
    fake address		use address above to reply

abuse@aol.com tosspam@aol.com abuse@att.com abuse@earthlink.com 
abuse@hotmail.com abuse@mci.com abuse@msn.com abuse@sprint.com 
abuse@yahoo.com abuse@cadvision.com abuse@shaw.ca abuse@telus.com 
abuse@ibsystems.com uce@ftc.gov				spam traps

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

From: january2003@saurasite.com
Subject: Re: Can I Send Bulk Faxes Through SuperFax/ Bitware?
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:50:25 +0200


Please note that the address "january2003@saurasite.com  is a
temporary address, and is valid only until the end of the current
month.  (Pat, as an aside, the only address that I have ever had
*seriously* compromised spam-wise is one that was published here -
sorry, but that *is* the awful truth :-))

On 13 Jan 2003 07:09:31 -0800, in comp.dcom.telecom
nirwani@rediffmail.com (Dhirender) wrote:

> send the faxes. Would the free versions of Bitware of Supervoice
> support sending about 400 numbers at one time? 

Bitfax would probably do just fine ...

In the help files it says this about groups:

 | If you frequently send the same fax to a group of recipients, 
 | creating a phone book group can save you a lot of time. 
 | For example, if you routinely send the same fax to your clients
 | in New York, you can create a group called "New York Clients."
 | Then when you want to send a fax to each person in that group,
 |  all you have to do is select the "New York Clients" group, instead
 |  of manually selecting each record

I use V 3.30.06 (which dates back to somewhere around Windows 3.1)
but still works just fine under my current 98 SE, and I have yet to
find a low-priced alternative that is anything like as good ....     I
also run it full time on an *old* machine to receive faxes, and unlike
so many other packages, it never falls over. 

> Is there any other free software that could do that? Is there any
> other alternative?

I would take a serious look at one of the old Bitfaxes first ... it's
a genuine "oldie but goodie" ...


Cheers,

Frank R. P.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I know what you are saying is true. The
readership base is so large here, and that includes spammers and other
scum. Sorry, I cannot do anything it, at least at present. I've
thought of a few tricks, such as printing no names and addresses at all,
and just printing commentaries, but that is really unfair to readers
who wish to communicate with each other without going through me. I'm
still thinking about solutions, but not having much luck.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 08:41:17 -0500
From: No Spam <nospam@resi.com>
Subject: Caller ID on CFWD No Answer on Merlin Legend


I'm curious about responses from others on this as well.  Here's what
I know ...

I'm running a Legend rel 7 v9.0 CKE3 with a PRI from a CLEC on a
DMS100 CO using 23B + D.  I can't speak to the drop-and-insert for
data connectivity.

With respect to the forwarding ... I forward my extension to my wireless 
phone when I leave the office every day. The only CallerID I see on 
'forwarded' calls is the BTN/ANI for the PRI trunk group.  If we place a 
regular DOD call from a station, the proper CallerID is sent.  The Legend 
can only handle a single NPA/NXX for callerID purposes, so if you intend to 
send station specific CallerID information, you need to be sure that every 
station fits within your DID plan, and that they are ALL in the same 
npa/nxx.  (If you do place an outbound call with a 'non-did' station, it 
will be prepended with your DID npa/nxx, and will display the 'wrong' 
number on the far end.

I don't know if that 'mistake' is illegal or not.)

The only 'other' option is to assign a static CallerID assignment on a
'per B channel' basis (like having copper trunks with one number per
trunk).  Another consideration for the above is whether your telco
validates the CallerID being sent.  (For example, since we have a
'mixed' npa/nxx DID range, I was trying to configure our toll-free
number on each B channel so that would be displayed on the far
end ... however our CLEC won't pass the toll-free number.)

As far as forwarding in the 'rest of the world' ... I think it's a
matter of telco implementation.  I also forward my home phone
(provided by an RBOC LEC on a 5ESS) to my wireless phone, and the
number that is displayed on the 'forward destination' end is the
'original' caller, and not my home (forwarding) number.


Joshua

I speak for myself but not necessarily for my employer ....

luvencl@potmail.com wrote:

> I am getting ready to convert a LUCENT Legend Release 7.0 to T1 PRI,
> and I have a couple of questions.

> The local operating company BellSouth is going to supply a Fractional
> PRI with internet data on DS0's 11-23.  Ch 24 is of course the B
> channel.

> And DS0's 1-10 will be dedicated to the Lucent Legend switch.  I am
> looking for someone that has actually seen this done successfully, and
> also would like to find out if caller ID on DOD calls has the options
> of displaying the actual DID extension's phone number?  And finally,
> on a call forward no answer (Lucent call this FWD with delay) will the
> incoming called ID info be passed on through the DOD call?  Example,
> someone on PSTN calls 555-555-1001, (which will DID to ext 101 on the
> PBX). Ext 101 does not answer, call gets routed to another outside
> line via two-way trunk over PRI. What will the destination end get for
> caller ID?  Will it be the originating end's called ID or the
> extension's called ID?

> To reply, please note I have anti spam setup.  Please change the p to
> an h as in hotmail.  Thanks very much for your time and help in
> advance!  luvencl@potmail.com

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can tell you my experience with SBC
> and  forward on busy/no answer is that the eventual recipient of the
> call (my cell phone, usually) gets the number of my house line, rather
> than the caller's number. That's a nuisance, since my answer phrase
> would change according to the number of the caller *if I knew what it
> was*. Telco explained it to me this way: YOU are making the call to
> your cell phone. We are simply automating the process. But oddly
> enough, if I use immediate call forwarding on my home line, the number
> of the original caller gets forwarded also. In other words, just the
> opposite process. Any explanations for that?    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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #233
******************************
    
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 15 21:07:03 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0G273j13157;
	Wed, 15 Jan 2003 21:07:03 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 21:07:03 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301160207.h0G273j13157@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #234

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 15 Jan 2003 21:07:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 234

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    NSA Reports Benchmarks Kill 91% Of Tested Vulnerabilities (Monty Solomon)
    Microsoft Reader e-Book Software Circumvention Code Post (Monty Solomon)
    Hong Kong Gym Pulls Plug on Camera Cell Phones (Monty Solomon)
    Supreme Court Upholds Copyright Law Extension (Monty Solomon)
    Unintended Consequences: Four Years under the DMCA (Monty Solomon)
    Started as a Gimmick, Ring-Tone Sales Near $1 Bilion (Monty Solomon)
    In-Flight Highspeed Internet Access for Trans-Atlantic (Monty Solomon)
    Colombia Cellphone Firms Sue Rival for Trespassing (Monty Solomon)
    RIAA Calls Hacking Claim a Hoax (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Is the RIAA "Hacking You Back"? (John Higdon)
    Mobile Phones Lose Millions of Text Messages (Monty Solomon)
    Can I Detect Call Fowarding? (Wayne Price)
    AT&T Wireless Internet at $4000/Month!! Look Out!! (Paul Erickson)
    Re: Request Recommendations for Integrated Access (Voice/Data) (Erickson)
    ANI and TracFone (K. Faraday)
    Chat on the Phone to Support Scientific Research (Thomas M Malec)
    Re: PBS Airs the (Long) History of Chicago (Jim Haynes)
    Re: Keystone Kops & Kollect Kalls (Joey Lindstrom)
    My Clumsy Fingers Hang up on Australian Caller (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: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 10:06:36 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: NSA Reports Benchmarks Eradicate 91% Of Tested Vulnerabilities


Excerpt from
	SANS NewsBites Vol. 5 Num. 02
	http://www.sans.org/newsletters/newsbites/vol5_2.php

  --December 2002  NSA Reports Benchmarks Eradicate 91% Of Tested
                    Vulnerabilities

The most recent US Department of Defense Information Assurance
Newsletter reports that tests run by the National Security Agency
measured the impact of applying security configuration benchmarks,
specifically the Center for Internet Security/NSA/GSA/NIST Windows
2000 Consensus Security Baseline Settings.  Applying the baseline
settings eliminated more than 95% of high priority vulnerabilities (as
determined by a popular commercial scanner) and 91% of all
vulnerabilities.  Download the complete IA Newsletter at
http://iac.dtic.mil/iatac/news_events/pdf/Vol5_No3.pdf The NSA data is
presented and analyzed beginning on page 10.  The baseline settings,
referenced in the article, are available for download from
www.cisecurity.org along with a free tool that tests your system for
compliance.

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 10:04:00 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Microsoft Reader e-Book Software Circumvention Code Posted


Excerpt from
	SANS NewsBites Vol. 5 Num. 02
	http://www.sans.org/newsletters/newsbites/vol5_2.php

British programmer Dan Jackson has posted software that circumvents
the copy protection on Microsoft Reader e-book software. Both the
program and its source code are posted on Jackson's site; the program's
creator wants to remain anonymous, according to Jackson. He says his
involvement with the project stems from his desire "to read e-books
on older platforms." Microsoft is examining its options, which include
taking legal action.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/28749.html
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-979778.html

[Editor's Note (Murray): We have heard that defense before. No one
cares what he does to satisfy his own reading appetite. He does not
have to publish on the Internet to do that.]

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note specifically to Murray:  We have heard
Microsoft apologists like you before also. If he wants to help others,
(and that is one objective of the internet, is it not?) the internet
would seem a very good place to publish his work.  Why is it Microsoft,
RIAA and many others are using the internet without understanding the
reasons for which it was started and is still basically used?  If 
those people do not want their stuff copied/abused by others, then
they should not be putting it on the net. My short e-book, *Genesis 39*
will be available on the net; whatever money I make from it is not the
reason I am making it available in this forum; it is intended to share
with the community of netizens.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 10:58:34 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Hong Kong Gym Pulls Plug on Camera Cell Phones


By Doug Young

HONG KONG (Reuters) - Warning: use of camera-equipped mobile phones 
could be hazardous to your health.

That's the message going out from at least one chain of health clubs 
in Hong Kong, where a new generation of cell phones that can take and 
transmit video and still photos is raising concerns over a new crop 
of privacy-related issues.

Physical, which operates nine gyms in the former British colony, 
recently posted signs in its Hong Kong facilities forbidding the use 
of mobile phones in locker rooms.

http://news.lycos.com/news/story.asp?section=OddNews&storyId=623861

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 11:04:57 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Supreme Court Upholds Copyright Law Extension


By James Vicini

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Wednesday a 1998
law extending copyright protection by 20 years, delaying when creative
works such as Walt Disney Co.'s Mickey Mouse cartoons, F.  Scott
Fitzgerald's novels and George Gershwin's songs become public
property.

The 7-2 ruling was a victory for supporters of the law, including
large media companies and song publishers that argued the longer term
was needed to protect a vital industry that contributes more than $500
billion to the U.S. economy.

It dealt a defeat to an Internet publisher and others who challenged
the law for limiting free speech and for harming the creative process
by locking up material that they said should be in the public domain
for all to use without charge.

http://news.lycos.com/news/story.asp?section=Politics&storyId=624841

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 11:07:42 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Unintended Consequences: Four Years under the DMCA


1.	Executive Summary

Since they were enacted in 1998, the "anti-circumvention" provisions 
of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), codified in section 
1201 of the Copyright Act, have not been used as Congress envisioned. 
Congress meant to stop copyright pirates from defeating anti-piracy 
protections added to copyrighted works, and to ban "black box" 
devices intended for that purpose.[1]

In practice, the anti-circumvention provisions have been used to 
stifle a wide array of legitimate activities, rather than to stop 
copyright piracy. As a result, the DMCA has developed into a serious 
threat to three important public policy priorities:

Section 1201 Chills Free Expression and Scientific Research.

Experience with section 1201 demonstrates that it is being used to 
stifle free speech and scientific research. The lawsuit against 2600 
magazine, threats against Princeton Professor Edward Felten's team of 
researchers, and prosecution of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov 
have chilled the legitimate activities of journalists, publishers, 
scientists, students, programmers, and members of the public.


Section 1201 Jeopardizes Fair Use.

By banning all acts of circumvention, and all technologies and tools 
that can be used for circumvention, section 1201 grants to copyright 
owners the power to unilaterally eliminate the public's fair use 
rights. Already, the music industry has begun deploying 
"copy-protected CDs" that promise to curtail consumers' ability to 
make legitimate, personal copies of music they have purchased.

Section 1201 Impedes Competition and Innovation.

Rather than focusing on pirates, many copyright owners have chosen to 
use the DMCA to hinder their legitimate competitors. For example, 
Sony has invoked section 1201 to protect their monopoly on 
Playstation video game consoles, as well as their "regionalization" 
system limiting users in one country from playing games legitimately 
purchased in another.

This document collects a number of reported cases where the 
anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA have been invoked not 
against pirates, but against consumers, scientists, and legitimate 
competitors. It will be updated from time to time as additional cases 
come to light. The latest version can always be obtained at 
www.eff.org.

http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20030102_dmca_unintended_consequences.html

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 11:14:04 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Started as a Gimmick, Ring-Tone Sales Near $1 Billion


By Bernhard Warner, European Internet Correspondent

    LONDON, Jan 15 (Reuters) - Ring tones, those ubiquitous,
monophonic song recordings programmed into seemingly every teenager's
mobile phone, are quietly becoming a money-maker for the music
industry.

    A new study released Wednesday by London-based Informa Media Group
said that authors' collection societies collected $71 million in
royalties from ring-tone sales in 2002, up 58 percent from the
previous year.

    Informa's senior analyst Simon Dyson said the royalties figure --
which is typically 10-15 percent of the total sales from ring tones --
would suggest that the overall market is over $700 million annually,
and quite possibly as high as $1 billion.

    The proceeds are divided between operators, labels and the
artists.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30914313

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 11:16:08 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: In-Flight Highspeed Internet Access for Trans-Atlantic Travelers


FRANKFURT, Germany--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 15, 2003--

           Lufthansa Frankfurt to D.C. Flight Marks Initial
                   Trials of Cisco Mobility Solution

    Passenger trials on the airline industry's first onboard broadband
network on a commercial plane begin today with a Boeing 747-400 flight
from Frankfurt, Germany to Washington, DC. Operated by Deutsche
Lufthansa AG, this pioneering Lufthansa flight offers air travellers
high-speed Internet access from the comfort of their own seats.

    Connexion By Boeing, a mobile information services provider, is
providing the infrastructure that allows two-way-live data between the
plane and the ground, with speeds of 3 Mbps downstream and 128 Kbps
upstream. Cisco Systems is providing the technology for the onboard
network with Wi-Fi (IEEE 802.11b) compliant wireless connectivity
throughout all the cabins and in addition an Ethernet connector in the
passenger seats.

    Five Cisco Aironet 350 Series Access Points have been fitted
throughout the plane, along with one Cisco 3640 Router and nine Cisco
Catalyst 3548 XL Series Switches. The Cisco standard equipment is
modified, tested and certified by Lufthansa Technik in order to meet
civil aviation regulations.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30914750

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 12:01:22 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Colombia Cellphone Firms Sue Rival for Trespassing


BOGOTA, Colombia, Jan 15 (Reuters) - Colombia's two mobile phone
operators, BellSouth Colombia and Comcel, have said they eparately
sued utility Empresas Publicas de Medellin (EPM) for a total of $200
million for allegedly infringing on their business.

    BellSouth Colombia, a subsidiary of U.S. firm BellSouth Corp.
(NYSE:BLS), and Comcel, controlled by Mexico's America Movil
(NYSE:AMX), said late on Tuesday that EPM's provision of a local
wireless loop service to subscribers in the cities of Bogota and
Medellin was effectively a mobile phone service.

    The wireless loop technology allows subscribers to use a portable
handset with their fixed-line phone up to a distance of about 25 miles
(40 km).

    EPM, which is controlled by the city of Medellin, only has a
license for providing fixed-line telephone services.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30922326

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 12:21:36 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: RIAA Calls Hacking Claim a Hoax


By Robert Lemos
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

Claims that the music industry hired a group of hackers to create a 
worm to infect peer-to-peer networks are being dismissed by security 
experts.

In an advisory posted to security mailing lists, a group called
Gobbles Security delivered its latest vulnerability -- a real one
found in a relatively unknown MP3 player -- wrapped in an apparent
joke aimed at the Recording Industry Association of America. The main
part of the advisory consisted of Gobbles' claims that its programmers
had created a "hydra" -- a worm capable of spreading in a variety of
ways -- that infects all major music software.

The RIAA, the organization that represents major music publishers, 
wasn't amused. "It's a complete hoax," said an RIAA spokesman, who 
asked that his name not be used. "It's not true."

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-980649.html

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Is the RIAA "Hacking You Back"?
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 09:47:23 -0800


In article <telecom22.232.10@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco
> Posted: 14/01/2003 at 00:29 GMT

> The RIAA is preparing to infect MP3 files in order to audit and
> eventually disable file swapping, according to a startling claim by
> hacker group Gobbles. In a posting to the Bugtraq mailing list,
> Gobbles himself claims to have offered his code to the RIAA, creating
> a monitoring "hydra".

Don't forget that in computing, what can be done can be undone. The RIAA 
is up against a world full of computer talent that does not necessarily 
agree with its tactics.

In turning to quasi-lawlessness, the RIAA is forgetting that its
targets enjoy the same lack of legal constraint. Anyone who's computer
is being invaded by RIAA tactics is well within his rights to protect
himself from the attack and to assist others to protect themselves
from the same.

I would imagine that virus scanning software will be quite capable of
detecting any bogus files, regardless of their source. If the RIAA
tries to coerce the software companies into ignoring the "official
infections", a great opportunity will be created for small competitors
in that field to rise to the top.

John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Mobile Phones Lose Millions of Text Messages
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 15:35:31 -0500


CHICAGO, Illinois (Reuters) -- Millions of short text messages sent
between mobile phones in the United States are lost every month, and
the chance of two parties connecting depends on which networks they
use, a study released Wednesday says.

Internet performance measurement company Keynote Systems Inc.  says in
its study that 7.5 percent of all short text messages sent between
wireless telephone companies are lost.

The increasingly popular service known as SMS (Short Message Service)
allows mobile phone users to send brief messages instantaneously to
their friends and family.  It typically costs 10 cents to send a
message and pennies to nothing to receive one.


http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/ptech/01/15/telecoms.keynote.reut/index.html

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

From: wprice@adneco.com (Wayne Price)
Subject: Can I Detect Call Fowarding?
Date: 15 Jan 2003 11:02:47 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Is it possible to detect if the phone number I am calling is forwarded
to another number?  Or is it possible to block call forwarding on
numbers that I call?


Thanks, 

Wayne

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

From: Paul Erickson <paule@mindspring.com>
Subject: AT&T Wireless Internet at $4000/Month!! Look Out!!
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:40:53 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Forwarded from alt.internet.wireless - this is quite a story.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "G. Barber" <gregbarber_mmx@hotmail.com>
  Newsgroups: alt.internet.wireless
  Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 2:38 AM
  Subject: AT&T wireless internet at $4000 a month!! Look out!!

Jan 7/03  Vancouver, Canada

I believe I may have received the largest bill AT&T has ever
fabricated for one month of wireless internet access.  $3996.33!!  Can
anyone top this or have you received a similar bill.

A little background.  I wanted wireless internet access from my laptop
and decided on the PCMCIA Sierra Wireless Aircard 750, using the new
GPRS connectivity through Rogers AT&T.  They had a promo package, and
I signed a six month contract for unlimited internet access for
$50/mo. CAD  Not a bad deal and for the most part the system worked
pretty well.  The aircard itself was pretty expensive at $599 CAD, but
since I'm completly mobile, living in my motorhome, this seemed like a
pretty good solution.

Things went along fine until the contract ended, when without
informing me they switched the billing to 5MB for $30.  Classic bait
and switch.  So I was happily surfing away as the $$$ piled up.  And
boy do they pile up fast.

I did a little experiment.  The aircard has a counter that allows you
to see how many KB are coming down the pipe.  I loaded an average web
page,and the counter was already over 6 MB in 30 seconds.  So in the
first minute of surfing the net, it had already cost me $30 and AT&T
was into the gravy.  Even though, from what I recall, the GPRS system
was usually only capable of 3KB/sec downloads, giving 180 KB/minute-
thats what the counter showed and thats how I was billed.

You can get into trouble real fast with this system.  How does
something that cost $50 one month become $4000 the next?  The first
way is to switch your contract hoping you don't notice.  I didn't.
The next way is that data in MB and KB is very difficult to control
when surfing the net, and not easily understood the way regular cell
phones are billed in minutes and seconds.  It is more intangable.  For
example, a 5MB plan would seem like a lot, but everything is tallied
and billed in KB.  Some of you whizzes will immediatly know that
5MB=5,000 KB, which is a pittance when surfing the net as I have
already shown.  For most people this would not be easy to understand.

As most of you already know, and as I add this post to the gazillion
under "AT&T SUCKS", I didn't get very far when trying to get customer
support to see the insanity of this bill.

I don't think the morons at AT&T realize the difference between text
messaging on the GSM/GPRS phones where 5 MB would make some sense, and
full blown graphical and data intensive internet access through a
wireless aircard.  In fact I'm almost certain they don't even know the
difference, since your aircard is paired to a phone number.  The
absolute highest plan they can come up with after your unlimited promo
is 80 MB for $145 CAD.  This would be good for a few hours of surfing
the net, a little email and internet banking and insanely expense for
internet access.

I hope anyone considering wireless internet access via aircard and
AT&T will see that this is not a viable option as it is presently
structured.  Also for anyone signed on to their "bait and switch"
promo, be careful.

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

From: Paul Erickson <paule@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Request Recommendations for Integrated Access (Voice/Data)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:45:48 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


> I have some clients that use Allegiance and XO for integrated
> voice/data solutions.

Just curious if your Allegiance clients are happy clients?  I have
heard nothing positive about them, and their salespeople lied to me in
an earlier encounter.

An XO rep stopped by the other day - another bankrupt telecom - what's
the word on these guys?


-- Paul

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

From: atlanta@att.net (K. Faraday)
Subject: ANI and TracFone
Date: 15 Jan 2003 08:48:25 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Hello,

I have an old analog TracFone and I was wondering if when I call
somewhere that has ANI (not Caller ID) such has a business or 800
number, if they get my name and address.  I know they ALWAYS get the
phone number but I wasn't sure about the other info.  TracFone does
have my name, address and phone number in their records but since this
is a prepaid phone I did not know if it goes out along with the ANI.

For instance, if I call a company for product info. I don't want them
to end up having my name and address to send tons of junk mail or
start calling my home number with sales calls.  Again, I realize they
get the cell number but that's OK.

Hope this made sense.

Thanks to anyone who can answer.

Kelly


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Have you tried using that phone to call
yourself at a number you control with caller ID to see how it looks?
That would be about the easiest way to tell what is being sent. I know
early on I tried using my (original) AT&T cell phone to call myself 
and look at the caller-ID screen when the call came through. I also
used a very old Motorola bag phone (which I have on prepaid service)
to call myself at my home number. Depending on the caller ID box -- I
have three of them, all stand-alones from different manufacturers,
they would (using the old Motorola bag phone) either have nothing at
all to say other than the number, or it would identify me as 'wireless
caller' and the number. PAT]

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

From: tmalec@GUSTAV.LDC.UPENN.EDU (Thomas M Malec)
Subject: Chat on The Phone to Support Scientific Research
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 17:03:08 UTC
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


Chat on the phone to support scientific research and earn a chance to win
$1000!

The Linguistic Data Consortium at the University of Pennsylvania
(www.ldc.upenn.edu) needs participants for FISHER, a new telephone
speech study to be conducted in the Early Winter 2002-2003.  FISHER is
open to all fluent speakers of English, native and non-native alike.
In contrast to our prior regional telephone studies (Switchboard),
FISHER will cover the entire US. The FISHER project will support
linguistic research, technology development and education.  All calls
will be recorded for these purposes and we will keep participant
identities strictly confidential.

FISHER participants will take part in 1 to 3 telephone calls talking
for ten minutes to other participants on suggested topics.  FISHER
topics can be found at the URL below:

    http://www.ldc.upenn.edu/Projects/EARS/Fisher/topics.html

A robot operator will initiate all calls. Participants need only
answer their phones at the times they specify during the registration
process.

Participants will be compensated $10 per call.  In addition, for each
call made, participants will be eligible for 1 chance at (3) $1000.00
lottery prizes.

This study is open to any fluent speaker of English in the US. You
need not be a US citizen to participate.  You need only have the
ability to answer a phone in the US.  If you know of anyone who might
be interested in contributing a few minutes of their time to support
research, we would greatly appreciate your making them aware of this
opportunity.

To register for this study please visit the following page:

http://www.ldc.upenn.edu/Projects/EARS/Fisher/intro.html

or call 1 800 380 PENN to register and for more information.

Sincerely,

Dr. David Miller
FISHER Project Manager

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

Subject: Re: PBS Airs the (Long) History of Chicago
Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu
Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni
From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 18:57:59 GMT


In article <telecom22.232.4@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> If you don't know much about the astonishing rise of Chicago in the 
> 19th century, or if you're a Chicago chauvinist, 'Chicago: City of 
> the Century' is rich gruel. If, however, you're remotely familiar 

There is also a book with the same title by Donald L. Miller.  I found
it for less than $5 on the remainder racks at some bookstore.  My one
disappointment is that in covering all the Chicago tycoons there was
no mention of the Mortons and the Salt business, and of course that
was the source of money and management for Teletype until the Bell
System purchase.

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:38:26 -0700
Subject: Re: Keystone Kops & Kollect Kalls
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 01:42:06 EST, Henry E Schaffer wrote:

> In article <telecom22.225.14@telecom-digest.org>, Joey Lindstrom
> <joey@telussucks.info> wrote:

>> Each and every man (and woman) in prison has been found guilty by a
>> judge and/or jury (do you have trials by judge alone in the US?  In
>> Canada, the accused can elect for such a trial).  It is therefore
>> inappropriate to assume their innocence until proven otherwise -- it
>> already has been proven otherwise.  

> Well, except for the ones who are awaiting trial -- sometimes for a
> time period approaching or exceeding a year.

And then Pat added:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Henry, your *theory* is quite correct.
> One thing that Joey Lindstrom did not realize when he wrote his screed
> (and I neglected to respond on) was the large number of people locked
> up in dungeon-like jails (Cook County in Chicago -- the largest jail
> in the world -- for one example) who are treated *as though they are
> already guilty* even though they have not been to court; oftentimes
> not even once at that point. It is quite common for an arrested person
> being held at Cook County Jail to not even be allowed to contact his
> lawyer or family for the first three or four days of his arrival; then
> when he *can* get to a phone, it has to be one of those (pardon me!)
> God-damned collect calls for several dollars. They do everything in
> their power to work around the requirement that inmates be allowed to
> notify family and attornies of their whereabouts, all in the name of
> institutional administrivia of course. Even the payphones in the
> police lockups in Chicago are on the same system. From the *very
> instant* one of the fine, noble, honest police officers in the
> 'Chicago system' (i.e. Chicago, and any of the suburbs) puts his
> sights on you, forget about any phone calls until *he* decides you
> should be allowed to make one, and then it will be at a payphone which
> is set to only make collect outgoing calls, using an automated
> operator-voice which informs the recipient of the call that 'this is a
> collect call from an inmate in a correctional institution, will you
> accept the charges? Press one to accept, two to decline.' And God help
> you if you do decide to accept it. If you do not press one or two, but
> simply stand there trying to make sense of it all, the message will
> repeat itself a couple times, then assume you said 'no' and disconnect,
> telling the arrested party the charges were declined.

This is a syntactical misunderstanding for which I'll take the blame.
Maybe this is more common on this side of the border, but I've always
assigned different meanings to the words "prison" and "jail".  The
former refers to the place you get sent to *AFTER* conviction.  The
latter refers to the place you spend time in *PRIOR* to conviction.

Everything I said, refered to "prison" - ie: to people convicted of
crimes.

Let me say for the record that when it comes to situations as you've
outlined, ie: people AWAITING TRIAL, I agree 100% that they are being
treated SHAMEFULLY - in other words (mark the time and date!) I agree
with you.  The assumption of innocence before a finding of guilt is
absolutely fundamental and sacrosact and is, last time I checked,
enshrined in the constitutions of both our nations.  I can see why the
outgoing Republican governor of Illinois pardoned all those guys on
death row.  I initially felt he had gone way too far, until I delved
further into the story and found it wasn't really a blanket pardon, but
was well-reasoned and tailored to each individual case.

But we're getting off the track.  Back to Henry:

>> We now assume their guilt -- and thus the appropriateness of
>> punishing them and otherwise restricting their rights, ie: the right
>> to make cheap phone calls -- until their innocence is otherwise
>> proven.  ...

> Is keeping them from making phone calls cheaply really an intentional
> punishment?  If so, why not just keep them from making any phone calls
> -- or perhaps restricting them to one call a month? (not to exceed
> three minutes.)

Well, as has been mentioned, some jurisdictions have advocate judges
who've decided to write new law, and have thus guaranteed that
criminals have the ability to make phone calls from prison (wouldn't
it be fun to get a phone call from the guy in prison who raped you?)
But more to the point: the primary idea behind throwing people in
prison, more than "punishment" or "rehabilitation", is protecting
society from these evil, twisted, sick bastards.  Letting them make
phone calls flies completely in the face of this.  They should not be
allowed to participate in the society that they have harmed - period.

I'll make one exemption to this: the prisoner must be allowed to
contact his/her legal representative (within reason).

-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is enshrined in the rules there in 
Canada, and that used to be the case here in the USA as well, at least
under the old system -- prior to 9-11-01. There are now hundreds of 
men locked up in USA jails whose only offense appears to be they are
 from the middle-east, or they 'appear' to be of some middle-east
nationality. Those are the guys I really feel bad about; in the wrong
place at the wrong time; now locked up until whenever, while the
police work hard trying to find something to pin on them. Of course,
Cook County Jail, Chicago, Illinois wasn't invented post 9-11. There
have been complaints about that place -- the largest  'jail' (i.e.
prison) in the world for many years -- to no avail. What's really
interesting to see is when someone who was *employed* there, winds up
as an inmate there. And that happens a lot also. It is a terribly
frightening place. And you would not be there if you were not already
guilty. Police make those decisions, and we all know they are very 
honorable, noble, fair and honest. If they had not thought you should
be there, you wouldn't be there. We know police don't make mistakes
or judge anyone unfairly! 

No Joey, the United States has pretty much given up on any pretenses
of 'innocent and worthy of rights, etc until proven guilty by a jury
of peers.' Police will tell you that sort of foolishness is not wanted
any longer here. And with thirty-plus 'actual' prisons already in
southern Illinois (250-400 miles south of Chicago), they are starting
to run out of places to build them. They may have to actually build
one or two new ones in Chicago. As it is, the Salvation Army operates
a half-dozen bus routes which run every weekend to the prisons, and
gives each bus rider (invariably black ladies; usually with their
babies, since the prisons in Illinois are 95 percent black and about 
90-95 percent Chicago residents) a sack lunch and milk for the babies,
etc. 

Three to four hour bus ride to get to the prisons, a three to four
hour bus ride back home, a *thirty minute* visiting time allowed when
there. It usually works out okay; now and again a bus full of black
ladies gets sidewiped on I-55 and everyone gets killed, as happened a
couple years ago at Christmas. When that happens the Chicago Tribune
tells about it in thick, bold headlines, then all gets back to
normal. The system seems to work okay, no complaints except from
young, very liberal social workers, some of whom are employed at Cook
County Jail; others are employed by Salvation Army.  But they soon
learn to shut up and go with the flow, at least the ones employed by
the jail. No, Joey, that old ridiculous concept (at least according to
police/prosecutors) of 'innocent until proven guilty' has no meaning
here in the United States any longer. I am *so glad* to be out of
Chicago, IL for good, permanently. The whole city and its political
structure has gotten so rotten.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 18:44:09 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: My Clumsy Fingers Hang up on Australian Caller


Wednesday afternoon at about 2 PM central time, I received a phone
call from a Digest reader in Perth, Australia. That would have been
very cool, but as it happened, the call arrived while I was working on
the television set in my bedroom. I had chatted very briefly with the
caller, and asked him to hold while I switched to another phone At
that point I quite accidentally cut him off!  If I had had his name
and telephone number I would have called him back. Lacking that
inforM- ation, I *hoped* he would call back so I could humbly
apologize.  But no such luck; he did not call back!  Whoever you were,
I do most sincerely apologize, and hope you will call again, so we can
chat at length, as long as you wish. I did not mean to be rude; I am
sure it appeared I just disconnected you. I did not mean to do that.


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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #234
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan 16 00:43:51 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0G5hpR17226;
	Thu, 16 Jan 2003 00:43:51 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 00:43:51 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301160543.h0G5hpR17226@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #235

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Jan 2003 00:44:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 235

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Tokelau, Pitcairn and Other Obscure Places (Mark J. Cuccia)
    Re: AT&T Wireless Internet at $4000/Month!! Look Out!! (Mark Crispin)
    SBP382 (Sellcom Tech Support)
    Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman)
    Re: FCC's Powell Concerned by Media Concentration (Paul Wallich)
    Re: Illinois Death Row is Empty Today (Linda Davis)

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, 15 Jan 2003 20:15:55 CST
From: Mark J Cuccia <mcuccia@tulane.edu>
Subject: Tokelau, Pitcairn and Other Obscure Places


Doug Faunt, replying to a previous post on how internal numbering space
within Tokelau's country code +690 seems to have been 'hijacked' (or
freely given???) to tele-SLEAZE (!) wrote:

> I don't understand how a valid country code can be abused as you
> suggest.  I'd appreciate a further explanation.

In today's telephone (and business) environment, these things have
been allowed to happen. Unfortunately, international and domestic
government regulatory agencies just don't seem to have the time nor
desire to police or root out such abuses. To be fair to them in some
respect, sometimes they (regulatory) just don't have the resources
and/or jurisdiction to police it.

It *USED* to be that from the US (and Canada), virtually all calls to
a particular country code would be charged the same rate, depending on
the calling party's time/day and "rate plan". I could call any number
range within that country code, regardless of service (landline
vs. wireless) or geographic location within that country code, and be
billed the same rate. Of course, internal toll-free numbers and
internal PAY-per-call (usually SLEAZE) numbers within that country/
country-code, were either BLOCKED by AT&T and/or the domestic carrier
in that destination country, or else if allowed, I'd be billed a rate
no higher than to call "POTS" landline or cellular numbers anywhere
within that country / country code.

Even in the 1980's/90's, there have been exceptions here/there ...

+52 Mexico has always been distance-based rated, depending on the
destination Mexican domestic numbering/codes I dialed dialed ...

+53 Cuba was not dialable from the US via US-based carriers until the
mid-1990s, although the 'kludge' code of +53-99 for the US Military
base at Guantanamo Bay has been dialable (as 01(1)+53+99+) from the US
(ONLY) since the 1980's. And today, with +53 Cuba now dialable from
the US, I seem to think that the rates from the US to Cuba as +53 and
from the US to +53-99 Guantanamo Bay are *DIFFERENT*. In the 1980's, I
also think it still mattered on from where *within* the (continental)
US you were calling from when using AT&T IOC Operators to call Cuba,
as to the rate you were charged -- i.e., a call to Cuba from Florida
would be charged a different rate (probably less) than a call from
California to Cuba would be charged.

(NOTE - calls to the US Military Base at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba from
non-US locations, INCLUDING from Canada and other [non-US] NANP points
apparantly can NOT be customer-dialed as +53-99-etc., but apparantly
must be OPERATOR HANDLED. I don't know if they have to conatact the
AT&T IOC in Pittsburgh -- or for that matter, ANY US-based AT&T OSPS
Operator -- or even if the operator in the calling country can
directly dial to +53-99, but I have read that the use of
+53-99-etc. for dialing directly to Guantanamo Bay in
customer-dialable ONLY from the *US*, and not even from Canada.)

In more recent years, overseas/international calls to points outside
of +1 (NANP) can have different rates to numbers within the same
country code depending on whether or not the destination number/number
range is landline or wireless/cellular... Or "personal" numbers
(similar to the +1-500 SAC fiasco in the US a few years ago). Domestic
calls to cellulars *within* that country are usually *VERY* expensive,
the calling party paying the "airtime" (mostly GRAVY for the telcos
and wireless providers).  And a vew years ago, they started demanding
that foreign overseas telcos and carriers pay this extra "gravy" on
calls to cellular originating from overseas.

In most (at least many) countries around the world, wireless service
is within its own area codes or numbering range. And these countries
have calling-party-pays (exhorbitant) airtime/toll/etc. "gravy" to
call cellular phones. And there are those trying to force this on
cellular and landline customers within in the US and Canada as well! :(

So now, depending on the carriers involved, it *might* now be possible
to call "900-like" numbers *within* a distant country/country-code,
not be blocked, and also be charged the expensive PAY-PAY-PAY-per-call
SLEAZE rate.

> And if MCI has no problem,

[on calling +690 Tokelau, in general]

> why does AT&T have this problem?

I don't know! :(

I think that even (US)Sprint-LD now allows calls to +690 Tokelau too.

It's a different world today, as I mentioned earlier. In today's
competitive environment, it could be that AT&T feels no real "incentive"
to set up dial-service to +690 Tokelau? How many people would "really"
be calling out there? Not that I agree with what AT&T is doing -- but
I'm guessing that maybe the SO CALLED "business realities" of today's of
today's telco industry is why AT&T doesn't offer service there???

And +690 Tokelau isn't the only location like this ...

I don't think that AT&T yet offers (dial) service to +670 East Timor.
Back in the 1970's, Portuguese Timor was separate from +62 Indonesia,
both telephonically and politically, and had its own Country Code
+672.  Eventually, Portugal pulled out of this colony/dependancy/
possesion (whatever its legal status was), and Timor became a part of
+62 Indonesia both politically/jurisdictionally as well as telephonically.

By 1984 the CCITT/ITU assigned +672 to "Australian External Territories".
(I don't understand WHY they had to get their own code, instead of
"sharing" from +61 Australia ... maybe there was some kind of routing
and/or rating reason?)

Also by 1984, +670 was assigned to the US possesion of Saipan/Mariana
Islands in the north Pacific. But in 1997/98 (and WITH advance notice),
Guam (+671) and Saipan/etc (+670) both became part of +1/NANP, as +1-671-
and +1-670 (respectively).

Since 1997 (and possibly earlier), there was a separatist movement in
"East Timor" (formerly Portuguese Timor). They eventually have
separated, but for an INTERIM time were reached through (ironically
their original country code) +672, but this time SHARING from number
space of Australia External Territories. I think that Australia helped
with investment and development of East Timor's new telephone
system. And then by 2000, +670 was (re) assigned (by the ITU), to the
new independent East Timor.

Even with various national and international standards bodies doing
what they could to inform the world telephone community that +670 is
now a valid country code for East Timor, and that Saipan/etc hasn't
been +670 since 1997 when it migrated into the NANP as +1-670-, there
are still either telcos/etc. who think +670 is still Saipan, or at
least don't yet recognize +670 for East Timor for customer dialing.

And I *THINK* that AT&T is one of these carriers. They don't "block"
(customer) dialed 01(1)+670-etc. in the originating 4ESS "as if" +670
was invalid, but they rather route it to a "vacant code" recording
from the 4ESS in Reno NV, that 4E was used in 1997/98 and for a few
years following to play the recording indicating that Guam and
Saipan/Mariana Islands were now dialed as 1+/0+ the 671/670 area code
etc., rather than as 01(1)+671/670-etc. if the customer happened to
still dial the call as an IDDD 011+ call.

But I also think that both MCI and (US)Sprint *DO* allow customer
dialing to +670 East Timor.

Similarly, +93 Afghanistan hasn't been customer dialable. (no surprise
there). But last year, after the US invasion, the telephone system has
been built up to SOME degree, and there is a domestic numbering
document for +93 Afghganistan at the ITU's website, see the following
set of URLs for further info:

http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/inr/index.html
http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/inr/nnp/index.html
http://www.itu.int/itudoc/itu-t/number/a/afg/77447.html
http://www.itu.int/itudoc/itu-t/number/a/afg/77447_ww9.doc (English)
http://www.itu.int/itudoc/itu-t/number/a/afg/77447_ww9-fr.doc (Francais)
http://www.itu.int/itudoc/itu-t/number/a/afg/77447_ww9-es.doc (Espanol)

BTW, according to the page, the Afghanistan numbering document is dated
13-Jan-2003, a VERY recent revision!

I think that MCI and/or (US)Sprint now allow customer dial service to
+93 Afghanistan but not yet AT&T.

Then there's Easter Island, politically/jurisdictionally (as well as
telephonically) part of +56 Chile. Regular domestic dialing is available
between Easter Island and mainland Chile. Canada, Australia, NZ, the UK,
and other countries have customer-direct-dialing to Easter Island.
However, the last time I checked, AT&T in the US still treats Easter
Island as *OPERATOR HANDLED ONLY*, probably via the Pittsburgh IOC (unless
the regular AT&T OSPS Operator can call Chile's own Inward/IOC?). I'm not
exactly certain about the actual numbering for Easter Island. I've seen or
heard conflicting information as to what is dialed domestically within
Chile compared to what is dialed from Canada and other countries. 

I assume that AT&T blocks both formats for customer dialing from the
US. I don't know if MCI and (US)Sprint yet offer customer dial service
to Easter Island. Also, the *rates* to Easter Island via AT&T (using
Operator handled service) is quite expensive. Maybe because of the
*distance* that Easter Island is from the mainland, as well as a
different routing is the reason that Easter Island isn't yet customer
dialable from the US?  (But if MOBILE ranges in other countries now
have different rates and routes from the US, and if Guantanamo Bay
have been routed and rated differently than for Cuba even though both
use +53, then Easter Island "could" be made customer dialable from the
US via AT&T and ANY other carrier!)

There's also Western (formerly Spanish) Sahara on the west coast of
Africa, between +212 Morocco and +222 Mauritania. This area has been
in dispute between the two bordering countries for a number of
years. There is NO distinct country code for Western Sahara. I don't
know what its telephone situation (if it even exists) is like in
Western Sahara. The last time I checked (some years ago), from the US
(via AT&T), one had to have the call handed by the Pittsburgh IOC at
Operator Handled Rates.

There are a few other "obscure" and "special" areas of the world
and/or telephone country codes, such as +970 for Palestine, separate
from +972 for Israel. I think that AT&T *IS* routing calls to
Palestine when dialed as 01(1)+970-etc., but many local telcos haven't
yet opened up +970 as a valid country code in their end-office
translations or routings to the LD-Carrier.

There is +881 for Global Mobile Satellite (including Iridium and others).
And +882 for "Global Networks".

Both of these have WORKING networks and subscriber numbers. However,
many local telcos don't yet have +881 and/or +882 properly opened up.

Other "specialty country codes" include +800 for Universal
International Freefone Numbers" which has been operational for several
years now, but inconsistantly, and future codes for "personal numbers"
(a-la +1-500-) on +878, Shared Cost service on +808, PAY-PAY-PAY
'premium' (sleaze?) on +979, and something on +991 called
"International Telecommunications Public Correspondence Service".

> BTW, I've now found that the Pitcairn Islands, country code 64, (with
> less than 20 subscribers), has the same problem.  AT&T doesn't
> acknowledge their existence, MCI will place a call for a reasonable
> rate.

I know that New Zealand has a degree of jurisdiction over Pitcairn
(with some jurisdiction/assistance/etc. also from Australia and the
UK). But the telephone system *on the island* is "fixed" InMarSat,
using Country Code +872 (for the Pacific).

BTW, +870 is to be the future "single code" for Mobile/Maritime
Satellite service. Presently, +871 is North Atlantic, +872 is Pacific,
+873 is the Indian Ocean, and +874 is the South Atlantic. You almost
have to "know in advance" in which part of the world the boat/ship or
plane will be in to know which +87X InMarSat "country" code to
use. However, the actual numbers are NOT re-used between individual
+87x codes, since the ship or plane is able to travel among all
ocean/code areas.

The ultimate use of the single +870 code is going to be somewhat like
"cellular roaming". You won't have to know "where" the vessel will be.
A 'location/roaming database' will probably be consulted to know which
satellite to route the call to.

Anyhow ... as for Pitcairn, from the "Pitcairn Island Web Site",
http://www.lareau.org/pitc.html
it mentions the InMarSat +872 phone and fax numbers on Pitcairn.

(Be advised that the cost to call InMarSat can be QUITE expensive, and
is not necessarily "discounted" on any international calling plans
with the major domestic carriers).

> These are not academic discussions, BTW.  I was considering going to
> Tokelau, but have postponed that trip, since I am going to Pitcairn.

Well, PLEASE give us a report on the telephone service there! :-)

I know that Pitcairn used to have one or two magneto party line
systems for the residents to use amongst themselves, which could be
"patched in" to a radio-telephone system. If this magneto party-line
system still exists, I don't think that they can patch it into the
InMarSat terminals.  One on the island can place/receive calls via the
InMarSat system only at the InMarSat terminal phone on the island.

I wonder if AT&T's IOC in Pittsburgh has a way to reach Pitcairn via
the HF Radio system (maybe routed via New Zealand IOC/Inward?), if one
wants to be patched into the magneto party line to speak directly with
a specific resident? I seem to remember when I was doing some research
on the Pacific Ocean area's phone service back in 1997, that the AT&T
operator told me that Pitcairn could be dialed directly using +872
(Pacific) InMarSat at rates not set by AT&T but rather by the InMarSat
organization or its sub-contractor ... OR it could be AT&T IOC
Operator Handled.

I also wonder what the status of Wake and Midway presently are? I
understand that they are mostly "de-militarized" now and are mostly
'exotic' and remote 'tourist' locations. When the US Military was more
active with bases there, I understand that there were TWO ways one could
place calls to Wake and Midway ...

As an Operator Handled Call, where the calling party would call their
usual local originating Bell System (AT&T) or independent telco operator,
and ask for a number at Wake or Midway. The telco operator would then
call GTE's Hawaiian Telco "Inward" in Honolulu HI, Kp+808+121+St. 

GTE-Hawaii would know the routing instructions from there -- probably
similar to a ring-down or "toll station". For *BILLING* identification
purposes (only, and NOT for customer nor even operator 'dialing'
purposes), the "mark-sense" code for Wake was/is (+1)808-998 and for
Midway was/is (+1)808-999.

The other way to reach Wake or Midway not too long ago was if you knew
the upfront +1-808-NXX- series for the US Military at Pearl Harbor
HI. I was told that a customer could "direct dial" to Wake/Midway "as
if" they were calling the Centrex or PBX at Pearl Harbor/Honolulu HI,
if they knew about it and the proper number range. The call would be
billed at rates for a customer-dialed call to Honolulu HI, "as if" the
base phone system at Wake/Midway were simply FX'd off Pearl Harbor,
Honolulu HI.

So, if you do make it to Pitcairn and back, please inform us about the
phone system! :-) Try to find out if the magneto party line system for
the island residents' own use still exists, and if it can be "patched"
into a 'traditional' two-way radio-telephone hookup!


Mark J. Cuccia
mcuccia@tulane.edu
New Orleans LA

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mark makes it *so worthwhile* for me to
keep this Digest going each day!  He really does! As always, his
articles are always well-reasoned, quite detailed and make very good,
interesting reading. From me at least, Mark, a hand of applause for
this latest contribution. PAT]

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

From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Subject: Re: AT&T Wireless Internet at $4000/Month!! Look Out!!
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 18:27:05 -0800
Organization: Networks and Distributed Computing


On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Paul Erickson wrote:

>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: "G. Barber" <gregbarber_mmx@hotmail.com>

> A little background.  I wanted wireless internet access from my laptop
> and decided on the PCMCIA Sierra Wireless Aircard 750, using the new
> GPRS connectivity through Rogers AT&T.  They had a promo package, and
> I signed a six month contract for unlimited internet access for
> $50/mo. CAD  Not a bad deal and for the most part the system worked
> pretty well.  The aircard itself was pretty expensive at $599 CAD, but
> since I'm completly mobile, living in my motorhome, this seemed like a
> pretty good solution.

> Things went along fine until the contract ended, when without
> informing me they switched the billing to 5MB for $30.  Classic bait
> and switch.  So I was happily surfing away as the $$$ piled up.  And
> boy do they pile up fast.

That is why I gave a huge Y-A-W-N when ATT offered GPRS.  I'll stick with
my CDPD connectivity at a flat $55/month for unlimited access, at least
until they pull the plug on CDPD.


-- Mark --
http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.

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

Reply-To: Sellcom Tech Support <support@sellcom.com>
From: Sellcom Tech Support <support@sellcom.com>
Subject: SBP382
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 21:13:08 -0500
Organization: http://www.sellcom.biz


My ID with you is sbp382.  I am posting in groups as support@sellcom.com
I am a paid subscriber to athenanews.com .

My posts to comp.dcom.telecom are not showing up and it is a moderated
newsgroup to which I am a member.


Regards,

Steve Winter  SELLCOM

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Steve, I do not know what the problem
is. *If* you get an autoreply message from me, then I got the message,
and always use it or return it. If you *did not* get an autoreply from
me, then in most instances that means I did not get the message. You
cannot post direct to c.d.t. (but then, I think you knew that) since
c.d.t. is moderated and when your *unmoderated* submission hits a site
in the news stream, it would prompty be emailed to me for handling,
and you would get that autoreply message. If you are mailing me a
message that Spam Assassin considers to be spam, then you will *not*
get an autoreply message, and it is possible (but not likely) I would
not see it prior to flushing it. But I do usually look through the
spam bucket each day prior to dumping it, and take out the items I
find in there which belong in the Digest. That person does not get an
autoreply as a result, but he *does see his item in the newsgroup.*
(You should have gotten an autoreply on this last message for example.)

