From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 18 13:44:52 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2IIiqx19339; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 13:44:52 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 13:44:52 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303181844.h2IIiqx19339@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 #351 TELECOM Digest Tue, 18 Mar 2003 13