If you have good email connectivity, the autoreply will be back to you
in a few seconds or within a minute of your original posting. If you
do not get that autoreply, then write me again as a PERSONAL message
(not much text, do not trip the assaassin again) just saying 'please
check the bucket for my message'. I'll do that, and if you hit the
bucket I will pull it out and use it. Other readers:  please follow
this same advice given to Steve ... you know how your email flows and
what to look for.   Sorry about that, Steve.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist
Organization: Excelsior Computer Services
From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman)
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 01:41:07 GMT


>   4) Turn off cookies.
>   5) Turn off Java.
>   6) Turn off Javascript ("Scripting" in MS IE.  Note that MS IE has
>      several entries for different kinds of scripting.  Turn off each
>      and every one).
>
>[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you realize how many web sites there
>are -- nice, good, seemingly innocuous sites which refuse to let you
>in if you do the things Walter suggests above? Yahoo is one example:

My suggestion is either:

1.  use Linux, in which case you can run the browser as a powerless
    user, so that the browser can't do too much damage; or

2.  (more severe than one) use two computers, one for your important
    data and one just to run the web browser.  You can run vnc on the
    browser computer so you can access it directly from your main
    computer.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Right now, it seems my Windows XP is
*very sick*. I think if I can raise the money I am going to have to
dump this machine entirely, and go with Linux. The trouble is, I have
many very wonderful Window-based programs which will not run on *nix.
I do not know if I will ever get it straightened out again.  :(   PAT]

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

From: Paul Wallich <pw@panix.com>
Subject: Re: FCC's Powell Concerned by Media Concentration
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:41:03 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


In article <telecom22.233.2@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> wrote:

>    By Andy Sullivan

>    WASHINGTON, Jan 14 (Reuters) - U.S. officials will probably not
> radically lift ownership limits on television stations, newspapers
> and other media when they take up the issue this year, the top
> telecommunications regulator told Congress on Tuesday.  Federal
> Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell said the agency
> would not allow one company to dominate local airwaves or other media
> outlets when it revisits the long-standing rules under court order.

>     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30905021

Isn't that what they've been saying all along, even as they lifted 
restrictions on multiple outlet ownership? Perhaps Powell's definition 
of "dominate" is a little like Bill Gates's definition of "monopolize" 
 -- it doesn't kick in until well above the canonical 99 and 44/100 
percent.


paul

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

From: Linda Davis <linda.davis@hotmail.com.nospam>
Subject: Re: Illinois Death Row is Empty Today
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 22:11:45 -0500


Linda Davis wrote:

> Patrick Townson wrote:

>> In a *very courageous* move on Saturday, Illinois governor Jim Ryan
>> totally vacated the state's 'death row', saying that there were too
>> many inconsistencies and problems with the way in which the prisoners
>> got there. All the inmates were commuted to much lesser sentences;
>> four (that makes about 12 in total) were totally pardoned as a result
>> of police/prosecutor misconduct in their trials. A few of the more than
>> 108 residents of death row were commuted to life in prison. A few others
>> were commuted to 40 year sentences.

> So you think that the prisoners might be innocent or unfairly punished by
> juries and the next rounds of appeals.   But you were in such hurry to
> celebrate excusing brutal murders that you don't care at all that the
> convicts who Ryan commuted to life or 40 years in prison just lose their
> future appellate review process.  While they were on death row, they were
> awaiting their right to further appellate review.  That's gone.  What could
> be more arbitrary then removing the right to an appeal that these convicts
> no longer have?  If these convicts were really innocent, tough luck now.

> With a stroke of the pen Mr. Ryan overruled the decisions of 167 judges and
> juries.  He complained that the death penalty is arbitrary, yet there is
> nothing more arbitrary then across the board executive orders.

> So who were these nice people Mr. Ryan just excused?  "In 1999 with
> the help of his girlfriend, Fedell Caffey shot and killed a
> 28-year-old pregnant mother, her 10-year-old daughter and her
> 7-year-old son. If that weren't horrific enough, the two then carved a
> nearly full-term unborn child from the mother's body with a pair of
> scissors.

> Then there's Howard Bean, who disguised himself as a priest and then
> handcuffed and shot 81-year-old Dorothy Polulach inside her home. Or
> Lenard Johnson, who murdered an 11-year-old boy he'd been babysitting
> and was holding a knife to the throat of one of two girls he'd raped
> when the police arrived. "As far as the evidence goes, it's pretty
> overwhelming against my client," Johnson's public defender was quoted
> as saying.

> There's also the odor of bad faith. Barely a month ago, Governor Ryan
> met with families of the people raped or killed or attacked by these
> inmates and told them he was leaning against a blanket reprieve. "They
> have a right to feel betrayed," the Governor admitted after his
> speech."  -excerpt from "Wall St Journal"

>> Police around Chicago area are today gunning for the governor, to say
>> the least. They hate him. Police do not like DNA testing either,
>> except when the results go the way they want.

> It is interesting you can stereotype all "Police" and tell us what
> "Police" hate and what "Police" want.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ms. Davis, I can stereotype all police
> in the same way you can stereotype all death row inmates.

Except I did not stereotype all death row inmates.  I did pointed out
that the ones I was mentioning are convicted murderers, which is a
plain fact, not a stereotype. By contrast, Mr. Ryan overruled juries
and judges in every case and there is nothing more arbitrary than
that.  If he cared so much about the poor murderers he commuted, he
just damned them instead because he robbed them of the appellate
review they had coming. 

Clearly that does not bother you.  Were you opposed when Mr. John
Wayne Gacy was sentenced to death in Illinois, a well-liked murderer
who had brutally entrapped and murdered scores of vulnerable young
boys, then disposed of their body parts?  Are you opposed to the drive
by murderers involved in last year's serial killings in the metro
Washington area receiving a sentence to die, a sentence much more
humane then their own killings?  Or did you have tears to shed for
poor Mr. McVeigh who horribly mass killed hundreds of innocent
victims, and destroyed the lives of their surviving family members
forever?

> One good stereotype deserves another, wouldn't you agree? You say
> death row inmates are all guilty as hell; I suggest many/most
> Chicago area prosecutors and police officers are going to the same
> place.

I *NEVER* said anything of the sort.  You put those words there and
attack what I did not write.  I did point out if they are truly
innocent, then robbing EVERY one of them (those who were commuted in
IL) of their appellate review across the board without trial does not
do a damned thing to help them, it just condemned them to prison in an
arbitrary manner.

> They don't even begin
> to deal in good faith. All the truly guilty people on death row are
> not worth one innocent person there. And Ryan found not one; not two,
> but *four* totally innocent men on death row, to say nothing of the
> *13 other cases* of innocence there which your beloved system got
> around to discharging without so much as a single 'we are sorry for
> this' over the past few years. Ryan only totally released four, the
> system in its good time released 13 others before he got involved.

No he didn't.  He found 4 men that may not be guilty.  I agree,
certainly they should not be killed.  But don't toss the baby away
with the bath water.  If DNA is strong enough to indicate those men
are indeed innocent, then it is strong enough to indicate those who
are guilty. The people he arbitrarily commuted will never get the
appeal that last week they still had waiting for them.  He overruled
scores and scores of juries, trials, and judges without any evidence
to suggest that there was a damn thing wrong with any of them.

"Despite ample claims to the contrary, researchers are now finding
that the death penalty is a deterrent. Researchers at Emory University
looked at nearly 6,000 death sentences and compared them to the murder
rates and likelihood of being sentenced to death in 3,000 counties. 
They found every execution saved as many as 18 would-be-murder
victims. Other studies done at the University of Colorado and the
University of Houston also found that executions saved lives."  -WSJ

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Normally, about this point, Ms. Davis,
I have to draw a line and ask the participants to move their debate to
private email. Since I am one of the more 'controversial characters'
around here I have to take my own medicine occassionally. But because 
I am the moderator here in this theoretically telecom-based newsgroup,
I try to be fair on 'controversial subjects' where I am an active
participant in the discussion. I try to think of myself as a 'user'
here, albiet a 'special' one, in charge of editing the messages and
presenting them. With the above in mind, I will make my final comments
on this topic 'in public' in the context of this message thread, I
will then allow you a final rebuttal (if you wish to write one) which
I will also publish, then, let's you and I take the entire thing to
private email. That's what I tell everyone else around here, and if
it were you and some third-party I would say it now, but I am
sensitive to the fact that Editor's Notes in effect get the final
word, and I don't wish to abuse my position here like that. So now,
here is my final word:

I do not *ever* support a *forced* death penalty (the kind where you
are led away then injected). I would support a *voluntary* death
penalty. If that sounds like an oxymoron, let me explain. After a
person crossed some arbitrarily defined point in society (either a 
henious murder, or similar, if *I* were the judge (which I never would
agree to be) then I would inform the person thus: "Mr. Gacy/McVeigh/
Whoever, it was the decision of the jury that you can no longer be
accepted as a member of society. They/we no longer feel any form of
rehabilitation for you is possible or desirable. You will be detained
in custody while YOU reach a decision; (1) if you feel, as most of us
would, that what remains of your lifetime is not worth living in the
confines of a prison, then YOU may ask the court to order your death.
You may choose the method of execution: firing squad, lethal injection,
electric chair, gas chamber, suicide, your choice. It will be a humane
and merciful and quick death. (2) if you prefer life in the hellish
confines of a prison, in effect afraid to face death and whatever that
may entail, then you may choose to accept confinement in a prison for
the rest of your natural life (or maybe present age plus 40 years or
death, whichever comes first.) In any event, Mr. Gacy/McVeigh/whoever,
**you can no longer be a member of society**. Too many people have
been harmed by your life. You make the choice. We will give you thirty
days to reach a decison. If YOU choose to end your own life in the 
next thirty days, we will honor that decision. Our goal is not to seek
revenge and have a public spectacle of your death. No one is going to
guard you and keep you alive for thirty days in order to get the Last
Laugh by walking you the 'last mile' to the execution room. If it
gives you some dignity to end your own life voluntarily and not
force us to do it for you, then do so. After thirty days, if you have
not reached a decision or refuse to respond, then the court will order
your lifetime in prison. Most guys would be very afraid of that choice.
But the choice has to be yours alone, Mr. McVeigh/Gacy. To aid you in
reaching the best decision, your cell will have a telephone, which you
are free to use as you wish to talk to your lawyer, your family and
your friends. Use them to help you make this important decision. The
quickest way to get that telephone yanked out of the wall and pitched
in a trash can, Mr. McVeigh/Gacy, is to make any contact at all with
your victims and their families. Your phone calls will be free of
charge to you, but will be monitored to insure your compliance with
the 'no contact with victims' rule. Now go back to your cell, sir, and
reach your decision. We find the whole process to be most distasteful,
and we do not intend in any event to have a revenge-getting spectacle.
We do not 'take revenge', we simply reach decisions that are best for
society in general. Under extraordinary circumstances, your decision
can be extended for a single additional thirty day period, on request
of your attorney or family members, provided you agree to the single
time extension. You see, sir, the victims of your crimes also have
rights."

That, Ms. Davis, is how *I* would deal with it. Like the problem of
unwanted animals in the Independence Animal Shelter (maybe your town
as well?) being 'put to sleep' when the shelter gets overcrowded, what
to do about miscreants in our human society is a dreadful problem, and
at best, putting them to death is a shitty answer to a shitty problem. 
Something has to be done, and I think Governor Ryan made a difficult
choice under a shitty set of circumstances. That's what leaders do. 

Please reply if you wish, I will print it without any further
commentary, then *please* let's continue it in private email. Thanks.
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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #235
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan 16 17:18:33 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0GMIX705904;
	Thu, 16 Jan 2003 17:18:33 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 17:18:33 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301162218.h0GMIX705904@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #236

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:17:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 236

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Tokelau, Pitcairn and Other Obscure Places (Herve Andrieu)
    Re: Tokelau, Pitcairn and Other Obscure Places (Darryl Smith)
    Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By Then Adjust (Joel Hoffman)
    Re: Can I Detect Call Fowarding? (joe@obilivan.net)
    Re: ANI and TracFone (Justin Time)
    Re: ANI and TracFone (Stanley Cline)
    Re: How to Detect an 'Invasive' MAC (Jared)
    Re: AT&T Wireless Internet at $4000/Month!! Look Out!! (Justin Time)
    New Link For Your Review (Daniel Baker)
    Re: Illinois Death Row is Empty Today (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
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: Herve Andrieu <andrieu@3u.net>
Subject: Re: Tokelau, Pitcairn and Other Obscure Places
Organization: 3U Telecom Inc.
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 07:48:55 GMT


Mark J Cuccia <mcuccia@tulane.edu> wrote in message
news:telecom22.235.1@telecom-digest.org:

> In more recent years, overseas/international calls to points outside
> of +1 (NANP) can have different rates to numbers within the same
> country code depending on whether or not the destination number/number
> range is landline or wireless/cellular... Or "personal" numbers
> (similar to the +1-500 SAC fiasco in the US a few years ago). Domestic
> calls to cellulars *within* that country are usually *VERY* expensive,
> the calling party paying the "airtime" (mostly GRAVY for the telcos
> and wireless providers).  And a vew years ago, they started demanding
> that foreign overseas telcos and carriers pay this extra "gravy" on
> calls to cellular originating from overseas.

> In most (at least many) countries around the world, wireless service
> is within its own area codes or numbering range. And these countries
> have calling-party-pays (exhorbitant) airtime/toll/etc. "gravy" to
> call cellular phones. And there are those trying to force this on
> cellular and landline customers within in the US and Canada as well! :(

> So now, depending on the carriers involved, it *might* now be possible
> to call "900-like" numbers *within* a distant country/country-code,
> not be blocked, and also be charged the expensive PAY-PAY-PAY-per-call
> SLEAZE rate.

Your article was really very interesting and seemed very well documented.

However I think that when you say "there are those trying to force
this on celullar and landline customers within the US and Canada as
well!" is not completely exact. Long distance providers are not trying
to force US and Canadian customers to pay for the extra charge when
calling a cellular phone in a country.

In fact this is just that long distance providers need to have rates
reflecting the reality of the market.

Let's take for example the French market which is quite representative
of all European markets. 10 years ago there were no cellular phones in
France.  At that time there was only 1 rate per provider for calls to
France from the US. Cellular phones in France have a specific area
code (+336 is the code for all cellular phones in France, +331,+332,+333,
+334,+335 are the codes for landlines in France, and +338 is the code
for Non Geographic Numbers, premium numbers like the +1-900 numbers
and toll free numbers like the +1-800).

The business model of cellular phone providers in France is quite
different from the providers in the US since the cell-phone user does
not pay for the incoming calls while the person calling has to pay a
very expensive price to call the cell-phone user as you mentionned (a
regular local call with the French main carrier is $0.03 per minute
while a call to a cell-phone user is between $0.23 and $0.35 per
minute).

The reason is that the cellular phone providers take a very expensive
fee from any telco provider who wants to send traffic to cellular
phones. They don't care where the calls come from (local, national,
international) everyone must pay the high price to call a cellular
phone.

Ten years ago, with no cellular phones in France, that was not a
problem for US long distance providers and they just had one rate for
calls to France. Five years ago, I don't remember the exact figures but
there was certainly something like 10% of all lines in France that
were cellular phones so that was still not a problem for US long
distance providers since their rates were based on average calls. But
nowadays, there are as much cellular phone lines than landlines in
France.

So when a US customer calls to France he is more likely to call a
cellular phone than he was before: nearly 50% (in fact people prefer
to call landlines for their international calls so there are still
less calls to cellular phones). Since long distance providers all have
to pay the fees to the French cellular phone provider, either they
have to increase their average rate or they just split it in a lower
price for calls to landlines and a more expensive price for calls to
cellular phones. And that's what's currently happening.

And this is not limited to US and Canadian long distance customers. 
This applies to all long distance customers worldwide. When a French
customer wants to call a cellular phone in Germany, he has to pay a
higher price than if he were calling a landline.

I hope my explanation was clear.


Herve Andrieu
3U Telecom Inc.
http://www.3utelecom.com

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

From: Darryl Smith <Darryl@radio-active.net.au>
Subject: Re: Tokelau, Pitcairn and Other Obscure Places
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:23:39 +1100


For completeness I will fill in a bit more about East Timor. 

Following the seperatist elections a few years back they had another
'code' between the +670 and +672.

Between these the entire country was basically ravaged in a slash and
burn operation by the outgoing administration basically leaving no
communications.

Thus the Australian Army 'invaded' to bring law and order as a peace
keeping force. One of the first things that they set up was a phone
system. Telstra provided a cell phone system for the capital for the
use of the Army and others (Members of the Army were banned from
taking their personal cellphones though when they invaded).

Anyway the way the cell phone system was set up was to place the cell
site 'officially' in South Australia a few thousand miles to the south.
This meant that the country code was +61 for Australia, and the cell
site was in the South Australian area code of 08. All users of the
cell phone system would have used cell phones with one of the
Australian mobile prefixes -- such as +61417 +61418 or +61419 for
Telstra Mobile Phones.

Aparently the GSM cell site was linked by satellite from Australia.


Darryl

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

Subject: Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust
Organization: Excelsior Computer Services
From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman)
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 15:12:28 GMT


> As part of a $20 million investment, Mr. Langeland, a Sacramento-based
> entrepreneur, has erected 10 billboards that can display both video
> and text and can be programmed with changing messages and images. In
> addition, the billboards include fledgling technology that is designed
> to identify the radio frequencies of passers-by.

Just to be clear, is the claim here that the sign can detect what
radio station I'm listening to?  It cannot.

At least, it cannot do so electrically or electronically.  I suppose
some method could be set up to see how drivers behave based on when
advertisements occur, but cars don't emit RF energy based on what
radio station is tuned.


-Joel

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

From: joe@obilivan.net
Subject: Re: Can I Detect Call Fowarding?
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 15:03:59 GMT
Organization: Cox Communications


Wayne Price wrote:

> Is it possible to detect if the phone number I am calling is forwarded
> to another number?  Or is it possible to block call forwarding on
> numbers that I call?

Nope and nope.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Joe is 99 percent correct. The two 
exceptions I know of are when (1) your call is forwarded to a non-ESS type
switch. The 'ringing signal' and 'busy signal' sound 'different'. You 
have to be on ESS in order to subscribe to call-forwarding and the
other features like that. On ESS, the ring is different in the sense
it begins immediatly. With crossbar and stepping switches (are there
any of them left at all?) the ring is ever so slightly delayed in
starting, and the ringing cadence is ever so slightly different. So if
you are on an ESS (you would have to be, to enable/use the feature)
then if you forward to a number on the same switch you won't hear any
difference at all. If you forward to a number on a different ESS
switch it is hard for the caller to tell the difference. If you 
forward to a non-ESS number, the caller definitly knows the call is 
going off the switch it was aimed at. (2) If the call recipient has
forwarded to a long distance number, the caller can usually tell this
by the slight delay in the call getting set up. On forwarding to 
same-switch numbers, you can't notice any *audible* difference, which
is the only thing you can detect anyway. (3) if the recipient has 
forwarded to an international number, the caller can definitly notice
a different ringing cadence/busy signal, etc. Since most of our
readers are too young to remember stepping switches or crossbar
switches, they probably do not know what they sounded like and assume 
all call setups sounded like they do today. That's why Joe is 99
percent correct.  

Regards 'do not forward' instructions by the person placing the call
wasn't there a dialing prefix code at one time intended to accomplish
that?  Seems to me *03 or *07, something like that as part of the
dialing string was written up as a way to do that, but not to widely
implemented. 

Another thing of interest about call-forwarding, which depends on the
generics in the particular switch:  X forwards his phone to Y, then
later on Y forwards his phone to Z. In some generics, X reaches Y and
stops, ringing Y without regard to what that guy asked for. The idea
is, X only wanted his calls to go to Y, and no further. Calls directly
dialed into Y get forwarded to Z, as that subscriber requested. In
other generics, chain-forwarding applies, and X will 'make the trip'
all the way to Z, or if Z has forwarded on to A, B, or C then X will
keep on 'making the trip' until it gets to the end of the line. Part
of the rationale also was to (1) eliminate the possibility of an
endless loop, where X forwards to Y, Y to Z, then Z back to X, and
the phones kept forwarding infinitly, never ceasing until all the
circuits in the central office or trunks between offices were all in
use. The other rationale was a bit more mercenary:  X forwards to
local number Y and Y forwards to [local to him, Z] however Z is not
local to X. Now X avoids a toll call when trying to reach Z. 

I had a case like that back in 1974 when Chicago first got ESS in
the WABash CO downtown. Getting cut from stepping switch to ESS
overnight (bypassing panel and x-bar totally in the process, that's
how old WABash was to begin with) was a cultural shock to start with,
but we immediatly started playing games with ESS and call-forwarding
to learn what we could do. My audiotext service on 312-HARrison 7-1234
was quite popular (several thousand calls each day) and one of my
regular user/listeners volunteered to help me. He lived in Joliet, IL
and like me at home had 'extended unlimited call pack' on his 
residential phone line. Joliet, in that little corner of the 815
area also offered unlimited/extended call pack entitling one to
call all over in the 312 area for units (non-coin-rated) charges only.
He volunteered to put a second phone line in his house, and leave
his first line *permanently on call forwarding to 312-427-1234* for
me. (The second line was so he could receive incoming calls for
himself. He made his personal (outgoing calls) on the extended
unlimited call pack line. By turning off the bell on his first line,
he was not annoyed by the frequent ringing at all times of the
day and night. (Call forwarding makes your phone ring one time, as
a 'reminder' to turn it off when you are at home.) Now my audiotext
phone service could get local phone calls not only from Chicago
area residents at no charge but also from anyone in the local to
Joliet area who dialed that 815-727-xxxx number. 

What caused the tandems to collapse, so to speak was I forgot that 
Illinois Bell also loved to listen to my daily three minute recorded
screed. (With what I had to pay for a couple dozen lines in a hunt
group and the associated recorded message equipment for each line
[you got it *all* from Ma Bell in those days] I was one of their
'better' small business customers.) With all that equipment and 
several thousand incoming calls each day which earned message units
for Mother, I should have known they would enjoy listening to me 
every day also. One day I concluded by announcing on the recorded
message, "if you are not in Chicago, you can listen to this message
by asking your operator for 'Enterprise 5468' or in the Joliet local
calling area at 815-727-xxxx.". As the Information Operator would 
say,  Bell decided to 'please make a note of that number'. The
Enterprise number was fine with Bell, since that was their tariffed
offering prior to 800 'toll-free' service. But 815-727, that was
being a bad dog!  I got a call the next day on my personal line in the
audiotext office (WEbster-9-4600) and told 'it' (the permanently
call-forwarded residential rated extended unlimited line) was being
turned off. I also got a phone call the same day from my friend in 
Joliet who said the business office had called him also and reamed
his back orifice out properly, and warned him against doing that
any further. So I had to get my Enterprise number expanded to include
the Joliet and Crystal/Fox Lakes areas of 815 as well as the
northern Indiana portion of 219 which I already had anyway. As Ma
Bell explained to me, 'we know best'.  PAT]

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

From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time)
Subject: Re: ANI and TracFone
Date: 16 Jan 2003 07:22:47 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


atlanta@att.net (K. Faraday) wrote in message
news:<telecom22.234.15@telecom-digest.org>:

> Hello,

> I have an old analog TracFone and I was wondering if when I call
> somewhere that has ANI (not Caller ID) such has a business or 800
> number, if they get my name and address.  I know they ALWAYS get the
> phone number but I wasn't sure about the other info.  TracFone does
> have my name, address and phone number in their records but since this
> is a prepaid phone I did not know if it goes out along with the ANI.

> For instance, if I call a company for product info. I don't want them
> to end up having my name and address to send tons of junk mail or
> start calling my home number with sales calls.  Again, I realize they
> get the cell number but that's OK.

> Hope this made sense.

> Thanks to anyone who can answer.

> Kelly

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Have you tried using that phone to call
> yourself at a number you control with caller ID to see how it looks?
> That would be about the easiest way to tell what is being sent. I know
> early on I tried using my (original) AT&T cell phone to call myself 
> and look at the caller-ID screen when the call came through. I also
> used a very old Motorola bag phone (which I have on prepaid service)
> to call myself at my home number. Depending on the caller ID box -- I
> have three of them, all stand-alones from different manufacturers,
> they would (using the old Motorola bag phone) either have nothing at
> all to say other than the number, or it would identify me as 'wireless
> caller' and the number. PAT]

Pat,

ANI reports the called number and origination point.  There is no
information regarding the identity of the caller.  I used to have to
pour through megabytes of ANI information on the 800 number lines we
had to verify the number of times a caller stated they called and the
number of times they actually called.  (The inflation rate of
perceived vs. actual calls was never less than 400%. - And to do the
calling, I had to have at least the entire 10 digit number so I could
sort the database by originating number by date and time.  That was
the only way you could find a business with multiple outbound lines.)

The ANI data delivered along with a call is often used to form a query
into a database the holder of the number builds with customer
information.  If you have called before from that number and you are
in the company's database, they can greet you by name and have an idea
about the services you have requested in the past.  A great example is
(was)Domino's Pizza.  They track the number and the order.  As you
have to give a delivery address Domino's can then target special
coupons for pizza and other items you may want to buy based on your
past preferences.  They can also build demographic data and know what
to feature in their television and print ads for a specific area.

So, if you call a company on their toll-free with your TracPhone (or
even your own land line) does the company get your name and address?
No, they don't.  They do get the originating telephone number, the
name of the city and state where the call originated and the time and
length of the call.  ANI is not Caller ID.  ANI cannot be blocked --
it's billing information the holder of the toll-free number is
entitled to (they ARE paying for the call) and does not have any
personal information regarding the billing name or directory name and
address of that number.  The only people with a "magic" database that
gives names and addresses for all callers are those associated with
emergency public safety numbers.  When you call 9-1-1 as an example,
the ANI data does a "database dip" and returns the location and
billing name for that telephone number.  In the case of cell phones,
you pretty much get "Wireless Call" or Carrier Name on the display.


Rodgers Platt

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

From: Stanley Cline <sc1-news@roamer1.org>
Subject: Re: ANI and TracFone
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 23:20:00 -0500
Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA
Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org


On 15 Jan 2003 08:48:25 -0800, atlanta@att.net (K. Faraday) wrote:

> I have an old analog TracFone and I was wondering if when I call
> somewhere that has ANI (not Caller ID) such has a business or 800
> number, if they get my name and address.  I know they ALWAYS get the

Not unless they already have your wireless number associated with your
name and address by virtue of you having an account with them, etc.

Besides, businesses won't even always get your number via *ANI* as
wireless ANI is wildly inconsistent; some wireless carrier switches
send customers' actual wireless numbers as ANI, while others send
"trunk" numbers that have nothing at all to do with the customer --
and may not even be in the same state as the wireless customer's phone
number, home, or office, or where the customer is physically located
when they make the call.

My favorite example of the latter:  one very small, rather unusual,
rural wireless carrier sends a Yuma, **Arizona** number -- which just
happens to be the carrier's roamer access number -- as BOTH CALLER ID
AND ANI on any and all calls placed from a town it serves in rural
northeastern **Tennessee**!  (The carrier actually backhauls its lone
cell site in that town -- and cell sites in other areas in at least a
half-dozen other states -- all the way to Yuma ...)  Caller ID name for
such calls (assuming the LEC serving the called party is Qwest, or has
access to Qwest's name database like BellSouth does) is the name of
the carrier, of course ... ;)


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: jared@hwai.com (Jared)
Subject: Re: How to Detect an 'Invasive' MAC
Date: 16 Jan 2003 08:54:39 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


So one does what one can and encrypts one's data, I guess.  Sounds
like what I should do , in addition to the previously outlined steps
(change SSID, no DHCP server, WEP) is designate one server behind the
firewall as proxy and set up VPN tunnels to the workstations on the
LAN.  I just don't know what else I can do.  Anyone ever set up Win2K
IPSec to FreeS/WAN connections?  <sigh> Like I don't have enough FM to
R(T) :-).

Thanks for the discussion.  As usual in this newsgroup, I learned
something useful.

Best regards,

jh


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, Jared, I've been the
moderator here for a while now, and I continue to learn new
things here by reading this newsgroup each day also. PAT]

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

From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time)
Subject: Re: AT&T Wireless Internet at $4000/Month!! Look Out!!
Date: 16 Jan 2003 06:29:47 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Paul Erickson <paule@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:<telecom22.234.13@telecom-digest.org>:

> Forwarded from alt.internet.wireless - this is quite a story.

>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: "G. Barber" <gregbarber_mmx@hotmail.com>
>   Newsgroups: alt.internet.wireless
>   Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 2:38 AM
>   Subject: AT&T wireless internet at $4000 a month!! Look out!!

> Jan 7/03  Vancouver, Canada

> I believe I may have received the largest bill AT&T has ever
> fabricated for one month of wireless internet access.  $3996.33!!  Can
> anyone top this or have you received a similar bill.

> A little background.  I wanted wireless internet access from my laptop
> and decided on the PCMCIA Sierra Wireless Aircard 750, using the new
> GPRS connectivity through Rogers AT&T.  They had a promo package, and
> I signed a six month contract for unlimited internet access for
> $50/mo. CAD  Not a bad deal and for the most part the system worked
> pretty well.  The aircard itself was pretty expensive at $599 CAD, but
> since I'm completly mobile, living in my motorhome, this seemed like a
> pretty good solution.

> Things went along fine until the contract ended, when without
> informing me they switched the billing to 5MB for $30.  Classic bait
> and switch.  So I was happily surfing away as the $$$ piled up.  And
> boy do they pile up fast.

Sounds like a case of "I didn't read my contract so I shouldn't be
held liable for MY stupidity."

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

From: Daniel Baker <dabc1@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: New Link For Your Review
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 21:33:15 -0600


Our site has just recently been introduced and we are in the process
of identifying similar websites that our visitors would be interested
in.

The website is:  www.TelephoneServiceDirectory.com

The title is:

US Telephone Service Directory (Inside Wiring Contractors & Local Service
Providers)


The description is:

"U.S. Directories of: Contractors who Add and Repair Inside Wiring &
Jacks AND Local Telephone Service Providers (Local Exchange
Carriers)."

Thank you for considering,

Daniel Baker

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 09:05:35 -0600
From: Gordon S. Hlavenka <nospam@crashelex.com>
Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com
Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc.
Subject: Re: Illinois Death Row is Empty Today


PAT - 

I have a solution to the problem of Capital Punishment.

When the prosecution intends to seek Capital Punishment, they are
required to state this at the beginning of the trial.  My proposal is
quite simple: The person who makes the declaration is noted by the
court as the "Responsible Prosecutor" ("RP").  The RP must take an
active and leading role in the prosecution of the case -- if they do
not, the court will declare a more appropriate RP.  In the event that
the accused is convicted and later exonerated, the RP is required to
serve the accused's entire (not remaining) sentence.  This requirement
holds in all capital cases, even if the punishment is not capital in
nature.  (Exoneration, by the way, means that they are proved NOT TO
HAVE COMMITTED the crime.  "Getting off on a technicality" does not
kick in the RP rule.)

Example: John Doe stands accused of murdering his neighbor.  Jane Roe
of the Prosecutor's office announces to the court that they intend to
seek Capital Punishment for this crime.  John is convicted on the
basis of his having been in a long-standing feud with the neighbor and
having stated publicly an intent to kill them.  A search of John's
house turns up a photograph of John, standing in his living room,
smiling broadly and holding a pistol of the caliber used in the
killing.  John is sentenced to 25 years because the murder weapon
can't be found.  Ten years later, a cop's son comes forward and says
his recently-deceased father confessed to having shot the neighbor
while cleaning his gun.

The cop's son produces the gun which ballistics tests show is the
murder weapon.  An investigation (using newly-developed computer
analysis not available at the time of the trial) shows that detectives
"Photoshopped" the picture.  John is immediately released, and Jane
must serve 25 years behind bars.  (What happens to the detectives is a
separate issue that can be handled under existing laws.)

Had John received the death penalty, Jane would be subject to
execution even if John had not yet been executed.

My suggestion (which I realize will NEVER happen) keeps Capital
Punishment available but discourages its use in all but the most
airtight cases.

Gordon S. Hlavenka    www.crashelex.com    nospam@crashelex.com
              Grammar and spelling flames welcome.
     Yes, that's really my email address.  Don't change it.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for another good suggestion on
ways to handle capital punishment cases. I've heard so many sides to
the arguments for and against capital  punishment. Truly, it does
deter; the punished person won't commit any further crimes, capital
in nature or otherwise. It does not seem to deter anyone else however.
As Ms. Davis pointed out in her item yesterday some magazines and
newspapers and university studies believe it is a deterrent. But I
don't think there are that many pre-meditated, deliberate, willful
murders, at least relative to the total body count. Deterrance only
counts if the action is something you can and do conciously choose 
to avoid having happen. If you can freely choose to not give in to
your urges, desires, etc then deterrance (as a result of seeing the
thing that happened to a capitally-punished person, i.e. their death)
can be used as a reason for advancing capital punishment. Deterrant
might be true in the case of McVeigh, but I am not sure.  

In the case of John Wayne Gacy deterrant would not be useful at all. (As
an aside, would you believe; really believe! he was a neighbor of mine
when we both lived years ago in the Rogers Park neighborhood in
Chicago? He actually came out and gave us a bid on the rebuilding of a
cement sidewalk behind my house. He was a contractor/construction guy
by trade.) Poor John ... how could *anyone* be that twisted and mixed
up mentally?  Trying to deter him from raping and killing little boys
by him seeing an example of what happened to guys who did that sort of
thing (news reports on other killers 'getting the chair', etc) would
have about as much effect on him as telling a male dog not to mount a
female dog in heat. Sexual urges will not be trifled with. That sort
of urge is *very difficult* to deal with, and almost impossible to
'cure'.

Ditto with Larry Eyler (another former neighbor in Rogers Park; he
lived less than a block away, on Fargo Street by the lake, in 1983,
ony a few years after Gacy lived in the same area.) Eyler, along with
his lover, the professor of library science and Librarian at Indiana
State University in Terre Haute, IN were both heavily into a scene
where they lured young guys from the bus station in Terre Haute out to
the professor's home and 'imposed' on them. When the heat got on Larry
Eyler, the professor moved Larry to Chicago, after Larry had serially
murdered several guys around Indiana. The icing on the cake however
happened when Larry, not content to merely serial-murder all the young
guys he and the professor cruised at the bus station in Terre Haute,
invited the professor to join him over Labor Day weekend in Chicago
when Larry brought the 'guest of honor', a fifteen year old male
prostitute home for the two of them, they proceeded to murder the boy
as well, and dispose of his totally dismembered body in dumpster
wagons in the alley behind Larry's new apartment in Rogers Park. What
kind of deterrant would stop two men from acting out their sexual
fantasies like that?  What worked in the professor's case was the
prosecutor cut him a deal; snitch on Larry so we can gas him, we will
let you walk. And it worked. Larry died of AIDS in prison in Illinois
before the state got the chance to inject him; his lover the professor
got off the hook entirely, although his university employer in Terre
Haute looked sort of askance at the whole lurid mess and told him get
a job somewhere else. I really have to wonder if Ms. Davis feels that
deterrent would have worked in their case either. Poor Larry, what 
made him act like that?

Or what about that cannibal up in Milwaukee (his name escapes me right
now; the guy who picked up young black guys in Chicago and took to his
home in Milwaukee where he cooked them and ate them following sex.)
When police *finally, eventually* heeded the neighbor's complaints 
about the guy (after he had acted out like that several times), the
police got to his apartment and found four human heads on platters in
the refrigerator and one headless body with maggots all over it upside
down in a big barrel in the bedroom. In the kitchen by the microwave
was a plate with an arm and a jar of mustard.  He had planned to 'eat
that later' when he got hungry again. One police officer on the scene
had to be excused while he went out on the back porch to vomit and
get a breath of fresh air. He died in prison also, but not by the
official and approved method. A couple of the Brothers killed him in
the prison laundry room. Poor guy, *what* got his mind so twisted?
How would publicity about capital punishment have ever deterred him
 from such evil acts?  Very simple, it wouldn't have. Serial killers
with sexual desires will never be stopped nor prevented. To be sure,
capital punishment deterred those three from continuing their evil
acts. But obviously none of the 1736 men on the nation's death rows
were very impressed.

[Editor's Note to Ms. Davis-if-you-are-reading-this: My use of the
term "poor (name)" in the above illustrations are NOT intended to
say I agree with them, nor believe what they did was right. It was
simply intended to say I know how powerful the demons can be which 
were controlling their minds, and how we, who with the grace of God
sit on the other side of the prison bars dare not be too arrogant 
about things. With our kindergarten-level of understanding about
the human mind and human behavior

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #236
******************************
    
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan 16 21:50:20 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0H2oKp11405;
	Thu, 16 Jan 2003 21:50:20 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 21:50:20 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301170250.h0H2oKp11405@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #237

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Jan 2003 21:50:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 237

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Calling Party Pays to Call Cellular (Mark J Cuccia)
    Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist (Tony Pelliccio)
    E-mail Address Problems was: Can I Send Bulk Faxes (january2003)
    Re: FCC's Powell Concerned by Media Concentration (John Higdon)
    Telephone Scam (Raymond Mereniuk)
    Sex.Com Announces Partial Victory in Domain Name Property (Monty Solomon)
    telcoBlue Announces Dial Tone Via the Internet (Monty Solomon)
    Orange Battles Security Glitch on Microsoft Phone (Monty Solomon)
    IBM Reports 2002 Fourth-Quarter and Full-Year  Results (Monty Solomon)
    Slowed by a Flawed New Media Idea, AOL Hopes for Comeback (Monty Solomon)
    Microsoft Reports Solid 2nd Quarter Financial Results (Monty Solomon)
    Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust (J Thompson)
    Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust (Jim Haynes)
    Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust (John Higdon)
    Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust (M. Marshall)

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: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:53:26 CST
From: Mark J Cuccia <mcuccia@tulane.edu>
Subject: Calling Party Pays to Call Cellular


I originally wrote in "Tokelau, Pitcairn and Other Obscure Places",
regarding different rates to call wireless phones domestically within
a country, as well as now to call wireless phones in that destination
country but originated from outside of that country:

> And there are those trying to force this on cellular and landline
> customers within in the US and Canada as well! :(

Then Herve Andrieu <andrieu@3u.net> replied:

> However I think that when you say "there are those trying to force this
> on celullar and landline customers within the US and Canada as well!" is
> not completely exact. Long distance providers are not trying to force US
> and Canadian customers to pay for the extra charge when calling a
> cellular phone in a country.

Well, while my personal opinion is that the extra charge to call
cellulars within those (non-NANP) countries as well as now charging
NANP (US/Canadian) callers to call cellulars/wireless in those
countries, is JUST PLAIN AND PURE "GRAVY" for the
telcos/carriers/wireless providers, my phrase:

"And there are those trying to force this on cellular and landline
customers within in the US and Canada as well! :("

does not really refer to charges on US/Canadian (landline or wireless)
callers who are calling cellulars/wireless in non-NANP locations.

No, here in the US and Canada, cellular/wireless/etc. is part of the
landline numbering space. Most all wireless service in the US/Canada
uses numbering/codes based on already existing tariffed
ratecenter/exchange rate areas.

If a cellular phone is based in the New Orleans rate area, it is a
LOCAL call for me to call it from a landline or a cellular based in
New Orleans.  (Of course, I will might have to pay some form of
outbound airtime if calling FROM a local cellular). But in MOST of the
US and ALL of Canada, LOCAL calls do NOT cost (landline) customers any
form of per-minute, per-call, per-mile charges. We pay a fixed monthly
fee for telephone service (dialtone) and get a certain block of
exchanges/prefixes/regions that we can call "unlimited". Sometimes,
there are several different "tiers" or "bands" which one can
optionally subscribe to (at a higher monthly fee) to get an even
larger region of unlimited calling which would otherwise be
per-call/mile/minute "toll".

And calls to cellular phones based outside of our local calling area
are billed at normal long-distance/toll rates, depending on our plan
with our long-distance provider.

What I was referring to as "those trying to force this (caller-pays
extra airtime charges) on us in the US/Canada" has to do with
proposals (which hopefully will FAIL) to force "European/rest-of-
the-word" type cellular billing on US/Canada landline (and the calling
side of cellular) customers for local/domestic-toll calling *WITHIN*
the NANP (US/Canada).

*IF* this were ever to happen, there would be no 'easy' way for one to
know if one is calling something locally and "free" (landline) or if
there will be huge charges to something that has a "local
ratecenter/exchange area" NPA-NXX type code but is expensive because
it is a cellular phone!  :(

FOR THE MOST PART, cellular/wireless numbers *do* have dedicated NXX
c.o.codes, but they are *within* standard NPA (area) codes. AND, we
don't have "dedicated" cellular area codes or any dedicated partition
of numbering for cellular. And I for one am glad that we don't!

The FCC stated some years back that 'dedicated' area codes or
numbering at that level strictly for cellular/etc. is "discriminatory". 
And if EVER portability really gets extended to cellulars, my
understanding is that not only would one be able to port their
cellular number amongst different cellular providers, but also be able
to port a number between landline and cellular! Thus a single NPA-NXX
code could have wireless and landline -xxxx line-numbers all
intermixed!

There *ARE* examples (from the 1980's and earlier) of old-style mobile
and AMPS cellular numbers "sharing" from a prefix already having
landline numbers. Those were usually in specific "thousands"
blocks. But even then, most billing software and routing didn't go
down to the "thousands" level.

And if the intended portability ever comes about, there wouldn't even
be separate thousands blocks to differentiate between celllular and
landline.

Most cellular providers in the US and Canada now have all kinds of
airtime/roaming/Long-Distance package plans, so the thought of making
the CALLING party pay EXTRA just because the destination number is a
cellular will be just pure GREED on the part of the cellular provider
(and telcos too, since they are really the same companies). And I
still think that this pure gravy/greed applies to other countries as
well, especially when calling to a cellular in another country when
calling from the NANP. But I rarely if ever make any 011+ calls to
non-NANP points anymore, so it isn't really an immediate concern to me
though!


Mark J. Cuccia
mcuccia@tulane.edu
New Orleans LA

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

From: Tony Pelliccio <tonypo1@cox.takemeout2.net>
Subject: Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist
Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 17:18:10 GMT


In article <telecom22.235.4@telecom-digest.org>, joel@exc.com says:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Right now, it seems my Windows XP is
> *very sick*. I think if I can raise the money I am going to have to
> dump this machine entirely, and go with Linux. The trouble is, I have
> many very wonderful Window-based programs which will not run on *nix.
> I do not know if I will ever get it straightened out again.  :(   PAT]

Why not multi-boot? I forget how it works on XP but in 2000 you have
to install Linux first, then 2000 because you have to use MS boot
loader for Win2K.

Should work the same with XP. 


Tony

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You can do that on XP also of course,
but, since my hard drive is already loaded with Windows stuff I would
need to partition the disk and load Linux on it, then also a mechanism
to boot the one of my choice. Its that partioning of the hard drive
which scares me. I feel *certain* I would get it messed up, then not
be able to get on line at all.  PAT]

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

From: january2003@saurasite.com
Subject: E-mail Address Problems was: Can I Send Bulk Faxes)
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:23:05 +0200


Please note that the address "january2003@saurasite.com  is a
temporary address, and is valid only until the end of the current
month.

On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:50:25 +0200, in comp.dcom.telecom you wrote:

> (Pat, as an aside, the only address that I have ever had
> *seriously* compromised spam-wise is one that was published here -
> sorry, but that *is* the awful truth :-))

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I know what you are saying is true. The
> readership base is so large here, and that includes spammers and other
> scum. Sorry, I cannot do anything it, at least at present. I've
> thought of a few tricks, such as printing no names and addresses at all,
> and just printing commentaries, but that is really unfair to readers
> who wish to communicate with each other without going through me. I'm
> still thinking about solutions, but not having much luck.  

Pat,  at the time of the "real address" I used, you appeared to be
opposed to any form of "munged" address, and I respected that. (Big
mistake, in retrospect -- that address is *doomed*, and will probably
be unusable forever!)

I've noticed that you seem to have relaxed somewhat in this regard,
and that was why I tried the "temporary address" approach this time.

Why not simply let the poster use his/her own favourite method for
dealing with their NG postings.  That places the resposibility
squarely on each poster's own shoulders, rather than yours.  After
all, we all know that posting on an NG carries spam risks, no matter
what NG it is, and we have all pretty much worked out how we want to
deal with the problem.

I've  had great  success (so far)  with the commonly used "munge"
method that has a footnote on the lines of "replace XXXX with YYYY to
reply by e-mail"  I've used this method for quite a while, in a
number of NGs, and I have yet to receive a single spam as a result (I
can tell by the address used -- I use a range of addresses, and am
fortunate to be able to chop and change as I wish, and also discard a
given address if it gets compromised). Real People appear to be
able to "decypher" without any problems, but the spammers seem to be
using automated methods that can't resolve a munged address.


Cheers

Frank R.P.

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: FCC's Powell Concerned by Media Concentration
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 09:32:04 -0800


In article <telecom22.235.5@telecom-digest.org>, Paul Wallich
<pw@panix.com> wrote:

> In article <telecom22.233.2@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
> <monty@roscom.com> wrote:

>>    By Andy Sullivan
 
>>    WASHINGTON, Jan 14 (Reuters) - U.S. officials will probably not
>> radically lift ownership limits on television stations, newspapers
>> and other media when they take up the issue this year, the top
>> telecommunications regulator told Congress on Tuesday.  Federal
>> Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell said the agency
>> would not allow one company to dominate local airwaves or other media
>> outlets when it revisits the long-standing rules under court order.

> Isn't that what they've been saying all along, even as they lifted 
> restrictions on multiple outlet ownership? Perhaps Powell's definition 
> of "dominate" is a little like Bill Gates's definition of "monopolize" 
>  -- it doesn't kick in until well above the canonical 99 and 44/100 
> percent.

Unfortunately, the onus of "media concentration" is dissapating. 
Language from the commission has crept in to the effect that since there 
is robust competition from alternative media (e.g. the Internet, etc.), 
concentration of ownership of radio and TV doesn't wield the power that 
it used to. 

I, personally, feel this is bogus, but watch carefully as the FCC in 
coming months softens considerably its stand on traditional media 
concentration. There are also conglomeration apologists who maintain 
that concentration of ownership does not necessarily mean lack of 
diversity. 

Recently, a spokesman for the NAB (dubbed by many of us in the industry 
as "not about broadcasting") declared that since the relaxation of 
ownership rules, there is MORE diversity in broadcasting. I'm not sure 
what he was smoking.

In San Diego, there are fifteen Clear Channel stations. A number of
those are in Mexico, just over the border ... and exempt from the FCC
rules. It is one of the most wretched radio markets in the country.
Without any meaningful competition, the stations just grind out
generic crap because they know they don't have to split the
advertising pie with anyone but themselves. This is a clear indicator
of what we can expect should the FCC relax its restrictions on
ownerwhip even more.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 10:42:19 -0800
From: Raymond Mereniuk <nospam4me@shaw.ca>
Subject: Telephone Scam


Found this article printed in a local neighborhood newspaper in
the Vancouver, BC area.  Port Moody is a small municipality at
the east end of Burrard Inlet (Vancouver Harbor) which was for a
few years the original terminus of Canada'a first transcontinental
railway.  It is primarily a bedroom community with its own police
force.

The newspaper has a web site,

http://www.thenownews.com/index.html

but this article was not available online.  A scanned complete
copy is available at

http://members.shaw.ca/nospam4me/telescam.html

I contacted the reporter via Email to ask if the rate of CAN$2,425 per
minute (approx. US$1,500) was accurate but after one day received no
reply.  This rate must be a typo, the telephone company wouldn't pass
such a high rate through to the customer would they?

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

Beware of latest telephone scam

By Leneen Robb, Staff Reporter, Coquitlam Now

Port Moody Police are warning residents to be aware of the latest
telephone scam.

Const. Brian Soles said the scam begins when residents receive
a message on their answering machine or pager asking them to
call a number beginning with area code 809, 284 or 876.

"The reason you are given to make this call varies," Soles said.

"It can be to receive information about a family member who has
been ill, to tell you that someone has been arrested, died, you've
won a lottery price, etc."

"If you place the call, you will get a long recorded message, or be
kept on the line for some other reason."

"The call will be billed to you at $2,425 per minute."

Soles said the area codes are located in the British Virgin Island
and Bahamas.

The codes can be used as pay-per-call numbers, similar to 900
numbers in Canada and the United States.

Shortly after sending in the original message received this reply from 
the reporter at the Coquitlam Now.

Hi,

Thanks for your inquiry. I double-checked our figure of $2,425 with the 
Port Moody Police today, and they tell me it is correct. I agree it's 
extremely high let's hope no one is taken in by this scam. Thanks again 
for taking the time to write in.

Leneen Robb
Reporter

 > ----------
 > From: 	Raymond Mereniuk
 > Sent: 	Wednesday, January 15, 2003 9:12 AM
 > To: 	lrobb@thenownews.com
 > Subject: 	Re: "Beware of latest telephone scam"
 >
 > Hello
 >
 > Read your article titled "Beware of latest telephone scam" in the
 > January 11, 2003 edition of the Coquitlam Now.  In the article you
 > mention a per minute rate of $2,425, is this correct?  Seems very high.
 >   Normally the the rates for such scams are lower.  At this rate it is
 > obviously a scam and the telephone company is unlikely to put the charge
 > through to the customer.  If the rate is in the range of $2.45 per
 > minute the telephone company will advise you to pay it and the scammer
 > gets their money.
 
 > Was $2,425 a mis-print?
 

Raymond Mereniuk
NoSpam4Me@shaw.ca
Yes, this is a real Email Address


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This seems to be a case where the
kindly police officers once again do not know what they are talking
about (what else is old?) and the newspaper reporters serve as the
police cheering squad. It reminds me of that old make-believe scam
several years ago where people were paged and given a number to call
back in New York City which was an audiotext service which charged
a premium rate for using it. All these telecom managers in companies
were busy sending out memos warning their employees to not make calls
like that. We here at TELECOM Digest thoroughly debunked that rumor
when it was pointed out that premium charges do *not* carry across 
interlata lines. The *only* 'prefix' that carries a surcharge here
in the USA is areacode 900. Exchanges like 976, and 540 (in New York
for example) cost whatever they cost on local, intralata calls. Outside
of the LATA (or maybe areacode, I do not remember which for sure) the
call costs only what a call to that areacode/LATA would cost. Those
premium surcharge numbers are *only* for use in the local area. 

An example which was given back then in the Digest referred to (at 
the time) a very popular service for gay men in San Francisco, at
the number 415-976-GAYS. The proprietor of the service complained to
Pacific Bell that his lines were always jammed up, but his commissions
were zilch. That started happening once guys from out of state figured
out they could simply ignore the opening disclaimer message about a
two dollar charge for three minutes of hot, adult chat. Eventually the
phone company convinced AT&T and the other LD carriers to quit
connecting to 976 numbers for that reason. I think MCI was the first
LD carrier to quit connecting their customers with 976 numbers. The
Chicago area guys, for example, were getting connected for about 25
cents, the cost of a three minute LD call to the west coast.  Maybe
one of our San Francisco readers can tell us if 976-GAYS is still a
working number or not, or of the technicalities of collecting the 
surcharge via the phone bill was too difficult to overcome. In any
event, don't worry about additional surcharges when calling outside
your own state (or in most cases even your own area code). All you
have to pay is the toll charges. Ditto on international calls.  A
WARNING: I cannot say if this same thing applies in Canada as well,
but I think it does.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:36:45 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Sex.Com Announces Partial Victory in Domain Name Property


        Federal Appeals Court Looks to California State Supreme Court

    SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 16 /PRNewswire/ -- Sex.Com
(http://www.sex.com) announced pivotal results today in the pending
Court decision against VeriSign (NASDAQ:VRSN).  With signs pointing
towards a win for Sex.Com, the Ninth U.S. Circuit of Appeals in San
Francisco has asked the state Supreme Court, the final authority on
California Law, to intervene and decide whether a domain name is
property that can be converted as well as guidance to assess damages
that might amount to $100 million.

    Attorneys for Gary Kremen, founder and chief executive officer of
Sex.Com, said the order, which recognizes domain names as a type of
property, was a step toward victory in the case.  The case involves
Kremen, VeriSign, formerly Network Solutions, Inc. (NSI), and Stephen
Cohen.

    VeriSign unilaterally took the Sex.Com domain name from Kremen
upon receiving a forged letter from Cohen, asking that Sex.Com be
transferred into his name.  Without verifying the authenticity of the
letter, NSI obligingly transferred the Sex.Com domain name into
Cohen's name, in which he proceeded to build a multi-million
international porn empire.  Kremen produced definitive proof of the
forgery and fraud, yet VeriSign refused to transfer back the
registration to Kremen.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30942119

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:37:51 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: telcoBlue Announces Dial Tone Via the Internet to Corporate


                    Long Distance Savings Up To 75 Percent

    SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 16 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- telcoBlue,
Inc. (BB:TLCB), owners of the telcoBlue Connectivity+ Internet-based
telephony network, said it has added standard handset dial tone
service for corporate accounts, offering savings of up to 75 percent
on long distance calls.

    telcoBlue will supply corporate accounts with a multi-port Cisco
ATA (NASDAQ:CSCO) that allows standard analog telephones and FAX
machines to connect to any telephone or FAX number within telcoBlues's
Internet Voice Network (IVN) at significantly lower per minute charges
than is possible over conventional long distance networks.  The ATA
186 supplied by telcoBlue comes pre-configured and plugs into any
existing cable or DSL modem.  It doesn't require any code entries,
access numbers, or special instructions.  ...

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30943327

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:38:32 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Orange Battles Security Glitch on Microsoft Phone


LONDON, Jan 16 (Reuters) - French-owned mobile phone operator Orange
SA (SBF:ORA) said on Thursday it was working with U.S. software ally
Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) to solve what it called a "security
issue" on a jointly developed phone.

    The British-based mobile phone group stressed that the SPV (sound,
picture and video) phones, which use Microsoft software, were only at
risk if customers disabled a security function by using a process
explained by a Web site, www.register.co.uk.

    The problem hinges partly on so-called "digital signatures", which
can establish the authenticity as well as the designer of applications
available on the Internet.

    Orange said if the phone's security function was disabled,
customers might be able to download applications that could make their
SPV unstable. But it stressed that the disabling process took 20
minutes and would have to be repeated each time the phone was switched
on.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30943329

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:46:03 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: IBM Reports 2002 Fourth-Quarter and Full-Year  Results



ARMONK, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--January 16, 2003--IBM (NYSE:IBM)

    --  Fourth-quarter diluted earnings per share of $1.11, including
        $.23 of net charges, or $1.34 excluding the net charges;

    --  Income from continuing operations of $1.9 billion, including
        $405 million of net charges in the fourth quarter;

    --  Fourth-quarter revenues from continuing operations of $23.7
        billion, up 7 percent

    IBM today announced fourth-quarter 2002 diluted earnings per
common share from continuing operations of $1.11, including $.23 per
diluted share for charges primarily associated with the acquisition
and integration of PricewaterhouseCoopers Consulting (PwCC), compared
with diluted earnings per common share of $1.46 in the fourth quarter
of 2001. Excluding the charges, diluted earnings per share from
continuing operations would be $1.34. Fourth-quarter income from
continuing operations was $1.9 billion -- including $405 million of
charges -- compared with $2.6 billion in the fourth-quarter 2001.
Excluding the charges, income from continuing operations would be $2.3
billion. Revenues from continuing operations for the fourth quarter
were $23.7 billion, up 7 percent (4 percent at constant currency)
compared with the fourth quarter of 2001 revenues of $22.1 billion.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30956966

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:52:38 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Slowed by a Flawed New Media Idea, AOL Hopes for Comeback


By STEVE LOHR

AOL Time Warner, the world's largest media company, stands today as a
casualty of the salesmanship of Stephen M. Case and the credulousness
of the Time Warner executives who bought into his sparkling vision of
synergies between the old media and the new.

Now, Mr. Case has resigned as the company's chairman, the vision has
dimmed and executives from the Time Warner side of the combined
business - filled with remorse if not resentment at having sold to
Mr. Case's America Online at the height of the Internet mania - face
the task alone of resuscitating the company.

The AOL online service was supposed to be the engine of growth for the
merged company, offering lucrative new ways to market the products of
Time Warner's sterling brands, from Time, People and Fortune to Warner
Brothers and CNN. It was meant to be the business equivalent of
pairing Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers: AOL would give Time Warner
sex, and Time Warner would give AOL class.

But nothing has turned out as planned. With online advertising in a
deep slump, online subscriber growth waning and lingering questions
about its accounting, AOL is an anchor dragging down the combined
company. Analysts say that its woes overshadow the generally strong
financial performance of the traditional media properties in the Time
Warner stable.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/14/business/media/14AOL.html

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 17:02:45 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Microsoft Reports Solid Second Quarter Financial Results


         Company Announces Dividend and Two-for-One Common Stock Split

     REDMOND, Wash., Jan. 16 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Microsoft
Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) today announced revenue of $8.54 billion for the
quarter ended Dec. 31, 2002, a 10 percent increase over revenue of
$7.74 billion for the same period in the prior year.  Operating income
for the second quarter was $3.26 billion, including an additional $210
million charge reflecting the company's estimate of costs related to
resolving pending state antitrust and unfair competition class action
lawsuits.  This compares to operating income of $2.84 billion reported
in the second quarter of last year, which included a $660 million
charge related to the company's estimate of the class action lawsuit
costs.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30958408

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

From: Jim Thompson  <Jim-T@analog_innovations.com>
Subject: Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 22:37:14 GMT
Organization: Cox Communications


On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 15:12:28 GMT, joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman),
said <telecom22.236.3@telecom-digest.org>, wrote the following:

>> As part of a $20 million investment, Mr. Langeland, a Sacramento-based
>> entrepreneur, has erected 10 billboards that can display both video
>> and text and can be programmed with changing messages and images. In
>> addition, the billboards include fledgling technology that is designed
>> to identify the radio frequencies of passers-by.

> Just to be clear, is the claim here that the sign can detect what
> radio station I'm listening to?  It cannot.

> At least, it cannot do so electrically or electronically.  I suppose
> some method could be set up to see how drivers behave based on when
> advertisements occur, but cars don't emit RF energy based on what
> radio station is tuned.

In England, where you are required to have a license for your TV, they
use RF sniffing vans to find TV sets.

There *may* be enough LO (local oscillator) leakage from a car radio
that a good spectrum analyzer could tell what station you are tuned
to.


|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  Jim-T@analog_innovations.com  Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |

            For proper E-mail replies SWAP "-" and "_"
             
I love to cook with wine.      Sometimes I even put it in the food.             
------------------------------

Subject: Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust
Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu
Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni
From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes)
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 22:51:02 GMT


In article <telecom22.236.3@telecom-digest.org>, Dr. Joel M. Hoffman
<joel@exc.com> wrote:

> Just to be clear, is the claim here that the sign can detect what
> radio station I'm listening to?  It cannot.

> At least, it cannot do so electrically or electronically.  I suppose

Don't be too sure.  Unless they are well shielded radio receivers emit
a little bit of local oscillator signal, which can be picked up and
used to determine the frequency you are listening to.

I have read of TV survey companies driving around and detecting local
oscillator signals to determine which channels are being viewed in
homes.  I've also read that in England, where radio and TV reception
is taxed, the tax collectors can drive around and determine who is
running a receiver who has not paid the tax.  Then there are the cases
where someone can learn remotely what is being displayed on your
computer screen by detecting radio emissions from the monitor.

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:55:35 -0800


In article <telecom22.236.3@telecom-digest.org>, joel@exc.com
(Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote:

> At least, it cannot do so electrically or electronically.  I suppose
> some method could be set up to see how drivers behave based on when
> advertisements occur, but cars don't emit RF energy based on what
> radio station is tuned.

Are you telling us that decades of radio sniffing by the British post
office (to track down listening license scofflaws) has been nothing
but a fraud?

Actually, most consumer radios DO leak significant amounts of LO
signal, whose frequency is a function of the station to which the
radio is tuned. Trust me.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only that, John, but years ago when
tube-style radios were common, radio station pirates could make actual
broadcasting stations by using that IF (intermediate frequency) which
comes around 440 KC I think. They would get in the back of the radio,
clip the wire with the IF, attach it to an outside antenna, tune a few
of the trim pots to crank up the IF to around a tenth or a quarter of
a watt, then set the tuning dial on the front of the radio a little
bit and that radio would be talking maybe a quarter or half-mile away.
Bill Pfieffer came over to my house one day and did that. He even had
a better idea. He hooked the RF output to one side of an unused phone
pair. Then we took my portable radio and walked down the street for
close to a mile and whenever we held that little portable battery
operated up next to a telephone pole, we would hear that old junky
tube style radio back at my house. Yes indeed, receiving radios do
also transmit a little.   PAT]

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

From: Megan Marshall <megan@no.spam.please>
Subject: Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 20:17:49 -0500


Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote:

>> As part of a $20 million investment, Mr. Langeland, a Sacramento-based
>> entrepreneur, has erected 10 billboards that can display both video
>> and text and can be programmed with changing messages and images. In
>> addition, the billboards include fledgling technology that is designed
>> to identify the radio frequencies of passers-by.

> Just to be clear, is the claim here that the sign can detect what
> radio station I'm listening to?  It cannot.

> At least, it cannot do so electrically or electronically.  I suppose
> some method could be set up to see how drivers behave based on when
> advertisements occur, but cars don't emit RF energy based on what
> radio station is tuned.

It most certainly can, and that is how the sign works.  It detects
what radio station cars are listening to and adjusts the current ad to
the demographics of the radio station.  How does it do this?  By
receiving the leaked weak signals emitted by the car radio's local
oscillator and using software to compare them to area broadcasts of
each local radio station.  Radar detector detectors used where radar
detectors are illegal, and TV detectors used where TV's are taxed each
year (such as UK) operate on the same principle.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And also see my message to John Higdon
in this same issue of the Digest. In the case especially of the old
style tube radios, the leak was not always all that weak. 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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #237
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jan 17 01:41:14 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0H6fEQ16084;
	Fri, 17 Jan 2003 01:41:14 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 01:41:14 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301170641.h0H6fEQ16084@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #238

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 17 Jan 2003 00:41:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 238

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Discarded Hard Drives Found Full of Personal Data (Monty Solomon)
    Yahoo Plans Big Expansion of Broadband (Monty Solomon)
    Judge: Microsoft to Add Java in 120 Days (Monty Solomon)
    Telemundo's Tricky Transition (Monty Solomon)
    20-Year Extension of Existing Copyrights Is Upheld (Monty Solomon)
    A Corporate Victory; One That Raises Public Consciousness (Monty Solomon)
    AT&T Broadband Users See 3rd E-Mail Shift (Monty Solomon)
    Keeping Tabs: A Two-Way Street (Monty Solomon)
    Spam? No Thanks, We're Full (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist (Ross Oliver)
    Caller ID (Forrest Nelson)
    What Have You Been Drinking? (Joey Lindstrom)
    What *He* Has Been Drinking; was Re: Death Row Empty (Dale Neiburg)
    Pat, the Visionary? (january2003@saurasite.com)

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: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 21:54:22 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Discarded Hard Drives Found Full of Personal Data


By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff, 1/16/2003

Millions of American families and businesses store sensitive
information on their computers. But what happens to that data when the
aging computers are resold or given away? According to a pair of MIT
graduate students, much of it is still on the hard drives, waiting to
be discovered by the machine's new owner.

In a new article in the engineering journal IEEE Security and Privacy,
Simson Garfinkel and Abhi Shelat describe how they went on a used hard
drive buying spree, and collected vast amounts of private information
in the process.

Garfinkel, author of several books on computer security, is working on
a doctorate in computer science at MIT. He and fellow graduate student
Shelat wondered whether people erased their hard drives before
reselling their PCs. ''I wanted to find out if this was a big problem
or not,'' said Garfinkel.

So Garfinkel and Shelat purchased 158 hard drives at swap meets and
used computer shops throughout the United States, and on the Internet
auction site eBay. They wound up with 129 drives that actually
worked. Then they used commonplace software tools to look for data on
the drives. They found everything from love letters to pornography
and, in one case, over 3,700 credit card numbers.


http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/016/business/Discarded_hard_drives_found_full_of_personal_data+.shtml

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:38:09 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Yahoo Plans Big Expansion of Broadband


By SAUL HANSELL

Buoyed by its growing sales and profits, Yahoo is planning to take 
its high-speed Internet access service nationwide.

Yesterday, the big Internet portal announced better-than-expected 
financial results for the fourth quarter of 2002. It was able to 
expand its sales of online advertising, even as it added new services 
that generate monthly fees from users.

One of the fastest-growing of those services is high-speed, or
broadband, Internet access, which Yahoo now offers as a co-branded
service with SBC Communications, the phone company that serves about
one-third of the nation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/16/technology/16YAHO.html

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Readers of the New York Times are
reminded that we have a 'group ID/password' to use there, to avoid
individual violations of privacy: Usename=telecomdigest Pwd=telecomdigest.
You are welcome to use it.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 20:06:45 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Judge: Microsoft to Add Java in 120 Days


Microsoft Corp. will have 120 days to release a version of Sun
Microsystems' Java programming language for Windows after a federal
judge issues his formal order against the software giant.

U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz set that schedule Wednesday
during a lengthy hearing with lawyers from both companies. Sun had
sought a 90-day period, while Microsoft wanted a three-phase approach
that would have extended over 180 days.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30949120

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 20:09:03 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Telemundo's Tricky Transition


by Penelope Patsuris, 01.16.03, 11:00 AM ET

NEW YORK - With its October 2001 purchase of Telemundo, the number two
Spanish-language television network in the U.S., NBC made a $2.7
billion bet that the booming Hispanic population will deliver
blockbuster growth.

There's no question that the Hispanic market is the next big thing for
advertisers. Already 33 million strong, it's the fastest growing
population segment, and its buying power is growing 118% annually, far
faster than that of the general population. Despite the fact that the
group represents 13% of the population, advertisers spend only 2.4% of
their budgets targeting Hispanics.

The opportunity is clear, but it remains a challenge to determine what
media are most effective for advertisers that hunger for this
ballooning demographic -- and Spanish-language TV isn't necessarily
it.

The George Lopez show on Walt Disney's (nyse: DIS - news - people )
ABC illustrates the challenges facing Telemundo. The sitcom is a hit,
and it marks the start of Hispanic themed-shows' assimilation into
mainstream media, much the way NBC's Cosby show was a pioneer for
blacks on television. But the Lopez show underscores a crucial
fact -- as Hispanics become more assimilated, they will turn more to
mainstream media for their entertainment, and tune in less to
Spanish-language television.

http://www.forbes.com/2003/01/16/cx_pp_0116telemundo.html

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 20:48:41 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: 20-Year Extension of Existing Copyrights Is Upheld


By LINDA GREENHOUSE

WASHINGTON, Jan. 15 - The Supreme Court today upheld the 20-year
extension that Congress granted to all existing copyrights in 1998,
declaring that while the extension might have been bad policy, it fell
clearly within Congress's constitutional authority.

The 7-to-2 decision came in the court's most closely watched
intellectual property case in years, one with financial implications
in the billions of dollars. A major victory for the Hollywood studios
and other big corporate copyright holders that had lobbied strenuously
for the extension, the ruling had the effect of keeping the original
Mickey Mouse as well as other icons of mid-century American culture
from slipping into the public domain.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's majority opinion methodically dissected
and rejected the arguments that a coalition of Internet publishers and
other users of noncopyrighted material had marshaled against the
Copyright Term Extension Act. The dissenters were Justices John Paul
Stevens and Stephen G. Breyer.

The named plaintiff in the case was Eric Eldred, who wanted to publish
some Robert Frost poems. Other plaintiffs included a church choir
director; an orchestral sheet music company; a company that restores
old films; and Dover Publications, a publisher of books that have
passed into the public domain.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/16/business/media/16BIZC.html

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 20:50:04 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: A Corporate Victory, but One That Raises Public Consciousness


By AMY HARMON

The Supreme Court's decision to uphold a 20-year extension on the
copyright term handed a major victory to the entertainment and
publishing industries, which stand to make billions of dollars by
keeping control over lucrative properties for up to 95 years.

But the public domain advocates who had challenged the constitution-
ality of the 1998 law might claim a measure of success in the court of
public opinion.

Both copyright holders and their opponents said the decision was 
likely to sharpen the increasingly contentious battle over how to 
balance the rights of copyright holders with the public interest at a 
time when digital technology offers new powers to both sides.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/16/business/media/16IMPA.html

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 21:40:38 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: AT&T Broadband Users See 3rd E-Mail Shift


By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 1/16/2003

In a move likely to anger thousands of its customers, AT&T Broadband 
confirmed yesterday that its recent acquisition by Comcast Corp. will 
force more than 200,000 New England cable Internet modem subscribers 
to get their third e-mail address in barely a year.

AT&T spokeswoman Jennifer L. Khoury said the company expects to begin 
making the switch from e-mail addresses ending in attbi.com to 
comcast.net starting in March. It will affect more than 2 million 
subscribers nationally. Mail sent to old attbi.com e-mail addresses 
may be forwarded to the new comcast.net addresses for as few as 60 
days before the attbi.com addresses are shut down, the company said.

Subscribers who were outraged last March over being forced to notify 
scores of friends, business associates, Internet newsletters, and 
online merchants when the company changed e-mail from mediaone.net to 
attbi.com blasted the latest planned switchover yesterday.


http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/016/business/AT_T_Broadband_users_see_3d_e_mail_shift+.shtml

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:27:01 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Keeping Tabs: A Two-Way Street


By WILL WADE

An ordinary day at the zoo for Timothy Neher was quickly turning
traumatic. "It was the first time I ever got to take out my niece and
nephew by myself," he remembers of the 1997 outing. "Everything was
fine until lunchtime. I glanced up at the menu at the snack bar; it
couldn't have been more than a few seconds, but when I looked down
they were gone."

His 5-year-old niece and 3-year-old nephew were nowhere in sight. "I 
felt that panicky feeling every parent dreads," Mr. Neher said.

Then the five-minute crisis was over. The children had wandered 
behind the snack stand. "When I took the kids home that night," he 
said, "I told their parents we'd had some excitement, but I'd come up 
with a great idea for a company."

Almost six years later, the company, Wherify Wireless in Redwood 
Shores, Calif., has produced the Personal Locator, a satellite-based 
tracking device intended to head off the kind of panic that Mr. Neher 
experienced.

Location-sensing technologies based on satellite-based systems or 
infrared tracking are not new. But design advances have made the 
components small enough to fit into hand-held units, or to be built 
into bracelets or backpacks, relaying information that can readily be 
monitored on the Web. Couple that with a more security-conscious 
world, and suddenly tracking systems seem to be everywhere, keeping 
tabs on the whereabouts of children, elderly relatives and even 
belongings - in addition, of course, to helping drivers, hikers and 
sailors find their way from point to point.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/16/technology/circuits/16loca.html

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 22:38:57 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Spam? No Thanks, We're Full


By Janet Kornblum
January 13, 2003

The number of spam messages sent increased nearly 300 percent from 
2001 to 2002 -- from 14,078,511 to 55,683,103, according to e-mail 
filtering company Brightmail.

"FREE mortgage quotes and "Cheap printer cartridges!" and "Free passes
to thousands of XXX sites!" All of it "URGENT & CONFIDENTIAL!"

If you think you're getting more spam than ever, you're right. Spam 
-- junk e-mail -- has dramatically increased in the past year, 
studies have shown. And next year will be even worse, one new report 
says. It predicts that by July, the volume of spam sent to business 
e-mail addresses will exceed the amount of regular e-mail.

http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/20447.html

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

From: reo@roscoe.airaffair.com (Ross Oliver)
Subject: Re: Pop-ups Add New Twist
Date: 17 Jan 2003 01:32:16 GMT
Organization: Concentric Internet Services


Dr. Joel M. Hoffman <joel@exc.com> wrote:

> My suggestion is either:

>1.  use Linux, in which case you can run the browser as a powerless
>    user, so that the browser can't do too much damage; or

>2.  (more severe than one) use two computers, one for your important
>    data and one just to run the web browser.  You can run vnc on the
>    browser computer so you can access it directly from your main
>    computer.

Third option: run one computer INSIDE of another.  Install Linux and
use VMware (www.vmware.com) to create a self-contained Windows environment
on a virtual machine.  Sure, VMware Workstation costs $299, but nobody said
security is cheap.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Right now, it seems my Windows XP is
> *very sick*. I think if I can raise the money I am going to have to
> dump this machine entirely, and go with Linux. The trouble is, I have
> many very wonderful Window-based programs which will not run on *nix.
> I do not know if I will ever get it straightened out again.  :(   PAT]

Pat, VMware could solve this problem as well, allowing you to run
Windows programs on a virtual machine under Linux.


Ross Oliver

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

Date: 16 Jan 2003 15:47:04 -0800
From: Forrest Nelson <jfnelson@aeieng.com>
Subject: Caller ID


How difficult is it for someone to change how their number is
displayed in your caller id?  As an example I received a call that had
nothing but zeros in the number. 

JFNelson

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is difficult or impossible for small
individual users. It is quite easy for large business users with a
PBX or DID (direct inward dial) lines. They seem to do as they wish 
with impunity. Even Southwestern Bell claims they cannot control what
companies do with their outbound Caller ID. Southwestern Bell will
sell you a bogus, fraudulent service called 'Privacy Manager', and
refer to it as a 'solution' if you scream loud enough however. We had 
a discussion recently on this very topic here in the Digest. Maybe a
couple of the guys who participated in it will bring you up to date.
Ten zeros is considered a 'legitimate' phone number for caller ID
purposes according to SW Bell. The chairman's office there told me
that after one of my calls to the Kansas commission prompted the
spokeslady for the chairman's office to call me. PAT]

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 15:51:11 -0700
Subject: What Have You Been Drinking?
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 17:18:33 EST, Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote:

> The cop's son produces the gun which ballistics tests show is the
> murder weapon.  An investigation (using newly-developed computer
> analysis not available at the time of the trial) shows that detectives
> "Photoshopped" the picture.  John is immediately released, and Jane
> must serve 25 years behind bars.  (What happens to the detectives is a
> separate issue that can be handled under existing laws.)

> Had John received the death penalty, Jane would be subject to
> execution even if John had not yet been executed.

> My suggestion (which I realize will NEVER happen) keeps Capital
> Punishment available but discourages its use in all but the most
> airtight cases.

The case *WAS* airtight, as far as Jane knew.  I can see implementing
this *ONLY* if you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jane was
party to a fraudulent prosecution.  If the cops cook the evidence and
present it to her, and she doesn't know the evidence is cooked, then
why in hell should she be subject to frying in the chair?  How on
earth can you justify that?


-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let me tell you how collusion between
police officers and prosecutors works, Joey. In 1982, I was the victim
of a robbery. A home invasion type thing. They suckered me with an
excuse into leaving my apartment for all of a minute; maybe two. They
worked quickly; when I went back in my place they had been there; an
Apple ][+ computer was missing. I notified the police, but managed
to retrieve the computer and cords and disk drives from where they had
stashed them in a vacant apartment in the building. The police officers
told me to go see the state's attorney on the day of the trial. When
I went in his office, a police officer was sitting there with him.

I had identified two of the guys who had been in on it (suckering me
to leave my apartment for a couple minutes). The police had arrested
them both in the hallway outside my apartment. *The other guys
involved in it (four in total) were no where to be found.*  The two 
the police had arrested did NOT have any of my stuff in their
possession.  The conversation with the prosecutor went like this:

(prosecutor):  did you see these two (arrested) guys in the hallway there?
(me)  Yes. 
(prosecutor):  what of your stuff was in their possesion?
(me)  Those two guys did not have any of it.
(prosecutor):  Do you know what that means? When we get into court and
               you give that testimony, the judge will cut them both
               loose. They'll walk out today. 

The prosecutor hangs his head, clucks his tongue, and says to the 
police officer, "would you please explain to Mr. Townson what we are
trying to accomplish here?"  With that, he got up and _left the room_.

The police officer said to me (once the prosecutor was out of the
room, he was smart enough to not be in the room while the cop was
talking to me) -- and I quote -- "do you want to see those niggers go
free?". I was a little shocked hearing that sort of thing, but decided
to continue listening. "You could get up in court and say what you
told us, and watch those vermin go free ... or you could lie about it.
Tell the judge you saw those two with one of the computer parts, lets
say the power cord. Then I can tell you they'll get two years IDOC
(Illinois Department of Corrections). That's how this judge works.
But dont use the word 'niggers' when we get in court. It has to appear
it is a fair trial." Then he shut up and made some sort of finger
motion, because the prosecutor came back in the room almost right
away. "Did you explain to Mr. Townson our objectives here?"  asked the
prosecutor.

The prosecutor was a smart man; he did not intend to leave himself
in any trickbag. I would have had to *prove* that he was part of
any conspiracy, that he knew what the police officer had said to me
and that he (prosecutor) had condoned perjury in the court. I told
the prosecutor I had decided not to prosecute the crime after all, and
excused myself, then left. Like many of the families of victims of 
the men on death row, I felt victimized twice also. Once by the
no-good guys who had come into my home and ripped me off; then a
second time by the police officer/prosecutor who had encouraged me
to get up and lie in court, 'so the niggers do not walk away without
punishment'. 

And if the police/prosecutor would encourage *me* to get up and commit
perjury over a lousy computer (since recovered) then what makes you
think they would not encourage perjury by a forensic technician who
was employed by the police or an outraged man whose wife had been
sexually assaulted or an angry mother whose little son had gotten
buggered on the way home from school one day?   

So Joey, how did your imaginary Jane know the case was cooked? Well,
if she had been a prosecutor in Chicago (or an evidence technician
in Oklahoma City named Joyce or God knows who in Detroit or New
York City, she'd know, believe me. Ms. Davis does not like the idea
of me sterotyping police, calling them evil intake agents for our
nation's correctional industry. So I won't call them that, I'll 
simply say alot/most of them leave much to be desired in the way of
decent understanding human beings. 

You see Joey, you're the one who needs the stiff drink tonight, not 
Gordon H. who you abused in your message. He lives around the
Chicago area like I used to; he knows how things work there.  PAT]

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

From: Dale Neiburg <DNeiburg@npr.org>
Subject: So What Has *He* Had to Drink Tonight? was Re: Death Row
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 18:08:45 -0500


Gordon Hlavenka wrote:

> Had John received the death penalty, Jane would be subject to
> execution even if John had not yet been executed.

> My suggestion (which I realize will NEVER happen) keeps Capital
> Punishment available but discourages its use in all but the most
> airtight cases.

This aproach is actually the one used for a thousand years or so in
imperial China.  The magistrate who tried a case also served as (in
our terminology) superintendent of police, public prosecutor, and
jury.  He was also not only allowed but *encouraged* to use torture to
get a confession.  What prevented the grossest abuses was an intricate
system of oversight and a law that if the judge tortured or executed
someone who subsequently turned out to be innocent, the same
torture/method of execution would be inflicted on the judge.  On the
whole it worked very well.

Dale Neiburg  **  NPR Satellite Operations  **  202-513-2640

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has
endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us 
to forgo their use."
                              --Galileo Galilei

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And I have always thought that we would
have a much better police force if ex-prison inmates were hired for the
job.   PAT]

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

From: january2003@saurasite.com
Subject: Pat, the Visionary ????
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:22:50 +0200


Please note that the address "january2003@saurasite.com  is a
temporary address, and is valid only until the end of the current
month.

On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 22:11:45 -0500, in comp.dcom.telecom you wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Normally, about this point, Ms. Davis,
> I have to draw a line and ask the participants to move their debate to

Pat, I was just beginning to wonder about that, having pretty much
"skimmed through" this particular thread ...

Then I saw this ... and I apologize for extending the thread.

> I do not *ever* support a *forced* death penalty (the kind where you
> are led away then injected). I would support a *voluntary* death
> penalty. If that sounds like an oxymoron, let me explain. After a
> person crossed some arbitrarily defined point in society (either a 
> henious murder, or similar, if *I* were the judge (which I never would

All I can say is a resounding " Y E S ! " ......  the concept you
suggested should be held up as an example everywhere ...

> (2) if you prefer life in the hellish confines of a prison, in 
> effect afraid to face death and whatever that may entail,
> then you may choose to accept confinement in a prison
> for the rest of your natural life (or maybe present age 
> plus 40 years or death, whichever comes first.)

And whatever that term is, it *will  not be reduced* ... no parole, no
"time off for good behaviour" etc ... 

> That, Ms. Davis, is how *I* would deal with it. Like the problem of
> unwanted animals in the Independence Animal Shelter (maybe your town
> as well?) being 'put to sleep' when the shelter gets overcrowded, what

Pat, the "problem" of a death row inmate more resembles the case of a
large, vicious dog, that had been running wild and attacking at
random.

"Society" seems to have no problem dealing with a vicious animal (who
won't get the benefit of judge and jury either) -- it ought not be any
more difficult to deal with a "human" who has, by his own actions,
voluntarily placed himself outside the norms of the society he lives
in.

This presupposes that there must be a *good* system that has proven
beyond any reasonable doubt that the person concerned *is* guilty and
there *must* be adequate safeguards, but sometimes there's Just No
Doubt at all, and society should be "relieved" of something
"unacceptable" ...


Cheers

Frank R.P.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's a mighty big presupposition you 
are asking us to make. And most of the time, when we 'assume' something
it makes an 'ass' of 'u' and 'me' as the statement goes. It has been a 
long time since we had any semblence of decency and honesty in our
system of justice in the USA. If we cannot trust police and prosecutors
in our country to not lie, who should we trust, the serial killers,
mass murderers and garden variety thieves and burglars? The Chicago
Tribune made that last statement after they ran the five part series
on prosecutor misconduct a few years ago, which was about the time
Governor Ryan started his own investigation which led to last week's
mass commutations/pardons.  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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #238
******************************
    
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jan 17 15:56:20 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0HKuKl02908;
	Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:56:20 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:56:20 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301172056.h0HKuKl02908@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #239

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:55:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 239

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Forget Tin Cans, These Gizmos Improve Wi-Fi Trouble Spots (Monty Solomon)
    Risks of Using Orange SPV Smartphone 2002 (Monty Solomon)
    Phone Units Join in Effort for Seamless Wireless Net (Monty Solomon)
    Getting Onto the Internet at 30,000 Feet or So (Monty Solomon)
    DMCA vs. The Garage Door Opener (Monty Solomon)
    ACLU Surveillance Report: "Bigger Monster, Weaker Chains" (Monty Solomon)
    Bouncing Signals Push the Limits of Bandwidth (Monty Solomon)
    Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb (Monty Solomon)
    Register.com Presented With Buyout Bid (Monty Solomon)
    MS Seeks Malware, Bust Phones After SPV Security Crack (Monty Solomon)
    APC "Back-UPS CS" Recall (Monty Solomon)
    Michelin to Embed Electronic ID Tags in Tires (Monty Solomon)
    DirecTV DSL Customers Get Reprieve (Monty Solomon)
    After the Copyright Smackdown:  What Next? (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.

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 22:36:55 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Forget Tin Cans, These Gizmos Improve Wi-Fi Trouble Spots


By WALTER S. MOSSBERG

The hottest technology in personal computing is wireless networking,
which allows users to share a high-speed Internet connection among
multiple computers without being tethered to wires or wall jacks.
Known as Wi-Fi, this wireless system is commonly used to connect
computers in various rooms of a home, but it's also popping up in
public places like airports, hotel lobbies and coffee shops.

But there's a problem with Wi-Fi: In most homes, the wireless Internet
signal doesn't extend to rooms far from the base station, or access
point, which transmits the Internet signal. Even if the signal gets to
a distant room, it can be weak or fade in and out, making for a slow
and unreliable connection.

Unfortunately, there are few simple, ready-made solutions for these
reception problems. If you're a techie or a do-it-yourselfer, you can
go online and learn how to rig up more-powerful antennas, using such
things as surplus Russian military gear and even empty cans from
Pringles potato chips. But it's complicated.

One maker of Wi-Fi gear, Linksys, has just introduced a special
component that boosts the wireless signal, but it works only if you
have certain Linksys base-station models.

http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20030102.html

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 23:07:08 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Risks of Using Orange SPV Smartphone 2002


Excerpt from
Rupert Goodwins' Diary
17:22 Friday 10th January 2003

http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t479-s2128519,00.html

The next time I looked at the phone it appeared to have turned itself
off -- so I tried switching it on again. When it eventually came to
life I could not get it to dial -- a closer examination revealed the
legend 'Radio off' displayed very legibly on the SPV's excellent
screen. No amount of menu searching let me find anything that would
turn the phone's radio back on. At this point I remember making a few
comments about the dubiousness of Bill Gates' parentage. I eventually
managed to flag down a passing skier who let me use her Nokia phone
(which switched on immediately) to call for help. Later analysis
revealed that the problem arose because of the SPV's implementation
of the ON/OFF button. It needs to be depressed for a couple of
seconds to function as an on/off switch. If pressed and released
briefly it summons a 'QuickList' menu -- where one of the items lets
you turn the radio -- presumably to let you watch movies on the thing
when airborne on something more reliable than two planks of wood.

My conclusion is that during my attempts to switch the phone on I must
have inadvertently selected the QuickList menu and then selected the
Radio off item. It took quite a bit of frustrating exploration to find
the QuickList menu again -- so I was without the use of the SPV for
another day or so."

So there you go: if you must place yourself in life-threatening
situations with a modern information appliance as your only hope of
rescue, don't pick something with an obscure user interface.

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 23:31:32 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Phone Units Join in Effort for Seamless Wireless Net


By BARNABY J. FEDER

Motorola, Proxim and Avaya are expected to announce today that they
will jointly develop technology to allow wireless communications to
jump between networks without interruption.

If the three companies are successful, an executive could begin
downloading data using a wireless hub in a Starbucks, airport or other
public site and move to a company office without interrupting the
transfer. Similarly, a phone call that began over a company's internal
voice-over-Internet network could move to a public carrier as the user
of the cellphone left the building.

Analysts briefed on the plans said the partnership would face daunting
technical hurdles, including reconciling the different security levels
and frequency levels in different wireless networks.  Analysts called
it the most ambitious wireless roaming plan yet to try to take
advantage of the spread of communication hubs based on a standard
called 802.11, known as Wi-Fi. The hubs, also called hot spots, are
either free to any user of a mobile device with a Wi-Fi card who
happens to be in the neighborhood or are limited to subscribers,
depending on who operates them.

Most Wi-Fi networks have focused on transfer of e-mail messages and
other forms of data from laptop computers but the goal of the three
companies is to offer seamless transitions to cellphone users as well.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/14/business/14MOTO.html

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 23:40:17 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Getting Onto the Internet at 30,000 Feet or So


By EDWARD WONG

For many air travelers, flying has become an escape from the 
modern-day cyclone of phone calls, e-mail and instant text messages.

But some of the world's largest airlines are now rolling out 
technology that allows passengers to surf the Internet, check e-mail 
and beam text messages to the ground.

Lufthansa Airlines, the German carrier, begins flying a Boeing 
747-400 today between Frankfurt and Washington outfitted with 
Internet connectivity developed by the Boeing Company. Next month, 
British Airways plans to start a trial flight with the same 
technology between London and New York. Japan Airlines and SAS, the 
Scandinavian carrier, have signed contracts with Boeing to outfit 
nearly a dozen planes each to offer Internet service next year.

Later this month, Cathay Pacific, the airline based in Hong Kong, 
will offer e-mail service on 40 planes using technology developed by 
Tenzing Communications, a small company based in Seattle that is 
partly owned by Airbus, Boeing's rival.

Another system, jointly developed by Tenzing and a company called 
ARINC, is already being used by Virgin Atlantic Airways, which has 
four planes that allow travelers to send brief text messages - at 
$2.50 each - that are typed out on video screens on the backs of 
seats. Virgin has a contract to install the system on its entire 
fleet by year's end; the technology has also been tested by Air 
Canada and Singapore Airlines.

The big question is whether passengers - especially business 
travelers - will pay to plug into the digital grid at 30,000 feet.

Those airlines that use Boeing's service, called Connexion by Boeing, 
expect to charge passengers $30 to $35 a piece for unlimited Internet 
access. Tenzing executives said airlines carrying its e-mail system, 
which does not allow Internet surfing, were expected to charge $10 to 
$20.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/15/business/15AIR.html

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 23:45:12 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: DMCA vs. The Garage Door Opener


http://www.politechbot.com/p-04319.html 

  From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
  Subject: FC: DMCA vs. The Garage Door Opener

[I've copied the attorneys for the plaintiffs in case they wish to
reply to Fred. For their reference: Politech is a moderated discussion
forum populated by many members of the legal community, and I attempt
to include all reasonable, well-stated views. --Declan]

  Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 18:48:21 -0800
  Subject: DMCA v garage door openers
  From: Fred von Lohmann EFF <fred@eff.org>
  To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>

[Feel free to post to Politech]

In the latest bit of DMCA lunacy, copyright guru David Nimmer turned
me onto a case that his firm is defending, where a garage door opener
company (The Chamberlain Group) has leveled a DMCA claim (among other
claims) against the maker of universal garage door remotes (Skylink).
Yet another case where the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA
are being used to impede legitimate competition, similar to the
Lexmark case. Not, I think, what Congress had in mind when enacting
the DMCA.

The Complaint:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20030113_chamberlain_v_skylink_complaint.pdf

The Amended Complaint:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/ 20030114_chamerberlain_v_skylink_amd_complaint.pdf

The Summary Judgment Motion:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20030113_chamerlain_v_skylink_motion.pdf

Attorneys for Sklylink are (both at the Orange County offices of Irell
& Manella, a large law firm):

"Nobles, Kimberley" <KNobles@irell.com>
"Greene, Andra" <AGreene@irell.com>


Fred von Lohmann
Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
fred@eff.org  +1 (415) 436-9333 x123

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q=declan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 23:49:43 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: ACLU Surveillance Report: "Bigger Monster, Weaker Chains"


http://www.politechbot.com/p-04324.html 

  Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 10:43:11 -0500
  From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
  Subject: FC: ACLU surveillance report: "Bigger Monster, Weaker Chains"

  Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 07:40:00 -0500
  To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
  From: Barry Steinhardt <BSteinhardt@aclu.org>
  Subject: The Growth of an American Surveillance Society.

Declan,

I thought politechers would like to know about a new ACLU report,
"Bigger Monster, Weaker Chains: The Growth of an American Surveillance
Society."

This report grew out of our sense here at the ACLU that in order to
make progress on the privacy issue, we have to shift the terms of the
debate.  When viewed in isolation, many new privacy invasions seem
harmless to many Americans, who don't see why they should care that
(for example) someone is recording the date and time that they drive
through a tollbooth.  To understand the privacy issue one has to look
at the big picture to understand that each new piece of information
collected about us, no matter how seemingly harmless, is increasingly
being added together with thousands of other data points to create an
extremely intrusive, high-resolution picture of our lives.

The need to shift the terms of the debate on privacy to focus more on
the big picture was made a lot easier by the breaking of the story of
the Pentagon/Poindexter Total Information Awareness program and that
story has provided the perfect opportunity to try to spark a broader
discussion of how we are going to handle all the intrusive new
technologies that are being developed, and what we are going to let
this country turn into.

The report is available on-line at http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=11573&c=39.

Barry Steinhardt

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q=declan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 00:03:02 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Bouncing Signals Push the Limits of Bandwidth


By IAN AUSTEN

IT is a phenomenon well known to people who drive through urban 
high-rise canyons. Just as you stop at a traffic light, the car radio 
loses its signal. Once the light turns green, the car only has to 
creep forward a few feet to restore the radio reception.

Those dead spots, which can also cut off cellphone calls and mobile
computer communications, are often caused when signals bounce wildly
off the surrounding buildings. This scattering creates pockets in
which two reflections of the same signal collide and cancel each other
out.

Avoiding the undesirable effects of multipath, as this scattering
effect is formally known, has long been a preoccupation of people who
design wireless communications systems. Now, however, a system
developed by Bell Labs actually embraces radio reflections not only to
improve reception but also to boost the speed of wireless
networks. Prototypes of the system, called Blast, can send data over
third-generation, or 3G, cellphone networks at rates about eight times
those of 3G.

http://nytimes.com/2003/01/16/technology/circuits/16next.html

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 22:19:05 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb


Wall Street Journal
BUSINESS EUROPE

Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb
By LEONARD WAVERMAN

The U.K.'s competition regulator is in danger of deciding that
Europe's decade of success in the mobile-phone business was a
mistake. It would like to turn back the clock, or at least make
Europe's wireless industry look a lot more like the far
less-successful American mobile-phone business.

There are innumerable differences between the U.S. and European
mobile-phone markets, many of which contribute in one way or another
to Europe's greater success in the mobile-telephony business. But one
of the most important is the principle known in the business as
"calling party pays."

In Europe, the person who calls someone using a mobile phone pays
entirely for that call. The called person pays nothing. This "calling
party pays" principle also applies to fixed lines everywhere, Europe
or the U.S., for calls made on the networks of BT, France Telecom, or
Bell South. But on mobile phones in the U.S., the called party, the
person who owns the mobile phone, pays part of the charges, so
Americans use mobile phones less and turn them off to avoid paying for
unwanted incoming calls.

This difference in pricing is thought to be an important element in
European domination in the mobile-phone wars. A greater proportion of
Europeans have mobile phones than do Americans. The European mobile
standard -- GSM -- dominates the world market, as do European phone
and network-equipment manufacturers.

None of this seems to matter to British regulators, however, which are
currently considering sweeping changes -- not only to how the
mobile-phone business is regulated but how customers themselves pay
for the calls they make and receive.

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/0,,SB1042409262357988944,00.html

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 01:16:59 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Register.com Presented With Buyout Bid


By ComputerWire

Register.com Inc has received an unsolicited offer of almost $200m to
buy the company outright, but has yet to make a public decision on
whether shareholders should accept the offer, it emerged yesterday.

RCM Acquisition Co LLC, a consortium of several Register shareholders
set up specifically to launch the bid and apparently led by Barington
Companies Equity Partners, said it presented the board of directors
with a cash offer of $4.95 per share.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/28890.html

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 01:18:59 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: MS Seeks Malware, Bust Phones After SPV Security Crack


By John Lettice

A quite bizarre CNET report reveals that Microsoft's Security 
Response Center began investigations into the circumvention of 
security on the SPV smartphone on Tuesday, searching -- so says CNET, 
anyway -- for reports of rogue programs on the network and damaged 
phones.

Furthermore, says an anonymous source "familiar with the situation,"
unlocking an SPV "is a difficult process that sometimes involves
taking the phone apart." Oh really? One hazards a guess that this
particular source is familiar with the situation as they would like it
to be, and as it no doubt will be by version 2.0 or 3.0 - security
hard-wired into the silicon, and the client irretrievably
controlled/owned by somebody out there, not you.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/59/28898.html

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 01:30:39 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: APC "Back-UPS CS" Recall


http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml03/03068.html 

APC Recall Hotline: (888) 272-7359 	
CPSC Recall Hotline: (800) 638-2772
CPSC Media Contact: Scott Wolfson (301) 504-7051

CPSC, American Power Conversion Corp. Announce Recall of Back-Up Power 
Supply Systems

WASHINGTON, D.C. - In cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC), American Power Conversion Corporation (APC),
of West Kingston, R.I., is voluntarily recalling about 900,000 back-up
power supply devices.  These devices are primarily used to protect
computers in case of a power failure.  The power supply device can
fail, causing the unit to overheat, which may pose a fire hazard to
consumers.
	
APC has received six reports of units overheating resulting in the
melting of the unit's outer casing and three reports of minor property
damage.  No injuries have been reported.
	
The recalled Back-UPS(r) CS Uninterruptible Power Supply devices
include the Back-UPS CS350 and the Back-UPS CS 500 models.  The model
number can be found on the front of the unit, along with the words,
"Back-UPS CS" and "APC." In addition, one of the following numbers
shows up on the bar code label located on the bottom of the unit:
BK350, BK500, BK500BLK. The recalled power supply devices also have
one of the following serial numbers - AB0048 through AB0251, BB0104
through BB0251, and JB0125 through JB0251 - which can be found on the
bottom of the unit.  Units with an "R" at the end of the serial number
within the above ranges are not part of this recall.
	
Retailers, computer and electrical distributors, and catalogs
nationwide sold the power supply devices from November 2000 through
December 2002 for between $70 and $130.
	
Consumers should immediately stop using the power supply devices by
turning off the power to all connected equipment, turning the Back-
UPS CS off, and then unplugging it from the electrical outlet.  To
obtain a free replacement unit, consumers should contact the company
at (888) APC-RELY (272-7359) between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday
through Friday or log on to the company's website at www.apc.com/rely.

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 03:09:56 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Michelin to Embed Electronic ID Tags in Tires


Tue January 14, 2003 08:31 PM ET

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Tire maker Michelin MICP.PA said on Tuesday it
planned to embed technology in its tires that would allow them to be
wirelessly linked to the car they are mounted on and transmit details
like inflation pressure to a dashboard computer.

Michelin North America, a unit of the French maker of tires and travel
guides, said the system consists of an antenna and an integrated
circuit the size of a match head.

Proponents of such RFID tags, which store, send and receive data
through weak radio signals, believe they will one day replace bar
codes and revolutionize the way that inventories are tracked and
consumer products are designed once their price falls far enough.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=technologyNews&storyID=2045403

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 03:22:44 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: DirecTV DSL Customers Get Reprieve


By John Borland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

DirecTV's high-speed Internet customers are getting an extra two weeks
to find a new Net connection, but the company says their time is
running out.

The broadband ISP (Internet service provider) originally planned to
turn off service Thursday to any of its 160,000 DSL (digital
subscriber line) customers who hadn't found an alternative
connection. Only a third of those subscribers actually have canceled
service in the month since the company announced it was leaving the
broadband business, however.

In e-mails and postal mail sent to the remaining customers this week, 
the company said it is providing an extra two weeks, but that Jan. 31 
will be the drop-dead date.

http://news.com.com/2100-1033-964608.html

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 03:26:28 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: After the Copyright Smackdown: What Next?


Don't despair at the Supreme Court's gift to Disney, says one expert. 
The fight has really only just begun.

By Siva Vaidhyanathan

Jan. 17, 2003 | When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that
Congress was within its constitutional bounds to extend the duration
of all copyrights by 20 years -- up to 70 years beyond the life of the
author and potentially infinitely -- many saw the ruling as a knockout
blow to the movement to reform copyright.

Some on the public interest side are tempted to lament what could be
called the "Dred Scott case for culture," unjustifiably locking up
content that deserves to be free. After all, six of the nine justices
concurred with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg when she issued a stark
opinion that cavalierly dismissed the historical "bargain" that
justified American copyright in the first place: We the People agree
to grant a limited, temporary monopoly to a creator or publisher in
exchange for access to creativity and the eventual return of the work
to a state of freedom.

And Ginsburg's opinion did not allow that the purpose of copyright is
to encourage future production, not lock up works already created.
She ignored the fact that the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act
of 1998 does nothing to "promote the progress" of science or art
because it grants no incentive to produce and distribute new works.

So out of despair some might see civil disobedience -- hacking and
freely distributing songs and films over digital networks -- as the
only remaining response to the excesses of the copyright regimes and
the hold they have over courts and Congress.

While disobedience might be more fun, the power of civil discourse
remains. In fact, the ruling gives public interest activists both
motivation and ammunition in the continuing battle against the
excessive expansion of the power to control information and culture.

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/01/17/copyright/

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #239
******************************

    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jan 17 17:19:51 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0HMJow04745;
	Fri, 17 Jan 2003 17:19:51 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 17:19:51 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301172219.h0HMJow04745@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #240

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 17 Jan 2003 17:19:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 240

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    US Military Bases Overseas (was Tokelau) (Mark J Cuccia)
    AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service (Hudson Leighton)
    Re: AT&T Broadband Users See 3rd E-Mail Shift (Jack Hamilton)
    Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust (J. Hoffman)
    Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust (P. Coxwell)
    High Debt Prompts SONICblue to Seek Copany Sale (Monty Solomon)
    'Sanitized' Hard Drives Prove a Trove of Personal Info (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Telephone Scam (Mark Brader)
    Spam Scam Busted (Joey Lindstrom)
    Re: AT&T Wireless Internet at $4000 a Month!! Look out!! (Mike Hartley)
    Re: Caller ID (John Higdon)
    Re: Can I Detect Call Fowarding? (Vance Shipley)
    Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From Given Country? (Vance Shipley)
    Why Are My Posts Not Showing Up? (Vance Shipley)
    Tail (SELLCOM Tech Support)
    Student Rush (Frank Beider)
    Re: Intertel vs. Harris 20-20 (Drew Ritenour)
    Can We Get Back on Topic? (Andrew Bell)

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, 17 Jan 2003 06:19:41 CST
From: Mark J Cuccia <mcuccia@tulane.edu>
Subject: US Military Bases Overseas (was Tokelau)


John R. Levine wrote:

> Mark J. Cuccia wrote:

>> I have read that the use of +53-99-etc. for dialing directly to
>> Guantanamo Bay in customer-dialable ONLY from the *US*, and not
>> even from Canada.

> I read somewhere that the phones at Gitmo are connected via the PBX at
> an army base in Virginia.  That explains no dialing from other
> countries, since there's doubtless ITU rules against funky routing of
> calls from A to B via C without B's consent.

BTW, re 'Gitmo' and Cuba ...

Cuba has a recently updated version of their Numbering Plan document at
the ITU's website:

http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/inr/index.html
http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/inr/nnp/index.html

(I'd mentioned this site recently, regarding Afghanistan's numbering
plan document, in my recent post on Tokelau ... you can also find
Tokelau's numbering plan and NUMEROUS other countries' numbering plans
including documentation on the recently expanded numbering plans for
+501 Belize and +592 Guyana at this site as well!)

I don't have Cuba's plan in front of me at the moment, but I seem to
think that they do *NOT* use the leading digit of '9' for any domestic
Cuban area codes. Neither do they start off national numbering with
'0'. I would "expect" a leading '0' for (domestic) toll calls, and a
leading '00' for international dialed calls, but I don't know for
certain if they follow the usual "most-of-the-rest-of-the-world"
standard or not.

But what's to stop Cuba from ever using +53-9(etc) for *CUBAN*
national numbering?! After all, isn't +53 an ITU code assigned to
*CUBA* and not the US? The use of +53-99 to reach 'Gitmo' from the US,
and ONLY dialable from the US -- outside of the US government and
telcos, who in the international telecom community (ITU/etc)
authorized this? It seems that no-one outside of the US 'honors'
+53-99 to reach 'Gitmo'; if Cuba determines that they want to start
using +53-9(etc) for *their* own internal numbering, then what happens
to 'Gitmo'? I would expect the "rest of the world" to honor such
possible +53-9(etc) as part of *CUBA's* own internal numbering!

> I wonder if there are secret Virginia numbers for Gitmo, like the
> Hawaii numbers for Midway, so you can call there for 5 cents rather
> than $2.

And I do agree that the current rate for the US to even *DIAL* 'Gitmo'
is *OUTRAGEOUS*. But even THAT (expensive rates) aside, if *routing*
to 'Gitmo' is *NOT* 'via Cuba', WHY does 'Gitmo' even use a segment of
*CUBA'S* numbering plan!?

I would think that since 'Gitmo' is SO CLOSE to the US mainland (and
in the *CARIBBEAN* at that too), that the Base *really* should be
numbered and dialed as a *NANP* location, maybe with a set of NXX
c.o. codes under the 787 (or 939 overlay) area codes for Puerto Rico!

But maybe there's something else here, regarding rates... if a
*REGULAR* NANP (and *US*, since Puerto Rico is billed as a domestic
call with the mainland US) area code is used, maybe the contract
company for routing calls between the mainland and 'Gitmo' wouldn't be
able to charge the outrageous "GRAVY-LADEN" rates they presently
do!???

As for possible 'secret' Virginia-based "NANP" numbers for 'Gitmo',
I wonder how many *OTHER* US Military Bases overseas as well as US
embassies and such, or even private corporations with "virtual corporate
networks" might actually be dialable at domestic rates, if one knew the
(secret) POTS/NANP number, since the calling party *would* in effect be
dialing a US/NANP type number (NPA-NXX)!?

The US Military, State Department, and *other* US government offices
located overseas still have "Autovon/DSN" or FTS-type numbers, don't
they?  I know that the *numbering plan* for Autovon/DSN is still a
'private network' type of numbering plan, but I think that FTS
abandoned their private/corporate numbering in favor of using REAL
POTS NANP numbering, a few years back. And even though Autovon/DSN is
still *itself* not part of the "public" NANP POTS numbering plan, most
locations on the Autovon/ DSN network also have 'parallel' NANP/POTS
numbers as well. So, if one knew the POTS/NANP number, one could be
able to dial at domestic rates.  I wonder if one could still call to a
PBX/switchboard/attendant type operator at some mainland location and
be 'transfered' to the US government facility overseas as well.


mjc

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

From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton)
Subject: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 21:41:23 -0600
Organization: MRRP


Steve Alexander
Star Tribune

In a Catch-22 price increase plan, Internet-only customers of AT&T
Broadband in St. Paul will be charged an additional $11 a month unless
they agree to subscribe to at least the basic tier of cableTV service
 -- for $11 a month.

Today, an AT&T Broadband customer with a cable modem pays $47 a month
for high-speed Internet-only service; those leasing a modem pay $50 a
month. Beginning next month, those prices will increase about 22
percent to $58 and $61 a month, respectively, for Internet-only
customers.

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1557/3594614.html

http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So $58 minus $47 or $61 minus $50 is
still an $11 difference, or what they charge for the 'basic tier'. I
would say if they want to watch television, then add the basic tier, 
essentially for free at the new price, however I cannot see what the
advantage would be if they are not into television. For that matter
I really have problems with cable modem service also. I cannot see
where/how it is any faster than DSL, and in fact I've heard rumors
that cable modem users with 'network neighborhood' enabled on their
computers get a lot of spies reading their files, etc.  True?  PAT]

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

From: Jack Hamilton <jfh@acm.org>
Subject: Re: AT&T Broadband Users See 3rd E-Mail Shift
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 23:34:22 -0800
Organization: Copyright (c) 2003 by Jack Hamilton.  Reproduction without attribution and archiving without permission are not allowed.
Reply-To: jfh@acm.org


Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 1/16/2003

> In a move likely to anger thousands of its customers, AT&T Broadband 
> confirmed yesterday that its recent acquisition by Comcast Corp. will 
> force more than 200,000 New England cable Internet modem subscribers 
> to get their third e-mail address in barely a year.

I have limited sympathy for the subscribers.  ATTBI is certainly doing
a bad thing, but there's an old saying that applies here: "Fool me
once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me."

There are many ways to get a relatively permanent email address.  Here
are a few:

1) You might belong to an organization which provides email forwarding
addresses to its members.  The email address I use to post to Usenet
is provided by the Association for Computing Machinery; mail sent to
jfh@acm.org is automatically rerouted to a real mailbox elsewhere.  If
that real mailbox goes away because the provider is bought up, no one
but me has to know - I just change the forwarding address, and
jfh@acm.org continues to work.

(I've been using this address on Usenet since 1995, and sometimes I'm
amazed by how much spam I receive.  But I still don't use a mangled
address.  I use Spamnix instead.)

2) You might have attended a college or university which provides
either forwarding or real mailboxes to alumni.  Sometimes you have to
be member of the alumni association, but sometimes you don't.

3) You can register a domain name and set up a forwarding account.
One outfit that will do this is <www.mydomain.com>; they charge
$15/year for the domain name registration, and the forwarding is free.

4) You can get an email address at yahoo or hotmail.  These work fine,
but you may be taken less seriously with that kind of address.  If you
want a lot of mail storage or other goodies, you might have to pay,
but the price is small compared to the price of a broadband
connection.

5) Last (and least), you can get a userid at AOL, which is unlikely to
change its name.

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

Subject: Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust
Organization: Excelsior Computer Services
From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman)
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 03:06:58 GMT


>> Just to be clear, is the claim here that the sign can detect what
>> radio station I'm listening to?  It cannot.

> Don't be too sure.  Unless they are well shielded radio receivers emit
> a little bit of local oscillator signal, which can be picked up and
> used to determine the frequency you are listening to.

How strong is this "oscillator signal"?  Strong enough to be detected
outside the car?  To be detected from the side of the ride?  To be
isolated among a hundred cars passing by at 60 miles an hour?


-Joel

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

From: PaulCoxwell@aol.com
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 08:44:09 EST
Subject: Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust


> At least, it cannot do so electrically or electronically.  I suppose
> some method could be set up to see how drivers behave based on when
> advertisements occur, but cars don't emit RF energy based on what
> radio station is tuned.

Actually, it is possible to detect the local oscillator of the receiver.  
Depending upon how well the radio is sheilded, and on how much of the L.O. 
signal leaks back through to the antenna, the oscillator can often be 
detected a good few yards away.
 
> TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only that, John, but years ago when
> tube-style radios were common, radio station pirates could make actual
> broadcasting stations by using that IF (intermediate frequency) which
> comes around 440 KC I think. They would get in the back of the radio,
> clip the wire with the IF, attach it to an outside antenna, tune a few

An I.F. of 455kHz for normal AM broadcast has been pretty much
standard or many decades now, at least in the U.S.A.  In most radios,
the L.O. runs above the tuned frequency, so it's a simple matter of
sampling the L.O.  leakage and deducting 455kHz to get the frequency
being listened to.  For FM broadcasting, the I.F. is almost always
10.7MHz these days.


Paul Coxwell,
Norfolk, U.K.

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:38:23 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: High Debt Prompts SONICblue to Seek Company Sale


NEW YORK, Jan 17 (Reuters) - SONICblue Inc. (NASDAQ:SBLU), the maker
of ReplayTV digital video recorders and Rio digital music players,
said on Friday its high debt load has prompted the board to consider,
among other things, a sale of the company.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30971389

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 21:56:03 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: 'Sanitized' Hard Drives Prove a Trove of Personal Info


By Justin Pope, Associated Press, 1/15/2003 15:45

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) So, you think you've cleaned all your personal
files from that old computer hard drive you're selling?

A pair of MIT graduate students suggest you think again.

Over two years, Simson Garfinkel and Abhi Shelat assembled a
collection of 158 used hard drives, shelling out between $5 and $30
for each at secondhand computer stores and on eBay.

Of the 129 drives that functioned, 69 still had recoverable files on
them and 49 contained ''significant personal information'' medical
correspondence, love letters, pornography and 5,000 credit card
numbers. One even had a year's worth of transactions with account
numbers from an ATM in Illinois.


http://www.boston.com/dailynews/015/region/_Sanitized_hard_drives_prove_a:.shtml

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not understand why, when people 
prepare to sell or otherwise dump an old computer, they do not use
a 'laundry machine' program first, to clean the entire hard drive,
then use added 'bleach' to rewrite garbage on the hard drive at least
five or six times as per NSA recommendations, *then* format the entire
drive.  PAT] 

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

Subject: Re: Telephone Scam
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 01:11:32 EST
From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader)


Raymond Mereniuk quotes Leneen Robb of the paper "Coquitlam Now",
quoting the Port Moody, BC, police:

> Const. Brian Soles said the scam begins when residents receive
> a message on their answering machine or pager asking them to
> call a number ...
> "The call will be billed to you at $2,425 per minute."

Despite the police evidently believing this (and reconfirming the
dollar figure to the reporter), it's not so.  High dollar amounts,
maybe, but nothing like *that* high -- as Ms. Robb might confirm by
asking the police to cite an actual example of someone, anywhere,
who had been billed for a call at such a per-minute rate.

Linc Madison explained it right here in comp.dcom.telecom in 2001<*>,
while Pat was off duty: the original version of the story must have
said $25 -- already an unlikely large amount -- which was turned
into "=2425" by transmission in MIME quoted-printable encoding,
but read by someone in an environment where that encoding wasn't
recognized, and so *seen* as "=2425" and "helpfully corrected" by
the human to "$2,425".

So, as Linc said at the time, "If you ever see a spam claiming
$242,425/minute, just remember you saw it here first."

<*>Message-ID <230120010912105551%lincmad001@telecom-digest.zzn.com>.


Mark Brader, Toronto               "Truth speak from any chair."
msb@vex.net                          -- Charlie Chan at the Wax Museum

My text in this article is in the public domain.

[TELECOM Diges Editor's Note: Not only was there Linc's article as
mentioned above, we have covered this topic several times in the 
past. Newspaper reporters rarely read or pay attention to things on
the net. We are not considered 'established' media by their
standards. PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:59:05 -0700
From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@garynuman.info>
Subject: Spam Scam Busted
Reply-To: joey@garynuman.info


WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Several unscrupulous "spammers" have been shut
down after bombarding Internet users with e-mail offers for allegedly
bogus international drivers' licenses, the U.S. Federal Trade
Commission said Thursday.

The move should put the brakes on a common scam that has evolved into 
one of the most prevalent forms of unwanted junk e-mail over the past 
several years. 

The FTC charged six online marketers with selling international 
drivers' licenses that actually are not recognized by any government, 
targeting immigrants and those who have had their real licenses 
revoked. 

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/01/17/spam.scam.reut/index.html

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

From: Mike Hartley <mike.hartley@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: AT&T Wireless Internet at $4000 a Month!! Look out!!
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 07:41:48 -0000


> I signed a six month contract for unlimited internet access for
> $50/mo. CAD Not a bad deal and for the most part the system worked
> pretty well.

> Things went along fine until the contract ended, when without
> informing me they switched the billing to 5MB for $30.  Classic bait
> and switch.  So I was happily surfing away as the $$$ piled up.  And
> boy do they pile up fast.

> from what I recall, the GPRS system was usually only capable of
> 3KB/sec downloads, giving 180 KB/minute- thats what the counter
> showed and thats how I was billed.

Well, I get something more like 20-30kb/s from my GPRS connection here
in the UK. However GPRS connection speed does depend on quality of
connection -- GPRS drops to a higher overhead coding scheme in low
signal/high interference, so YMMV.

Luckily I don't pay for my mobile phone bill, so I don't get crippled
with high data bills, but I certanly appreciate the poster's anguish
at high data cost. I don't think many mobile operatrs are really
setting tarriffs up for web surfing -- and most web pages aren't
really designed to optimise mobile data bills either ;+) The problem
is that GPRS data is a very new service, and 'Bellhead' marketing
people in mobile nets have yet to really get their head round high
levels of dsata usage. To be fair, you do have to have a very well
dimensioned and optimised access network to be able to support high
levels of web surfing at reasonable data throughput (trust me, I do
this for a living), so high pricing is arguably there to try to
control early adopter demand.


Cheers,

Mike

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Caller ID
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 22:53:29 -0800


In article <telecom22.238.11@telecom-digest.org>, Forrest Nelson
<jfnelson@aeieng.com> wrote:

> Ten zeros is considered a 'legitimate' phone number for caller ID
> purposes according to SW Bell. The chairman's office there told me
> that after one of my calls to the Kansas commission prompted the
> spokeslady for the chairman's office to call me.

As someone with Privacy Manager, I have to say that I have found it by
and large quite effective. I get calls with all zeros and with 800
numbers showing in the display. These calls are ignored or sent
straight to voice mail (where no message is ever left). Other than
those very occasional calls (less than one a week), my phone doesn't
ring except with desired traffic.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Well I have found it reasonably 
effective also. I have since moved one of my caller-ID boxes into
the computer room area where I spend much time so I can glance over
at it and see what numbers/names, if any, are presented when the 
phone rings. In fairness to SWB Telco, they are *good* at picking
out the calls where the ID was deliberatly withheld, i.e. *67 type
calls. Its the 'default' style calls, where the caller does nothing
deliberate (except possibly working for a telemarketer) that SWB
handles poorly. My *big* complaint with them was actually with their
former parent, AT&T, who was/is still using all zeros and things like
'name withheld' as ID in order to circumvent the 'system'. SWB does
claim all zeros (or all of anything, ones or nines, etc) is considered
a valid number for ID purposes, and they refuse  to manually edit
whatever database is dipped to prevent those annoyances.    PAT]

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

From: vances@motivity.ca (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: Can I Detect Call Fowarding?
Date: 17 Jan 2003 08:58:17 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


wprice@adneco.com (Wayne Price) wrote:

> Is it possible to detect if the phone number I am calling is forwarded
> to another number?  Or is it possible to block call forwarding on
> numbers that I call?

Yes it is.  If you have an ISDN line (or SS7) there are indicators for
this.  In a well engineered network, which are harder and harder to
find these days mind you, the display on your phone should show you
when forwarding takes place by indicating the new number and the
reason for forwarding.  There is also an indication for the connected
number should that differ from the dialed number once answer has taken
place.

See Q.952 (Call Diversion) and Q.951 (Connected Line Presentation).


Vance Shipley
Motivity Telecom Inc.
vances@motivity.ca

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

From: vances@motivity.ca (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: Call Blocking Box For All Numbers From a Given Country?
Date: 17 Jan 2003 09:23:08 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


If you have ISDN (or SS7) you will ahve an indication of whether the
call is international or not as well as what numbering plan is in use.
This makes it very definitive indeed.  There is no reason why
international CLID shouldn't work properly.  It is true that it
probably doesn't work properly in most cases is a matter of improper
network engineering and CPE device design.  The first time I received
an international CLID here in Bell Canada land my Vista 350 telephone
(by Nortel) truncated the number and formated it as 417-xxx-xxxx.


Vance Shipley
Motivity Telecom Inc.
vances@motivity.ca

Linc Madison <nobody@example.com> wrote:

> Even if the caller ID is accurate, it would still be difficult to use
> for blocking a given country, because in the US we often get the
> caller ID with no indication that it's an international number. I got
> a call from a Swiss cellphone that showed up as 417-xxx-xxxx-x. If the
> digit count weren't off, I'd have no way to know it wasn't a call from
> Missouri.

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 12:15:04 -0500
From: Vance Shipley <vances@motivity.ca>
Subject: Why Are my Posts Not Showing Up?
Organization: Motivity Telecom Inc.


Pat,

I posted back on Monday January 13th and haven't seen my message
show up.  Is there a reason for this?  I used Google Groups to
do so, something I haven't tried before.  Is this a source of a
problem?

-Vance

  From: posting-system@google.com
  Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 11:31:20 -0800
  Reply-To: posting-system@google.com
  To: vances@motivity.ca
  Subject: Bell Mobility voicemail doesn't support caller's number
  Errors-To: posting-system@google.com

  From: vances@motivity.ca (Vance Shipley)
  Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
  Subject: Bell Mobility voicemail doesn't support caller's number
  NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.93.133.220
  Message-ID: <3d64fb2b.0301131131.bf4dac3@posting.google.com>

I just spent 45 minutes on the phone with Bell Mobility to finally get
a definitive answer as to why my voicemail envelope information (pressing
5 while listening to a message) never gives me the number of the caller.
Instead it says "New message from an outside caller". 
 
At first they insisted that it did work, and that only in cases where
the caller blocked the number would it not.  Then we tested it together.
It worked the same on my cell number as it did on theirs.

Then the story became that two years ago it did work but that they
stopped offering call return.  At that point the envelope information
stopped appearing.

This is of course very lame.  I have a reasonable expectation that my
voicemail on my cell number will operate the same as the voicemail on
my land line.  Especially given that they are both provided by Bell
Canada (Bell Mobility is wholely integrated with Bell Canada, they
have the same web site).

This is yet another example of how the cellular companies offer an
inferior service to that of the local exchange operators.  A shining
example of this is Caller's Name Display which is unavailable from any
cellular operator yet so common on landlines that my elderly mother
has it.


Vance


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  I will address only the first part of
your message (about messages appearing or not) and will leave your
main and pertinent message to the group to answer.

Regards what appears here, *everything I recieve here appears here.*
If you will produce for me an autoreply I issued to you on January 13
for the above message, I will attempt to find out what I did with it.
That goes for other readers as well. If this is becoming a regular
problem for many people, then *save those autoreplies for a few days
following the sending of your messages, and forward them to me with
a short note, 'what happened to this one?'. Otherwise I cannot be of
help, sorry.   PAT]

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

From: SELLCOM Tech Support <support@sellcom.com>
Subject: Tail
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:05:24 -0500
Organization: www.sellcom.com
Reply-To: support@sellcom.com


This may be a stretch regarding topic, but since I plan to view a SMTP
log in real time to spot spam it kind of relates to current
discussions regarding spam.  I just wanted to ask people who know what
they are talking about.

What I am trying to find is a utility like the linux "tail" which
allows you to watch a log/text file as it changes in real time (sort
of).  But I need a version of that for Win2K Server.

While I'm at it, let me also share with you a little trick.  If you
have a linux box you can telnet in from remote run tail (with some
command switches that I forget) on the log and then set your telnet to
save the log to disk.  Then even if your linux box were to get hacked
and the logs deleted on the way out, you would have a log of whodunnit
on your remote machine.   I used to log my linux log to my OS/2
machine.

Now I just want to have my smtp log on my desktop in real time.


Steve at SELLCOM

http://www.sellcom.com
Discount multihandset cordless phones by Siemens, Vtech 5.8Ghz
EnGenius NEW EP436 4line (the longest range), Panasonic,
Twinhead notebooks, WatchGuard firewall, Okidata, Polycom!
If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself.

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

Subject: Student Rush
From: Frank Beider <fhb@norlight.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:27:49 -0600


I used to work for a LEC in a college town.  Every August thought
September we used to experience something called the "student rush".
There was this rush of orders during this August - September for
telephone service from students.  We put in a lot of overtime to meet
this rush.

Here is my question.  Do the LECs in a college town still experience the
student rush during August - September?

The reason I ask is now with the proliferation of wireless phones
thanks to generous parents is there still a student rush?  I would
think students are using wireless in place of the landline.  Bad of
the LEC good for wireless.

What have the LECs been experiencing?

Would appreciate any info.

Thanks.

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

From: dritenour@ecomm-sys.com (Drew Ritenour)
Subject: Re: Intertel vs. Harris 20-20
Date: 17 Jan 2003 12:05:08 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


dave.turnbull@omsg.co.uk (Dave Turnbull) wrote in message
news:<telecom22.207.2@telecom-digest.org>:

> We are considering replacing a Harris (Teltronics) 20-20 with an
> Inter-tel Axxess solution to run a multi-site skills based call centre
> with PBX functionality for each site as well as intra-site voip calls
> across existing leased lines.  Does anybody have experience of this,
> because the Inter-tel solution (price) seems almost too good to be
> true based upon our experience with the 20-20.  I am told that
> performance and capabilities of the Axxess is not on a par with the
> 20-20 - any comments?

> Thanks,

> Dave

Dave:

I am an sales engineer for one of the top five Inter-tel dealers in
the country. We currently have five offices networked via IP over
leased lines. We are one of the major beta test sites for Inter-tel. 
I don't know the Harris system at all. But take into consideration
market share and profitability and no one else can match Inter-tel. 

Let me tell you when I design call center applications I add features
that will push my comp. to go to their Definity Call Center
Application and I am 30% less than what they are while providing 90%
of their functionality.

Go for the Inter-tel. If it isn't a direct office....shop for the
best.

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

From: Andrew Bell <andrew.bell@siemens.com>
Subject: Please Get Back to Telecom
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:35:29 -0500


Pat, can we PLEASE get the digest back onto Telecom topics?

Regards,

Andrew


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I agree entirely.    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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #240
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jan 17 18:06:43 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0HN6hR05889;
	Fri, 17 Jan 2003 18:06:43 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 18:06:43 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301172306.h0HN6hR05889@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #241

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 17 Jan 2003 18:07:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 241

Inside This Special Issue:                     Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    EPIC Alert 10.01 (Monty Solomon)

This special issue of the Digest features the issue of EPIC Alert
which came out two days ago. 

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: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:51:16 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EPIC Alert 10.01


http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.01.html

=======================================================================
                          E P I C  A l e r t
=======================================================================
Volume 10.01                                           January 16, 2003
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Published by the
             Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
                           Washington, D.C.

           http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.01.html

=======================================================================
Table of Contents
=======================================================================

[1] EPIC Wins FOIA Lawsuit Against Pentagon on Poindexter Records
[2] Sen. Feingold Introduces "Total Info" Moratorium Bill
[3] INS Seeks Information on U.S. Citizens Who Travel
[4] Court Grants EPIC Right to Discovery in Homeland Security Case
[5] Georgia Supreme Court Voids Fornication Law on Privacy Grounds
[6] Privacy International Urges UK Citizens to Oppose National ID Card
[7] EPIC Bill-Track: New Bills in Congress
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events

=======================================================================
[1] EPIC Wins FOIA Lawsuit Against Pentagon on Poindexter Records
=======================================================================

U.S. District Judge John Bates today issued a decision that rejects the
Defense Department's attempt to impose financial obstacles to EPIC's
requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The court ruled
that EPIC is entitled to "preferred fee status" under the FOIA and
ordered the Pentagon to "expeditiously" process EPIC's almost year-old
request for information concerning Admiral John Poindexter and the
Information Awareness Office (see item below concerning the
controversial Total Information Awareness program).

Under 1986 legislative amendments to FOIA enacted in an effort to "keep
fees from becoming an unnecessary barrier to disclosure," entities
granted "news media status" are not required to pay search and
duplication fees related to their FOIA requests. EPIC has routinely
been granted such status since its inception. In response to an EPIC
FOIA request submitted in February 2002 seeking documents from
Poindexter's office, DoD refused to process the request unless EPIC
agreed to incur substantial fees. The agency claimed that EPIC, as a
non-profit public interest organization, did not fall within DoD's
definition of "representative of the news media."

In granting EPIC news media status, Judge Bates noted EPIC's
publication activities and stated:

     EPIC gleans the information it publishes in its books from a
     wide variety of sources, including FOIA requests, state and
     federal courts, government agencies, universities,
     international groups, law reviews, interest groups, and even
     other news sources. EPIC researches issues on privacy and
     civil liberties, reports on this information, analyzes
     relevant data, evaluates the newsworthiness of material and
     puts the facts and issues into context, publishing and
     distributing this "news" through the sale of its books to the
     public. All these activities are hallmarks of publishing,
     news, and journalism.

The decision removes potential obstacles for requests submitted not
only by EPIC, but also by other public interest groups that seek to
inform the public about significant (and secretive) government
activities. The immediate impact will be to expedite the release of
documents concerning data-mining initiatives within the Pentagon.

The court's opinion in EPIC v. DoD is available at:

     http://www.epic.org/open_gov/foia/fees/EPICvDOD_decision.pdf

=======================================================================
[2] Sen. Feingold Introduces "Total Info" Moratorium Bill
=======================================================================

Sen. Russell Feingold (D-WI) has introduced legislation to place a
moratorium on the development of the controversial Total Information
Awareness (TIA) project.  TIA is a system being developed by Admiral
John Poindexter of the Defense Advance Research Projects Agency (DARPA)
that aims to sift though troves of personal information in order to
detect potential terrorist activity.  Feingold's legislation would stop
development of this domestic surveillance system until Congress has had
an opportunity to review its implications.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) has also introduced legislation to halt the TIA
project.  His legislation would be attached to the pending Defense
Department appropriations bill, but it currently contains a provision
that could allow President Bush to override the moratorium.

Feingold's legislation follows a groundswell of Congressional criticism
of TIA.  The growing list of Senators raising questions about TIA
includes Susan Collins (R-ME), Charles Grassley (R-IA), Tom Harkin
(D-IA), Charles Schumer (D-NY), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), and Patrick
Leahy (D-VT).  Sen. Collins, the incoming Chairwoman of the
Governmental Affairs Committee, recently said that the Pentagon project
"raises extraordinary concerns about individual privacy."  Sen.
Grassley has called for the Inspector General of the Department of
Defense to review the TIA project.  Sen. Harkin has requested that
Poindexter be summoned before Defense Appropriations Subcommittee to
testify on TIA.  Sen. Schumer has called upon Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld to replace Poindexter, saying, "If we need a big brother, John
Poindexter is the last guy on the list that I would choose."  Senators
Leahy, Cantwell and Feingold have sent a detailed letter to Attorney
General Ashcroft requesting more information about the use of
data-mining, and the extent to which the Department of Justice is
collaborating with DARPA on TIA.

EPIC and a coalition of groups that includes the American Civil
Liberties Union, American Conservative Union, Eagle Forum, and the
Electronic Frontier Foundation have joined the call for a moratorium on
TIA.  In a letter to the leaders of several key congressional
committees, the coalition argued that Congress should prohibit the
development of TIA and other data mining initiatives.

Coalition Letter Calling For a Halt to TIA:

     http://www.epic.org/privacy/profiling/TIA_coalition_letter.pdf

Sen. Feingold's TIA Moratorium Press Release:

     http://www.epic.org/redirect/feingold.html

Sen. Wyden's Legislation for a Moratorium on TIA:

     http://wyden.senate.gov/leg_issues/bills/tia_amendment.pdf

Sen. Grassley's Letter Requesting an Inspector General Investigation of
TIA:

     http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/11/gr112202.html

Sen. Harkin's Letter Requesting a TIA Hearing:

     http://www.senate.gov/~harkin/news.cfm?id=189711

Letter from Senators Leahy, Cantwell and Feingold to Attorney General
Ashcroft on Data Mining and TIA:

     http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200301/011003.html

EPIC Total Information Awareness page:

     http://www.epic.org/privacy/profiling/tia/

=======================================================================
[3] INS Seeks Information on U.S. Citizens Who Travel
=======================================================================

The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) has proposed a new
rule that would require all individuals leaving or entering the United
States -- including U.S. citizens -- to provide certain personal
information to the government in advance of an aircraft or vessel's
arrival in or departure from the United States.  The required data
would include complete name; date of birth; citizenship; sex; passport
number and country of issuance; country of residence; United States
visa number, date, and place of visa issuance, where applicable; alien
registration number, where applicable; and United States address while
in the United States.  Such identification requirements currently apply
only to non-resident aliens.

The new rule proposes to implement section 402, titled Passenger
Manifests, of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of
2002 (Pub. L. 107-173), which requires that commercial carriers
transporting passengers to or from the United States deliver arrival
and departure manifest information electronically to the INS, beginning
no later than January 1, 2003.

The new rule proposes to require manifest data on certain passengers
and voyages previously exempt from this requirement, including U.S.
citizens, lawful permanent resident aliens of the United States,
immigrants to the United States, and certain in-transit passengers.
The INS believes that the new rule is necessary to provide it with
advance notification of information necessary for the identification of
passengers, crewmembers and any other occupant transported.
Furthermore, INS believes that this information will assist in the
efficient inspection of passengers and crewmembers, and is necessary
for the effective enforcement of the immigration laws.

Public comments on the proposed rule may be submitted until February 3
in one of the following ways:

* Written comments should be submitted (with reference INS No. 2182-01)
to:

     Director, Regulations and Forms Services Division
     Immigration and Naturalization Service
     425 I Street NW., Room 4034
     Washington, DC 20536

* Electronic comments should be submitted to the INS at
insregs@usdoj.gov with INS No. 2182-01 in the subject heading.

The proposed INS rule is available at:

     http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2003/02-33145.htm

Additional information on the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry
Reform Act of 2002 is available at:

     http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_cr/h031202.html

=======================================================================
[4] Court Grants EPIC Right to Discovery in Homeland Security Case
=======================================================================

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a decision on
December 26 permitting EPIC to pursue discovery concerning the "nature
of the authority" delegated to the Office of Homeland Security (OHS)
and its Director, Tom Ridge.  The ruling came in a Freedom of
Information Act lawsuit filed by EPIC after OHS took the position that
it is not subject to the open government law.

The Department of Justice sought dismissal of EPIC's FOIA lawsuit and
argued that OHS is not an "agency" and therefore is not subject to the
FOIA's disclosure requirements.  The government asserted that the OHS
"functions solely to advise and assist the President and, does not
exercise substantial independent authority."  It likened the OHS to the
National Security Council, which the D.C. Circuit Court in 1996 held
was exempt from the FOIA.

EPIC, which will now seek information concerning the structure and
activities of OHS, firmly believes that, under well-established
principles of open government, an entity like the OHS -- especially
with its important mandate -- should be open to public oversight.  The
FOIA, which, among other agencies, covers the CIA, FBI, and NSA, makes
adequate provision for protecting sensitive information from
disclosure.  The creation of the new Department of Homeland Security
makes the status of OHS even more significant, as the Office will
continue to function within the White House and is likely to set policy
for the Department.

EPIC's initial request sought the disclosure of documents relating to
OHS Director Tom Ridge's efforts to create a "trusted-traveler" card
and his plans to standardize state driver's licenses so as to create a
de facto national identification system.

The decision in EPIC v. OHS is available at:

     http://www.epic.org/open_gov/homeland/ohs_decision.pdf

For more information, see EPIC's Homeland Security Page:

     http://www.epic.org/open_gov/homeland/

=======================================================================
[5] Georgia Supreme Court Voids Fornication Law on Privacy Grounds
=======================================================================

The Supreme Court of Georgia has invalidated a state anti-fornication
law, holding that "the government may not reach into the bedroom of a
private residence and criminalize the private, noncommercial,
consensual sexual acts of two persons legally capable of consenting to
those acts."  The 170-year-old Georgia law provides that sex between
unmarried people constitutes a misdemeanor and could be fined at least
$1000.  The Court recognized that the "right to privacy has a value so
essential to individual liberty in our society that its infringement
merits careful scrutiny by the courts."

The Court also rejected the prosecution's argument that an individual
has no right to privacy when they are a guest in another's home: " We
reject the broad assertion that people abandon their constitutional
guarantee to privacy when they enter as guests into the private home of
another. An invitation to enter another person's private home does not
include an implicit condition that the guest surrender his
constitutional right to privacy."

The decision extends a 1998 ruling where the same court invalidated a
state anti-sodomy law that was previously upheld by the U.S. Supreme
Court.  The U.S. Supreme Court will revisit the issue of anti-sodomy
laws this term in Lawrence and Garner v. Texas.  That case will test
sodomy laws in 13 states.

In re: J. M., a child, Case No. S02A1432, Supreme Court of Georgia,
January 13, 2003:

     http://www2.state.ga.us/Courts/Supreme/pdf/s02a1432.pdf

Lawrence and Garner v. Texas, Lambda Case Review:

     http://www.lambdalegal.org/cgi-bin/iowa/cases/record?record=93

EPIC Gender and Privacy Page:

     http://www.epic.org/privacy/gender/

=======================================================================
[6] Privacy International Urges UK Citizens to Oppose National ID Card
=======================================================================

Looking for a way to voice your opposition to the United Kingdom
government's "Entitlement Card" National ID proposal?  Here's your
chance.  Privacy International and STAND, a UK group working to inform
the public about privacy, censorship, and other issues, have set up a
campaign allowing members of the UK public to leave phone or fax
messages for their Member of Parliament (MP) to let them know just what
the public thinks of their National ID proposal.  The UK government,
which is currently holding a "silent consultation" on the National ID
card -- and still claiming that there is majority support for ID cards
-- has confirmed that these phone/fax messages will be regarded as
legitimate responses in the consultation.

To voice your opposition to UK National ID, call 0845 330 7246 in the
UK, or see below for a link to STAND's online fax service.

For more information, see Privacy International's UK ID Card page:

     http://www.privacyinternational.org/issues/idcard/uk/

Fax your MP using STAND's online service:

     http://www.stand.org.uk/

=======================================================================
[7] EPIC Bill-Track: New Bills in Congress
=======================================================================

*House*

H.R.48: To develop and deploy technologies to defeat Internet jamming
and censorship. Sponsor: Rep Cox, Christopher (R-CA). Committees: House
International Relations. Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003 Referred to
House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on
International Relations.

H.R.69: To require the Federal Trade Commission to prescribe
regulations to protect the privacy of personal information collected
from and about individuals who are not covered by the Children's Online
Privacy Protection Act of 1998 on the Internet, to provide greater
individual control over the collection and use of that information, and
for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Frelinghuysen, Rodney P. (R-NJ).
Committees: House Energy and Commerce. Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003
Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on
Energy and Commerce.

H.R.70: To regulate the use by interactive computer services of Social
Security account numbers and related personally identifiable
information. Sponsor: Rep Frelinghuysen, Rodney P. (R-NJ). Committees:
House Energy and Commerce. Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003 Referred to
House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce.

H.R.71: To require customer consent to the provision of wireless call
location information. Sponsor: Rep Frelinghuysen, Rodney P. (R-NJ).
Committees: House Energy and Commerce. Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003
Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on
Energy and Commerce.

H.R.107: To amend the Federal Trade Commission Act to provide that the
advertising or sale of a mislabeled copy-protected music disc is an
unfair method of competition and an unfair and deceptive act or
practice, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Boucher, Rick (D-VA).
Committees: House Energy and Commerce; House Judiciary. Latest Major
Action: 1/7/2003 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on
the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall
within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

H.R.115: To amend title 49, United States Code, to improve airport
security by using biometric security badges, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Hefley, Joel (R-CO). Committees: House Transportation and
Infrastructure. Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003 Referred to House
committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure.

H.R.122: To amend section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 to
prohibit the use of the text, graphic, or image messaging systems of
wireless telephone systems to transmit unsolicited commercial messages.
Sponsor: Rep Holt, Rush D. (D-NJ). Committees: House Energy and
Commerce. Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003 Referred to House committee.
Status: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

*Senate*

S.6 Comprehensive Homeland Security Act of 2003. A bill to enhance
homeland security and for other purposes. Sponsor: Sen Daschle, Thomas
A. (D-SD). Committees: Senate Judiciary. Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003
Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary.

S.16: A bill to protect the civil rights of all Americans, and for
other purposes. Sponsor: Sen Daschle, Thomas A. (D-SD). Committees:
Senate Finance. Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003 Referred to Senate
committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.

S.22: A bill to enhance domestic security, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Daschle, Thomas A. (D-SD). Committees: Senate Judiciary.
Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003 Referred to Senate committee. Status:
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

S.41: A bill to strike certain provisions of the Homeland Security Act
of 2002 (Public Law 107-296), and for other purposes. Sponsor: Sen
Lieberman, Joseph I. (D-CT). Committees: Senate Governmental Affairs.
Latest Major Action: 1/7/2003 Referred to Senate committee. Status:
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.

S.113: A bill to exclude United States persons from the definition of
"foreign power" under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978
relating to international terrorism. Sponsor: Sen Kyl, Jon (R-AZ).
Committees: Senate Judiciary. Latest Major Action: 1/9/2003 Referred to
Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on
the Judiciary.

S.123: A bill to exclude United States persons from the definition of
"foreign power" under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978
relating to international terrorism. Sponsor: Sen Kyl, Jon (R-AZ).
Committees: Senate Judiciary. Latest Major Action: 1/9/2003 Referred to
Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on
the Judiciary.

S.153: A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to establish
penalties for aggravated identity theft, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA). Committees: Senate Judiciary.
Latest Major Action: 1/14/2003 Referred to Senate committee. Status:
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.


EPIC Bill Track: Tracking Privacy, Speech, and Cyber-Liberties Bills
in the 108th Congress, is available at:

     http://www.epic.org/privacy/bill_track.html

=======================================================================
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events
=======================================================================

9th Annual Digital Frontier Conference: Technology Means Business.
Kellogg School of Management. January 17-18, 2003. Chicago, IL. For
more information: http://www.digitalfrontier.org/

O'Reilly Bioinformatics Technology Conference. February 3-6, 2003.
San Diego, CA. For more information:
http://conferences.oreilly.com/macosxcon/

10th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium. The
Internet Society. February 5-7, 2003. San Diego, CA. For more
information: http://www.isoc.org/ndss03/

Politics of Code: Shaping the Future of the Next Internet. Programme in
Comparative Media Law and Policy (PCMLP), Oxford University. February
6, 2003. Oxford, England. For more information:
http://pcmlp.socleg.ox.ac.uk/code/

Third Annual Privacy & Data Security Summit: Implementing & Managing
Privacy in a Complex Environment. International Association of Privacy
Professionals. February 26-28, 2003. Washington, DC. For more
information: http://www.privacyassociation.org/html/conferences.html

Quality Labels for Web Sites: Alternative Approaches to Content Rating.
Programme in Comparative Media Law and Policy (PCMLP), Oxford
University. February 27, 2003. Kirchberg, Luxembourg. For more
information: http://saferinternet.org/news/Events-feb2003.asp

The Law and Technology of DRM: What will DRM technologies mean for the
future of information? University of California, Berkeley, School of
Information Management and Systems and Boalt Hall School of Law.
February 27 - March 1, 2003. Berkeley, CA. For more information:
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/institutes/bclt/drm/

Legal and Pedagogical Aspects of a Safer Internet. Programme in
Comparative Media Law and Policy (PCMLP), Oxford University. February
28, 2003. Kirchberg, Luxembourg. For more information:
http://saferinternet.org/news/Events-feb2003.asp

Spectrum Policy: Property or Commons? Stanford Law School Center for
Internet and Society. March 1, 2003. For more information:
http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/spectrum/

P&AB's Privacy Practitioners' Workshop and Ninth Annual National
Conference. Privacy & American Business. March 12-14, 2003.
Washington, DC. For more information:
http://www.pandab.org/postcard.pdf

CFP2003: 13th Annual Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy.
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). April 1-4, 2003. New York,
NY. For more information: http://www.cfp2003.org/

28th Annual AAAS Colloquium on Science and Technology Policy. American
Association for the Advancement of Science. April 10-11, 2003.
Washington, DC. For more information:
http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/colloqu.htm

Integrating Government With New Technologies '03: E-Government, Change
and Information Democracy. Riley Information Services. April 11, 2003.
Ottawa, Canada. For more information: http://www.rileyis.com/seminars/

RSA Conference 2003. RSA Security. April 13-17, 2003. San Francisco,
CA. For more information: http://www.rsaconference.com/

O'Reilly Emerging Technology Conference. April 22-25, 2003. Santa
Clara, CA. For more information: http://conferences.oreilly.com/etcon/

O'Reilly Open Source Convention. July 7-11, 2003. Portland, OR. For
more information: http://conferences.oreilly.com/oscon/

Privacy2003. Technology Policy Group. September 30 - October 2, 2003.
Columbus, OH. For more information: http://www.privacy2000.org/

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

EPIC Publications:

"The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2002: United States Law, International
Law, and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2002).
Price: $40. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pls2002/

The "Physicians Desk Reference of the privacy world."  An invaluable
resource for students, attorneys, researchers and journalists who need
an up-to-date collection of U.S. and International privacy law, as
well as a comprehensive listing of privacy resources.

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

"FOIA 2002: Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws," Harry
Hammitt, David Sobel and Mark Zaid, editors (EPIC 2002). Price: $40.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/foia2002/

This is the standard reference work covering all aspects of the
Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Government in the
Sunshine Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act.  The 21st
edition fully updates the manual that lawyers, journalists and
researchers have relied on for more than 25 years.  For those who
litigate open government cases (or need to learn how to litigate
them), this is an essential reference manual.

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

"Privacy & Human Rights 2002: An International Survey of Privacy Laws
and Developments" (EPIC 2002). Price: $25.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/phr2002/

This survey, by EPIC and Privacy International, reviews the state of
privacy in over fifty countries around the world.  The survey examines
a wide range of privacy issues including data protection, telephone
tapping, genetic databases, video surveillance, location tracking, ID
systems and freedom of information laws.

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

"Filters and Freedom 2.0: Free Speech Perspectives on Internet Content
Controls" (EPIC 2001). Price: $20.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/filters2.0/

A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet content
filtering.  These papers are instrumental in explaining why filtering
threatens free expression.

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

"The Consumer Law Sourcebook 2000: Electronic Commerce and the Global
Economy," Sarah Andrews, editor (EPIC 2000). Price: $40.
http://www.epic.org/cls/

The Consumer Law Sourcebook provides a basic set of materials for
consumers, policy makers, practitioners and researchers who are
interested in the emerging field of electronic commerce.  The focus is
on framework legislation that articulates basic rights for consumers
and the basic responsibilities for businesses in the online economy.

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

"Cryptography and Liberty 2000: An International Survey of Encryption
Policy," Wayne Madsen and David Banisar, authors (EPIC 2000). Price:
$20. http://www.epic.org/crypto&/

EPIC's third survey of encryption policies around the world.  The
results indicate that the efforts to reduce export controls on strong
encryption products have largely succeeded, although several
governments are gaining new powers to combat the perceived threats of
encryption to law enforcement.

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

EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, free
expression, crypto and governance can be ordered at:

     EPIC Bookstore
     http://www.epic.org/bookstore/

     "EPIC Bookshelf" at Powell's Books
     http://www.powells.com/features/epic/epic.html

=======================================================================
Subscription Information
=======================================================================

Subscribe/unsubscribe via Web interface:

     http://mailman.epic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/epic_news

Subscribe/unsubscribe via e-mail:

     To: epic_news-request@mailman.epic.org
     Subject line: "subscribe" or &"unsubscribe" (no quotes)

Help with subscribing/unsubscribing:

     To: epic_news-request@mailman.epic.org
     Subject: "help" (no quotes)

Back issues are available at:

     http://www.epic.org/alert/

The EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier.

=======================================================================
Privacy Policy
=======================================================================

The EPIC Alert mailing list is used only to mail the EPIC Alert and to
send notices about EPIC activities.  We do not sell, rent or share our
mailing list.  We also intend to challenge any subpoena or other legal
process seeking access to our mailing list.  We do not enhance (link
to other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name.

In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail address
from this list, please follow the above instructions under
"subscription information."  Please contact info@epic.org if you would
like to change your subscription e-mail address, if you are
experiencing subscription/unsubscription problems, or if you have any
other questions.

=======================================================================
About EPIC
=======================================================================

The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interest
research center in Washington, DC.  It was established in 1994 to
focus public attention on emerging privacy issues such as the Clipper
Chip, the Digital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medical
record privacy, and the collection and sale of personal information.
EPIC publishes the EPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Act
litigation, and conducts policy research.  For more information,
e-mail info@epic.org, http://www.epic.org or write EPIC, 1718
Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009.
+1 202 483 1140 (tel), +1 202 483 1248 (fax).

If you'd like to support the work of the Electronic Privacy
Information Center, contributions are welcome and fully
tax-deductible.  Checks should be made out to "EPIC" and sent to
1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009.
Or you can contribute online at:

     http://www.epic.org/donate/

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

Drink coffee, support civil liberties, get a tax deduction, and learn
Latin at the same time!  Receive a free epic.org "sed quis custodiet
ipsos custodes?" coffee mug with donation of $75 or more.

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

Your contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act and
First Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for the
right of privacy and efforts to oppose government regulation of
encryption and expanding wiretapping powers.

Thank you for your support.

   ---------------------- END EPIC Alert 10.01 ----------------------

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #241
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jan 17 20:04:25 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0I14PX08409;
	Fri, 17 Jan 2003 20:04:25 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 20:04:25 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301180104.h0I14PX08409@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #242

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 17 Jan 2003 20:05:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 242

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    DSL vs Cable (Christopher Wolf)
    Email Forwarders (Joey Lindstrom)
    Re: Sanitized Hard Drives Prove a Trove of Personal Info (Rich Greenberg)
    E-mail Acks, was Re: Why Are my Posts Not Showing Up? (Danny Burstein)
    Boeing Debuts In-Flight, Broadband Internet (Monty Solomon)
    The "Latest Telephone Scam" (Neal McLain)
    The Digest - Suggestions (Brandon Turok)
    Ancient Chinese Legend? was Re: So What Has *He* Had to (Danny Burstein)
    Stiff Drinks (Joey Lindstrom)
    Spiked Drinks (Joey Lindstrom)
    Re: What I Have Been Drinking (Gordon S. Hlavenka)
    Re: Spiked Drinks (Gordon S. Hlavenka)
    Re: Spiked Drinks (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: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:34:03 CST
Subject: DSL vs Cable
From: Christopher Wolf <temp6@thewolfden.org>


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So $58 minus $47 or $61 minus $50 is
> still an $11 difference, or what they charge for the 'basic tier'. I
> would say if they want to watch television, then add the basic tier,
> essentially for free at the new price, however I cannot see what the
> advantage would be if they are not into television. For that matter I
> really have problems with cable modem service also. I cannot see
> where/how it is any faster than DSL, and in fact I've heard rumors
> that cable modem users with 'network neighborhood' enabled on their
> computers get a lot of spies reading their files, etc. True? PAT]

Depends on the cable system.  My understanding is that the most common
DSL tops out below 1.5Mb/sec and drops off quickly as you move away
from the CO.  Meanwhile, Time Warner cable modem service in Houston
gives 1.5Mb/sec everywhere, and I often see my residential service
peak at 2Mb/sec.

On the other hand, I've seen plenty of cable modems and DSL services
that are much slower, such as 384kb/sec.  At least with the cable
modem, you don't have to worry about the distance, and there is enough
spare bandwidth that you don't have to worry about whether your
neighbors are also surfing.

Re: network neighborhood, I don't think there is any difference for
DSL vs Cable.  In both cases, you esentually become part of a larger
network, usually the "internet", and if you expose those services
without a firewall, people will see them.

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

From: Joey Lindstrom"<joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:02:56 -0700
Subject: Email Forwarders
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 17:19:51 -0500 (EST), Jack Hamilton wrote:

> I have limited sympathy for the subscribers.  ATTBI is certainly doing
> a bad thing, but there's an old saying that applies here: "Fool me
> once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me."

> There are many ways to get a relatively permanent email address.  Here
> are a few:

> 1) You might belong to an organization which provides email forwarding
> addresses to its members.  The email address I use to post to Usenet
> is provided by the Association for Computing Machinery; mail sent to
> jfh@acm.org is automatically rerouted to a real mailbox elsewhere.  If
> that real mailbox goes away because the provider is bought up, no one
> but me has to know - I just change the forwarding address, and
> jfh@acm.org continues to work.

> (I've been using this address on Usenet since 1995, and sometimes I'm
> amazed by how much spam I receive.  But I still don't use a mangled
> address.  I use Spamnix instead.)

If anyone in telecomland wants such an email forwarder free of charge,
drop me a line.  I've got the following domain names available - you
can have any (not already in use) username in any of these domains,
forwarded to whatever mailbox you specify:

telussucks.info
interocitor.net
oldtimeradiovault.com
garynuman.info
lindstrom.ca

With Dave Leibold's permission, I could possibly add wtng.info to that
list as well.

(If you want to use my services but with your own domain name, that too
is doable but at a small price, which I won't name as I ain't gonna
spam this mailing list, heh heh!  Drop me a line if that's what you
need.)

-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

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

From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: 'Sanitized' Hard Drives Prove a Trove of Personal Info
Date: 17 Jan 2003 18:07:29 -0500
Organization: Organized?  Me?


In article <telecom22.240.7@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> By Justin Pope, Associated Press, 1/15/2003 15:45

> CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) So, you think you've cleaned all your personal
> files from that old computer hard drive you're selling?

[...]

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not understand why, when people 
> prepare to sell or otherwise dump an old computer, they do not use
> a 'laundry machine' program first, to clean the entire hard drive,
> then use added 'bleach' to rewrite garbage on the hard drive at least
> five or six times as per NSA recommendations, *then* format the entire
> drive.  PAT] 

Because joe average computer user doesn't realize that by deleting a
file and emptying the recycle bin/trash they have only removed the
directory entry leaving the data still there.

While Pat's method would definitely clean the drive beyond readable,
unless you expect the government spooks to be searching the hard
drive, a single format is enough.  There are several Super-erase
programs available that overwrite the data in addition to removing
(and overwriteing) the directory entry for the cautious among us.


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: Danny Burs
tein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: E-Mail Acks, was Re: Why Are my Posts Not Showing Up?
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 22:34:20 UTC
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


I've noticed that I only get e-mail acks about (very roughly) half the 
time. But I know you've gotten the others because they get posted ... (at 
least when they're good).


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well you can blame that on the
spammers, who have largely made our net unusable in recent years. I
send out acks to everyone. Guys who change their email address to
avoid spam find the autoreply goes the same place as all the spam. 
Guys who do not change their email address often times are victimized
by over-zealous spam fighting techniques which consider the autoreply
itself to be spam. Even entire issues of the Digest do not get out to
some people, because they are treated as spam. I have no answers,
sorry.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 17:42:29 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Boeing Debuts In-Flight, Broadband Internet


By JAMES WALLACE
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER AEROSPACE REPORTER

Jan. 16 - Editor's note: P-I aerospace reporter James Wallace was 
among the journalists on a Lufthansa 747 yesterday that was the first 
commercial jetliner to use The Boeing Co.'s Connexion Internet 
service. He filed this report while the 747-400 was flying from 
Frankfurt, Germany, to Washington, D.C.

http://www.msnbc.com/local/PISEA/104318.asp

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:22:46 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com
Organization: Ann's Garden
Subject: The "Latest Telephone Scam"


Raymond Mereniuk <nospam4me@shaw.ca> wrote:

> Found this article printed in a local neighborhood 
> newspaper in the Vancouver, BC area....

> Port Moody Police are warning residents to be aware of 
> the latest telephone scam....

> Const. Brian Soles said the scam begins when residents 
> receive a message on their answering machine or pager 
> asking them to call a number beginning with area code 
> 809, 284 or 876....

> "The call will be billed to you at $2,425 per minute."

> the area codes are located in the British Virgin Island
> and Bahamas.

It seems like it would have been a simple matter for the Coquitlam Now
reporter to check her phone book to see if the area codes actually
matched the countries.  That discrepancy alone should have been enough
to make her suspicious about the accuracy of this so-called "latest
telephone scam."

Anyway, I can't wait to see Linc Madison's response to this.  He must be
getting awfully tired of debunking the same old hoax!


Neal McLain
nmclain@annsgarden.com

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

From: Brandon Turok <loonquawl@loonquawl.com>
Subject: The Digest - Suggestions
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:48:32 -0800


Hey Pat,

I love reading the Digest, and I think it's wonderful, but is it at
all possible to create something like comp.dcom.telecom.montysolomon?
Not that I don't enjoy the news, but there's so much of it that it
really feels like it's cluttering up the NG and stifling most other
conversation.

Thanks for listening to my kvetching!


Brandon Turok
http://www.loonquawl.com/
Dial-A-Machine (925) 288-9825
Free when you call from work

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, readers?    PAT

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: Ancient Chinese Legend? was Re: So What Has *He* Had to Drink
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 06:53:54 UTC
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  From HERE to the rest of this current
issue, I am just cleaning house, getting rid of all the death penalty
messages. I am sorry I brought the topic up. Ms. Davis has not yet
responded after two days, I assume she is no longer interested either.
I am running these messages because I feel I have an obligation to
allow *all* points of view on a topic I raised. No more after now, and
I honestly do not care if you read the rest of this issue of the
Digest or not.   PAT]

In <telecom22.238.13@telecom-digest.org> Dale Neiburg
<DNeiburg@npr.org> writes:

[ snip ]
> This aproach is actually the one used for a thousand years or so in
> imperial China.  The magistrate who tried a case also served as (in
> our terminology) superintendent of police, public prosecutor, and
> jury.  He was also not only allowed but *encouraged* to use torture to
> get a confession.  What prevented the grossest abuses was an intricate
> system of oversight and a law that if the judge tortured or executed
> someone who subsequently turned out to be innocent, the same
> torture/method of execution would be inflicted on the judge.  On the
> whole it worked very well.

Nice concept. But without any citations (and I didn't find anything in a
web search - which, of course, doesn't prove it didn't happen) this sounds
way too much like a Chief Seattle type urban legend.

I'll readily concede my knowledge of historical China only goes back as 
far as the Boxer Rebellion. But I'd really like to see if there's any 
valid historical proof that this type of checks and balances existed.

_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
		     dannyb@panix.com 

[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:45:19 -0700
Subject: Stiff Drinks
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 01:41:14 -0500 (EST), editor@telecom-digest.org
wrote:

> The prosecutor was a smart man; he did not intend to leave himself
> in any trickbag. I would have had to *prove* that he was part of
> any conspiracy, that he knew what the police officer had said to me
> and that he (prosecutor) had condoned perjury in the court. I told
> the prosecutor I had decided not to prosecute the crime after all, and
> excused myself, then left. Like many of the families of victims of 
> the men on death row, I felt victimized twice also. Once by the
> no-good guys who had come into my home and ripped me off; then a
> second time by the police officer/prosecutor who had encouraged me
> to get up and lie in court, 'so the niggers do not walk away without
> punishment'. 

I'd at least have gone through with my testimony - then explained to
the judge exactly what went on in that room.  Yes, the "niggers" would
have got off scot free (which they did anyways when you walked away),
but at least you'd have publicly embarrassed the prosecutor and cop,
and maybe, just maybe, gotten them in a bit of trouble.

> You see Joey, you're the one who needs the stiff drink tonight, not 
> Gordon H. who you abused in your message. He lives around the
> Chicago area like I used to; he knows how things work there.  PAT]

What you and Gordon have described is gross misconduct and certainly
"criminal" behaviour, for which these people should spend time in
prison (preferably sharing the same cell as those they've convicted).
But Gordon advocated killing these people.  It seems grossly
disproportionate, thus I questioned just what he'd been drinking - I
still do.  At worst, if you could prove (beyond a reasonable doubt)
that a prosecutor knowingly put someone on death row when he knew (or
should have known) that that person was not guilty of a capital crime,
the prosecutor should be found guilty of attempted murder.  And
attempted murder, though a heinous crime in and of itself, does NOT
merit the death penalty.

Pat, some time ago you got on my case because I stated that that kid
out in California deserved the chair.  How can you advocate leniency
and understanding in that case, yet defend Gordon's proposal that
prosecutors guilty of misconduct should be put to death?  Don't you see
the contradiction here?  Don't you see that Gordon and yourself are
both guilty of the "reactionary", "let's lynch 'em!" attitude you
accused ME of?

Several folks, myself included, have accused John Higdon of living in
his own little world and not seeing the bigger picture.  I think maybe
the same could be said of you, Pat.  Yes, from all accounts, Chicago's
justice system is rife with corruption (though I have trouble believing
that every single police officer, prosecutor, and judge is corrupt). 
But Chicago is a worst-case scenario.  Don't get me wrong - it needs
fixing.  Badly.  But it does NOT reflect the rest of the USA and the
rest of the world.  You seem only able to look at criminal justice
cases in other places through the lens of your Chicago experience, and
I think that's a shame.

There are a lot of honest, hard-working police officers and prosecutors
out there.  It's too bad they all get tarred with the same brush.  They
are ALL that stands between us and complete chaos.


-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 12:52:56 -0700
Subject: Spiked Drinks
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:26:31 -0600, Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote:

> PAT - I sent this direct to Joey but I thought you should see it also. 
> Again, your call on whether to continue the Digest thread.

>> If the cops cook the evidence and
>> present it to her, and she doesn't know the evidence is cooked, then
>> why in hell should she be subject to frying in the chair?

> It is her job, as prosecutor, to ENSURE that the evidence is NOT cooked.
> Her life is literally on the line -- as is the life of the accused.  If
> she is not willing to risk her own life on the evidence, she has no
> right to risk John's life either.

And how is she expected to do that, Gordon?  I would really like your
thoughts on that - I've had a lousy day and REALLY could do with a
good laugh right now.

There is no way to ENSURE that evidence is not cooked in any case -
period.  Not even if she dispenses with the police and conducts the
entire investigation herself - interviewing witnesses, conducting DNA
testing, the whole nine yards.  At some point, you have to rely on
your witnesses in the witness box, and while you may believe with all
of your heart that they are telling God's own truth, they COULD BE
LYING.

And you would have us execute Jane because somebody else lied?  You
would punish her for the behaviour of somebody else?

What if she did everything she could think of, but either didn't think
to ask someone a particular question or simply forgot to?  Tough -
kill her.  We sentence you to death for doing your job incompetently
(or less than brilliantly, as the case may be).

> So let's say she legitimately believes the evidence is clean.
> Obviously, the detectives would know it's not, and yet they allow
> her to proceed with a Capital case.  Jane's kin (and/or the
> Prosecutor's office) would probably send up the detectives for
> murdering Jane.  They might all fry together.  Knowing this
> potential outcome would (or should) deter the detectives from faking
> evidence in the first place.

Whoa there, pardner.  Back up a second.  You actually think it's ok to
have a system in place whereby the state will execute Jane BECAUSE SHE
WAS DECEIVED INTO A FALSE PROSECUTION?  I got news for you: it doesn't
work that way.  We don't use strict liability for serious cases like
this, and Lord help us if we ever do.  You HAVE to prove that Jane
actively conspired with the detectives and/or others to falsely
convict someone of a capital crime - she had to KNOWINGLY do this.  In
the example above, you not only haven't proved this, you also say it's
ok for Jane to get fried EVEN THOUGH SHE LEGITIMATELY BELIEVED HER
CASE WAS CLEAN.  We then tell her family: "yeah, those cops probably
set her up - too bad we had to croak her.  You might wanna go after
those cops, prove they set her up, and get them fried too."

I ask you again, Gordon.  What exactly have you been drinking?  I'm
guessing some really cheap tequila.

> As I said, this has no chance of actually being implemented in today's
> world.  But apparently the Chinese beat me to it by a millennium or so.

Right.  And there's a reason it's not done anymore.  Similar to the
reasons why we don't live in caves anymore, and why we don't bonk
women we want to have sex with over the head and drag them back to our
cave by their hair (though some guys in bars are only BARELY better
behaved, I'll admit).  We are trying to civilize ourselves, and aren't
interested in going back 1000 years in time.

It's ironic.  Normally it's we conservatives being accused of wanting
to live in the past and go back to the old days.  At least we only
want to go back to the 1950's, not the 1000's.  :-) Ironic also, that
you (and Pat) would advocate a system whereby it's really easy to
(literally) condemn a prosecutor for not doing their job well enough
(or in bad faith), yet condemn our current system for making it too
easy to condemn people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time
("c'mon, take the deal, or you'll get a much longer sentence!")
Typical liberalism - think with the heart, not with the head.


-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:26:31 -0600
From: Gordon S. Hlavenka <nospam@crashelex.com>
Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com
Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc.
Subject: Re: What I Have Been Drinking


PAT - I sent this direct to Joey but I thought you should see it also. 
Again, your call on whether to continue the Digest thread.

> If the cops cook the evidence and
> present it to her, and she doesn't know the evidence is cooked, then
> why in hell should she be subject to frying in the chair?

It is her job, as prosecutor, to ENSURE that the evidence is NOT cooked.
Her life is literally on the line -- as is the life of the accused.  If
she is not willing to risk her own life on the evidence, she has no
right to risk John's life either.

So let's say she legitimately believes the evidence is clean. 
Obviously, the detectives would know it's not, and yet they allow her to
proceed with a Capital case.  Jane's kin (and/or the Prosecutor's
office) would probably send up the detectives for murdering Jane.  They
might all fry together.  Knowing this potential outcome would (or
should) deter the detectives from faking evidence in the first place.

As I said, this has no chance of actually being implemented in today's
world.  But apparently the Chinese beat me to it by a millennium or so.


Gordon S. Hlavenka    www.crashelex.com    nospam@crashelex.com
              Grammar and spelling flames welcome.

     Yes, that's really my email address.  Don't change it.
     
------------------------------

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 14:56:03 -0600
From: Gordon S. Hlavenka <nospam@crashelex.com>
Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com
Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc.
Subject: Re: Spiked Drinks


[ Let's do this:  CC Pat on our discussion (because I think he's
interested) and he can decide what, if anything, to forward to the
Digest ]

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's not do that. Its a closed topic
now that you have both had your say-so.  PAT]

Joey Lindstrom wrote:

> And how is she expected to do that, Gordon?  I would really like your
> thoughts on that - I've had a lousy day and REALLY could do with a good
> laugh right now.

I'm not sure whether a career in stand-up comedy is in my future, but
I'll see what I can do for you.

> There is no way to ENSURE that evidence is not cooked in any case -
> period.  Not even if she dispenses with the police and conducts the
> entire investigation herself - interviewing witnesses, conducting DNA
> testing, the whole nine yards.  At some point, you have to rely on your
> witnesses in the witness box, and while you may believe with all of
> your heart that they are telling God's own truth, they COULD BE LYING.

Yup.  But you're missing a key point:  Nobody's _requiring_ Jane to go
for the kill in any case.  The particular case I made up wasn't really
worthy of Capital Punishment in the first place: No direct witnesses,
and what evidence they had was mostly circumstantial.  Jane was an idiot
for making the call she made.  But then, I invented Jane, and I invented
her as exactly the kind of idiot I needed for demonstration purposes.

> And you would have us execute Jane because somebody else lied?  You
> would punish her for the behaviour of somebody else?

Nope.  I would punish her for her own behaviour:  Pursuing Capital
Punishment in a case where it wasn't warranted.

> What if she did everything she could think of, but either didn't think
> to ask someone a particular question or simply forgot to?  Tough - kill
> her.  We sentence you to death for doing your job incompetently (or
> less than brilliantly, as the case may be).

You're beginning to catch on!  Prosecutors who ask for Capital
Punishment must perform their jobs -- all facets -- with mathematical
perfection.  Someone's life is in the balance, we can ask for no less.
Like a nuclear weapon, Capital Punishment is intended to work as a
deterrent: When it must actually be _used_, that means it has failed.
But to fail to use it when it's prescribed makes it useless.

> Whoa there, pardner.  Back up a second.  You actually think it's ok to
> have a system in place whereby the state will execute Jane BECAUSE SHE
> WAS DECEIVED INTO A FALSE PROSECUTION?

Yup.  It's her job not to be deceivable.  She didn't HAVE to call for
Capital Punishment.  She could decide the evidence isn't strong enough
to risk a life on, and opt for some other punishment.

> I got news for you: it doesn't work that way.  We don't use strict
> liability for serious cases like this, and Lord help us if we ever do.
> You HAVE to prove that Jane actively conspired with the detectives
> and/or others to falsely convict someone of a capital crime - she had
> to KNOWINGLY do this.

Under current law, yes.  But keep in mind, I'm suggesting a change to
current law.

> In the example above, you not only haven't
> proved this, you also say it's ok for Jane to get fried EVEN THOUGH SHE
> LEGITIMATELY BELIEVED HER CASE WAS CLEAN.

As I said, you're beginning to catch on.  I didn't say it was "OK" for
her to fry, but that she must.  A thin but critical semantic difference.

> We then tell her family:
> "yeah, those cops probably set her up - too bad we had to croak her.
> You might wanna go after those cops, prove they set her up, and get
> them fried too."

I'm pretty sure the family would reach this conclusion without outside
assistance.

But nobody has to prove the detectives "set her up".  They only need to
prove that the detectives faked evidence (which was already proven as
part of John's exoneration) and that their actions led to Jane's death.

> I ask you again, Gordon.  What exactly have you been drinking?  I'm
> guessing some really cheap tequila.

Mostly RC cola.  Tequila tastes like turpentine.

>  Ironic also, that you
> (and Pat) would advocate a system whereby it's really easy to
> (literally) condemn a prosecutor for not doing their job well enough
> (or in bad faith)

I believe that someone who calls for the execution of another person
should be willing to put their own life on the line.

> yet condemn our current system for making it too
> easy to condemn people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time

I try to stay out of "wrong places" -- been in a couple, and left as
soon as I figured it out.  Almost certainly avoided some (undeserved)
jail time in one case, as Bad Things happened shortly after I left.

> Typical liberalism - think with the heart, not with the head.

I'm fairly liberal in some respects, and fairly conservative in others. 
But I take umbrage at being called "typical".


Gordon S. Hlavenka    www.crashelex.com    nospam@crashelex.com
              Grammar and spelling flames welcome.
     Yes, that's really my email address.  Don't change it.

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:15:47 -0700
Subject: Re: Spiked Drinks
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 14:56:03 -0600, Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote:

> [ Let's do this:  CC Pat on our discussion (because I think he's
> interested) and he can decide what, if anything, to forward to the
> Digest ]

Agreed.  (But it looks like Pat's already shut this down in the Digest)

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I sure have, thank you!   PAT]

>> There is no way to ENSURE that evidence is not cooked in any case -
>> period.  Not even if she dispenses with the police and conducts the
>> entire investigation herself - interviewing witnesses, conducting DNA
>> testing, the whole nine yards.  At some point, you have to rely on your
>> witnesses in the witness box, and while you may believe with all of
>> your heart that they are telling God's own truth, they COULD BE LYING.

> Yup.  But you're missing a key point:  Nobody's _requiring_ Jane to go
> for the kill in any case.  The particular case I made up wasn't really
> worthy of Capital Punishment in the first place: No direct witnesses,
> and what evidence they had was mostly circumstantial.  Jane was an idiot
> for making the call she made.  But then, I invented Jane, and I invented
> her as exactly the kind of idiot I needed for demonstration purposes.

Yes I know this - but what I did was postulate another hypothetical
case.  Under your plan, "Jane" comes across a case that appears
air-tight.  She's got a Dahmer-like guy that needs to be put out of her
misery.  She dots all her i's and crosses all her t's, does everything
exactly the way she was supposed to do it, and gets the conviction. 
Afterwards, she sleeps well at night, knowing she got a monster off the
streets.

Then, a few months later, one of the police detectives cracks.  Seems
he and his cohorts set this guy up - he was never guilty of these
crimes.  Someone ELSE out there did it, and he's still loose.

In that situation, you advocate Jane's death.  Sorry, but you just
ain't gonna convince me that this is A Good Idea<tm>.

>> And you would have us execute Jane because somebody else lied?  You
>> would punish her for the behaviour of somebody else?

> Nope.  I would punish her for her own behaviour:  Pursuing Capital
> Punishment in a case where it wasn't warranted.

And if all the evidence at the time suggested it WAS warranted, as
above?

>> What if she did everything she could think of, but either didn't think
>> to ask someone a particular question or simply forgot to?  Tough - kill
>> her.  We sentence you to death for doing your job incompetently (or
>> less than brilliantly, as the case may be).

> You're beginning to catch on!  Prosecutors who ask for Capital
> Punishment must perform their jobs -- all facets -- with mathematical
> perfection.

Then let's kill off all the humans and replace them with robots. 
Because that's what you're going to need in order to make your little
utopia work.

> Someone's life is in the balance, we can ask for no less. 
> Like a nuclear weapon, Capital Punishment is intended to work as a
> deterrent:  When it must actually be _used_, that means it has failed. 

No, when it must actually be used, it means SOCIETY has failed to some
degree, in that it failed to educate the perp as to what behaviours
are, and are not, acceptable.  Then again, some people just have a
genetic predisposition to be naughty.  But I've never really been one
to buy into this idea that deterrence is the main idea behind capital
punishment.  I firmly believe that some people SO offend the rest of
us that they have to be put down, like mad dogs.  When we kill a mad
dog, we don't do it with the hope that the other neighbourhood dogs
will see it and think to themselves, "whoa!, I guess I better not do
THAT or they're gonna shoot me!"

>> Whoa there, pardner.  Back up a second.  You actually think it's ok to
>> have a system in place whereby the state will execute Jane BECAUSE SHE
>> WAS DECEIVED INTO A FALSE PROSECUTION?

> Yup.  It's her job not to be deceivable.  She didn't HAVE to call for
> Capital Punishment.  She could decide the evidence isn't strong enough
> to risk a life on, and opt for some other punishment.

Nobody is impervious to being deceived.  Ergo, you are advocating the
abolition of prosecution.

>> I got news for you: it doesn't work that way.  We don't use strict
>> liability for serious cases like this, and Lord help us if we ever do.
>> You HAVE to prove that Jane actively conspired with the detectives
>> and/or others to falsely convict someone of a capital crime - she had
>> to KNOWINGLY do this.

> Under current law, yes.  But keep in mind, I'm suggesting a change to
> current law.

Which would change not only current law, but one of the fundamental
principles underlying ALL current law.  No, it ain't gonna fly - not in
this society.  Ancient China, perhaps.  The world under Saddam and Bin
Laden, perhaps ...

> But nobody has to prove the detectives "set her up".  They only need to
> prove that the detectives faked evidence (which was already proven as
> part of John's exoneration) and that their actions led to Jane's death.

And while she's at it, they can go after *YOU*, for supporting this
change to the law that led directly to her death.

>> I ask you again, Gordon.  What exactly have you been drinking?  I'm
>> guessing some really cheap tequila.

> Mostly RC cola.  Tequila tastes like turpentine.

I have no idea what turpentine tastes like.  I'm guessing that your
particular experience ingesting that fluid is quite recent.

>>  Ironic also, that you
>> (and Pat) would advocate a system whereby it's really easy to
>> (literally) condemn a prosecutor for not doing their job well enough
>> (or in bad faith)

> I believe that someone who calls for the execution of another person
> should be willing to put their own life on the line.

And what colour is the sky on your planet?

>> yet condemn our current system for making it too
>> easy to condemn people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time

> I try to stay out of "wrong places" -- been in a couple, and left as
> soon as I figured it out.  Almost certainly avoided some (undeserved)
> jail time in one case, as Bad Things happened shortly after I left.

And there, but for the grace of God, go you.  Pity poor Jane.

>> Typical liberalism - think with the heart, not with the head.

> I'm fairly liberal in some respects, and fairly conservative in others. 
> But I take umbrage at being called "typical".

OK, I'll take back my "typical liberal" statement.  I'll replace it
with "left-wing extremist", as it seems a better fit.

-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The topic is now closed, as of this
minute.    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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #242
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Jan 18 18:47:58 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0INlwO07769;
	Sat, 18 Jan 2003 18:47:58 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 18:47:58 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301182347.h0INlwO07769@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #243

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 18 Jan 2003 18:48:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 243

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T Broadband Users See 3rd E-Mail Shift (Brandon Turok)
    Re: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service (Geoffrey Welsh)
    Re: Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb (Linc Madison)
    Re: Tail (SELLCOM Tech Support) (David B. Horvath, CCP)
    Re: DMCA vs. The Garage Door Opener (Monty Solomon)
    Apple silences iTunes P2P software (Monty Solomon)
    Sonicblue Mulls Company Sale; Planet Replay Stops Sharing (Monty Solomon)
    EFFector 16.1: Alert:TIA Update - Support the Data Mining (Monty Solomon)
    The Internet Nanosecond (Monty Solomon)
    Re: DSL vs Cable (John R. Levine)
    Re: DSL vs Cable (J Kelly)
    Re: The "Latest Telephone Scam" (Linc Madison)
    Changes at LincMad.com Web Site; New Anti-Spam/Virus/Hoax Page (Linc Mad)
    Re: 'Sanitized' Hard Drives Prove a Trove of Personal Info (jbl)
    Re: 'Sanitized' Hard Drives Prove a Trove of Personal Info (T. Pelliccio)
    Re: 'Sanitized' Hard Drives Prove a Trove of Personal Info (D. Horvath)

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: Brandon Turok <news@loonquawl.com>
Subject: Re: AT&T Broadband Users See 3rd E-Mail Shift
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:11:30 -0800
Organization: Astound Broadband


You know, this makes a damn good case for buying your own domain... :)

Brandon Turok
http://www.loonquawl.com/
Dial-A-Machine (925) 288-9825
Free when you call from work

Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote in message
news:telecom22.238.7@telecom-digest.org:

> By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 1/16/2003

> In a move likely to anger thousands of its customers, AT&T Broadband
> confirmed yesterday that its recent acquisition by Comcast Corp. will
> force more than 200,000 New England cable Internet modem subscribers
> to get their third e-mail address in barely a year.

> AT&T spokeswoman Jennifer L. Khoury said the company expects to begin
> making the switch from e-mail addresses ending in attbi.com to
> comcast.net starting in March. It will affect more than 2 million
> subscribers nationally. Mail sent to old attbi.com e-mail addresses
> may be forwarded to the new comcast.net addresses for as few as 60
> days before the attbi.com addresses are shut down, the company said.

> Subscribers who were outraged last March over being forced to notify
> scores of friends, business associates, Internet newsletters, and
> online merchants when the company changed e-mail from mediaone.net to
> attbi.com blasted the latest planned switchover yesterday.

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/016/business/AT_T_Broadband_users_see_3d_e
_mail_shift+.shtml

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

From: Geoffrey Welsh <geoffrey_welsh@bigfoot.com>
Subject: Re: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:27:53 -0500


> [..] and in fact I've heard rumors
> that cable modem users with 'network neighborhood' enabled on their
> computers get a lot of spies reading their files, etc.  True?  PAT]

Perhaps at the very first, when cable modems came out as - and DSL
devices were being adapted to - simple Ethernet bridges.  However,
security seems to have been improved since then.

Soon after deployment of cable modems began in southern Ontario, I ran
a sniffer on a LANcity/Digital/Bay/Nortel cable modem on Rogers Cable
and found pretty much what I expected: Ethernet broadcasts (e.g.,
ARP.)  Once in a while things misfired badly, e.g. a cable modem user
would try to connect a home network to the cable modem and their DHCP
server would answer their neighbours' requests for IP addresses(!),
but this seems to have stopped completely years ago (though I don't
know how -- perhaps the operators disabled layer 2 forwarding between
subscribers.)

Later (and perhaps out of the foolish desire to do something different
and learn from it) I subscirbed to Bell Canada's "Sympatico High Speed
Edition" DSL service and was issued a Nortel "1 Meg Modem"(*) and,
much to my surprise, running a sniffer on it I never saw any traffic
that wasn't meant for me.

Of course, this really isn't all that differrent (except for speed)
from dialing into an ISP -- or even connecting an office to one through
more traditional means, such as ISDN or leased lines.  No matter what
your connection, IP connectivity to the internet means that millions
of people can attempt to exploit your security vulnerabilities.

(*) The Nortel "1 Meg Modem", for those who don't know, was a nifty
design that allowed Nortel DMS line card drawers to be upgraded to
DSLAMs by replacing the standard Bus Interface Card ("BIC") with a
Data-enhanced Bus Interface Card ("DBIC") and using DSL-enhanced line
cards.  While its market was obviously limited to COs that used Nortel
switches, I believe that it failed (I believe that the product line
became a victim of Nortel's struggle to survive) even in that market
segment because it was a proprietary, 1.3 Mbps maximum, system that
became unattractive as high-speed and interoperrable systems emerged.

For those interested, some more details are available at:

http://www.nortelnetworks.com/products/01/dms500/collateral/50167.16-03-99.p
df.

Geoffrey Welsh <Geoffrey [underscore] Welsh [at] bigfoot [dot] com>
This address is not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given
away without explicit written consent.  Unsolicited bulk mail is spam, no
matter what regulations (real or imagined) it complies with!

FIGHT SPAM AND SCAMS: DISCONNECT CHINA FROM THE INTERNET!

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

From: Linc Madison <nobody@example.com>
Subject: Re: Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:24:14 -0800
Organization: LincMad.com Consulting
Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com


In article <telecom22.239.8@telecom-digest.org>,
Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb
> By LEONARD WAVERMAN (Wall Street Journal, Business Europe)

> None of this seems to matter to British regulators, however, which are
> currently considering sweeping changes -- not only to how the
> mobile-phone business is regulated but how customers themselves pay
> for the calls they make and receive.

> <http://online.wsj.com/article_email/0,,SB1042409262357988944,00.html>

The basic issue that the UK Competition Commission is investigating is
an important one in need of redress. The charges for terminating calls
to mobiles in the UK are exorbitant and excessive. It costs more to
call a mobile than to call most countries on the other side of the
world.

As for the "less successful" US model, most cellphones come with
bundles of included minutes, often including a larger (if not
unlimited) package of night/weekend minutes, that make it quite
feasible for people to take incoming calls without great concern over
the costs.

Mr. Waverman states the reality quite directly, although he disagrees
with it: "The argument is simple -- the called party cares what he
pays for terminating on his phone but cares little if the calling
party pays for that service. Hence forcing the called party to pay
would eliminate the abuse of the current monopoly termination charge."

I'm not saying that the UK should abandon calling party pays without
another thought. However, it is clear that something needs to be done
to bring market forces to bear on the current scheme of termination
charges. If the threat of throwing wireless party pays into the mix
gets the wireless companies to be a bit more sensible about their
termination charges, then it's all for the better.


www dot LincMad dot com  / Telecom at LincMad dot com
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:36:14 EST
From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP)
Subject: Re: Tail (SELLCOM Tech Support)


On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:05:24 -0500, SELLCOM Tech Support
<support@sellcom.com> posted to CoFD:

> What I am trying to find is a utility like the linux "tail" which
> allows you to watch a log/text file as it changes in real time (sort
> of).  But I need a version of that for Win2K Server.

There are several packages that contain tools like this including the
FSF's "DOS Utilities", Cygwin, and I believe that NT 4 included it as
part of the POSIX environment.

> While I'm at it, let me also share with you a little trick.  If you
> have a linux box you can telnet in from remote run tail (with some
> command switches that I forget) 

The flag you want is  -f  or --follow (depending on whether you're using the
old UNIX form or the fancier GNU/Linux form).


David B. Horvath, CCP
Consultant, Author, International Lecturer, Adjunct Professor
Board Member: ICCP Educational Foundation, ICCP Test Council, and
Philadelphia Association of Systems Administrators

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:24:12 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Re: DMCA vs. The Garage Door Opener


http://www.politechbot.com/p-04322.html

 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 00:04:24 -0500
 From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
 Subject: FC: Polk Wagner: Garage door opener DMCA case is hardly "lunacy"

 Polk teaches intellectual property law at the University of 
 Pennsylvania's law school. Previous Politech message:
 http://www.politechbot.com/p-04319.html

-Declan

 Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 23:57:42 -0500
 Subject: Re: FC: DMCA vs. The Garage Door Opener
 Content-Type: text/plain; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
 From: "R. Polk Wagner" <polk@law.upenn.edu>
 To: declan@well.com

I don't see the lunacy.

The case features patent and various trademark-type claims as
well. The DMCA provides one additional (albeit significant) argument -
with the allegation being that Skylink is building devices that break
whatever protection is wrapped around the code-rolling software.  It
would seem to have the basic features of what Congress was intending
with the DMCA: to make technological protections 'stick'.

Further, trying to control a complementary market to one's good (here,
replacement door-opener remotes) is a very standard business tactic.
And one that is implemented via a number of mechanisms: contracts,
technology, and (gasp) intellectual property.  The discipline here is
provided by the market - if Chamberlain uses its control of the
replacement remote market in a way that diminishes the utility (or
raises the overall cost) of their goods, then they'll suffer the
consequences.  (Assuming, of course, that the market for garage-door
opening systems is competitive, which seems a safe assumption.)

In some cases, it can be more efficient to allow the creator of the
original good to control the complementary market; it may allow for
better pricing mechanisms, or some quality benefits.  In other cases,
it's not so good.  But in either event, given reasonable competition in
the market for the original goods, this will get sorted out -- almost
certainly in the consumer's favor.  Here, Chamberlain argues that the
Skylink remotes 'break' the security features of the garage door system.

There are a number of problems with the DMCA.  But I'm not sure this is
one of them, even if one doubts (as I do) whether this move is smart
for Chamberlain's business.


Polk

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/

Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q=declan

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 22:19:35 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Apple Silences iTunes P2P Software


By Matthew Broersma and Ian Fried
Special to CNET News.com
January 17, 2003, 10:08 AM PT

Apple Computer has forced a developer to stop distributing a plug-in 
that turned its iTunes music player into peer-to-peer music-sharing 
software.

The plug-in, called iCommune, allowed iTunes users to browse the 
music libraries of other Macintoshes over a network and stream or 
download music from them.

On Wednesday, Apple notified developer James Speth that he was 
violating the terms of his software agreement and ordered him to stop 
distributing the plug-in and to return Apple's development tools. 
Speth removed the iCommune download from his Web site.

Apple's move comes amid increasing hostility between the 
entertainment industry and music-swapping applications such as Kazaa 
and the now-defunct Napster.

However, Apple did not make any direct reference to copyright issues 
in pulling the plug on iCommune. Instead, the company said that Speth 
broke the terms of the agreement that allowed him access to the 
iTunes software development tools. Apple makes those tools available 
to those that want to make their hardware compatible with iTunes but 
not to software makers that want to tap into iTunes.


http://news.com.com/2100-1040-981147.html

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 23:30:58 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Sonicblue Mulls Company Sale; Planet Replay Stops Sharing Service


    NEW YORK, Jan 17 (Reuters) - Sonicblue Inc. (NASDAQ:SBLU), the
maker of ReplayTV digital video recorders and Rio digital music
players, said on Friday its weighty debt load has prompted it to
consider, among other things, selling the company.

 ...

    In a related move, Planet Replay, a popular Web forum for ReplayTV
owners that is unaffiliated with Sonicblue, on Thursday pulled the
plug on a program-sharing service under pressure from movie and
television studios.

 ...

 - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30976946

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

Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 14:46:54 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 16.1: Alert: TIA Update - Support the Data Mining



EFFector       Vol. 16, No. 1        January 17, 2002     ren@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation     ISSN 1062-9424

In the 240th Issue of EFFector:

    * Alert: TIA Update - Support the Data Mining Moratorium Act of  
      2003!
    * Alert: Who Controls Your Digital Media? Shouldn't it Be You?
    * EFF Needs Volunteer Editors
    * Local Alert: Urge the San Francisco Board of Supervisors to
      Oppose USAPA!
    * Lawmakers Urge Protection of Fair Use
    * Senators Seek Moratorium on Government Data-Mining
    * Hollywood Not on the Same Planet as ReplayTV Fans
    * EFF Releases Update to "Unintended Consequences: Four Years
      Under the DMCA"
    * Norwegian Teenager Jon Johansen Acquitted in DVD Case
    * US Supreme Court Says Californians Can't Sue Texas Resident
    * Nomination Call for EFF Pioneer Awards - Deadline Feb 1st
    * Deep Links (8): Another Reason to Repeal the DMCA; Mickey Mouse
      Clubbed
    * Administrivia

 ...

http://www.eff.org/effector/HTML/effect16.1.html

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 23:14:48 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: The Internet Nanosecond


Innovation faltered, and the Web became a giant white elephant 	 

Jan. 15 - In 1999 America Online published a collection of Steve
Case's speeches modestly titled "Looking Ahead to the Internet
Century." It contained Case's musings on how the Internet would change
education, democracy, philanthropy, public policy and international
trade, as well as (of course) business and entertainment. Some of
Case's prophecies have come to pass: Parents and students can check
homework on the Net. But much of his vision remains unfulfilled, and
it's doubtful that 100 years from now people will refer to the
Internet Century. Probably they will simply call it the 21st century.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/859700.asp

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

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: DSL vs Cable
Date: 18 Jan 2003 00:07:37 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Depends on the cable system.  My understanding is that the most common
> DSL tops out below 1.5Mb/sec and drops off quickly as you move away
> from the CO.  Meanwhile, Time Warner cable modem service in Houston
> gives 1.5Mb/sec everywhere, and I often see my residential service
> peak at 2Mb/sec.

That varies a lot from system to system.  The peak speed of cable
modems is higher, but the practical speed depends more on how
congested your provider's connection to the outside world is than the
speed of individual links.  For example, the TW system around here has
a nominal speed of 27Mb (megabits, not megabytes) but the outside
connection was originally a pair of T1's which meant the real max
speed was 3Mb if you were the only one using it, which you never were.

> Re: network neighborhood, I don't think there is any difference for
> DSL vs Cable.  In both cases, you esentually become part of a larger
> network, usually the "internet", and if you expose those services
> without a firewall, people will see them.

Not so.  With cable modems, each branch of the network is logically an
Ethernet, while with DSL each line logically runs straight into the
router.  If you have an older (pre-DOCSIS, I think) cable system that
doesn't encrypt its traffic, it's quite possible to share files and
printers with your neighbors and snoop on all the traffic on your
branch.  Since DSL is routed, the only traffic on your line is yours.
In practice, if you have enough sense to turn on the default firewall
in Windows XP or use something like Zonealarm on older systems, it
doesn't matter.


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: J Kelly <usenet-replies002@pileof_remove-me_monkeycrap.com>
Subject: Re: DSL vs Cable
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:25:25 -0600
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:34:03 CST, Christopher Wolf
<temp6@thewolfden.org> wrote:

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So $58 minus $47 or $61 minus $50 is
>> still an $11 difference, or what they charge for the 'basic tier'. I
>> would say if they want to watch television, then add the basic tier,
>> essentially for free at the new price, however I cannot see what the
>> advantage would be if they are not into television. For that matter I
>> really have problems with cable modem service also. I cannot see
>> where/how it is any faster than DSL, and in fact I've heard rumors
>> that cable modem users with 'network neighborhood' enabled on their
>> computers get a lot of spies reading their files, etc. True? PAT]

Two cable providers here (no DSL providers).  One provider (municipal
utility) offers 384/128kbps for $44.95.  Other one (Mediacom) offers
1.4Mbps/128kbps for $39.95.  Both of those can be had for $10 less if
you take their respective cable tv offerings.  1.5Mbps seems plenty
fast for most stuff, the upload of 128kbps is a tad slow sometimes,
especially when I'm transferring large photos to shutterfly.com to be
printed.

The Network Neighborhood thing is pretty much a myth, I believe.  The
DOCSIS specification allows the modem to ONLY talk to the CMTS, so it
would take a gross misconfiguration for people to see other computers,
or so I'm told by one of the local cable operators.  They do filter
some ports (139 and maybe others) that Windows uses for networking.  I
was unable to find any computers in Network Neighborhood when I tried
it (tried it with both systems, I switched to the faster one the day
it rolled out, was customer #1).  I installed a Linux firewall a few
days after getting cable internet service and it definitly blocks any
windows networking from entering or leaving the WAN ethernet port.

FWIW, I've had only one outage since May, which was caused by a McLeod
USA fiber cut, on my Mediacom modem.  It lasted several hours while
the fiber got spliced.  (Okay, I've had a few 3 minute outages this
week while they are doing some work on the cable lines on by block but
that doesn't really count).  My old service was down several times a
week as the guys running it were quite clueless about cable internet
and had a crappy backbone provider besides.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  I never really, in my younger days
ever thought the time would come when some people would consider 128
kbps would be a 'tad slow' ... and regards system outages, my DSL
service from Southwestern Bell is quite reliable. I don't think I have
ever had any outages I could blame on the DSL connection.   PAT]

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

From: Linc Madison <nobody@example.com>
Subject: Re: The "Latest Telephone Scam"
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 18:28:56 -0800
Organization: LincMad.com Consulting
Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com


In article <telecom22.243.6@telecom-digest.org>, Neal McLain
<nmclain@annsgarden.com> wrote:

> Raymond Mereniuk <nospam4me@shaw.ca> wrote:

>>[from "Coquitlam Now" local newspaper in British Columbia]

>> Const. Brian Soles said the scam begins when residents 
>> receive a message on their answering machine or pager 
>> asking them to call a number beginning with area code 
>> 809, 284 or 876....

>> "The call will be billed to you at $2,425 per minute."

>> the area codes are located in the British Virgin Island
>> and Bahamas.

> It seems like it would have been a simple matter for the Coquitlam
> Now reporter to check her phone book to see if the area codes
> actually matched the countries.  That discrepancy alone should have
> been enough to make her suspicious about the accuracy of this
> so-called "latest telephone scam."

They did at least update the hoax with the new area codes for BVI and
Jamaica. Why Jamaica, though, and not the Bahamas? Hmm. Of course, one
also wonders why the Coquitlam Now reporter thought that she was
scooping CNN, AP, and Reuters on this story about telephone calls that
cost $2,000 a minute. That's hardly the sort of news one expects to
break in a small local paper.

> Anyway, I can't wait to see Linc Madison's response to this.  He must
> be getting awfully tired of debunking the same old hoax!

Hrrmmm, mutter-mutter-yawn-mutter-mutter:
<http://www.LincMad.com/telesleaze.html>


www dot LincMad dot com  / Telecom at LincMad dot com
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California

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

From: Linc Madison <nobody@example.com>
Subject: Changes at LincMad.com Web Site; New Anti-Spam/Virus/Hoax Page
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 18:42:17 -0800
Organization: LincMad.com Consulting
Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com


I recently updated the LincMad.com web site. There's very little news
in the area code split end of things, but there are two specific
changes relating to the site itself.

First, the e-mail address "webmaster" is being discontinued due to the
overwhelming volume of spam and virus e-mail. There are several
viruses out that specifically target "webmaster@yourdomain.com"
addresses, including some that send themselves as many as 100 times a
day. There's just nothing quite like opening up your mailbox to see 67
copies of the Friendship Screen Saver, when you've only been away from
your e-mail for the 8 hours you were asleep.

The new address for e-mail related to the web site is "contact" at
LincMad d0t com. Please DO NOT put any "clickable" links to this
address on any web page or Usenet article. Note that I've spelled out
"at" and "d0t" to make it more difficult for e-mail harvesting
programs to parse.

The second item, though, is that I have started a new page about the
banes of the e-mail world: spam, viruses, and virus hoaxes. I don't
expect to have anything more than a cursory explanation, plus links to
other sites for further reading.

However, one new link that I will be adding over the weekend is to a
wonderful anti-spam software company, Matterform. I've been using their
Spamfire product for the Macintosh (not yet available for MS-Windows,
although some of their other stuff is), and it does a remarkably good
job of trapping most of my spam. I refine the filters to cut down the
false negatives and false positives, but that process is simple and
straightforward. One of my favorite features, though, added just a few
days ago, is called "Bug the Web Bugs." It scans your recent spam
messages for "web bugs," replaces the identifier with either random
characters or your choice of friendly message, and then sends your
valuable marketing data to the spammers, over and over and over again.
I particularly enjoy finding a spammer whose web bug rot-13 encodes the
victim's e-mail address, because then I can insert a pleasant hello
message that the spammer won't see until he decodes the rot-13.

If you have other anti-spam, anti-virus, or anti-virus-hoax links to
suggest, please make a note of the new "contact" address, or reply to
this message.


www dot LincMad dot com  / Telecom at LincMad dot com
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California

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

From: jbl <jbl@spamblocked.com>
Subject: Re: 'Sanitized' Hard Drives Prove a Trove of Personal Info
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 20:27:04 -0700
Organization: On the desert
Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com


In <telecom22.240.7@telecom-digest.org>, PAT wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not understand why, when people 
> prepare to sell or otherwise dump an old computer, they do not use
> a 'laundry machine' program first, to clean the entire hard drive,
> then use added 'bleach' to rewrite garbage on the hard drive at least
> five or six times as per NSA recommendations, *then* format the entire
> drive.  PAT] 

The last time I dumped an old machine, I took it to the landfill with
the rest of the trash.  I waited till the crusher (that huge tractor
like thing with the huge steel rimmed spiked wheels was rolling over
and mashing all the trash our way, and threw the box with the drive
under the wheels.  Maybe it's not as good as NSA-style sanitizing, but
I think it was adequate (considering that there was nothing on that
drive worth the attention of the NSA or any government or civil agency
at all).


JBL

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

From: Tony Pelliccio <tonypo1@cox.takemeout2.net>
Subject: Re: 'Sanitized' Hard Drives Prove a Trove of Personal Info
Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 05:14:47 GMT


In article <telecom22.240.7@telecom-digest.org>, monty@roscom.com 
says:

> http://www.boston.com/dailynews/015/region/_Sanitized_hard_drives_prove_a:.shtml

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not understand why, when people 
> prepare to sell or otherwise dump an old computer, they do not use
> a 'laundry machine' program first, to clean the entire hard drive,
> then use added 'bleach' to rewrite garbage on the hard drive at least
> five or six times as per NSA recommendations, *then* format the entire
> drive.  PAT] 

When I get rid of a system the drive gets physically destroyed. At this 
point drives are so cheap just let the buyer get their own. 

The process I use is:

1) Pass a bulk eraser over the drive SEVERAL times. 

2) Use a sledge hammer and break the drive into as many small pieces as 
you can. 

Perfectly unrecoverable at that point. 


Tony

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:34:07 EST
From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP)
Subject: Re: 'Sanitized' Hard Drives Prove a Trove of Personal Info


On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 21:56:03 -0500, PAT wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not understand why, when people 
> prepare to sell or otherwise dump an old computer, they do not use
> a 'laundry machine' program first, to clean the entire hard drive,
> then use added 'bleach' to rewrite garbage on the hard drive at least
> five or six times as per NSA recommendations, *then* format the entire
> drive.  PAT] 

Because they don't know any better, that's why. And those who do (or
should know better -- like the folks in corporate tech services) don't
have the time.

Remember, once you "delete" a file (under DOS/Windows) and clear the
recycle bin, you can't get the files back using the base operating
system tools. The fact that the data is still there escapes the notice
of most people.

Personally, I use compress and clear on occassian and have written my
own file overwrite deletion program. I replaced a failing hard drive
(striction) recently. No one will ever read that drive -- not after
several rounds of high power rifle ammo went through it.


David B. Horvath, CCP
Consultant, Author, International Lecturer, Adjunct Professor
Board Member: ICCP Educational Foundation, ICCP Test Council, and
Philadelphia Association of Systems Administrators

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #243
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jan 20 01:49:52 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0K6nq826826;
	Mon, 20 Jan 2003 01:49:52 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 01:49:52 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301200649.h0K6nq826826@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #244

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 20 Jan 2003 01:50:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 244

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Digest - Suggestions (J Kelly)
    Re: The Digest - Suggestions (Lincoln J. King-Cliby)
    Re: The Digest - Suggestions (George Mitchell)
    Re: The Digest - Suggestions (John David Galt)
    Re: The Digest - Suggestions (Greg T. Knopf)
    Re: Tail (Greg T. Knopf)
    Re: Tail (Walter Dnes)
    Re: Tail (Lincoln J. King-Cliby)
    Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust (John Higdon)
    Re: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service (Dave Phelps)
    Problems with AT&T Wireless GSM service (Jeffrey James Bryan Carpenter)
    Re: ANI and TracFone (K. Faraday)
    Re: Intertel vs. Harris 20-20 (Jeff Moss)
    Vonage Telephone via Internet (Paul Coxwell)

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: J Kelly <usenet-replies002@pileof_remove-me_monkeycrap.com>
Subject: Re: The Digest - Suggestions
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:16:19 -0600
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:48:32 -0800, Brandon Turok
<loonquawl@loonquawl.com> wrote:

> Hey Pat,

> I love reading the Digest, and I think it's wonderful, but is it at
> all possible to create something like comp.dcom.telecom.montysolomon?
> Not that I don't enjoy the news, but there's so much of it that it
> really feels like it's cluttering up the NG and stifling most other
> conversation.

> Thanks for listening to my kvetching!

> Brandon Turok
> http://www.loonquawl.com/
> Dial-A-Machine (925) 288-9825
> Free when you call from work

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, readers?    PAT

Yes, Monty posts a lot of stuff, of which maybe 10% is of interest to
me.  That 10% makes it worth having, I don't have to download the
bodies for the posts that don't appear interesting from the subject
line.

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:35:09 -0800
From: Name Withheld at Poster's Request
Subject: Re: The Digest - Suggestions


[Not for publication (unless you get rid of my email address)]

Pat - 

First let me say how much I've enjoyed reading your comments / tales
from telecom's older days. Once I get out of academia and can afford
to, I will gladly "donate".

On topic -- I was having the same thoughts earlier, especially since
90% of Monty's stuff I've already seen elsewhere (often a day or two
earlier). I do appreciate his posts for the 10% that I haven't seen.

I'm not positive this will work universially -- especially those who
receive the telecom digest via email -- but a happy medium may be to
psuedo thread the messages, so that one can "mark thread as read". To
do this (based on my experimentation) you would just (automatically, I
presume) add a References: (something) header, where (something) was
say "monty".

As far as I can tell some newsreaders thread based on subject, some
based on the references. In therory, a news reader that threades based
on the references would put all of Monty's in the same thread (because
they all referenced the same imaginary article)...

Regardless of what you decide to do, it seems like its starting to get
overwhelming.


Thanks, 

Lincoln J. King-Cliby
Lead Student Technician/Media Support Technician 
Classroom Technology Services
Instructional and Information Technology Services (IITS)
California State University, San Marcos
San Marcos, CA 92096-0001

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

From: George Mitchell <george@coventry.m5p.com>
Subject: Re: The Digest - Suggestions
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 22:09:02 -0800
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Brandon Turok wrote:

> I love reading the Digest, and I think it's wonderful, but is it at
> all possible to create something like comp.dcom.telecom.montysolomon?
> Not that I don't enjoy the news, but there's so much of it that it
> really feels like it's cluttering up the NG and stifling most other
> conversation.

One man's clutter is another's bread and butter.  I enjoy Mr. Solomon's
contributions.  He knows the value of brevity.  Actually, I wonder when
he has the time to read all these publications for which he provides
pointers.  I think many readers like me would enjoy a few words about
Mr. Solomon's life and career.


George Mitchell (obfuscated email address)

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

From: John David Galt <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us>
Subject: Re: The Digest - Suggestions
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 23:01:17 -0800
Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society


Brandon Turok wrote:

> I love reading the Digest, and I think it's wonderful, but is it at
> all possible to create something like comp.dcom.telecom.montysolomon?
[snip]
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, readers?    PAT

Monty's news items are mostly on-topic and a few are even ones I
haven't already seen ten times - but there has been such a flood
lately that I recently gave up and killfiled him.  If he doesn't want
us all doing that, he might want to put a keyword in his subject lines
that allows a filter to distinguish the news articles from the rest,
just as the "ICB Toll Free" and "Telecom Update (Canada)" people did
some time ago.

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

From: Greg T. Knopf <gtknopf@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: The Digest - Suggestions
Date: 19 Jan 2003 00:20:15 GMT
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Reply-To: gtknopf@concentric.net


Hello,

I like the Solomon posts even though I know what the poster is saying.
Like most people I don't have time to keep track of all the tech
things I would like to, much less anything else.  The Solomon posts
help in that I can recognize by the subject something which might be
very interesting but which wouldn't be brought to my attention
otherwise.

Just my two cents.


Greg
   gtknopf@concentric.net

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

From: Greg T. Knopf <gtknopf@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Tail
Date: 19 Jan 2003 02:37:27 GMT
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Reply-To: gtknopf@concentric.net


Hello,

SELLCOM Tech Support wrote:

> What I am trying to find is a utility like the linux "tail" which
> allows you to watch a log/text file as it changes in real time

Is the log file for the win2k box a text file?  If so, have you used
the gnu utilities for dos/windows which mimic the un*x commands?
Their "tail" command is part of their textutils group.  Information
about this plus downloading info can be found at:

      http://www.gnu.org/software/textutils

If you haven't used these I'm sure that you're going to find them to
be a relief to have around.


Greg
gtknopf@concentric.net

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

From: Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
Subject: Re: Tail
Date: 19 Jan 2003 19:51:23 GMT
Reply-To: waltdnes@waltdnes.org


On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:05:24 -0500, SELLCOM Tech Support,
<support@sellcom.com> wrote:

> What I am trying to find is a utility like the linux "tail" which
> allows you to watch a log/text file as it changes in real time
> (sort of).  But I need a version of that for Win2K Server.

   It's actually a "posix" utility.  I.e. Unix (TM of owner-du-jour)
and Unix-like OS's, including linux, HP-UX, IBM-AIX, etc, etc.  Go to
http://www.cygwin.com and get Cygwin.  It's a free bash-emulator for
Windows.  tail, cut, paste, grep, the whole 9 yards.  *NOTE* the
default install does *NOT* put in all the utils.  You want to force
the full install.

   Because it's an emulation layer, I find things slower going through
large files than a comparable machine running linux or whatever.  But
it does do the job.  I work in a scientific-support environment, and I
have occasion to slice+dice large text files ... and the workplace
policy is WIndows XP.  Cygwin is a way to re-use your shell-scripts
verbatim.

   If you *REALLY* wnat to push things, you can download developer
modules and actually build programs like mutt, sendmail, etc under the
NT branch (NT/W2K/XP) of Windows whilst pretending to be under linux.
The main problem is tweaking the configure/makefiles so that they
don't detect that you're running under Windows.


Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
I'm not repeating myself; I'm an X Window user, I'm an ex-Windows user
Palladium ain't done till linux won't run

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

From: chsvideo@hotmail.com (Lincoln J. King-Cliby)
Subject: Re: Tail
Date: 18 Jan 2003 13:48:36 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


SELLCOM Tech Support <support@sellcom.com> wrote in message
news:<telecom22.240.15@telecom-digest.org>:

<snip>

> What I am trying to find is a utility like the linux "tail" which
> allows you to watch a log/text file as it changes in real time (sort
> of).  But I need a version of that for Win2K Server.
<snip>

Well ... 

Your ability do do this <EASILY> is limited by how cooperative the
"owning" software is (the "owner" is the software that opened the file
first), more than anything else. Much of the time when a file is
opened in any windows environment it is "locked", prohibiting anything
else from opening it.

There is a way to cheat, and get an unlocked copy of a locked file.
All you have to do is manually (or programatically) copy the file. For
some reason in windows you can copy a file any time you want,
including when it is locked, and when you're finished with it just
delete the copy.

That being said, the way Windows file management works I doubt you
could get real time information out of a file ... The best idea I have
is something with a timer that every X seconds copies the file (to
defeat locks), sees if its the same size as the last file, if it isn't
it does something, then deletes the copy.

If you can't find anything, please feel free to contact me by email at
lking [hyphen] cliby [at] lincoln [dot] homeip [period] net ... Could
probably wack something together in a few minutes.


Lincoln J. King-Cliby
Lead Student Technician/Media Support Technician 
Classroom Technology Services
Instructional and Information Technology Services (IITS)
California State University, San Marcos
San Marcos, CA 92096-0001

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 14:20:13 -0800


In article <telecom22.240.4@telecom-digest.org>, joel@exc.com
(Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote:

> How strong is this "oscillator signal"?

It varies from set to set, but it can usually be detected from many
feet away.

> Strong enough to be detected outside the car?  To be detected from
> the side of the ride?  To be isolated among a hundred cars passing
> by at 60 miles an hour?

Modern spectrum analysis equipment has no trouble with it.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: Dave Phelps <tippenring@deadspam.com>
Subject: Re: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 23:21:15 -0600


In article <telecom22.240.2@telecom-digest.org>, hudsonl@skypoint.com
says:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So $58 minus $47 or $61 minus $50 is
> still an $11 difference, or what they charge for the 'basic tier'. I
> would say if they want to watch television, then add the basic tier, 
> essentially for free at the new price, however I cannot see what the
> advantage would be if they are not into television. For that matter
> I really have problems with cable modem service also. I cannot see
> where/how it is any faster than DSL, and in fact I've heard rumors
> that cable modem users with 'network neighborhood' enabled on their
> computers get a lot of spies reading their files, etc.  True?  PAT]

It generally used to be true, but not much anymore. I believe the
DOCSIS 1.1 standard addressed this issue. Otherwise, I would suggest
deciding on a service based on reliability and support of the
provider.

I would avoid SBC DSL, because they *never* have a problem -- just ask
them. I started with cable about 3 years ago. First, it was AT&T, then
switched to Charter.

AT&T had a problem they ignored for a couple of months regarding a 
saturated DS3 between St. Louis and Kansas City. They finally added 
another. Service was unbearably slow during periods of heavy traffic. 

Now I've got Charter, and the local reliability has been very good.
However, regionally, they have a single physical path to their
distribution point. There is no physical route diversity. Bad network
design to be sure. Occasionally this fiber is damaged, or some other
trouble occurs for one reason or another and cable TV and internet
service is out for a period of hours.

OTOH, I've spent more time arguing with SBC DSL tech support in a
month than I've spent talking to Charter tech support in the 2 years
that I've had them. SBC insisted that the problem was not theirs until
the customer decided to drop DSL.


Dave Phelps
deadspam=tippenring

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 00:49:28 -0000
From: Jeffrey James Bryan Carpenter <jjc@pobox.com>
Subject: Problems with AT&T Wireless GSM service


I have been having a strange problem with voicemail on AT&T Wireless's
new GSM service.  I have not been able to resolve it with AT&T yet.

I have busy call forwarding and no answer call forwarding from my
office phone to my AT&T Wireless GSM phone. I noticed that in some
cases, when a call rang through from my office number to the GSM phone
voice mail, I would get the generic, "Welcome to AT&T Wireless
Services voicemail. To enter your mailbox, press '#'...".  In other
words, it appears that when the call was received by the voicemail
system, it could not figure out the correct mailbox.  After conducting
a series of experiments, I was able to establish a pattern.

Before explaining the results, I need to explain my understanding of
how call forwarding and voicemail work.  When a call is placed from
number "A" to "B", and "B" is forwarded to "C", when the call is
delivered to "C's" switch from "B's" switch, 3 numbers are passed:

	Called Party Number (CPN)
	Original Called Party Number (OCPN)
	Redirecting Number (RN)

CPN is the number the call is being placed to. The OCPN is the
original number that was dialed, regardless of how many times the
call has been forwarded. The RN is the last number the call passed
through, i.e. the one that is forwarding to the CPN.

In my above example, CPN is "C", OCPN is "B", and RN is "B".

When a call rings to voicemail, it is simply busy/no answer call
forwarding to a number that rings into the voicemail system.  My guess
is that it determines the mailbox from the RN.  I cannot see that
either of the other two numbers would work, especially considering the
case where a call is forwarded through more than one number.

I conducted test calls through various paths of busy, no answer, or
unconditional call forwarding.  The results were as follows:

     ofc         wireless
  no answer ---> no answer---> correct
     CF             CF         mailbox

     ofc         wireless
  no answer --->   busy*  ---> correct
     CF             CF         mailbox

     ofc         wireless
    busy    ---> no answer---> failed
     CF             CF

     ofc         wireless
    busy    --->   busy   ---> failed
     CF             CF

     ofc         wireless
unconditional--> no answer---> failed
     CF             CF

     ofc         wireless
unconditional-->   busy   ---> correct
     CF             CF         mailbox

I tried these several times to make sure this was not random.

(* It was hard to force busy call forwarding on the GSM service. If
you had a call in progress to the phone, and initiated another
answering it through call waiting, I expected all other calls to go
via busy call forwarding. Wrong. When a third call was placed, it
showed on the display, although it seemed it could not be answered
unless one of the other calls was terminated.  It took a fourth call
to go through busy call forwarding!)

These results are freaky.  I was guessing between the GSM switch and
voicemail, something was getting munged.  But, would it not have to be
the GSM switch munging the RN, or the voicemail system munging it or
doing something else wrong?

In a possibly related problem, when I used this phone in Europe last
December, when calls sent to the phone went unanswered, it was sent to
the voicemail system, and the result was the same failure; it got the
generic "Welcome to AT&T" message. Calls to customer service were met
with, "yeah, we know there is some problem with voicemail."

Any ideas on this are welcome. For anyone clueful at AT&T Wireless,
any intervention is welcome. Front-line customer service still want to
delete and recreate my mailbox.


jeff


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I had a situation somewhat similar with
a voicemail service from Ameritech. I had two actual numbers (call
them 9210 and 9211. They were both listed in the directory for
different 'departments'.) Originally there was a hunt group where 9210
would ring 9211 if 9210 was busy. If 9211 was busy, that was it. I had
voicemail put on 9211 so that if it was busy (or if 9210 rolled over
and got a busy 9211) the call would go to voicemail. If someone dialed
direct into 9211 and it was busy or did not answer, voice mail knew
exactly what to do. Then I told Ameritech I wanted to change the
system by also having voicemail on 9210, *and* having 9211 'hunt
backwards' as needed. Now everyone got two chances to get in, with
9210 rolling ONCE and stopping if 9211 was busy. 9211 rolled back
to 9210 and if it was busy, the call also went to voicemail. That's
where the problem started. When 9210 rolled to 11 and then voicemail, 
the VM did not know who was calling, and vice versa. 

Finally telco said what they would do is have *one* box on 9210 with
9211 'aliased' to 9210. *Anytime* 9211 called for voicemail service
the system said 9211 is the same (for VM purposes) as 9210. I could
use either line and get my voicemail. 

In your application, someone, somewhere is passing an 'incorrect' (to
voicemail's and your) point of view. The VM is saying what do I do
with this and gives it a generic greeting. See if you can figure out,
using caller-ID boxes what is actually being passed in each of those
cases you described above. Then advise telco you want any or all of
those unidentified (to VMs point of view) numbers to be 'aliased' to 
the correct number. Is somewhere a DID number or the original caller's
number being handed over to VM who knows nothing about them?  If your
wireless number is X, I assume X should always be what is handed to
the VM. By a series of tests some number (other than X) is getting to
the VM now and then. Keep us posted.  PAT]  

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

From: atlanta@att.net (K. Faraday)
Subject: Re: ANI and TracFone
Date: 18 Jan 2003 07:52:21 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Thanks for your responses.

I may be using an incorrect term when I say ANI because I know some
numbers such as 800's **DO** get the caller's billing info.

Before I understood why they do this, I once had a mail order company
ask all kinds of questions about my telephone account such as how it
is listed, actual billing name, etc. I thought they were just trying
to get the information from me under the guise of saying they had to
verify everything so I gave incorrect information and the rep.
immediately knew this and said my response did not match what he
showed on his screen [my phone was listed at that time under someone
else's name] and I had to then give the correct info. which he
obviously did have because he was able to tell when I gave him the
accurate name. The billing info. on my credit card was different from
the info. on my phone account so that was why they were asking, but
they did have everything just by my having made the call as I had
never delt with this company before and certainly had never given them
my ph. co. info.

This call was from a landline phone as oppsosed to a cell phone but
with all the new technology I was curious as to how much info. goes
out with cell calls.

Thanks again for all your help.

Kelly


Stanley Cline <sc1-news@roamer1.org> wrote in message
news:<telecom22.236.6@telecom-digest.org>:

> On 15 Jan 2003 08:48:25 -0800, atlanta@att.net (K. Faraday) wrote:

>> I have an old analog TracFone and I was wondering if when I call
>> somewhere that has ANI (not Caller ID) such has a business or 800
>> number, if they get my name and address.  I know they ALWAYS get the

> Not unless they already have your wireless number associated with your
> name and address by virtue of you having an account with them, etc.

> Besides, businesses won't even always get your number via *ANI* as
> wireless ANI is wildly inconsistent; some wireless carrier switches
> send customers' actual wireless numbers as ANI, while others send
> "trunk" numbers that have nothing at all to do with the customer --
> and may not even be in the same state as the wireless customer's phone
> number, home, or office, or where the customer is physically located
> when they make the call.

> My favorite example of the latter:  one very small, rather unusual,
> rural wireless carrier sends a Yuma, **Arizona** number -- which just
> happens to be the carrier's roamer access number -- as BOTH CALLER ID
> AND ANI on any and all calls placed from a town it serves in rural
> northeastern **Tennessee**!  (The carrier actually backhauls its lone
> cell site in that town -- and cell sites in other areas in at least a
> half-dozen other states -- all the way to Yuma ...)  Caller ID name for
> such calls (assuming the LEC serving the called party is Qwest, or has
> access to Qwest's name database like BellSouth does) is the name of
> the carrier, of course ... ;)

> 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: jeffmoss26@adelphia.net (Jeff Moss)
Subject: Re: Intertel vs. Harris 20-20
Date: 18 Jan 2003 12:57:18 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


I couldnt agree more with Inter-Tel. My dad works for the largest
Inter-Tel Platinum Dealer in Cleveland. They sell a ton of different
systems and solutions, but Inter-Tel is their #1 system hands down. I
have seen a lot of their new advanced networking features, they look
pretty cool. Not cheap, though.

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

From: PaulCoxwell@aol.com
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 16:21:52 EST
Subject: Vonage Telephone via Internet


I came across this website:   www.vonage.com

The basic offer is a U.S. local telephone line in any one of a number
of areas, accessible to you anywhere in the world by way of the
Internet, so long as one has a DSL/Broadband connection.  A flat
monthly fee of $39.95 provdes unlimited local and long-distance calls
within the U.S., international calls billed at normal rates, and the
ability for anyone to reach you anywhere in the world on your
U.S. number.

I'd be interested if anyone is already using this service, or has any
experience of it, especially from the point of view of using it from
overseas.


Paul Coxwell,
Norfolk, U.K.

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #244
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jan 20 03:41:00 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0K8f0p28852;
	Mon, 20 Jan 2003 03:41:00 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 03:41:00 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301200841.h0K8f0p28852@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #245

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 20 Jan 2003 03:40:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 245

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Mobile Phonecos Braced For Tough Price Cuts (Monty Solomon)
    Register.com Rejects 'Inadequate' Hostile Bid (Monty Solomon)
    Rumsfeld Orders .mil Web Lockdown (Monty Solomon)
    "I Poisoned P2P Networks for the RIAA" - Whistleblower (Monty Solomon)
    Judge to Hear Air ID Challenge (Monty Solomon)
    A Sinking Feeling at the Register (Monty Solomon)
    World Ports Using Electronic Security to Fight Terrorism (Monty Solomon)
    Judge Approves Class Action Status for South Carolina Lawsuit (M Solomon)
    Court Rules Against Network Associates' Software Review Policy (Solomon)
    802.11g Update (Monty Solomon)
    Microsoft Introduces CD Copy-Protection "Fix" (Monty Solomon)
    Legendary Hacker to Get Unleashed and Online (Monty Solomon)
    Radio Shack: Name/Phone/E-Mail (Steven Lichter)
    Re: Email Forwarders (Dave Close)
    Re: DSL vs Cable (Greg T. Knopf)
    Re: Calling Party Pays to Call Cellular (John David Galt)
    Greek Dialing Plan Changes Phase 4 (Spyros Bartsocas)
    Cingular Cellphone Flakiness (Jeff Hecht)
    Re: Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb (Robert Woolley)
    Re: Intertel vs. Harris 20-20 (S. Solton)
    NPA-NXXs Rate Centers (Rollyfngaz@aol.com)
    Last Laugh! Bible College Shuns 666 Phone Number (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: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:10:14 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Mobile Phonecos Braced for Tough Price Cuts


By Tim Richardson

It appears that the UK's mobile phone operators have lost their fight 
to stave off enforced price cuts following a year-long investigation 
by the Competition Commission.

The FT reports that termination charges - the fees service providers
charge for routing calls from other operators through their networks -
could be slashed by 15 per cent with a further 14 per cent reduction
over three years.

Any price cuts would be implemented from April, according to the newspaper.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/59/28915.html

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:11:01 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Register.com Rejects 'Inadequate' Hostile Bid


By ComputerWire

Register.com Inc yesterday rejected an unsolicited takeover bid that
was launched on Wednesday by a group of investors as "financially and
structurally inadequate", claiming the potential buyer was trying to
pressure the company to sell cheap, writes Kevin Murphy.

RCM Acquisition Co LLC's offer of $4.95 cash per share, representing a
bid of almost $200m, "does not reflect the significant opportunities
Register.com has to grow value for our stockholders," said
Register.com executive chairman Mitchell Quain.


http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/28909.html

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:11:57 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Rumsfeld Orders .mil Web Lockdown


By Kevin Poulsen, SecurityFocus Online

U.S. defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld this week directed the armed
service to strip military Web sites of information that could benefit
adversaries, citing a terrorist training manual and a year-long review
of the Department of Defense's 700-gigabyte Web presence.


http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/28917.html

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:13:34 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: "I Poisoned P2P Networks For the RIAA" - Whistleblower


By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco

"Gobbles", the German hacker who improbably claimed to have infected
peer-to-peer file sharing networks and to "0wn" your computer this
week, has confirmed that his brag was a hoax. That much, you probably
suspected, as Goebbels (as we must now call him) failed to offer a
shred of evidence in support of the notion that the RIAA was engaged
in widespread intrusion of personal computers.

But meet Matt Warne. He has an interesting tale to tell.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/28919.html

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 00:25:37 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Judge to Hear Air ID Challenge


By Julia Scheeres
02:00 AM Jan. 18, 2003 PT

San Francisco -- A U.S. District Court judge agreed to hear a
challenge to an airline requirement that forces passengers to show
identification before boarding a plane, despite a motion by the
government and two airlines to dismiss it.

John Gilmore, the co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, 
has sued United Airlines, Southwest Airlines and Attorney General 
John Ashcroft, alleging that the ID requirement stems from a "secret 
law" that violates his right to anonymous travel within the United 
States.

The case stems from two July 4 incidents in which Gilmore refused to 
show his ID at San Francisco and Oakland airports before boarding 
cross-country flights. Southwest refused to let him board without 
identifying himself, while United said he could board if he submitted 
to a hand search, which he refused.

Gilmore, a longtime libertarian, arrived at the federal building
wearing Birkenstocks and a purple suit jacket. Pinned to the lapel,
was a button with the words "suspected terrorist" superimposed over
the shape of an airplane.


http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,57276,00.html

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 12:16:32 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: A Sinking Feeling at the Register


By DAVID LEONHARDT

ONE year ago, a 50-inch Hitachi television cost $1,400 at Circuit 
City. It costs $1,000 today.

Five years ago, automakers charged $25,500 for the average new 
vehicle. They charge about $24,500 today.

A decade ago, a round trip on Delta Air Lines between New York and 
San Francisco cost $388 - and it was part of a sale. Delta now sells 
the same advance-purchase ticket for $317.

Most stunning is the price path of Burger King's Whopper sandwich, 
which cost about $1.40 some 20 years ago, when the Dow Jones 
industrial average hovered around 1,000 and hourly wages were about 
one-half their current level. This weekend, a Whopper sells for 99 
cents.

Deflation, a sustained decline in prices across the economy, remains 
merely a threat, with overall prices still rising mildly. For some of 
the nation's largest industries, though, falling prices are a 
reality. The costs of cars, clothing, electronics, furniture, 
jewelry, kitchen equipment and toys - indeed, of most manufactured 
goods - have been dropping for more than a year, causing turmoil for 
companies and their workers. Although airlines and fast food are 
among the only industries in the service sector to be suffering 
through declines, overall service prices are rising more slowly than 
they were two years ago, according to figures released last week.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/19/business/yourmoney/19ECON.html

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 13:32:34 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: World Ports Using Electronic Security System to Fight Terrorism


By Gene Johnson, Associated Press, 1/18/2003

SEATTLE - Eleven of the world's busiest seaports, including New York,
have started using an electronic container security system that was
developed to help the US military keep track of food, ammunition, and
other gear shipped overseas.

The technology, created by Savi Technology of Sunnyvale, Calif.,
relies on electronic seals placed on container closures. Using radio
signals, the seals can transmit information about where the container
is, what is inside it and whether it has been opened - all crucial to
thwarting smugglers or terrorists.


http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/018/nation/World_ports_using_electronic_security_system_to_fight_terrorism+.shtml

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 13:36:04 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Judge Approves Class Action Status for South Carolina Lawsuit


By Associated Press, 1/18/2003 08:47

SPARTANBURG, S.C. (AP) A judge approved class-action status for a
lawsuit accusing cable television company Charter Communications of
requiring South Carolina customers to rent unnecessary equipment or
pay a bogus wire maintenance fee.

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/018/nation/Judge_approves_class_action_st:.shtml 

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 13:37:50 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Court Rules Against Network Associates' Software Review Policy


By MATT RICHTEL

New York court has ruled that Network Associates, a maker of popular 
antivirus and computer security software, may not require people who 
buy the software to get permission from the company before publishing 
reviews of its products.

The decision, which the company has vowed to appeal, could carry a 
penalty in the millions of dollars, according to Ken Dreifach, chief 
of the Internet bureau of the office of the New York State attorney 
general, Eliot Spitzer.

Last spring, Mr. Spitzer sued Network Associates, which has its 
headquarters in Santa Clara, Calif., asserting that the company's 
software included an unenforceable clause that effectively violated 
consumers' free speech. The clause, which appeared on software 
products and the company's Web site, read: "The customer will not 
publish reviews of this product without prior consent from Network 
Associates Inc."

In a decision the parties received late Thursday, Justice Marilyn 
Shafer of State Supreme Court in Manhattan ruled that the clause was 
deceptive and that it warranted a fine, which she wrote that she 
would determine in the future.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/18/business/18SOFT.html

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 13:44:46 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: 802.11g Update


By Adam Engst and Glenn Fleishman (1/17/2003)

In 2002, Wi-Fi -- mostly in the form of 802.11b equipment -- ruled the
land. The faster, 54 megabit-per-second (Mbps) 802.11a devices that
shipped during 2002 seemed interesting, but because they used a
different frequency than 802.11b and also cost more, only a small
number of early adopters and testers bought in.

More promisingly, 802.11g winked at us from the horizon. That standard
runs, like 802.11a, at 54 Mbps but with full backward compatibility
with 802.11b. Because of political and technical conflicts, the
specification's IEEE committee work dragged on, but a final version
appears likely to be ratified by summer or fall 2003.

Technology doesn't wait for engineering groups, though: against some
industry experts' better judgment, several companies have started to
ship equipment based on chipsets that use a draft version of 802.11g
to achieve the higher speed and better indoor signal characteristics.

Apple, of course, was one of the first out of the gate -- just like
with 802.11b -- announcing new products under the AirPort Extreme name
in January 2003 at the Macworld Expo. But Linksys, Buffalo, and Belkin
 -- in roughly that order -- beat Apple to the punch by shipping a
variety of gateways and adapters in December 2002 and January 2003,
but Apple has released substantially more detail about their equipment
while also offering a few interesting features in their new wireless
gateway that may tempt people with no Macintoshes in sight.

In this addendum to The Wireless Networking Starter Kit, we discuss 
the forward and backwards compatible issues with 802.11g and Apple's 
AirPort Extreme, and run through Apple and other vendor's equipment.

http://wireless-starter-kit.com/80211g_update.html

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 16:12:07 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Microsoft Introduces CD Copy-Protection "Fix"


By Bernhard Warner, European Internet Correspondent

    CANNES, France, Jan 18 (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT)
announced on Saturday the introduction of new digital rights software
aimed at helping music labels control unauthorized copying of CDs, one
of the biggest thorns in the ailing industry's side.

    Stung by the common practice of consumers copying, or "burning,"
new versions of a store-bought CD onto recordable CDs, music companies
have invested heavily in copy-protection technologies that have mainly
backfired or annoyed customers.

    For example, most copy-proof CDs are designed so that they cannot
be played on a PC, but often this prevents playback on portable
devices and car stereos too.

    Last year, some resourceful software enthusiasts cracked Sony
Music's (TOKYO:6758) proprietary technology simply by scribbling a
magic marker pen around the edges of the disc, thus enabling playback
on any device.

    Microsoft believes it may have come up with a solution. The new
software is called the Windows Media Data Session Toolkit.

    It enables music labels to lay songs onto a copy-controlled CD in
multiple layers, one that would permit normal playback on a stereo and
a PC.
    
     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30990611

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 16:13:22 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Legendary Hacker to Get Unleashed and Online


By Elinor Mills Abreu

    SAN FRANCISCO, Jan 19 (Reuters) - One of the world's most famous
computer hackers gets off probation this week and plans to dive back
into the Internet, his former playground where breaking-and-entering
landed him in jail for five years.

    On Tuesday, 39-year-old Kevin Mitnick will log on to the Internet
for the first time in eight years, during the live TechTV show "Screen
Savers." Also scheduled to be on the program are Shawn Fanning,
creator of Internet music downloading pioneer Napster, and Steve
Wozniak, a co-founder of Apple Computer Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL)

    Mitnick says he is ready to go to work, ironically, in a position
where he will be helping protect companies against the kind of hacking
he used to do. He has a job interview scheduled for Monday, but
declines to name the company.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=30998374

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

From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter)
Date: 19 Jan 2003 02:10:32 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Subject: Radio Shack: Name/Phone/E-Mail


The ads hit the radio today that Radio Shack is no longer asking for
these.  They want it to be easy to buy from them.  Could the cause of
this be the 20% loss in business?


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) I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot In Hell Company.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's hope the new policy is national
in scope and applies to dealers and agency stores alike. At our local
Radio Shack agency store here in Independence it was not much of an
issue since the two guys who manage and own the store know almost
everyone in town, and everyone knows them. But in the Chicago area for
many years, this was quite a bone of contention. To buy a set of
batteries for cash, they wanted to know names, addresses, etc.   PAT]

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

From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close)
Subject: Re: Email Forwarders
Date: 18 Jan 2003 19:06:36 -0800
Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California


Jack Hamilton wrote:

> 1) You might belong to an organization which provides email forwarding
> addresses to its members.  The email address I use to post to Usenet
> is provided by the Association for Computing Machinery; mail sent to
> jfh@acm.org is automatically rerouted to a real mailbox elsewhere.  If
> that real mailbox goes away because the provider is bought up, no one
> but me has to know - I just change the forwarding address, and
> jfh@acm.org continues to work.

That's a great technique and I use it also. I have both an IEEE address
and an alumni association address which forward to my real mailbox. But,
when I reply to an incoming message, the recipient will learn, and perhaps
retain, my actual mailbox address. I can change the From: line in my mail
but I have no way to insure that all recipients will pay attention. The
true Sender: address is always there. What's your answer to this problem?


Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA  "Politics is the business of getting
dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359    power and privilege without
dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu           possessing merit." - P. J. O'Rourke

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

From: Greg T. Knopf <gtknopf@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: DSL vs Cable
Date: 19 Jan 2003 02:01:46 GMT
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Reply-To: gtknopf@concentric.net


Hello,

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So $58 minus $47 or $61 minus $50 is
>> ...
>> For that matter I
>> really have problems with cable modem service also. I cannot see
>> where/how it is any faster than DSL,

It might be more reliable and more easily accessible.  Reliable in
that the DSL service is dependent on the quality of the phone lines
with their attendant quirks.  More easily accessible in that DSL
service is dependent on distance from the central office.

This is not to discount DSL.  There are some DSL services which
guarantee 765kb/s download/downstream and 256kb/s upload/upstream or
some such number. This is between the residence and the central office
DSLAM (digital subscriber line access multiplier) equipment.

On a cable system you do indeed share bandwidth with those in your
locale.  The cable/broadband access is a shared broadcast medium.  So
in theory you can have your downloads, etc., throttled by whatever
anyone else on the same system is doing.  I've never seen it but my
experience is limited.

>> and in fact I've heard rumors that cable modem users with 'network
>> neighborhood' enabled on their computers get a lot of spies reading
>> their files, etc. True? PAT]

> Re: network neighborhood, I don't think there is any difference for
> DSL vs Cable.  In both cases, you esentually become part of a larger
> network, usually the "internet", and if you expose those services
> without a firewall, people will see them.

Yes, of course.  And it depends on which interface that you expose
those services.  The probable desired setup is to have those services
enabled/visible on the local network within your home, for example,
and hidden from the wider internet.

I guess that the prejudice about cable modem users comes from them
being favored as targets for people trying to break in.  They are most
likely to have their machines "always on" as opposed to a dialup
access user.  Also, someone trying a variety of break-in techniques
enjoys quicker access to the target machine on a cable network than
they would going to a dialup user's machine.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, folks.


Greg
gtknopf@concentric.net


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although I have DSL here in Independence
I am always 'on line'. I never turn it off. However I have noticed
that every day or two, sbcglobal.net does play around with the IP 
addresses. Sometimes I get dumped off line for no apparent reason. But
when it is up and running (most of the time) is is pretty fast. I am
only five or six blocks away from Edison CO (620-330/331/332 which
serves Independence) so I get fairly fast service. The only people in
town who cannot get DSL (if they want it) are the folks on the far
north side of town in the area called 'Country Club'. Everyone here in
town is served by 620-331, but they are just a wee bit too far north
to be within the range of DSL.  (620-330 is Montgomery County offices
and a few cell phones such as mine; 620-332 is City of Independence
and a few cell phones and a couple other *large* companies in the
town.)  PAT]

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

From: John David Galt <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us>
Subject: Re: Calling Party Pays to Call Cellular
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 20:56:51 -0800
Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society


Mark J Cuccia wrote:

> FOR THE MOST PART, cellular/wireless numbers *do* have dedicated NXX
> c.o.codes, but they are *within* standard NPA (area) codes. AND, we
> don't have "dedicated" cellular area codes or any dedicated partition
> of numbering for cellular. And I for one am glad that we don't!

> The FCC stated some years back that 'dedicated' area codes or
> numbering at that level strictly for cellular/etc. is "discriminatory".

I seem to recall that what the FCC actually said was that forcing cellular
subscribers, but not landline subscribers, to CHANGE to a new area code
was discriminatory.  I doubt they would object to the creation of a new
cellular-only area code if moving into it was voluntary on the part of
the individual cellular subscriber.

However, any such code would suffer from the same problem that killed
AT&T's EasyReach (700/500) service:  Office PBX managers would block
calls to the new code for fear it would be used to offer phone sex.
One can hope that pay phone owners would not block it, though, if the
cost is predictable (say, a national flat rate, as it is in the UK).

> And if EVER portability really gets extended to cellulars, my
> understanding is that not only would one be able to port their
> cellular number amongst different cellular providers, but also be able
> to port a number between landline and cellular! Thus a single NPA-NXX
> code could have wireless and landline -xxxx line-numbers all
> intermixed!

That's my understanding too.  If a cellular-only area code were created,
number porting into and out of it would have to be forbidden, but that
is not beyond the realm of possibility.

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

From: Spyros Bartsocas <Spyros@telecom-digest.zzn.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 16:24:25 +0200
Subject: Greek Dialing Plan Changes Phase 4


As of January 19, the last change of the new Greek dialing plan is 
in effect. All mobile numbers have the initial 0 replaced by a 6:

Provider   Old Number   New Number
TeleStet   093-1234567  693-1234567
Vodaphone  094-1234567  694-1234567
CosmoOte   097-1234567  697-1234567
Q-Telecom  099-1234567  699-1234567

Beeper numbers have also changed from 0920-123456 to 6920-123456

When calling from abroad, these change consists of the digit 6 being 
added between the country code and the service code, e.g. +30-9x-
yyyyyyy becomes +30-69x-yyyyyyy.

Note the choice of the digit 6 is consistent with the dialing plans 
of France and Spain (and possibly other countries as well).
 
------------------------------

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 16:27:52 -0500
From: Jeff Hecht <jeff@jeffhecht.com>
Subject: Cingular Cellphone Flakiness


My has been having a peculiar problem with her Cingular cellphone 
service on a new GPA Nokia phone. Every so often the phone seems to 
develop amnesia, and won't receive calls. Incoming calls go into 
voice-mail without ringing the phone and the phone can't dial out at 
all (she gets busy signals trying to dial out). She can't access 
voice mail. Pushing options, she gets 0000 and Field Test.

She's taken it back to Cingular a couple of times to have it reset, 
but after several weeks it's back to doing it again.

Has anybody seen these symptoms before? Any idea what they might mean?

Thanks, 

Jeff Hecht

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You say when dialing out she gets
'busy signals'. Do you mean she gets a rapid busy tone, otherwise
known as a 'no circuits available' tone? The cell tower apparently 
has a limited number of lines available for incoming/outgoing calls, 
and I am sure this is what is happening. When a call comes in, it 
hits that no-circuit condition coming in to the tower and treats it
like any 'busy signal' and transfers the caller to voicemail. Likewise
on her outgoing calls, after she presses 'send' the phone in essence
goes off hook and that fast busy (no circuits tone) greets her. 

That same condition is a regular gripe of people who use Alltel prepaid
cellular service here on the cell tower south of town in Liberty, KS. 
If you complain about it to George, the Alltel sales rep over at
Walmart, he is quick to lay the blame on Southwestern Bell, saying 
'they just won't give us the number of lines we need.'  One day I
asked him about it, complaining on behalf of two of my friends who
because of their youthful age (teenagers) do not qualify for 'regular'
type cell service. Their same youthful age prevents them from knowing
much telco stuff about 'fast busies' for no-circuits, etc. He actually
that day made a call to an Alltel engineer in Little Rock, Arkansas
and reported to me that the egg was on their face that time:  SWB
Telco *had* finished installing a new bank of lines, but had 'forgotten'
to turn the lines on and put them in service. My friends had in turn
been getting complaints from their girl friends who demanded to know
why their lines had been busy all the night before. Alltel only about
a month ago started offering voicemail and caller ID to their prepaid
customers off of the Liberty, Kansas (620-924) cellular tower. But to
hear George tell it earlier, the excuse was 'we cannot force Southwestern
Bell to hurry any faster than they want to'.  

Maybe that's your wife's problem also. PAT]

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

From: Robert Woolley <rob@home.com.see.below.com>
Subject: Re: Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 22:45:08 +0000


On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 22:19:05 -0500, Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
wrote:

> Wall Street Journal
> BUSINESS EUROPE

> Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb
> By LEONARD WAVERMAN

> The U.K.'s competition regulator is in danger of deciding that
> Europe's decade of success in the mobile-phone business was a
> mistake. It would like to turn back the clock, or at least make
> Europe's wireless industry look a lot more like the far
> less-successful American mobile-phone business.

[snip]

This article missed one critical area of the Compeition Commission's
work; the review of call charges between mobile networks.

In the UK generally calling an-on network phone from a mobile costs
the same as calling a landline.

Calling an off-network can be between 3 and 10 times more expensive.
OFTEL, the regulator was looking to get operators to slash that
differential.


Rob
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk

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

From: ssolton <ssolton@attglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Intertel vs. Harris 20-20
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 18:18:17 -0700


I agree with the Sales Engineer. With one exception. There is nothing
wrong with buying from an authorized Inter-tel dealer. I work for a
very reputable dealer in Colorado. Our office is as good if not better
then the local direct office. Whatever you do find s dealer you like
and trust and bulid a relationship with them. That will get you your
best results.

Steve

Drew Ritenour <dritenour@ecomm-sys.com> wrote in message
news:telecom22.240.17@telecom-digest.org:

> dave.turnbull@omsg.co.uk (Dave Turnbull) wrote in message
> news:<telecom22.207.2@telecom-digest.org>:

>> We are considering replacing a Harris (Teltronics) 20-20 with an
>> Inter-tel Axxess solution to run a multi-site skills based call centre
>> with PBX functionality for each site as well as intra-site voip calls
>> across existing leased lines.  Does anybody have experience of this,
>> because the Inter-tel solution (price) seems almost too good to be
>> true based upon our experience with the 20-20.  I am told that
>> performance and capabilities of the Axxess is not on a par with the
>> 20-20 - any comments?

> Dave:

> I am an sales engineer for one of the top five Inter-tel dealers in
> the country. We currently have five offices networked via IP over
> leased lines. We are one of the major beta test sites for Inter-tel.
> I don't know the Harris system at all. But take into consideration
> market share and profitability and no one else can match Inter-tel.

> Let me tell you when I design call center applications I add features
> that will push my comp. to go to their Definity Call Center
> Application and I am 30% less than what they are while providing 90%
> of their functionality.

> Go for the Inter-tel. If it isn't a direct office....shop for the
> best.

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

From: Rollyfngaz@aol.com
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 21:11:43 EST
Subject: NPA-NXXs Rate Centers


I am looking for information on what rate centers and NPA-NXXs are
local to each other.Please send all correspondences to:

Adrian.Anderson@Nextel.com.

Thanks.

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@garynuman.info>
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 21:34:10 -0700
Subject: Last Laugh! Bible College Shuns 666 Phone Number
Reply-To: joey@garynuman.info


VANCLEVE, Kentucky (AP) -- A small Appalachian Bible college is
fighting to change its telephone number because the 666 prefix is
disturbing to Christians who recognize it as the biblical mark of the
beast.


http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/South/01/18/offbeat.mark.of.the.beast.ap/inde
x.html

(It's odd that they use the language "fighting", since the story goes
on to say that telco is cooperating fully.  Apparently the request for
a new number was made about six months ago, and the story quotes
telco's lawyer as saying the number will be changed as soon as
possible.  It also adds the area got a new prefix, 693, "recently" but
doesn't specify just how recently.)

/ From the desk of Joey Lindstrom
  
/ "Information is not knowledge; knowledge is not wisdom; wisdom is not
/ truth; truth is not beauty; beauty is not love; love is not music; music
/ is the best."
/         --Frank Zappa

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why do you suppose it is there is not
(and is unlikely to ever be) an area code '666'? Same reason. Americans
are very superstitious people. There used to be a (named) exchange in 
Chicago called 'MONroe'.  That got changed, (like all named exchanges)
to the numerical value '666'. Someone started a rumor that the Checker
Taxicab Company was owned and operated by Satan and they (the rumor-
pusher) could 'prove it' since after all, the telephone number to call
for a taxicab was 666-3700. No matter that Checker had had that number
for about 75 years (when they were driving Model-T Fords as taxicabs)
under variations of the 3700 number. In 1920 the taxicab number was
MONroe-3700. Then on to MOnroe-6-3700, and from sometime in the 1970's
when they had occassion to get new cabs or repaint the old ones, the
number was 666-3700.  Unlike 1920, when things were different to say
the least, the Monroe central office general neighborhood has changed
quite drastically. In those days -- the 1920's -- Monroe served a 
mostly white, Jewish neighborhood. Starting sometime in the 1950's the 
Jews all moved out and the neighborhood turned all minority. A very
prominent synagogue in those long ago days had the phone number of
MONroe-1000. When the synagogue closed down and a fundamentalist black
church group took over the building, the first thing they did was get
rid of that 666-1000 phone number. The taxicab people also changed
their number (but partly because the dispatch operation was consoli-
dated with Yellow Cab). Now the two of them use 773-TAXICAB.

Here in Independence, I am told that a Pentacostal Church had been
given the number 1666 years and years ago, and that when dial service
started in the 1950's and it changed to EDison 1-1666 they wanted
*their* number changed. Do not ask me to figure out how people's minds
work. If I could do that and sell my results, I would be a rich man
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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #245
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jan 20 20:16:04 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0L1G4708746;
	Mon, 20 Jan 2003 20:16:04 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 20:16:04 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301210116.h0L1G4708746@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #246

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 20 Jan 2003 20:14:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 246

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Update (Canada) #366, January 20, 2003 (Angus TeleManagement)
    Public Interest Registry Seeks Nominees For Advisory Council (A Shroeder)
    Re: Modular ICS + Startalk (Harry)
    Re: DSL vs Cable (C.)
    Re: Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb (John R. Levine)
    Re: Vonage Telephone via Internet (John R. Levine)
    Re: How to Detect an 'Invasive' MAC (Henry E Schaffer)
    Re: The Digest - Suggestions (Henry E Schaffer)
    Re: DSL vs Cable (temp6@thewolfden.org)
    Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By Then Adjust (Roy McCammon)

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, 20 Jan 2003 10:19:14 -0500
From: Angus TeleManagement <jriddell@angustel.ca>
Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #366, January 20, 2003


************************************************************
TELECOM UPDATE
************************************************************
published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group
http://www.angustel.ca

Number 366: January 20, 2003

Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous
financial support from:
** BELL CANADA: http://www.bell.ca
** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: http://www.cisco.com/ca/letstalk
** CYGCOM INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES: http://www.cygcom.com
** ERICSSON CANADA: http://www.ericsson.ca
** JUNIPER NETWORKS: http://www.juniper.net
** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca
** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com
** TELUS: http://www.telus.com

************************************************************

IN THIS ISSUE:

** AT&T Sets Transition Plan
** CRTC to Review Telco Winback Promos
** DSL Winback Rules Extended
** Q3 2002 Telecom Statistics Released
** Bell Launches Speech Recognition
** Craig, UBS Take Stakes in Look
** Lucent Wins Bell DSL Contract
** GT Memo Says Layoff Completed
** Payphone Directory Charge Rejected, for Now
** Globalstar Finds a Buyer
** Ericsson, Rogers AT&T Renew Equipment Deal
** Telus to Offer BlackBerry on 1X
** Northern Telephone Modifies Name
** Dawn Hunt Named Chair of CWTA
** Shaw Reports Revenue, Subscriber Gains
** Cogeco Halts Subscriber Erosion
** Call Now for On-Site Call Centre Training

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

AT&T SETS TRANSITION PLAN: AT&T Canada has received Ontario court
approval for new commercial agreements that allow it to continue to
connect to AT&T Corp's network and use its technology and products. In
addition:

** AT&T Canada will adopt a new brand name by September 9. It
    will cease use of the AT&T name for most purposes by year-
    end, and on calling cards and Internet addresses by June
    30, 2004.

** AT&T Corp. can serve Canadian customers directly,
    including by competing with AT&T Canada.

** AT&T Canada has also received court approval to
    disseminate its restructuring plan to creditors, who will
    vote on it on February 20.

CRTC TO REVIEW TELCO WINBACK PROMOS: Telecom Public Notice 2003-1
invites comment on whether the CRTC should continue to approve winback
promotions by incumbent telcos, "given the state of competition in the
local wireline telephone market."  The Commission has suspended
consideration of new winback proposals in the meantime.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2003/pt2003-1.htm

DSL WINBACK RULES EXTENDED: CRTC Telecom Decision 2003-1 extends the
DSL winback rule set for Bell Canada last June (see Telecom Update
#339) to Aliant, SaskTel, and Telus. The ruling sets a 90-day
prohibition on trying to win back customers who switch to an ISP that
uses the telco's wholesale DSL service.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2003/dt2003-1.htm

Q3 2002 TELECOM STATISTICS RELEASED: Statistics Canada has released
its telecom services report for third quarter 2002.  In the first nine
months of 2002, wireless revenues and profits grew substantially
compared to 2001, while wireline revenues and profits declined,
resulting in essentially flat industry performance. Capital spending
fell 25%.

http://www.statcan.ca:80/Daily/English/030116/d030116a.htm

BELL LAUNCHES SPEECH RECOGNITION: Bell customers in Ontario who dial
the 310-BELL customer service number are now served by a speech
recognition system based on Nuance technology.  The system, dubbed
Emily, will be introduced across the country at a cost of $10 million.

CRAIG, UBS TAKE STAKES IN LOOK: Craig Wireless International has
bought 29.9% of the shares of Look Communications and will buy another
2.6% if the CRTC approves. Unique Broadband Systems has acquired 20%
of Look's shares for $2.3 million.  Craig and Look offer wireless
cable service in Manitoba and Ontario respectively; UBS makes fixed
wireless equipment.  (See Telecom Update #359)

LUCENT WINS BELL DSL CONTRACT: Lucent Technologies has won a
multi-year contract to provide its AnyMedia equipment to Bell Canada,
to expand Bell DSL service in Ontario and Quebec.  Lucent says it's
"our first major inroad into Bell."

GT MEMO SAYS LAYOFF COMPLETED: According to the Toronto Star, Group
Telecom CEO Dan Milliard has told his staff that "there are no
additional headcount reductions planned or scheduled at this time."
GT's sales force is "the core aspect of the business" and will be
retained. (See Telecom Update #361)

PAYPHONE DIRECTORY CHARGE REJECTED, FOR NOW: CRTC Telecom Order
2003-21 rejects a proposal from MTS to charge for directory assistance
from payphones. The Commission says it may revisit the question in a
wider proceeding on payphone pricing.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2003/o2003-21.htm

GLOBALSTAR FINDS A BUYER: New Valley Corp, a Miami-based investment
company, has agreed to invest US$55 million in satellite phone company
Globalstar LP, now under bankruptcy protection. Subject to court
approval, New Valley will take an 80% stake in the reorganized
company.

ERICSSON, ROGERS AT&T RENEW EQUIPMENT DEAL: Rogers AT&T Wireless has
awarded Ericsson Canada a three-year contract for wireless equipment
and services worth up to $465 million.

TELUS TO OFFER BLACKBERRY ON 1X: Telus Mobility says it will offer a
1XRTT version of the RIM BlackBerry to enterprise customers across
Canada. Although no announcement has been made, Telecom Update has
learned that Bell Canada will offer a similar service in February.

NORTHERN TELEPHONE MODIFIES NAME: Northern Telephone, the BCE-owned
telco in northeast Ontario, has changed its name to
NorthernTel. Nortel Mobility becomes NorthernTel Mobility, and
Logicon, its IT services company, becomes NorthernTel Infosystems.

DAWN HUNT NAMED CHAIR OF CWTA: The Canadian Wireless
Telecommunications Association has named Dawn Hunt as its Chair. Hunt
is Rogers AT&T's VP Government and Intercarrier Relations.

SHAW REPORTS REVENUE, SUBSCRIBER GAINS: Shaw Communications reports
sales of $513 million for the three months ended November 30, 14.5%
higher than a year previously. Shaw's net loss was reduced to $19
million from $55 million. Shaw gained 12,526 cable, 42,616 Internet,
and 19,192 satellite TV subscribers.

COGECO HALTS SUBSCRIBER EROSION: Cogeco Cable added a net 2,809 basic
cable subscribers between August and November, the first increase
since March 2001. Its Internet subscriber total increased
18,250. Revenue of $115 million during the three months was up 1.3%
from the same period a year ago.

CALL NOW FOR ON-SITE CALL CENTRE MANAGEMENT TRAINING: Angus Dortmans
Associates is now scheduling client-site presentations of "Essential
Skills and Knowledge for Incoming Call Centre Management" for
2003. The two-day course has received rave reviews from call centre
managers, team leaders, and support staff across Canada.

** For information, call 1-800-263-4415 ext. 300 or go to
    http//www.angustel.ca/angdort/adccs.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: Anne Shroeder <anne@isoc.org>
Subject: Public Interest Registry Seeks Nominees for Advisory Council
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:40:15 -0500


Council will help .ORG better serve the global noncommercial community

Reston, VA - January 16, 2003 - The Public Interest Registry (PIR) is
seeking nominations for its .ORG Advisory Council.  PIR is a new,
not-for-profit corporation created to manage the .ORG domain in a
manner that educates and empowers the noncommercial community.  PIR
assumed responsibility for the .ORG domain on January 1, 2003.

As part of its commitment to operate the .ORG domain in a manner that
is responsive to the needs, concerns, and views of the noncommercial
Internet community, PIR is establishing a .ORG Advisory Council to
advise the management team on issues unique to the noncommercial
world.  These issues may range from policy to the introduction of new
services, and the Council will serve as an ombudsman-type resource for
management as it seeks to incorporate the broadest possible input for
important decisions. Council membership will consist of leaders
representing a broad and geographically diverse spectrum of the
noncommercial community, including but not limited to educational,
artistic, cultural, human rights, political, religious and scientific
sectors.  At least two members will be chosen from each of the
following six regions: Asia, Africa, Europe, North America, Asia
Pacific and Latin America.

 "The .ORG Advisory Council provides an important opportunity for
leaders in the noncommercial community to participate in the continued
growth of the Internet. We welcome nominations from all sectors of the
non-profit community and from regions all around the world," said Marc
Rotenberg, executive director of EPIC, PIR Trustee and founder of the
Public Voice Coalition. The Public Voice works to promote public
participation in decisions concerning the future of the Internet. (
www.thepublicvoice.org )

For complete information on PIR's .ORG Advisory Council, including the
Charter, and PIR Bylaws, go to www.pir.org/about/council.html Council
members will be announced on March 1, 2003. Nominations must be
submitted before February 1, 2003. Please contact nominations@pir.org.

 PIR will institute additional mechanisms to enhance responsiveness to
the noncommercial community including web-based input mechanisms for
interested parties and special services designed to protect the
security and privacy of noncommercial organizations, including
ORGWatch, ORGlock, ORGSearch, ORGCloak, and ORGSure.

 ABOUT PIR

Public Interest Registry (PIR) is a not-for-profit corporation created
to manage the .ORG domain.  PIR's mission is to manage the .ORG domain
in a way that supports the continuing evolution of the Internet as a
research, education and communications infrastructure, and educates
and empowers the noncommercial community to most effectively utilize
the Internet.


PIR was created by the Internet Society (ISOC).  ISOC is a
not-for-profit, open membership organization founded in 1991 and is
dedicated to ensuring the open evolution, development and use of the
Internet for the benefit of all people.  It provides leadership in the
management of Internet related standards, policy developments and
education.  PIR is based in Reston, Virginia.  Further information can
be found at www.pir.org.

Contact:
Julie Williams
Tel: 703-464-7005, x111
cell:703-402-6715
jwilliams@pir.org
Public Interest Registry +1.703.464.7005 Fax: +1.703.464.7006
URL: http://www.pir.org

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

From: harryhydro@hotmail.com (harry)
Subject: Re: Modular ICS + Startalk
Date: 20 Jan 2003 11:51:52 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Hi Folks:

     Someone sent me a great link for Norstar stuff.  
http://www.optiontelecom.com/tech_support/Helpful_docs_list.htm

Take Care!

Harry

Dave Phelps <tippenring@deadspam.com> wrote in message news:<telecom22.217.15@telecom-digest.org>:

> In article <telecom22.215.9@telecom-digest.org>, harryhydro@hotmail.com 
> says:

>>     I hope I'm giving you enough info.  This ICS has system version
>> SP: 30JBM03 NAT.  In the past we've tried to put a Startalk on but had
>> problems that was stated to be System Version issues..  Is this ture
>> or is this system capable of supporting a Startalk?

> I don't believe the Startalk will work properly with MICS 2.0 and later.

> Dave Phelps
> Phone Masters Ltd.
> deadspam=tippenring

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

From: pcdj@cox.net (C.)
Subject: Re: DSL vs Cable
Date: 20 Jan 2003 12:20:22 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


I will recommend Cable Internet for people who what ease of
installation and support. With cable you basically just plug it in and
then go.

DSL on the other hand requires an inline filter for every phone, fax,
modem, etc. that is using the phone line and most of the time requires
some spyware dial up software to be installed in your pc for PPPoE
authentication. I have heard that the speed is a little faster if you
are closer to the Telco central office or remote office. But I'm
sticking to cable mostly because I can't stand my local phone company
(Qwest)

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

Date: 20 Jan 2003 02:14:50 -0500
From: John R Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb


I was interested to read Leonard Waverman's piece in the January 13th
Wall Street Journal, commenting on planned changes to the British
mobile phone market, and primarily crediting "calling party pays" for
the success of European mobile telephony.  It seems to me that this is
much too simplistic an analysis, and doesn't consider the important
benefits of the North American system where the subscriber pays any
surcharge.

While Europeans are accustomed to an "everyone pays" system where the
caller pays by the minute for every call, in North America most local
calls are either free or untimed.  As a result, Americans have no
patience for surcharged phone numbers (other than porn, psychics, and
other marginal applications).  The few experiments with caller pays
cellular have been failures, as has been the 500 pseudo-area code,
which was designed for services that would have a small surcharge to
the caller.  It also means that landline service is a much stronger
competitor to cellular in North America than in Europe, since the
price is so low, both for voice calls and for data using flat rate
dialup or DSL Internet service.  It's an important reason for the
failure of text messaging in the U.S., since one of the reasons that
it's so popular in Europe is that it's cheaper than voice calls.

It's true that the uptake of mobile service has been slower in the
U.S.  than in Europe, and that Europe's GSM system is more successful
than American AMPS.  Beyond the fact that we had less pent-up demand
since we already had more landlines in place, the U.S.  divided the
country into hundreds of little mobile service areas and auctioned
each one off separately, which meant that until a few years ago,
roaming outside your local area basically didn't work, and roaming
text messages still are too flaky to depend on.  Compare the
experience in the U.S. with that of Canada, where they awarded a
national franchise to Rogers, and regional franchises to the small set
of incumbent telcos who were already used to working with each other,
and the effect of U.S. fragmentation is clear.

The worldwide success of GSM is easily attributable to the fact that
GSM was designed later than and is technically superior to AMPS. AMPS
couldn't support any sort of data traffic without expensive retrofits,
and now suffers from two incompatible retrofit systems (TDMA and CDMA)
that don't interoperate.

But what of the benefits of the North American system?  I think one
can make a strong case that it was bad public policy in Europe to
design a charging scheme and numbering plan that ensures that mobile
service will always cost more than landline.  The combination of
subscriber pays and our integrated phone numbering means that cellular
and landline compete head-to-head, both in price and service.  In
recent years mobile rates have plunged and increasingly approach
landline-style pricing; for example, I get 250 daytime minutes and
3000 night/weekend minutes for $30/month, of which I rarely use as
much as 200, so my service might as well be flat rate.  

As a result we're now seeing mobile service replace landline service,
particularly for students and others who move frequently.  If the FCC
does its job and makes carriers implement local number portability
between mobile and landline, I'm sure we'll see vast numbers of people
switch to mobile once they can do so without losing the phone numbers
they already have, something that would never be possible if calls to
mobiles weren't interchangable with calls to landlines.  Europeans
certainly sign up for lots of new mobile service, with an oft-used
example being that everyone in rural Scandinavia uses mobile phones,
but that strikes me as much as an indictment of the failure to provide
affordable landline service as a success of mobile.

I'm also surprised that as an economist he's not more troubled by the
ridiculous rates that European carriers charge for inbound calls, due to
the inability of callers to negotiate prices.  It costs me under 6
cents/minute to call a British landline, about the same as to call a U.S.
landline or mobile, but 40 cents to call a British mobile.  That means if
someone in the UK gives me a mobile number to call, I'm inclined to tell
them that if they want to hear from me, give me a real phone number, the
same as if a U.S. correspondent gave me a 500 or 976 number.  I doubt I'm
the only person who feels this way, and arranging for subscribers to pay
the rates for the service they choose, as they do here, is the
straightforward way to introduce competitive pricing.

Finally, the argument that high inbound rates are beneficial because they
permit carriers to hand out lots of subsidised phones is unpersuasive.
For one thing, subsidies don't depend on inbound charges.  My carrier
currently offers a Motorola C331t phone for free or a Nokia 3360 for $30
if you sign up for a year or two of service, which is typical of the
subscriber-pays deals here.  And if the goal is to encourage providers to
hand out subsidized phones, why stop at the halfway point of sticking
landline users with a charge only on inbound calls?  Charge the same
inflated rates to recipients of outbound calls, thereby relieving mobile
users of paying anything at all, and every man, woman, child, dog, cat,
and parakeet in the country will soon have a phone.  But I hope not.

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: Vonage Telephone via Internet
Date: 20 Jan 2003 02:29:46 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I'd be interested if anyone is already using this service, or has
> any experience of it, especially from the point of view of using it
> from overseas.

A friend of mine (Bob Frankston, one of the great nerds of all time)
is using it and thinks it's great.  They provide a Cisco phone to
Ethernet adapter into which you plug a phone.  If you have a phone
number in one of the areas where they provide service you can port
that number to their system, otherwise they'll issue you a new number.
They don't support 911 and the phone stops working if the power fails,
so it's not a good choice for your only telephone.

Their terms of service say that it's NOT supported outside the U.S.
and although they'll let you sign up, it's completely at your own
risk.  There's no technical reason it shouldn't work from the UK,
although I'd think the transatlantic link would add significant extra
delay, making calls sound lousy.

Regular phone calls between the US and UK are now so cheap that you'd
have to spend over 8 hours a month on the phone to make their $26/mo
service cheaper than just calling with one of the widely available
3p/min plans.  Unless you need a US phone number, I don't see the
point.


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: hes@hes01.unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E Schaffer)
Subject: Re: How to Detect an 'Invasive' MAC
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:57:58 UTC
Organization: North Carolina State University


In article <telecom22.233.12@telecom-digest.org>, Linc Madison
<Telecom@LincMad.com> wrote:

> I don't know of any stronger measures you can take; if someone just
> passively eavesdrops on your packets, it's nearly impossible to detect,
>let alone prevent.

  I was told by an expert (who is at http://alan.clegg.com/802/ ) that
some wireless access points have a way to set their output power
level, and that it is a good idea to set it to the minimum which will
cover your premises.

  This decreases the chance that someone outside can eavesdrop.

henry schaffer
hes@ncsu.edu

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

From: hes@hes01.unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E Schaffer)
Subject: Re: The Digest - Suggestions
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 15:39:05 UTC
Organization: North Carolina State University


In article <telecom22.244.1@telecom-digest.org>, J Kelly
<usenet-replies002@pileof_remove-me_monkeycrap.com> wrote:

> Yes, Monty posts a lot of stuff, of which maybe 10% is of interest to
> me.  That 10% makes it worth having, I don't have to download the
> bodies for the posts that don't appear interesting from the subject
> line.

  My news client display's the poster's name as well as the subject.  So
I can easily identify his posts -- and read the ones that might be
interesting.  It doesn't bother me to have the others (the ones I don't
read) appear.


henry schaffer
hes@ncsu.edu

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:49:11 -0600
From: temp6@thewolfden.org
Subject: Re: DSL vs Cable


Greg T. Knopf <gtknopf@concentric.net> wrote about Re: DSL vs Cable:

> ...On a cable system you do indeed share bandwidth with those in your 
> locale. The cable/broadband access is a shared broadcast medium. So in 
> theory you can have your downloads, etc., throttled by whatever anyone 
> else on the same system is doing. I've never seen it but my experience is 
> limited.

Yes, but you may be sharing a lot more bandwidth than you think.  I
was speaking with a 3rd level technician a few months ago who noted
that in Houston on a Time Warner cable system, even if everyone on the
system "clicked on a link" at the same time, they'd only use something
like less than 40% of the bandwidth they had on the system, and that
he had spent several days the previous month setting at various nodes
around town measuring throughout vs usage, so it sounds like they
actually care here in Houston.  Checking bandwidth to a Time Warner
site (which would only measure speed along the shared neighborhood
lines) has always shown me to be within a few percent of the stated
speed (1.5 Mb/s).

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although I have DSL here in Independence I 
> am always 'on line'. I never turn it off. However I have noticed that 
> every day or two, sbcglobal.net does play around with the IP addresses. 
> Sometimes I get dumped off line for no apparent reason. But when it is up 
> and running (most of the time) is is pretty fast. I am only five or six 
> blocks away from Edison CO (620-330/331/332 which serves Independence) so 
> I get fairly fast service. The only people in town who cannot get DSL (if 
> they want it) are the folks on the far north side of town in the area 
> called 'Country Club'. Everyone here in town is served by 620-331, but 
> they are just a wee bit too far north to be within the range of DSL. 
> (620-330 is Montgomery County offices and a few cell phones such as mine; 
> 620-332 is City of Independence and a few cell phones and a couple other 
> *large* companies in the town.) PAT]

Here in Houston, it seems most of the outlying areas cannot have DSL.
At least, everyone I know South and Southwest of town say they only
have broadband internet access via the cable modem service in their
neighborhood.  Up until a few months ago, I could not even get above
22k with a modem connection because of the poor phone line quality --
and I'm in a brand new neighborhood that was just wired less than two
years ago.

My cable modem connection is up [i.e. I can see a number of key
internet sites] 99.3% of the time (and I run software that constantly
monitors it, so I can note this with confidence).

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is interesting how different things
can be, depending on where you are at. Here, if your phone is 620-331
(which is everyone) you can have DSL except for the far north edge of
town (Country Club area). Of course this is a smaller town (two miles
long by a mile and a half wide). Some people choose to get their DSL
from the local ISP's 'competing' phone company, but thats really a
sort of joke. The ISP brokers it in bulk from the 'real' telco and the
rich people out around the Country Club area still cannot get it even
through the 'competitor', since the competitor uses Bell wires and
cables, etc and is merely co-located with Bell over at 6th and Maple
Streets. As far as cable modem is concerned, it does not exist.  There
is none. We had Time Warner here from the beginning of cable TV service
and if anyone asked the lady in the Time Warner office downtown about
cable modem service she would say 'well, maybe someday'. About six
months ago she started saying 'it will be here next year'. Then as of
January 1, the local Time Warner office became a new company 'Cable
One' (same lady sitting in the office; her husband still drives the
truck around town and maintains the cable wires but in a new truck
instead of the old Time Warner one) and on cable TV they are now
giving advertisements saying 'cable modem will start sometime in the
first quarter of this year.' I do not know whether I will switch to it
or not ... I know if I try it, I will have it turned on and make sure
it works right *before* I turn off the sbcglobal.net DSL line. Maybe
I will keep them both for awhile and see which one I like best. PAT]

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

From: Roy McCammon <rbmccammon@mmm.com.DELETETHIS>
Subject: Re: New Billboards Sample Radios as Cars Go By, Then Adjust
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 12:09:57 -0600
Organization: 3M


Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote:

>>> Just to be clear, is the claim here that the sign can detect what
>>> radio station I'm listening to?  It cannot.

>> Don't be too sure.  Unless they are well shielded radio receivers emit
>> a little bit of local oscillator signal, which can be picked up and
>> used to determine the frequency you are listening to.

> How strong is this "oscillator signal"?

Much stronger than the radio signals to which the radios are tuned.

> Strong enough to be detected outside the car?

Yes, easily.

> To be detected from the side of the ride?  To be
> isolated among a hundred cars passing by at 60 miles an hour?

It is only necessary to guess which station has the most listeners at
a given moment.  Absolute accuracy is not important.  You really only
need to determine the band with the most power.


Thank you for reading and or replying.  If you are one in a million,
there are 6000 people just like you.  Local optimization almost never
yields global optimization.

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #246
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jan 20 21:02:10 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0L22Aq09483;
	Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:02:10 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:02:10 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301210202.h0L22Aq09483@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #247

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:02:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 247

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Novelist John le Carre: "The U.S. has gone mad!" (Monty Solomon)
    Now is the Time to Get Protected (Protect)
    Privacy: Going, Going ... (Monty Solomon)
    Rat Shack & Future Slop (Joey Lindstrom)
    Cisco ATA and Private IP Address (Francisco Perez-Landaeta)
    Microsoft Releases New Windows Media Data Session Toolkit (Monty Solomon)
    Major Labels Bring Back Net Music Giveaway (Monty Solomon)
    T-Mobile and Lucent Technologies Jointly Launch 3G UMTS (Monty Solomon)
    SunnComm Announces Use of Microsoft's Windows Media Data (Monty Solomon)
    PlanetReplay Webmaster Spooked by Deposition Deletes Info (Monty Solomon)
    Can XM Put Radio Back Together Again? (Monty Solomon)
    Intertel Axxess Installation Manuals (M Patel)

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, 20 Jan 2003 17:16:24 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Novelist John le Carre: "The U.S. has gone mad!"


http://www.politechbot.com/p-04331.html

  Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 00:55:04 -0500
  From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
  Subject: FC: Novelist John le Carre: "The U.S. has gone mad!"

le Carre's bio:
http://www.johnlecarre.com/newsite/index.htm

  Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:22:12 +1100
  From: Nathan Cochrane <ncochrane@theage.fairfax.com.au>
  Organization: The Age newspaper
  To: declan@well.com
  Subject: Novelist John le Carre slams Bush "Junta" in Iraq

The United States of America Has Gone Mad
John le Carre

America has entered one of its periods of historical madness, but this
is the worst I can remember: worse than McCarthyism, worse than the
Bay of Pigs and in the long term potentially more disastrous than the
Vietnam War.

The reaction to 9/11 is beyond anything Osama bin Laden could have
hoped for in his nastiest dreams. As in McCarthy times, the freedoms
that have made America the envy of the world are being systematically
eroded. The combination of compliant US media and vested corporate
interests is once more ensuring that a debate that should be ringing
out in every town square is confined to the loftier columns of the
East Coast press.

The imminent war was planned years before bin Laden struck, but it was
he who made it possible. Without bin Laden, the Bush junta would still
be trying to explain such tricky matters as how it came to be elected
in the first place; Enron; its shameless favouring of the already-too-
rich; its reckless disregard for the world's poor, the ecology and a
raft of unilaterally abrogated international treaties. They might also
have to be telling us why they support Israel in its continuing
disregard for UN resolutions.

MORE:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,482-543296,00.html

Nathan Cochrane
Deputy IT Editor
:Next:
The Age and Sydney Morning Herald
http://www.next.theage.com.au 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q�clan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------

From: Protect <Protect@home.com>
Subject: Now is the Time to Get Protected
Reply-To: Protect@home.com
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 14:17:56 -0500
Organization: Bell Sympatico


Now is the time to get protected.

The reason is believed to be the new porn scandal which is making
everyone more aware of the risks of being investigated. If you havent
already heard, there are a staggering 300,000 suspects on the list, So
far, more than 1300 arrests have been made including a judge,
magistrates, senior public school teachers and 50 police officers.

http://soz.web1000.com/protect.htm

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 17:25:04 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Privacy: Going, Going ...


http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillmor/archives/000736.shtml#000736
posted by Dan Gillmor 09:31 PM

Privacy invaders are like termites. They undermine, eating away at the
structure of your personal life, until you wake up one day and realize
that the foundation is gone.

The American Civil Liberties Union, battling harder than ever for your
basic rights against increasingly nosy corporate and government
snoops, has issued a report that should be raising alarms everywhere.
The bottom line is evident in the title: "Bigger Monster, Weaker
Chains: The Growth of an American Surveillance Society."

We're inundated with examples of this or that invasion of privacy, the
ACLU says. The current villain is the Pentagon's "Total Information
Awareness" project, which would scoop up all kinds of public and
private personal data to look for hints of bad activity including
terrorism, according to its Big-Brotherish planners.

The individual threats are bad enough, the report says, but consider 
the bigger picture.

"Too many people still do not understand the danger, do not grasp just
how radical an increase in surveillance by both the government and the
private sector is becoming possible, or do not see that the danger
stems not just from a single government program, but from a number of
parallel developments in the worlds of technology, law and politics."

The best way to slow this erosion is to change laws, the ACLU says.
That means you have to be politically active if you care about
protecting what's left of your privacy, much less getting back any of
what you've already lost.

It's getting late.

http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacylist.cfm?c=39

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:26:53 -0700
Subject: Rat Shack and Future Slop
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 03:41:00 EST, editor@telecom-digest.org
wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's hope the new policy is national
> in scope and applies to dealers and agency stores alike. At our local
> Radio Shack agency store here in Independence it was not much of an
> issue since the two guys who manage and own the store know almost
> everyone in town, and everyone knows them. But in the Chicago area for
> many years, this was quite a bone of contention. To buy a set of
> batteries for cash, they wanted to know names, addresses, etc.   PAT]

My experience with Rat Shack here in Calgary isn't quite as bad, but
still annoying.  Generally, buying some batteries for cash is an
in-the-door, out-the-door proposition.  Buying anything more than that
 -- for example, I recently bought a laser pointer (as a toy for my
cats -- they *LOVE* chasing that red dot!) -- and you get the request
for all that personal info.

I simply answer "I'm sorry, I don't give that out" and the response
(from Radio Shack employees) has always been "that's quite alright" and
the transaction proceeds without it.  Getting asked is annoying, but at
least they don't make you feel bad about it.

Not so at Future Shop, a national electronics chain which is now part
of the (if I recall correctly) US "Best Buy" empire.  They, too, want
your name and address and phone number on pretty much any non-trivial
transaction.  Most of the time they're ok with it when I tell 'em I
don't give it out.  Some ask me (just out of curiosity, while the
transaction is proceeding) why, and I tell 'em that every time I give
it out, ESPECIALLY to Future Shop, I start getting a lot more of
addressed-directly-to-me junk mail.  Most feign surprise: apparently,
the company tells the sales droids that this information is NOT used
for marketing, but I'm here to tell you that it is.  I mean, what
*OTHER* legitimate reason is there for them to compile such a dossier
on their customers?

Some Future Shop employees, though, get downright surly about it,
trying to make me feel somehow guilty about not allowing them to do
their job properly.

This isn't the end of it, though.  Most of the time, if your purchase
is medium to large (for example, a new DVD player), they start pushing
the extended warranty on you.  Basically this involves a sales pitch
telling you just what a complete pile of crap the product you're buying
is, and that you're absolutely nuts not to buy some extra protection
($40 on a $240 DVD player).  Generally speaking, if a product fails
within the normal warranty but after 15 days from sale, you're on your
own to get warranty support from the manufacturer.  With extended
warranty, you bring the product back to Future Shop (in the case of
large items, like a widescreen projection TV, they'll come to your
house) and they'll repair or replace it.

Here's the rub: you CANNOT have their extended warranty protection
without giving up your name, address, and phone number.  Now, you can
get away with a fake address and phone number (but the address better
be right if you expect on-site service), but the name has to match the
name on the credit card you're paying with.  Otherwise, no sale.

Fun.

Despite it all, I keep going back because generally speaking they've
got pretty good pricing -- but I've reached the point that their price
has to be SIGNIFICANTLY better than other retailers before I'll buy
from them.  On one visit, I was buying a DSL router and a hunk of
ethernet cable.  The sales droid (who works on a commission basis)
kept pushing and pushing for my personal information, and I kept
refusing, less and less politely each time.  Finally I said, "look,
I'm not giving you that information, and if it's a problem, I'll take
my business elsewhere."

That made him back off.  That is, until it came time to start pushing
the extended warranty on me.  I was already annoyed with the guy, so
when he started with the very-familiar push, I said firmly, "no, I
don't want the extended warranty."  That didn't stop him.  Now he
wants to explain just why he feels I'm making a mistake.  I
interrupted him again: "I'm quite familiar with the extended warranty
plan, and I'm not interested.  You're also very close to talking
yourself out of a sale."

You'd think that would do it.  Nope.  He said, "why wouldn't you want
the peace of mind that the extended warranty brings?"

At that point, I put the equipment I was trying to purchase gently onto
the floor, turned around, and walked directly out the door.  I found
what I was looking for over at Staples for only $2 more and no
intrusive questioning.

I've since been back a couple of times, once to buy about $500 worth
of DSL modems.  He hovered, waiting to pounce on me, but I waited
until he was momentarily distracted by another sales droid.  I swooped
in, grabbed the modems, and walked directly to the checkout.  Halfway
there he caught up with me and asked if I wanted any help.  "Not from
you, buddy" was my reply.  He walked away -- FINALLY getting the
message.

Now, having outlined some bad experiences, let me say something good
about some internet retailers.  Specifically, Future Shop's website
(futureshop.ca), Amazon.ca (also amazon.com and amazon.co.uk), and
chapters.ca.  I've purchased from all of these e-tailers, and as part
of the transaction they do ask for your email address, shipping
address, etc.  I've been dealing with them for about three or fourn
years now.  When I give them my email address, I give them a special,
only-for-e-tailers email address (a different one for each e-tailer) -
the idea being, if they sell access to their database, I should find
out about it pretty quickly.  And in those three or four years, I've
had exactly zero spam in those mailboxes.  I get the usual "we have
now shipped your product" email as well as an electronic receipt, but
NOTHING else -- at least, from these particular merchants.  Kudos to
them!

(Also, no addressed postal spam either -- since moving into my current
residence in 1998 I've been EXTREMELY careful about giving this out,
and I just don't get ANY).


-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

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

From: fplandae@hotmail.com (Francisco Perez-Landaeta)
Subject: Cisco ATA and Private IP Address
Date: 20 Jan 2003 13:42:11 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


Hi,

I would like to know if the CISCO ATA 186 will work fine behind a
Linksys Firewall on the DMZ zone. The ATA 186 will be exposed to the
Internet, but I will assign a private IP address. My Internet
Connection is ADSL from Bellsouth. I Have been told that It would not
work because with H323 but will with SIP. Is this true ? Can someone
clarify this for me.

Thanks,

Francisco

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:46:13 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Microsoft Releases New Windows Media Data Session Toolkit


Toolkit Is Adopted by MPO, World's Largest Independent CD Manufacturer; Major
         Record Labels Universal Music Group and EMI Recorded Music;
              And SunnComm, a Leader in Digital Content Security

    CANNES, France, Jan. 20 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Microsoft
Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) today announced the availability of the Windows
Media(R) Data Session Toolkit, a new component of Windows Media 9
Series that enables media companies to securely create and deliver
content via a second session in various formats including CDs and
DVDs. The toolkit gives media and entertainment companies the
capability to protect their content easily, cost-effectively and
efficiently, and at the same time create the PC experience that
consumers enjoy, including the freedom and flexibility to enjoy their
music when and how they want.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31002689

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:50:32 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Major Labels Bring Back Net Music Giveaway


By Bernhard Warner, European Internet Correspondent

    CANNES, France, Jan 20 (Reuters) - Major music and technology
companies announced on Monday they will bring back a promotion they
tried six months ago involving the give-away of free music to attract
customers to their nascent Internet music businesses.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31008966

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:47:37 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: T-Mobile and Lucent Technologies to Jointly Launch 3G UMTS Pilot


Companies to Demonstrate the Value of 3G Secure Mobile Data Services for
                         Enterprise Customers

    BONN, Germany, Jan. 20 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Lucent
Technologies (NYSE:LU) and T-Mobile today launched a joint pilot
project to evaluate secure high-speed data services using
third-generation (3G) Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
(UMTS) technology.  The pilot, which will involve enterprises in the
Nuremberg region, will demonstrate how business customers can benefit
from secure, high-speed data mobile services and integrated end-
to-end enterprise applications.  This pilot network will leverage
experience and expertise gained from the development of the Lucent
UMTS network at its facility in Nuremberg.  

Under the agreement, Lucent will supply T-Mobile with its Secure
Mobile Data Solutions for Enterprises (SMDSe) offer, a pre-integrated
package of hardware and software designed to enable business customers
to use their laptop PCs or PDAs to access -- from any location -- all
the applications they normally use with the same level of security and
performance they typically experience in their office.  A key
component of this end-to-end solution is the 3GlobeTrotter(TM) UMTS
wireless modem PCMCIA card -- jointly developed by Lucent and Option
 -- which supports high-speed data connections on laptops, PDAs and
other mobile devices.

Late last year, Lucent and Option completed the first data calls using
the 3GlobeTrotter cards at Lucent's labs in Nuremberg, where
substantial development work on the cards has been done.  Lucent's
SMDSe offer also incorporates software tools that enable an enterprise
user to quickly and easily activate high-speed mobile data services,
and solutions to support seamless roaming from the 3G UMTS network to
wireless local area networks.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31003279

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:46:23 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: SunnComm Announces Use of Microsoft's Windows Media Data Session


     SunnComm Announces Use of Microsoft's Windows Media Data Session
     Toolkit with MediaMax CD-3 To Create 'Second Session' for
     Upcoming Ike & Tina Turner Historic Compilation CD
     - Jan 20, 2003 03:39 AM (BusinessWire)

PHOENIX--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 20, 2003--SunnComm Technologies,
Inc. (OTC:STEH) announced today that its MediaMax(TM) CD-3(TM)
technology has been incorporated to enhance and protect the content
within Ike and Tina Turner's newly discovered historic compilation CD
entitled "The Early Sessions." The content incorporated on the CD's
original tracks (called the "Redbook" session), will be released by
Sterling Entertainment, a division of UAV, and protected by SunnComm.

    The audio CD will also feature a secure multimedia experience
referred to as a "second session" for playback on the PC. This "second
session" is built using the Microsoft Windows Media Data Session
Toolkit, a new component of Windows Media 9 Series that enables media
companies to securely create and deliver secure high-quality content
via a "second session" in various formats including CDs and DVDs for
playback on the PC. The toolkit gives media and entertainment
companies the capability to protect their content easily,
cost-effectively and efficiently, and at the same time create the PC
experience that consumers enjoy, including the freedom and flexibility
to enjoy their music when and how they want.  

The album, "The Early Sessions" is scheduled to be released to the
public in March 2003 by Sterling Entertainment, a division of UAV and
will utilize SunnComm's MediaMax technology under a licensing deal
that will generate a per-unit royalty payment to SunnComm. The
addition of SunnComm and Microsoft technologies on the album's "second
session" allows buyers of the CD to make licensed copies of the music
on their PC for their own personal use. Additionally, using SunnComm's
PromoPlay(TM) functionality, consumers can send selected music tracks
to their friends to enjoy for a limited number of plays or a limited
number of days of play.  Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) will include a
demo of this solution built using the Windows Media Data Session
Toolkit while at the Midem conference in Cannes, France. Midem is
indisputably the world's leading international music market
conference. Midem is online at http://www.midem.com.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31002923

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:57:19 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: PlanetReplay Webmaster Spooked by Deposition, Deletes Info


http://www.politechbot.com/p-04333.html 

  Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 00:57:37 -0500
  From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
  Subject: FC: PlanetReplay webmaster spooked by deposition, deletes info

Here's some background on the SonicBLUE lawsuit:
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-981128.html
http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=sonicblue

  From: "Paul \"Evil Genius\" Music" <evlpawl@cox.net>
  To: "DeClan" <declan@well.com>
  Subject: On the advice of my lawyer, I have taken down the 
           sharing side of the Planet Replay web site
  Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 21:57:39 -0600

http://www.planetreplay.com/sharing_011603.php

Sharing currently suspended

I gave my deposition testimony in the Entertainment Companies' lawsuit
against SonicBLUE on January 14th. Based on the questions they asked
me at my deposition, the fact that I do not want my users to be sued
or their privacy put at risk, and that I myself do not want to be
sued, the portions of PlanetReplay.com relating to sharing shows have
been taken down until further notice.

As many of you may know if you have been reading this web site over
the past few months, I was subpoenaed to give documents and a
deposition in the lawsuit between the Entertainment Companies and
SonicBLUE. That deposition happened on January 14th, 2003. Based on
the questions I was asked by the lawyer for the Entertainment
Companies, it became clear to me that the Plaintiffs consider my web
site, Planet Replay, to be aiding in the violation of their
copyrights. More importantly to me, it seems that the Plaintiffs were
also interested in the users of this site and the data about show
sharing that this site provides.

I think it is also obvious to anyone paying attention to current
events that the Plaintiffs have little reluctance to sue anyone who
they consider to be violating their copyrights or helping others to
violate their copyrights (such as SonicBLUE, KaZaa, Napster,
etc. etc.) On the advice of my lawyer, I have taken down the sharing
side of the Planet Replay web site and one of the forums.

Given that I do not want to put the privacy of Planet Replay users at
risk, and that I myself do not want to be sued, I made the hard
decision that it is in the best interests of the users of this site,
as well as my own, that the sharing portions of this web site be taken
down. Hopefully, if the lawsuit against SonicBLUE goes to trial and
the court supports the legality of show sharing, the site will return.

The rest of Planet Replay, the FAQs, Forums, and Account Management
area (including account removal) will still remain active during these
times.

Thank you all for your support and your interest.

If you have any questions about why I have taken down the site, please
send an email to press@planetreplay.com and either I or my lawyer will
get back to you.

-Chad Little
Owner, Planet Replay. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q=declan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 17:12:14 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Can XM Put Radio Back Together Again?



Heard avril Lavigne's 'Complicated' just a wee bit too often? You can
thank Lee Abrams, the man who shackled FM radio to the tyranny of mass
market research. The 'Moses of programming,' they call him.

By Frank Ahrens

Sunday, January 19, 2003; Page W12

Why does radio sound the way it does today? Why does it sound like
it's been prepped, packaged and served up in easy-to-digest bites,
like tiny bits of Spam stuck on toothpicks?

We're talking about music radio, so we're talking about FM. Staticky 
AM remains the province of news, sports, talk and such utility-style 
information. Silken FM, as it has been for the past 35 years, is the 
home of music, thanks to its static-free stereo sound.

Owing to a growing sophistication in audience research, light-speed
consolidation of radio ownership and the attendant rise in value of FM
stations, the commercial FM dial has been essentially reduced to six
musical formats: Pop/rock, hip-hop, country, classical,
Spanish-language and variations on the theme of "adult contemporary,"
a sort of light pop or R&B. Research has shown radio owners that these
are the moneymaking formats, and this is where they've flocked.  Swept
off the dial are niche formats, such as blues, bluegrass, easy
listening and jazz, except for Kenny G-style "lite jazz," which falls
neatly in the adult contemporary category.

Today's broadcasters will publicly tout what they call the diversity
of the radio dial, but they know better. "It's not like the old days,"
they lament, though never in public.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57791-2003Jan15.html

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

From: mayur.patel@seminole.com (M Patel)
Subject: Intertel Axxess Installation Manuals
Date: 20 Jan 2003 14:49:22 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


We are trying to find an analog port off of the Axxess System for use
on a polycomm conference phone. Does anyone know a site to get the
manual or which pair they maybe off the system. Some direction would
be appreciated.

Thanks,

MP

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

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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #247
******************************
    
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jan 21 20:41:53 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0M1frw23318;
	Tue, 21 Jan 2003 20:41:53 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 20:41:53 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301220141.h0M1frw23318@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #248

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 21 Jan 2003 20:42:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 248

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Tail (Clarence Dold)
    Modernizing the "555" Exchange (Gordon S. Hlavenka)
    Re: The Digest - Suggestions (Ross Oliver)
    Re: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service (Herb Stein)
    Sprint Network Failure (Pete Romfh)
    Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop (Paul Coxwell)
    Remember Locksmith for the Apple ][ and //e (R Gilbert)
    PPPoE (Joey Lindstrom)
    Re: DSL vs Cable (Jack Adams)
    11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC (Allston Parking Refugee)
    Re: Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb (Mike Hartley)
    Looking For Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider (*selah*)
    Wireless For The Well Off (Eric Friedebach)
    Digest Got Spammed Again! (David B. Horvath, CCP)
    666 (Neal McLain)

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: dold@31.usenet.us.com
Subject: Re: Tail
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 01:55:07 UTC
Organization: a2i network


Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:

>    It's actually a "posix" utility.  I.e. Unix (TM of owner-du-jour)
> and Unix-like OS's, including linux, HP-UX, IBM-AIX, etc, etc.  Go to
> http://www.cygwin.com and get Cygwin.  It's a free bash-emulator for
> Windows.  tail, cut, paste, grep, the whole 9 yards.  *NOTE* the
> default install does *NOT* put in all the utils.  You want to force
> the full install.

I wouldn't force the full install.  That's actually advised against in
the online documents.  The cygwin download is not small, but I use it
every day on Windows ME, NT, 2k, and XP.  I never use "cmd" or
"command".  I am in a bash shell if I need to do command line stuff,
even on remotely mapped systems "cd '\\othersystem\c\foo\file'".

Wonderful stuff for someone accustomed to unix utilities.  Do the
default download, using rcn.net as the mirror site.  Then go back and
expand each group, to see what you might have missed.  Tail might be
in the default set, or the "text utilities" set.

I use the free XWin as an xterminal to Unix boxes in the lab.

> Because it's an emulation layer, I find things slower going through

It's not an emulator.  These are Windows-compiled binaries.

http://cygwin.com

Clarence A Dold - dold@email.rahul.net
                - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA.

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 22:47:15 -0600
From: Gordon S. Hlavenka <nospam@crashelex.com>
Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com
Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc.
Subject: Modernizing the "555" Exchange


It had to happen sooner or later.

On last week's episode of "John Doe" a murder suspect communicates
mostly by emailed voice files.  He's got a girlfriend (remember,
this is fiction :-).  John asks him for her IP address (!) and he
replies, "127.21.01.43".  John says, "Hmmm ... local web sex site."

Yeah, VERY local.


Gordon S. Hlavenka    www.crashelex.com    nospam@crashelex.com
              Grammar and spelling flames welcome.
     Yes, that's really my email address.  Don't change it.

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

From: reo@roscoe.airaffair.com (Ross Oliver)
Subject: Re: The Digest - Suggestions
Date: 21 Jan 2003 04:53:44 GMT
Organization: Concentric Internet Services


To me, the Digest is most importantly a first-person link to all the
readers and participants.  Mr. Solomon's postings are not first
person, but are clippings of the writings of others from major news
media.  Including reprints as a major portion of the Digest,
regardless of their brevity or applicability, seriously diminishes the
value of the first person participation that distinguishes the Digest,
and USENET News in general, from traditional mass media outlets.


Ross Oliver

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

From: Herb Stein <herb@herbstein.com>
Subject: Re: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 23:26:44 -0600


Dave Phelps <tippenring@deadspam.com> wrote in message
news:telecom22.244.10@telecom-digest.org:


> In article <telecom22.240.2@telecom-digest.org>, hudsonl@skypoint.com
> says:

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So $58 minus $47 or $61 minus $50 is
>> still an $11 difference, or what they charge for the 'basic tier'. I
>> would say if they want to watch television, then add the basic tier,
>> essentially for free at the new price, however I cannot see what the
>> advantage would be if they are not into television. For that matter
>> I really have problems with cable modem service also. I cannot see
>> where/how it is any faster than DSL, and in fact I've heard rumors
>> that cable modem users with 'network neighborhood' enabled on their
>> computers get a lot of spies reading their files, etc.  True?  PAT]

> It generally used to be true, but not much anymore. I believe the
> DOCSIS 1.1 standard addressed this issue. Otherwise, I would suggest
> deciding on a service based on reliability and support of the
> provider.

> I would avoid SBC DSL, because they *never* have a problem -- just ask
> them. I started with cable about 3 years ago. First, it was AT&T, then
> switched to Charter.

> AT&T had a problem they ignored for a couple of months regarding a
> saturated DS3 between St. Louis and Kansas City. They finally added
> another. Service was unbearably slow during periods of heavy traffic.

> Now I've got Charter, and the local reliability has been very good.
> However, regionally, they have a single physical path to their
> distribution point. There is no physical route diversity. Bad network
> design to be sure. Occasionally this fiber is damaged, or some other
> trouble occurs for one reason or another and cable TV and internet
> service is out for a period of hours.

> OTOH, I've spent more time arguing with SBC DSL tech support in a
> month than I've spent talking to Charter tech support in the 2 years
> that I've had them. SBC insisted that the problem was not theirs until
> the customer decided to drop DSL.

> Dave Phelps
> deadspam=tippenring

Not to defend SBC, even though I retired from there, but I've actually
had very good service on the DSL side. I just spent 2 hours on the
phone with them after my wife f**ked up her DSL install and they were
pleasant the entire time. I'm in St. Louis BTW. I prefer to think that
an old retired fart gets no better service that the general public,
but who's to say.

I've had worse luck on the SDSL circuit which is from AccessUS through
IP Communications through SBC (for the copper). Lots of
finger-pointing there. It take about a week to get bad outside plant
fixed.


Herb Stein
The Herb Stein Group
www.herbstein.com
herb@herbstein.com
314 952-4601

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

From: Pete Romfh <spamblocked@yourISP.com>
Subject: Sprint Network failure
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 00:05:15 -0600
Organization: Not Organized


I don't notice any news stories about the two hour failure of the
Sprint LD network Monday. They seemed to have covered it fairly
well. My company had over 100 sites off-line coast to coast. It
occurred between 09:00 and 11:00 Central time.

Was anyone else effected?


Pete Romfh, Telecom Geek & Amateur Gourmet.
promfh at texas dot net

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

From: PaulCoxwell@aol.com
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 06:30:16 EST
Subject: Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop


>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's hope the new policy is national
>> in scope and applies to dealers and agency stores alike. At our local
>> Radio Shack agency store here in Independence it was not much of an
>> issue since the two guys who manage and own the store know almost
>> everyone in town, and everyone knows them. But in the Chicago area for
>> many years, this was quite a bone of contention. To buy a set of
>> batteries for cash, they wanted to know names, addresses, etc.   PAT]

> My experience with Rat Shack here in Calgary isn't quite as bad, but
> still annoying.  Generally, buying some batteries for cash is an
> in-the-door, out-the-door proposition.  Buying anything more than that
> -- for example, I recently bought a laser pointer (as a toy for my
> cats -- they *LOVE* chasing that red dot!) -- and you get the request
> for all that personal info.

The Radio Shack stores in the U.K. go by the name of Tandy, but the
same principle applies.  It's very seldom I use them (too expensive
for most items), but they go through the same routine of asking for
name, address, phone number, what you had for breakfast etc. on every
little purchase.


Paul Coxwell
Norfolk, U.K.

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

Subject: Remember Locksmith for the Apple ][ and //e
From: RGilbert@dval.com
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 07:50:16 -0500


This article, and the general copy protection for DVD/CD discussions,
put me in mind of the old Locksmith program for the Apple ][ and //e
computers.  This was a great program for copying disks that could not
normally be copied.  It handle such advanced (for the time) techniques
to prevent copying like half tracking, 1/4 tracking, etc.  It seemed
like everyone playing with Apple computers those days had a copy of
Locksmith, and the was always a mad rush when a new version came out.
Now, with DMCA, I don't expect to see such comprehensive tools like
Locksmith available.  Any one else have fond memories of this program?


Regards,

Ray

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

From: Joey Lindstrom <joey@telussucks.info>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 08:51:13 -0700
Subject: PPPoE
Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info


On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 20:16:04 EST, someone too cool to use a real name
wrote:

> I will recommend Cable Internet for people who what ease of
> installation and support. With cable you basically just plug it in and
> then go.

> DSL on the other hand requires an inline filter for every phone, fax,
> modem, etc. that is using the phone line and most of the time requires
> some spyware dial up software to be installed in your pc for PPPoE
> authentication. I have heard that the speed is a little faster if you
> are closer to the Telco central office or remote office. But I'm
> sticking to cable mostly because I can't stand my local phone company
> (Qwest)

Not all DSLs are created equally, apparently.

I have five DSL lines here.  None of these lines have those
at-the-jack inline filters, although my ISP now offers it as the
default option.  You can (now at extra cost) get a POTS splitter
installed near your demarc, which accomplishes the same thing.  In
actual fact, the system will work without either the inline filters or
the POTS splitter, but your DSL performance can suffer when you're
using the line for other things (and particularly when hanging up,
picking up the line, etc.)

While I understand that this PPPoE thing may not be uncommon south of
the 49th, most ISP's here (and I suspect many in the US) don't use it.
With my ISP, "consumer" grade DSL is set up as if the client machine
is simply part of the ISP's ethernet.  ISP provides a DHCP server, and
client is assigned an IP on the fly.  My lines are commercial and thus
I have static IP's - I just tell each ethernet adapter what it's IP
is, and I'm good to go - NO other configuration, NO spyware, NO PPPoE.

Anyone using the above as criteria in choosing between DSL and cable
should be aware of these differences, and should investigate these
things with their prospective ISP's before signing up.


-- Joey Lindstrom
-- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info

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

From: Jack Adams <jackadams@lucent.com>
Subject: Re: DSL vs Cable
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 14:33:25 -0500
Organization: Lucent Technologies


Christopher Wolf <temp6@thewolfden.org> wrote in message their

>> computers get a lot of spies reading their files, etc. True? PAT]

> Depends on the cable system.  My understanding is that the most common
> DSL tops out below 1.5Mb/sec and drops off quickly as you move away
> from the CO.  Meanwhile, Time Warner cable modem service in Houston
> gives 1.5Mb/sec everywhere, and I often see my residential service
> peak at 2Mb/sec.

Actually cable modem service also depends on the topology of how the
vendor provisions it's segments.  Cable is a "shared media" transport
whereas DSL is not.  Sharing of the bandwidth on cable is fine as long
as there aren't too many other active subscribers hogging it.  The
DOCSIS standards still don't provide for individual dynamic bandwidth
mediation (AFAIK?) and thus your neighbor who is uploading (narrowest
bandwidth) his or her entire electronic photo collection is going
bring cable modem transport for other users to a grinding halt.  It
can also occur in the downstream side, but there it is generally less
of a problem due to a much larger spectrum allocation.  See for
yourself if your cable modem has an "activity LED" on it.  It is quite
similar to the NIC active LEDs in that it indicates packets moving
somewhere on the segment that you are attached to.

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

From: AllstonParkingRefugee@hotmail.com (Allston Parking Refugee)
Subject: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC
Date: 21 Jan 2003 12:09:56 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/


11-digit dialing is coming to NYC on February 1, 2003.  NYC had
managed to hang onto 7 digit dialing even with its overlays for a few
years, thanks to the NYS PSC who fought the FCC and lost over this
issue.

Besides the general stupidity of having to dial an area code when
calling within the same area code, this new scheme makes even less
sense, since dialing a 1 will now be required for *all* calls, except
things like 911, 411, and 0.  What's the point of making everyone who
calls anywhere dial a 1?  How long until they sell phones that dial a
1 as soon as you pick up the receiver?


-Apr

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That dialing '1' in front of everything
is a dumb move. I hope they will fix it at least so that a person who
without thinking dials '1911' won't be forced to hang up and dial
again.  PAT]

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

From: Mike Hartley <mike.hartley@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 21:58:25 -0000


Old threads never die, they just go to sleep for a while ;+) Note I
don't want to stir up a 'my system's better than yours ya boo sucks'
exchange here.

> service.  It's an important reason for the failure of text 
> messaging in the U.S., since one of the reasons that it's so 
> popular in Europe is that it's cheaper than voice calls.

It's true to say that most mobile contract subscriptions include bundles
of 'free' text messages, so the cost of texting is often very low.
However the 'texting generation'- generally children/youths under 18 are
too young to get contracts and mainly use prepay. Typical texting
behaviour is exchanges of multiple messages - each one costing around 10
pence. Voice call costs vary, but you could generally make a one minute
mobile-mobile voice call carrying the same (or more) information for
less than the cost of a typical text exchange.

<..>

> little mobile service areas and auctioned each one off 
> separately, <..> Compare the 
> experience in the U.S. with that of Canada<..>and the effect of 
> U.S. fragmentation is clear.

Don't forget that there are also two new standards, CDMA and GSM- I'm
sure this doesn't help much either, even if you have a dual mode
handset.

> The worldwide success of GSM is easily attributable to the 
> fact that GSM was designed later than and is technically 
> superior to AMPS. 

Don't forget roaming, and frequency standardisation.

> But what of the benefits of the North American system?  I 
> think one can make a strong case that it was bad public 
> policy in Europe to design a charging scheme and numbering 
> plan that ensures that mobile service will always cost more 
> than landline.  

To be fair, one of the main reasons for the premium is the termination
cost charged by the mobile operators. This is about to take a beating
from the UK telecoms regulator OFTEL..which won't help my annual bonus
one little bit, let me tell you. :+((

> The combination of subscriber pays and our 
> integrated phone numbering means that cellular and landline 
> compete head-to-head, both in price and service.

Not sure what you man by service in this context, here in the UK
mobile nets certainly offer more fautures, and you don't usually have
to pay extra for them; for example my mobiel subscripion has
incluisive voicemail, call waiting and CLID which would all attract an
additional charge if I wanted them on my PSTN line.

> In recent years mobile rates have plunged and increasingly approach
> landline-style pricing

Same here in the UK. Call minutes are a commodity product now, and
priced as such.

> As a result we're now seeing mobile service replace landline 
> service, particularly for students and others who move 
> frequently.  If the FCC does its job and makes carriers 
> implement local number portability between mobile and 
> landline, I'm sure we'll see vast numbers of people switch to 
> mobile once they can do so without losing the phone numbers 
> they already have, something that would never be possible if 
> calls to mobiles weren't interchangable with calls to 
> landlines.  

Fair point, but is number portability really that important in the US
market? We've had mobile number portability in the UK for some time now
and takeup hasn't really been all that high compared to inter-operator
churn.

> Europeans certainly sign up for lots of new 
> mobile service, with an oft-used example being that everyone 
> in rural Scandinavia uses mobile phones, but that strikes me 
> as much as an indictment of the failure to provide affordable 
> landline service as a success of mobile.

Possibly. Don't forget that Scandanavia is also home to two of the
worlds' dominant mobile equipment manufacturers.

> I'm also surprised that as an economist he's not more 
> troubled by the ridiculous rates that European carriers 
> charge for inbound calls, due to the inability of callers to 
> negotiate prices.  It costs me under 6 cents/minute to call a 
> British landline, about the same as to call a U.S. landline 
> or mobile, but 40 cents to call a British mobile.

See my point on OFTELs investigation of mobile termination costs above.
You can probably always use a low cost calling card operator though.

<..>

> Finally, the argument that high inbound rates are beneficial 
> because they permit carriers to hand out lots of subsidised 
> phones is unpersuasive. For one thing, subsidies don't depend 
> on inbound charges.  My carrier currently offers a Motorola 
> C331t phone for free or a Nokia 3360 for $30 if you sign up 
> for a year or two of service, which is typical of the 
> subscriber-pays deals here. 

And typical of any mobile net anywhere in the world trying to pick up
customers . Handset subsidies are a serious drain on mobile operators'
profits, but sadly traditionally considered a necessary evil to
attract contract customers- hence the contract period tie in which is
required to recoup the handset cost. The factory gate price of your
3360 probably approaches $150-$200.

In the end I don't think there's a 'winning' solution- both methods of
charging have their advantages and disavantages, and advocates of
either method are influenced to a large degree by what you're used
to. The one thing you can be certain of is that there is serious
downward pressure on call costs - both regulatory and market driven.


Regards,

Mike

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

From: *selah* <soma@noedorsai.org>
Subject: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider
Date: 21 Jan 2003 23:10:42 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


I'm looking for companies that would be able to provide phone, tv and
internet from a satellite dish. Would appreciate any info.


Thanks.


remove "noe" to reply

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

Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 16:26:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Eric Friedebach <friedebach@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: friedebach@yahoo.com
Subject: Wireless For The Well Off


Megan E. Mulligan, 01.21.03, Forbes.com 

NEW YORK - The Vertu phone was never intended for technophiles. It's
big, it's heavy, there's no Palm software available that can turn it
into a handheld computer. But the company, an offshoot of mass
mobile-phone marketer Nokia, has chosen a contrarian design approach
that is filling a particular niche -- occupied by those who tote Hermes
towels to the beach and think nothing of jetting to a second home in
Paris or the Caribbean for the weekend.

Ranging in price from $4,900 to $19,450, Vertu's mobile phones are
made of precious materials -- from the extremely durable sapphire
crystal faceplate, grown at the company's own castle in Switzerland
(only a diamond is harder) to the stainless steel, gold or platinum
detailing. Several new designs have been released recently -- one of
brushed gold (ironically meant to be less flashy than the polished
gold) and another with a mirrored finish on the face.

Each phone contains 450 parts rather than the 50 used in most
conventional phones, and Swiss watchmakers spend three weeks
handcrafting them in a factory outside London. Twenty new patents were
developed in the course of product development.

http://www.forbes.com/2003/01/21/cz_mm_0121tentech.html

Eric Friedebach

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 22:12:35 EST
From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP)
Subject: The Digest Was Spammed Again!


SPAM, plain and simple PAT.

Sorry ...

- David

At 09:02 PM 1/20/03 -0500, telecom@telecom-digest.org wrote:

> From: Protect <Protect@home.com>
> Subject: Now is the Time to Get Protected
> Reply-To: Protect@home.com
> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 14:17:56 -0500
> Organization: Bell Sympatico

> Now is the time to get protected.

> The reason is believed to be the new porn scandal which is making
> everyone more aware of the risks of being investigated. If you havent
> already heard, there are a staggering 300,000 suspects on the list, So
> far, more than 1300 arrests have been made including a judge,
> magistrates, senior public school teachers and 50 police officers.

> http://soz.web1000.com/protect.htm

David B. Horvath, CCP
Consultant, Author, International Lecturer, Adjunct Professor
Board Member: ICCP Educational Foundation, ICCP Test Council, and
Philadelphia Association of Systems Administrators


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: May I ask, of curiosity, *who told you*
this was spam, and more specifically, 'bad' (that is, mostly useless)
spam?  I had never seen it prior to getting in the mail
yesterday. Most 'bad' spam I get frequently, like everyone else.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 23:04:05 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com
Organization: Ann's Garden
Subject: 666


PAT Wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why do you suppose it is there
> is not (and is unlikely to ever be) an area code '666'? Same 
> reason. Americans are very superstitious people....

Not the mention the fact that all "YYY" combination (all three digits
the same) are reserved for some unspecified future use.  Or, as our
friends at <www.areacode-info.com> put it, YYY combos are "Unassigned
easy-to-recognize."  For that matter, so are all NYY combinations.

Apparently you can't get a YYY area code even if you ask for it. 
According to a story here on TD several years ago, Nevada couldn't get
777, so they had to settle for 775.  Sorta like getting two cherries and
a lemon.

And this raises a question I've been wondering about: what *is* that
"unspecified future use"?  Anybody know?

Speaking of area codes, I should note that the 801/385 split (Utah) has
been postponed again.  The latest target date is 2005.

The local high school students are probably disappointed by this delay. 
They've already figured out what 385 spells, and (at least according to
rumor) some of them are anxious to start using it.

But in the meantime, they seem to be amusing themselves by renaming our
locally-famous mountain, Ben Lomond Peak.  It's now known as Bin Laden
Peak.


Neal McLain
nmclain@annsgarden.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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #248
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan 23 18:07:42 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0NN7gt17064;
	Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:07:42 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:07:42 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301232307.h0NN7gt17064@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #249

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:07:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 249

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Two From Europe Make Brazil Phone Deal (Monty Solomon)
    DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud (Monty Solomon)
    Article | Telecom Undone - A Cautionary Tale (Monty Solomon)
    Johansen Verdict Appealed by Norwegian Prosecutors (Monty Solomon)
    EchoStar in Talks With Murdoch, Liberty Media - WSJ (Monty Solomon)
    Verizon Must Reveal Internet Song-Swapper - Judge (Monty Solomon)
    Verizon Must Comply With RIAA's DMCA Subpoena, Judge Sez (Monty Solomon)
    How to Destroy Data, From Software to Sledgehammer (Monty Solomon)
    Lucent Technologies Reports Results for 1st Quarter (Monty Solomon)
    AT&T Reports Fourth-Quarter and Full-Year Results (Monty Solomon)
    Motorola Unveils Location-Based Services Software For Wireless (Solomon)
    Zingy Powers Polyphonic Ringtones for Nextel Wireless Phones (M Solomon)
    Master-Keyed Lock Vulnerability (Monty Solomon)
    Illegal Snooping Costs Allstate Access to Online DMV (Monty Solomon)
    Motorola Reports Fourth-Quarter and Full-Year Financial (Monty Solomon)
    TiVo Announces Resignation of Morgan Guenther, President (Monty Solomon)
    In Re: Verizon Internet Services, Inc. (Monty Solomon)
    Last Laugh! ***SPAM*** I Made $60,000 in Two Months!!! (roberthj1@juno)

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, 21 Jan 2003 01:42:22 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Two From Europe Make Brazil Phone Deal


By TONY SMITH

SAO PAULO, Brazil, Jan. 16 - Two major European phone companies,
Telefonica of Spain and Portugal Telecom, said today that they would
acquire the Brazilian mobile phone operator Tele Centro Oeste Celular
Participales for just over $1 billion, raising their share in one of
the world's fastest-growing wireless markets above 50 percent.

The companies said their existing Brazilian joint venture, Telesp
Celular Participa��es, would pay 1.4 billion Brazilian reais ($425
million) to Grupo Splice, the main shareholder in Tele Centro Oeste,
for its 61 percent voting stake, and then later offer 2 billion reais
($580 million) to minority and nonvoting shareholders for the
remainder.

Together, Telesp and Tele Centro Oeste would have 16.8 million
subscribers, more than three times those of the next biggest carrier
in Brazil, Telecom Italia Mobile.

The deal would also fill in nearly all the gaps in Telesp's service
map, leaving only one state in the north, Minas Gerais, where it must
depend on a roaming agreement with a local carrier, V�sper.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/17/business/worldbusiness/17WIRE.html

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

Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 02:12:15 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud


By Lauren Weinstein (a commentary)
02:00 AM Jan. 20, 2003 PT

Get out your wallet. Big business has found another way to tighten the
screws on customers, in league with its new partner: the notorious
Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Just as naysayers predicted when it was enacted, the DMCA's
anticompetitive impact is reverberating widely beyond the
entertainment and software industries, with potentially devastating
effects on consumers.

Businesses have always tried to try control their customers and
prevent competition. The saga of Ma Bell -- AT&T's old Bell System --
is a case in point.

Not so many decades ago, you couldn't buy or legitimately connect your
own phone or other telecom equipment to the public telephone network
in the United States, except in some cases if you were the government
or a newspaper wire service. Virtually everything related to telephone
communications had to be leased from the local monopoly phone company,
which also performed all installations and maintenance.

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,57268,00.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Lauren Weinstein is a charter
subscriber to this Digest also, and has written many articles for 
telecom, including the infamous somg we publish here from time to
time.  This most recent article in Wired is well worth reading. 
PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 02:37:02 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Article | Telecom Undone - a Cautionary Tale


January 2003
By Peter Huber

The demise of the telecommunications industry can be traced to a
single source-the FCC's own implementation of the Telecommunications
Act of 1996. Huber examines how utopianism and meddlesome arrogance on
the part of the government have resulted in the near-total collapse of
the telecommunications industry.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_comm-telecom.htm

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

Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 02:45:42 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Johansen Verdict Appealed by Norwegian Prosecutors


http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DeCSS_prosecutions/Johansen_DeCSS_case/20030120_eff_pr.php


Electronic Frontier Foundation Defends Viewing Own DVDs
Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Advisory

Oslo, Norway - Norwegian government prosecutors today submitted an
appeal of the case against Jon Johansen, a teenager who again faces
criminal charges for helping to write and publish a DVD descrambling
program. Johansen used the program called DeCSS to watch his own DVDs
on his Linux computer.

Johansen's attorney Halvor Manshaus, of the lawfirm Schj�dt AS, 
provided the following statement:

"It is correct that the prosecution has decided to appeal the court
ruling in this case. This is not unexpected, as the prosecution has
flagged this as a case of principle interest. The appeals court,
Borgarting lagmannsrett, may decide not to grant the appeal, as there
is a screening principle for criminal cases. If the appeal is granted,
this means that there will be full proceedings before the appeal court
on all aspects of the case, i.e. both factual evidence and legal
arguments. I am positive with regard to the final outcome of the
case."

"The lower court ruled unanimously that Johansen did not violate 
Norwegian law," said Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) Executive 
Director Shari Steele. "Johansen did not violate any copyrights and 
Norway doesn't have a Digital Millennium Copyright Act that could 
prevent DVD owners from viewing their own DVDs on their own computers 
as we have here in the United States."

Links:

For this advisory:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DeCSS_prosecutions/Johansen_DeCSS_case/20030120_eff_pr.php 


More on the Johansen case:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DeCSS_prosecutions/Johansen_DeCSS_case/

Information on related DVD CCA cases:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DVDCCA_case/

About EFF:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading civil liberties 
organization working to protect rights in the digital world. Founded 
in 1990, EFF actively encourages and challenges industry and 
government to support free expression and privacy online. EFF is a 
member-supported organization and maintains one of the most linked-to 
websites in the world at http://www.eff.org/

Contact:

Shari Steele
Executive Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
ssteele@eff.org
+1 415 436-9333 x103

Halvor Manshaus
Attorney
Advokatfirmaet Schj�dt AS
halvor.manshaus@schjodt.no
+47 22 018800

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

Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 02:59:46 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EchoStar in Talks With Murdoch, Liberty Media - WSJ


NEW YORK, Jan 21 (Reuters) - EchoStar Communications Corp.
(NASDAQ:DISH) is in talks to sell itself to Rupert Murdoch or
Liberty Media Corp. (NYSE:L), the Wall Street Journal reported on
Tuesday.

    Citing industry officials familiar with the contacts, the
newspaper said EchoStar Chairman Charles Ergen, recently
blocked by federal regulators from acquiring Hughes Electronics
Corp. (NYSE:GMH) and its DirecTV satellite unit, has been talking
with Murdoch's News Corp. (AUS:NCP) and Liberty Media but there
have not been any formal negotiations.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31016035

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

Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 18:13:49 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Verizon Must Reveal Internet Song-Swapper - judge


    WASHINGTON, Jan 21 (Reuters) - Recording companies won a
victory in their fight against online piracy on Tuesday, when a
U.S. court ordered Verizon Communications (NYSE:VZ) to turn over
the name of a customer suspected of downloading more than 600
songs in one day over the Internet.

    The decision could set an important precedent as the
recording industry asks schools, businesses and Internet
providers to help them track down the online song swappers that
they believe are cutting into their sales.

    Under a 1998 digital-copyright law, Internet providers have
voluntarily shut down Web sites that contain infringing
material, but they have balked at requests to disconnect users
who trade songs with each other directly using "peer to peer"
networks such as Kazaa and Morpheus.


     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31035461

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 01:12:48 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Verizon must comply with RIAA's DMCA subpoena, judge Sez


http://www.politechbot.com/p-04344.html 

  Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 15:17:50 -0500
  From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
  Subject: FC: Verizon must comply with RIAA's DMCA subpoena, judge sez

I've placed the decision here:
http://www.politechbot.com/docs/verizon.riaa.decision.012103.pdf

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-981449.html
                                      
   RIAA wins battle to ID Kazaa user
   By Declan McCullagh
   January 21, 2003, 12:02 PM PT

   A federal judge on Tuesday ordered Verizon Communications to disclose
   the identity of an alleged peer-to-peer pirate in a legal decision
   that could make it easier for the music industry to crack down on
   file-swapping networks.
   
   In a 37-page decision, U.S. District Judge John Bates said the wording
   of the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act requires Verizon to give
   the Recording Industry Association of America the name of a Kazaa
   subscriber who allegedly was sharing more than 600 music recordings.
   Bates said "the court disagrees with Verizon's strained reading of the
   act, which disregards entirely the clear definitional language."

   [...]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q=declan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 01:31:27 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: How to Destroy Data, From Software to Sledgehammer


By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff, 1/20/2003

Last Thursday, the Globe wrote about two grad students at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology who discovered personal data on
discarded computer hard drives. The users had neglected to completely
delete their data before selling or giving away their old machines.
And the Globe neglected to tell you how to avoid the same mistake.

The result was an e-mailbox full of good questions, and an excellent 
excuse for a column.


http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/020/business/How_to_destroy_data_from_software_to_sledgehammer+.shtml

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 08:41:28 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Lucent Technologies Reports Results for First Quarter of Fiscal


     *  Financial results in line with guidance
     *  Revenues of $2.08 billion for the quarter and loss per share of 11
        cents
     *  Expects second quarter revenues to increase to about $2.5 billion
     *  Reaffirms return to profitability in fiscal 2003
     *  Repurchased more than $1 billion of convertible securities to date

    MURRAY HILL, N.J., Jan. 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Lucent
Technologies (NYSE:LU) today reported results for the first quarter of
fiscal 2003, which ended Dec. 31, 2002, in accordance with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP).  The company
recorded revenues of $2.08 billion in the quarter, which represented a
9 percent sequential decline from the $2.28 billion in revenues
achieved in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2002.  The company had
previously stated that revenues for the quarter would be flat to down
10 percent on a sequential basis.  The company recorded $3.58 billion
in revenues in the year-ago quarter.

    The company's net loss for the quarter was $264 million or 11
cents per share(1).  These results compare with a loss of $2.81
billion or 84 cents per share in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2002 and
a loss of $423 million or 14 cents per share in the year-ago quarter.

    The first quarter's loss per share included the favorable impact
of 5 cents per share(2) due to the reduction of reserves for a legal
settlement associated with Lucent's former consumer products leasing
business and certain business restructuring actions, as well as
customer financing recoveries.  These favorable items were partially
offset by a negative impact of 1 cent per share(2) from the repurchase
of convertible securities, including the resulting tax benefits.
These items resulted in a net favorable impact of 4 cents per share in
the first quarter.  

By comparison, the loss per share for the fourth quarter of fiscal
2002 was negatively impacted by charges of 59 cents per share(2),
primarily due to business restructuring charges, a significant
customer financing default and other asset impairment charges.  The
loss per share for the year-ago quarter was favorably impacted by 13
cents per share(2), primarily due to gains related to the sale of the
optical fiber business and certain other investments and the reversal
of certain business restructuring charges.  In addition, results for
the year-ago quarter included significant tax benefits, which are not
currently recognized due to the full valuation allowance on the
company's net deferred tax assets.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31047737

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

Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:06:07 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: AT&T Reports Fourth-Quarter and Full-Year Results


    BEDMINSTER, N.J., Jan. 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- AT&T (NYSE:T)
today announced its fourth-quarter and full-year 2002 results.  The
company's fourth-quarter earnings per diluted share, which reflect a
gain in discontinued operations from the disposition of AT&T
Broadband, partially offset by a loss from continuing operations
resulting from restructuring and asset impairment charges announced
earlier this month, was $0.66.

    The company reported a loss from continuing operations, primarily
resulting from an asset impairment charge associated with the
company's past investment in AT&T Latin America (ALA), and also
reflecting the impact of a restructuring charge associated with
planned employee separations and an asset impairment charge related to
the value of the company's DSL assets. The loss per diluted share from
continuing operations was $0.79.  Revenue for the quarter was $9.3
billion, a decline of 8.6 percent from the year-ago quarter.  The
company attributes the revenue decline to continued declines in long
distance voice services, partially offset by growth in local voice as
well as data/Internet protocol (IP) and managed services.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31079253

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

Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:07:25 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Motorola Unveils Location-Based Services Software For Wireless,


         Consumers Can Easily Access Maps And Turn-By-Turn Directions
        On Wireless Devices Via One Of Motorola's First Location-Based
                            Software Applications

    SCHAUMBURG, Ill., Jan. 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Motorola,
Inc. (NYSE:MOT) announced today that it is offering wireless carriers,
auto manufacturers and other enterprises location-based services
software that will deliver relevant, easily accessible information to
consumers while they are mobile.  Information delivered through the
"ViaMoto" software can be customized depending on a consumer's
personal preference, will be available in virtually any environment
and will be available on a variety of wireless phones or other
devices.  

The first two tiers of software offered in the ViaMoto
package, GoViaMoto and FindViaMoto, are currently available and are
undergoing customer trials with Motorola GPS-enabled cell phones in
North America.  Consumers can easily interact with ViaMoto
applications through human operators (similar to directory
assistance), voice recognition, keypad entry, or websites.
Easy-to-use location applications like those provided by ViaMoto are
expected to be useful, and appealing, to most mobile users.
Driscoll-Wolfe's 2002 Wireless Location-Based Services Marketing
Research Study states that nearly half of all cell phone users are
interested in receiving directions to their destination on their
handsets.  That same study showed that a third of all mobile phone
users would agree to pay $5 per month for unlimited navigation
assistance on their phones.

 ...

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31079451

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

Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:09:08 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Zingy Powers Polyphonic Ringtones for Nextel Wireless Phones


      Nextel Subscribers Can Customize Communication With a Unique Sound

    NEW YORK and PLANTATION, Fla., Jan. 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ --
Zingy (http://www.zingy.com ), the largest mobile entertainment
provider in North America, today announced an agreement to power the
polyphonic ringtones available on Nextel (NASDAQ:NXTL) wireless phones
from Motorola (NYSE:MOT).  Zingy will offer hundreds of new polyphonic
song titles to Nextel subscribers who use the Motorola i95cl and i90c
handsets, allowing wireless users to personalize the sound of their
phones.

    Zingy offers 16-chord polyphonic MIDI ringtones, which produce
richer, fuller sounding compositions when compared with traditional
monophonic ringtones.  Ringtones are available in hundreds of song
titles and include the latest in hip-hop, rock, pop, classical, and
theme music.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31079561

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

Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 10:08:10 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Master-Keyed Lock Vulnerability


http://www.crypto.com/masterkey.html

Matt Blaze
AT&T Labs -- Research

The threat

In a recent research paper, we describe weaknesses in most
master-keyed lock systems, such as those used by offices, schools, and
businesses as well as by some residential facilities (particularly
apartment complexes, dormitories, and condominiums).  These weaknesses
allow anyone with access to the key to a single lock to create easily
the "master" key that opens every lock in the entire system. Creating
such a key requires no special skill, leaves behind no evidence, and
does not require engaging in recognizably suspicious behavior. The
only materials required are a metal file and a small number of blank
keys, which are often easy to obtain.

Needless to say, the ability for any keyholder to obtain system-wide
access represents a serious potential threat to the security of
master-keyed installations. Individuals and institutions that depend
on such locks to protect their safety and property should be aware of
these risks and consider alternatives to eliminate or reduce their
exposure to this threat.

The vulnerability was discovered by applying the techniques of 
cryptanalysis, ordinarily used to break secret codes, to the analysis 
of mechanical lock design. The research paper describing this 
analysis and the discovered vulnerability can be found (in PDF 
format) on the world wide web at http://www.crypto.com/papers/mk.pdf. 
(Note -- this file is rather large, about 4MB and is not suitable for 
download over dialup or slow connections). A version of the paper has 
been submitted to the IEEE journal "Security and Privacy."

http://www.crypto.com/papers/mk.pdf

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

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Illegal Snooping Costs Allstate Access to Pnline DMV Records
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 14:05:30 -0500


By Deborah Lohse
Mercury News

California's Department of Motor Vehicles has banned Allstate
Insurance from checking driver records online after Allstate employees
were caught illegally snooping through records of friends, family and
others.

In one case, an Allstate employee released a confidential home address
that enabled an unidentified road-rage driver to send a written threat
to another driver.

After that incident, the threatened driver complained to DMV, which
investigated.  It did not learn the identity of the Allstate employee
who facilitated the threat, but DMV did find 131 violations of
confidentiality rules such as those requiring people who access the
data to have individual passwords and sign confidentiality papers.

Allstate employees in seven claims offices violated the rules,
sometimes by sharing computer passwords on Post-it notes, in other
cases by making up fake car-claim numbers to get into friends' or
family members' DMV records, officials said.


http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/4965810.htm

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

Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 18:18:22 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Motorola Reports Fourth-Quarter and Full-Year Financial Results


     - Fourth Quarter Sales of $7.5 Billion, up 3% vs. the Prior Year
     - Fourth Quarter GAAP Earnings of $.08 Per Share vs. Loss Per Share of
       ($.55) in the Prior Year
     - Fourth Quarter Earnings, Excluding Special Items, of $.13 Per Share
       vrs Loss Per Share of ($.04) in the Prior Year
     - Fourth Quarter Positive Operating Cash Flow of Approximately $500
       Million
     - Ratio of Net Debt to Net Debt Plus Equity Improved to 16.7% from 18.4%
       in the Prior Year
     - First Quarter 2003 Guidance:
       * Sales: $6.0 to $6.2 Billion, Flat to up 3% vs. the Prior Year
       * GAAP Earnings Per Share: Break-Even to $.02 Per Share vs. Loss Per
         Share of ($.20) in the Prior Year
       * Earnings Per Share, Excluding Special Items: Break-Even to $.02 Per
         Share vs. Loss Per Share of ($.08) in the Prior Year
     - Reaffirms Full-Year 2003 Guidance:
       * Sales: $27.5 Billion, up 3% vs. 2002
       * GAAP Earnings Per Share of $.40 vs. Loss of ($1.09) in 2002
       * Earnings Per Share, Excluding Special Items, of $.40 vs. $.14
     - in 200

    SCHAUMBURG, Ill., Jan. 21 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Motorola, Inc.
(NYSE:MOT) today reported sales of $7.5 billion in the fourth quarter
of 2002 and net earnings of $174 million, or $.08 per share, presented
in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles
(GAAP). This represents an increase in sales of 3 percent from $7.3
billion in the year-ago quarter.  Motorola reported a net loss in the
year-ago quarter of $1.2 billion, or ($.55) per share.

    Excluding special items, Motorola had net earnings in the fourth
quarter of 2002 of $299 million, or $.13 per share, compared with a
net loss of $90 million, or ($.04) per share, in the year-ago
quarter. In the fourth quarter of 2002, Motorola reported special
items resulting in a net charge of $203 million pre-tax, or $125
million after-tax.  Motorola communicated in July 2002 that it
anticipated it would take special charges of approximately $200
million in the fourth quarter of 2002.  In the fourth quarter of 2001,
Motorola reported special items resulting in a net charge of $1.7
billion pre- tax, or $1.1 billion after tax. Details of the special
items are presented in a table at the end of this press release.


http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31039889

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

Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 18:19:56 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: TiVo Announces Resignation of Morgan Guenther, President


    SAN JOSE, Calif., Jan. 21 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo
(NASDAQ:TIVO), the creator of and leader in television services for
digital video recorders (DVR), today announced the resignation of
Morgan Guenther, effective January 31, 2003.  Guenther joined TiVo in
1999 and was named president in October 2001.

    "Over the last three years, Morgan has been involved in developing
many of TiVo's strategic alliances and helped to develop TiVo's
current business model," said TiVo CEO Mike Ramsay.  "We appreciate
Morgan's contribution and wish him well in his future endeavors."
TiVo has already initiated a search for a senior executive to oversee
the business development areas that are managed by Guenther.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31040340

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 01:12:30 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: In Re: Verizon Internet Services, Inc.


IN RE: VERIZON INTERNET SERVICES, INC. (January 21, 2003)
    Court Order Directing An Internet Service Provider To Provide,
    Pursuant To Subpoena, The Music Industry's RIAA With The
    Identity Of An Anonymous User Suspected Of Infringing
    Copyright Holders' Rights By Allegedly Having Allowed Web
    Users To Downloaded More Than 600 Copyright-Protected
    Songs In A Single Day [PDF]

    http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/verizon/inreverizon12103opn.pdf

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

From: <roberthj1@juno.com>
Subject: Last Laugh! ***SPAM*** I Made $60,000 in Two Months!!!
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 00:09:45 -0100


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It seems to be not enough that we each
get tons of spam every day; now there is a netizen who wishes to sell
us material on how to create new, additional spam. I thought this
thing which I found in my spam bucket yesterday was really very 
interesting.    PAT]

Hi:

I'm a college dropout.  I work about two hours a day.  I'm ambitious,
but extremely lazy, and I make over $30,000 a month.  Are you curious
yet?

In a minute I'm going to tell you my secret, it's the dirty little
secret of the Internet ...

You've probably heard stories about people making whopping huge money
online, but you thought they were the big corporate execs, famous
programmers, or boy-geniuses.

Well, grasshopper, think again ...

It's people like you and me that are making the real money.  Yep,
people like YOU AND ME!

Ever since the "dot com bubble" burst in 1999, small-time
entrepreneurs are getting richer while the Fortune 500 companies look
for bankruptcy lawyers.

Today small business owners and ordinary folks like you and me can use
the web to achieve complete financial freedom with NO INVESTMENT and
very little work.  How?  By learning the most profitable marketing
technique ever created - it's called bulk email, or SPAM.

If you've ever recieved an email advertisement, then you know what
bulk email is.  I bet you can't click on DELETE fast enough for most
of those ads, right?  You might not want their product, but remember
that thousands of other folks probably do.  Bulk email is a percentage
game - every bulk emailer who contacts you makes a six figure income
on the Internet.  I guarantee it.  Now let's go back to Math 101 and
review some numbers ...

If you sell on eBay, you pay anywhere from a few dollars to over a
hundred dollars just to post one auction.  How many people see your
ad?  Maybe a couple thousand or even ten or twenty thousand over a
period of days.  Using bulk email, YOU CAN SEND YOUR AD TO MORE THAN A
MILLION PEOPLE A DAY at virtually no cost.  Whether your send 100,000
emails or 100 million emails, the price is the same.  ZERO!

Stop paying those outrageous auction listing fees when hardly anyone
sees your ad!

Imagine that you have a decent product with a profit margin of $20.00
on each sale.  If you send an email ad to 500,000 people, and only one
person in a thousand actually places an order, then you just generated
500 orders and made $10,000 in a few hours of work.

It's that simple ...

All you have to do is convince ONE PERSON OUT OF A THOUSAND to buy
your stuff and you're FILTHY RICH.

The best thing is that anyone can do it.  Doesn't matter if you're a
nineteen-year-old college student using a dorm-room computer or a
fifty-year-old executive working from an office building in New York
City.  Anyone, and I repeat ANYONE, can start bulk emailing with
virtually no startup costs.  All it takes is a few days of study,
plenty of ambition, and some basic familiarity with the Internet.

I quit college when I was 19 to capitalize on the "Dot Com" mania, and
I've never looked back.  I started with no money, no product to sell,
and only the most rudimentary computer skills.  I saw an opportunity
and I seized it.  A few years later, I bought my own home - with CASH.

You don't need any money.  You don't need a product.  You don't
need to be a computer nerd and no experience whatsoever is required.

If you saw an employment ad in the newspaper like that you'd jump
right on it.  It would be a dream come true.  So what are you waiting
for?! 

I'm going to ask you four simple questions.  If you answer
YES to all of them, then I can almost promise that you will make at
least $100,000 using bulk email this year.  <p> Here goes ...  <p> Do
you have basic experience with the web?  Do you have a computer and an
Internet connection?  Do you have a few hours each day of free time?
Do you want to earn some extra money with an eye towards complete
financial freedom?  

If you answer YES to these questions, you could be making $5,000 -
$20,000 per week working from your home.  Kiss your day job goodbye -
this sure beats the 9-5 daily grind!  <p> All you need is ambition and
commitment.  This is no "get rich quick scheme".  You have to work to
make big bucks, but ANYONE - and I mean ANYONE - can do it.

You're probably wondering if it's hard to get
started.  Don't worry, it's not! I will show you step-by-step how to
start your first email campaign and how to build a booming online
business.  You'll be generating orders - AND MAKING MONEY - in less
than seven days.  

Okay, so what if you don't have anything to sell?

No problem!!  I'll show you where to find hot products that sell like
CRAAAAAAZY! Most people delay starting an Internet business because
they have nothing to sell, but I'm removing that hurdle right now.
After reading the Spambook, you can build your complete product line
in less than two hours!  There is NO EXCUSE not to get started! I will
get you up-and-running within seven days. In fact ...

I personally guarantee that you will start your own bulk email
campaign less than a week after reading the Spambook!  I'll give you a
toll-free phone number to reach me 24 hours a day, seven days a week;
where else will you find that level of service?!

I will also include a step-by-step guide to starting your very first
email campaign called "Seven Days to Bulk Email Success".  This
seperate guide contains a daily routine for you to follow with
specific, exact instructions on how to get started.  On day one, for
example, I teach you where to find a product to sell.  The next day
you learn how to build a fresh mailing list.  On the seventh day, you
just click send!  Your very first campaign is ready to go.

As a special bonus, you'll recieve a FREE copy of our STEALTH MASS
MAILER, a very powerful bulk email program which retails for $49.99!
I'll even include 7 million email addresses absolutely FREE if you
order NOW!  <p> Stop wasting your money on auction listing fees,
classifieds, and banner ads - they don't work, and never will!  If you
are SERIOUS about making money on the Internet, bulk email is your
only option.  What are you waiting for?  Few of us are willing to
share this knowledge, but I promise to teach you everything I know
about bulk emailing in this extraordinary bulk emailer's handbook
 ... The Spambook!

Once again, here's the deal.  You give me $29.99.  I give you ALL THE
TOOLS YOU NEED to become a successful, high profit email bulk emailer.
INCLUDING:

** THE SPAMBOOK Teaches you step-by-step how to become a high profit
bulk emailer.  Secret techniques and tips never before revealed.

** SEVEN DAYS TO BULK EMAIL SUCCESS Provides detailed
day-by-day instruction to start sending your first email campaign in
seven days.  

** 600 Email subjects that PULL LIKE CRAZY  

** EMAIL LIST MANAGER Manage your email lists quickly and easily.  Very
user-friendly, yet powerful, software.  

** STEALTH MASS MAILER
Software can send up to 50,000 emails an hour automatically.  Just
load them in there and click SEND!  

** ADDRESS ROVER 98 and MACROBOT SEARCH ENGINE ROBOT Extracts email
addresses from databases and search engines at speeds of over 200,000
per hour.  

** WORLDCAST EMAIL VERIFIER Used to verify your email addresses that
you extract to make sure they're valid.

** EBOOK PUBLISHER Easily publish your own e-books and reports for resale
using, you guessed it, bulk email!  

** SEVEN MILLION EMAIL ADDRESSES This huge list will get you started
bulk emailing right away.  I harvested these addresses myself, the
list is filled with IMPULSE BUYERS ready to respond to your ads!

If you added up all of the FULL VERSION BULK EMAIL software included
with the Spambook package, it would total over $499.  I am giving you
the whole bundle for only $29.99.  That means there is no other
out-of-pocket startup expense for you.  Nothing else to buy, no reason
to waste money on software that doesn't work.  With this one package,
you get EVERYTHING YOU NEED to START BULK EMAILING RIGHT AWAY.


Are you willing to invest $29.99 for the opportunity to make a SIX
FIGURE INCOME on the Internet with no startup cash and very little
effort?  Remember, you will recieve a toll-free phone number for
24 hour expert advice and consultation FROM ME PERSONALLY.

To order the Spambook right
now for only $29.99 with any major credit card or Paypal, please click
on the link below. This will take you to a secure server where
you may place your order.

<p> Product: "The Spambook" Price: $29.99 <p>

HOW TO ORDER BY MAIL: Print out this order form and send cash,
personal check, money order or cashier's check to the address listed
below: 

Blair Russell
RR#2 Coulsons Hill Road #2452
Bradford, Ontario, Canada

IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTE: There are no criminal laws against the
non-fraudulent sending of unsolicited commercial email in the United
States.  However, other countries have passed laws against this form
of marketing, so non-US residents should check local regulations
before ordering.  To view US State and Federal guidelines concerning
bulk email, and to check foreign regulations, please visit
http://www.spamlaws.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Blair, maybe there are no laws 
against Spam in Canada or the USA right now, but there certainly 
should be. To other readers:  Did you ever see a spammmer this brassy
before?  Not only sending it, but teaching the other guys how to send
it also.  Geeze!    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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #249
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan 23 19:17:11 2003
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]])
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0O0HBP18080;
	Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:17:11 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:17:11 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200301240017.h0O0HBP18080@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #250

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:17:00 EST    Volume 22 : Issue 250

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC (Lisa Miller)
    Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC (John Higdon)
    Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC (John R. Levine)
    Calling Party Pays to Cellular (Randal Hayes)
    Westchester DA (NYC Suburb) vs. Nigerian Scammers (fwd) (Danny Burstein)
    A Pretty Decent Anti-Spam Decision in NYS (Danny Burstein)
    Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again!(David B. Horvath, CCP)
    Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (Tom Betz)
    Re: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service (Steven J. Sobol)
    Re: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service (Dave Phelps)
    Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider (John Higdon)
    Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider (Steven J. Sobol)
    Re: Prison Call Overcharging (Gail M. Hall)
    Re: 666 (Doug Krause)

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: Lisa Miller <lise3@hitme.nospam.please>
Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 21:57:07 -0500


Allston Parking Refugee wrote:

> 11-digit dialing is coming to NYC on February 1, 2003.  NYC had
> managed to hang onto 7 digit dialing even with its overlays for a few
> years, thanks to the NYS PSC who fought the FCC and lost over this
> issue.

I can understand why the area code has to be dialed, but why is Verizon
(or the NY PUC?) mandating the 1+ too?   Verizon has already implemented
10 digit dialing up and down its territory, as have many other places
too.  In these areas, Verizon has repeated over and over that the 1+ is
not necessary, and to just dial 10 digits, not 11.

But in New York City, 11 (1+ 10digits) apparently will be mandated.  I
suspect it is the PUC that is requiring this strangeness, but who knows.
Verizon obviously has the technology to do just 10 digits.  It would make
a lot more sense to keep things consistent across the land where the area
code must be used for all calls.


Reference: http://tinyurl.com/4qbq  (Verizon Web Page)

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

From: Tony Pelliccio <tonypo1@cox.takemeout2.net>
Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC
Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 04:09:07 GMT


In article <telecom22.248.10@telecom-digest.org>,
AllstonParkingRefugee@hotmail.com says:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That dialing '1' in front of everything
> is a dumb move. I hope they will fix it at least so that a person who
> without thinking dials '1911' won't be forced to hang up and dial
> again.  PAT]

It's a revenue enhancer. Used to be that 1 was the toll indicator , now 
people will just blindly dial away and get hit with the toll when the 
bill comes in. 

Typical predatory tactics. 


Tony

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:57:11 -0800


In article <telecom22.248.10@telecom-digest.org>,
AllstonParkingRefugee@hotmail.com (Allston Parking Refugee) wrote:

> Besides the general stupidity of having to dial an area code when
> calling within the same area code, this new scheme makes even less
> sense, since dialing a 1 will now be required for *all* calls, except
> things like 911, 411, and 0.  What's the point of making everyone who
> calls anywhere dial a 1?  How long until they sell phones that dial a
> 1 as soon as you pick up the receiver?

I can see why you would have to dial the local area code (after all,
how would the switch know WHICH local area code in the overlay that
you meant?), but the dialing of the '1' seems superfluous.

Back in the really old days (fifties), not only was a '1' not
necessary for dialing long distance here, but a '1' as an initial
digit would not even break dial tone. Somewhere in the eighties, the
'1' became optional. You could dial it (it would break dial tone then)
or not; your call would complete just fine regardless. Then finally,
in the mid-nineties when the informal prefixes finally came to 408,
the '1' became mandatory to differentiate between a seven or ten-digit
number.

Any area that uses ten-digit dialing should make the '1' optional.


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC
Date: 22 Jan 2003 00:35:31 -0500
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> What's the point of making everyone who calls anywhere dial a 1?

To prevent misdialing by people who are trying to dial seven digit
numbers.  I suspect after training the customers for a year or two,
they'll start letting you dial without the 1.


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 Jan 2003 12:15:20 -0600
From: Randal Hayes <randal.hayes@uni.edu>
Subject: Calling Party Pays to Cellular


In December 2001, the FCC lifted its ban on technology-specific area
codes. 

However, the FCC's policy change does not automatically assure
approval of a request for such an area code. It requires state
regulatory agencies to request such area codes on an individual basis,
and each will be approved/disapproved based on the merits of the
request.
 

Randy Hayes
University of Northern Iowa 

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: Westchester DA (NYC Suburb) vs. Nigerian Scammers (fwd)
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:13:21 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


TWO INDICTED IN NIGERIAN BUSINESS SCAM

Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro and Ardsley Police
Chief Emil Califano announced the indictment of Chuks Nwogu (DOB
9/12/70) of 63 West 7th Street, Mt. Vernon, New York and his wife,
Svitlana Nwogu (DOB 2/18/77) of 3039 Kingsland Ave. Bronx, New York
for Grand Larceny in the Second and Third Degree. It is alleged that
over the course of the past year, the two defendants and others
solicited more than $200,000 in cash payments from a Wisconsin
businessman on the pretext that the money would be used to ship
$50,000,000 into the United States from Nigeria, at which time the
victim would receive one third of the money.

[ snippety snip, rest at:

	http://www.da.westchester.ny.us/detailp.cfm?page=793 ]
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
		     dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have to wonder what sort of 'businessman'
the guy in Wisconsin would be to give away two hundred thousand in
cash on a Nigerian promise to send him fifty million dollars. I've
seen those scams forever and did not realize there are some people
who fall for them.  PAT]

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: A Pretty Decent Anti-Spam Decision in NYS
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:14:04 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


And it's one using common sense consumer protection
truth-in-advertising laws rather than brand new stuff. lots of good
points here which would apply to many other spammers.

http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2003/jan/jan22c_03.html

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Lottie E. Wilkins permanently enjoined
MonsterHut, Inc., its Chief Executive Officer Todd Pelow, and its
Chief Technical Officer Gary Hartl, from "further engaging in any of
the fraudulent, deceptive and illegal acts and practices pertaining to
representations of 'opt-in', 'opt-out' or the 'permission-based'
nature of their protocols or the collection and use of their email
data."

A central issue in the dispute was the Attorney General's contention �
which the court endorsed � that Monsterhut and its principals had violated
New York's consumer fraud laws by falsely representing that the company
had obtained consumers' "permission" to send emails, or that consumers had
"opted in" to receive them. The court held that the term "opt-in" (like
the term "opt-out") has a clearly defined meaning within the industry,
regulators and that Monsterhut's practice did not qualify as "opt-in"
under the accepted definition of that term.

[ snip ]

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

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

Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 21:06:28 -0500
From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP)
Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again!


At 08:41 PM 1/21/03 -0500, telecom@telecom-digest.org wrote:
dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) wrote that The Digest Was
Spammed Again! 

> SPAM, plain and simple PAT. 
> Sorry ... 

At 09:02 PM 1/20/03 -0500, telecom@telecom-digest.org wrote:
  
> From: Protect <Protect@home.com>
> Subject: Now is the Time to Get Protected
> Reply-To: Protect@home.com   
> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 14:17:56 -0500 
> Organization: Bell Sympatico 
  
> Now is the time to get protected.  
> The reason is believed to be the new porn scandal
> which is making everyone more aware of the risks of being
> investigated. If you haven't already heard, there are a 
> staggering 300,000 suspects on the list, So far, more than 
> 1300 arrests have been made including a judge, magistrates,
> senior public school teachers and 50 police officers.

> http://soz.web1000.com/protect.htm

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: May I ask, of curiosity, *who told 
> you* this was spam, and more specifically, 'bad' (that is, mostly 
> useless) spam?  I had never seen it prior to getting in the mail
> yesterday. Most 'bad' spam I get frequently, like everyone else.
> PAT]

No one told me, I clicked on the link expecting to find an interesting
article (about some porn scandal and maybe even a review of protection
software), followed the links, and ended up on a page that tried to
sell me some software that clears out caches and run histories (and
other stuff) for over $100 for a single user license. And if you don't
buy the product, you get multiple large pop-up browser windows asking
why you didn't buy ...

- David

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What about the writer's allegation of
three hundred thousand 'suspects' and 'hundreds of arrests already
made'. Was there any truth to any of that?   PAT]

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

From: Tom Betz <tbetz@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again!
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 01:33:40 UTC
Organization: XOme


Quoth dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) in news:telecom22.248.14@telecom-digest.org:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: May I ask, of curiosity, *who told you*
> this was spam, and more specifically, 'bad' (that is, mostly useless)
> spam?  I had never seen it prior to getting in the mail
> yesterday. Most 'bad' spam I get frequently, like everyone else.  PAT]

It's spam for "Evidence Eliminator".

See <http://groups.google.com/groups?q=+%22Evidence+Eliminator%22+group:news.admin.net-abuse.sightings&scoring=d>
for a WHOLE BUNCH of collected spam (going back more than two years) 
for Evidence Eliminator.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, it may get to the point real
soon here on this list that I start accepting incoming mail *only*
 from a trusted whitelist of readers/contributors, with all other mail
going into the bit bucket. There simply is not enough time in the day
for *me* to go around the web looking for hiding places for spam. All
trusted whitelist contributors will have a list giving the correct
email addresses of others on the list. Then all email addresses
printed here will vanish also. That seems to me like a horrible way to
be part of the net, and extremely arrogant. Do you knoww, Tom, if
there was any truth at all to his allegations regards the number of
'suspects', inquistioned persons, etc? Or was that all just a lot of
crap as well?  PAT]

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

From: Steven J. Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 02:20:38 -0000
Organization: JustThe.net LLC


In article <telecom22.248.4@telecom-digest.org>, Herb Stein wrote:

> Not to defend SBC, even though I retired from there, but I've actually
> had very good service on the DSL side. I just spent 2 hours on the

SBC Internet Services did OK for me in the year that I had them for DSL.
The telco division of SBC is the fine group of people that screwed up 
my DSL line by placing a loop between me and the CO that never should
have been there, and sat on the problem for two months.


Steve Sobol, CTO  JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH
http://JustTheNetLLC.com/  888.480.4NET (4638)

A practicing member of the Geek Orthodox religion!

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

From: Dave Phelps <tippenring@deadspam.com>
Subject: Re: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 22:38:08 -0600


In article <telecom22.248.4@telecom-digest.org>, herb@herbstein.com 
says:

> Not to defend SBC, even though I retired from there, but I've actually
> had very good service on the DSL side. I just spent 2 hours on the
> phone with them after my wife f**ked up her DSL install and they were
> pleasant the entire time. I'm in St. Louis BTW. I prefer to think that
> an old retired fart gets no better service that the general public,

AccessUS, from my limited experience, is a shambles. From what I've 
seen, I can't believe they're still around.

I just installed another SBC ADSL connection today. SLA=128/384. Actual, 
about 110/150-170. We'll see how it goes.

When I called them, they fed me a line about leaving the DSL modem on
for ten days for "optimization". Anyone know what SBC does during the
ten day "optimization" period? Firmware upgrade?


Dave Phelps
Phone Masters Ltd.
deadspam=tippenring

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

From: John Higdon <no-spam@amadeus.kome.com>
Subject: Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:59:53 -0800


In article <telecom22.248.12@telecom-digest.org>, *selah*
<soma@noedorsai.org> wrote:

> I'm looking for companies that would be able to provide phone, tv and
> internet from a satellite dish. Would appreciate any info.

Would you REALLY want to talk on a phone served by a satellite in 
synchronous orbit?


John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | SF:  +1 415 428-COWS
+1 408 264 4115 |     Anytown, USA    | FAX: +1 408 264 4407

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

From: Steven J. Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 02:18:08 -0000
Organization: JustThe.net LLC


In article <telecom22.248.12@telecom-digest.org>, *selah* wrote:

> I'm looking for companies that would be able to provide phone, tv and
> internet from a satellite dish. Would appreciate any info.

Starband would be able to do the Satellite Internet/TV.

If you're in an area that Vonage serves you can use them for phone
over your broadband Internet connection. I'm considering trying them
myself.


Steve Sobol, CTO  JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH
http://JustTheNetLLC.com/  888.480.4NET (4638)

A practicing member of the Geek Orthodox religion!

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

From: Gail M. Hall <gmhall@apk.net>
Subject: Re: Prison Call Overcharging
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 04:00:33 -0500
Reply-To: gmhall@apk.net


On 6 Jan 2003 08:28:10 -0800, in comp.dcom.telecom message
<telecom22.221.9@telecom-digest.org>, you wrote:

> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff Nor Lisa) wrote in message
> news:<telecom22.212.2@telecom-digest.org>:

> There are a great many more issues involved in this than what is being
> presented in this post.  The point of this post indicates that
> "collect calls from correctional facilities cost more than collect
> calls from regular payphones and that is wrong."  While this is true,
> there are other factors that are not addressed in this broadside that
> fail to mention some of the reasons behind the high charges.

There are other issues, too, even for calls other than from prisons.

I think that when I am paying for a long-distance call, even if as a
collect call, it should be paid to the company *I* have selected as my
long-distance carrier.  I have supposedly had the chance to see their
rates for different kinds of calls.  When the call comes collect and
is being charged by a company unknown to me, I have NO way of knowing
who they are or what their rates are until I get my phone bill.
That's a terrible way to do business!  People should have the right to
know up front what the charges are so they can make an informed
decision about whether to accept the charges or not.

I have NEVER been asked to accept charges on a collect call when I was
*informed* about what company the L/D carrier is or what the rate I am
paying will be.  Most of those collect calls these days are automated
and you can't talk to an operator who can tell me what the per-minute
charges are.

Lately, I have been seeing MANY advertisements for something called
1-800-COLLECT which tells us to "save a buck or two."  Well, if you
call "Momma" using that service, how is she going to know what the
charges will be?  How will you know for sure that you are saving her
"a buck or two" when you use this service?  I suspect a lot of people
will be duped and find out the charges are not really better.

I remember for a while getting a rash of collect calls from some kind
of penal institution.  I could never understand or hear clearly the
name given of the person trying to make the call.  I always just hang
up immediately, thinking they dialed a wrong number.  Yet, when it
happened a lot, I began to think someone was up to no good since I had
no family or friends in such a place.

I personally think the prisons would do better to have an approved
list of numbers a prisoner can call out to.  Family members willing to
be called could register their numbers with the prison as OK for the
prisoner to call.

This might stop some of the problem of them dialing people like us who
have no desire to talk to strangers who are in jail or prison.

> Many facilities allow the inmate to purchase phone time from
> commissary credits or from funds sent from home.  These calls are
> still handled at the higher rates, but the family is not billed for
> these calls.  

That's a great idea!  This would allow the family to budget how much
they want to contribute toward that person's phone calls.  If he uses
up all the money on trivial calls, that's his problem.  The family can
at least say they have paid an amount they can afford and not have to
worry about accepting charges for calls they have no idea what the
rates are.

I'll be interested to hear if this "Save a buck or two" company really
does save people money for collect call charges.  I must say they have
some cute commercials!

Gail in Ohio USA

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

From: dkrause@ratcage.com (Doug Krause)
Subject: Re: 666
Date: 21 Jan 2003 20:52:11 -0600
Organization: Rat Cage Unlimited


In article <telecom22.248.15@telecom-digest.org>, Neal McLain
<nmclain@annsgarden.com> wrote:

> PAT Wrote:

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why do you suppose it is there
>> is not (and is unlikely to ever be) an area code '666'? Same 
>> reason. Americans are very superstitious people....

> Not the mention the fact that all "YYY" combination (all three digits
> the same) are reserved for some unspecified future use.  Or, as our
> friends at <www.areacode-info.com> put it, YYY combos are "Unassigned
> easy-to-recognize."  For that matter, so are all NYY combinations.

But there are 666 exchanges.  At least 714 (Houston, et al) has it.


Doug Krause
dijon@ratcage.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But many of the '666 exchanges' are
quite old and were around as names (such as MONroe in Chicago) prior
to going to numbers. I wonder what 666 exchanges are newer (in the
last ten or twenty years) and began life merely as '666' rather than
as a name combination?  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: 620-330-6774
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 775-306-8390
                        Fax 3: 775-642-0603
                        Fax 4: 530-309-7234
                        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: mirror.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.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2003 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 V22 #250
******************************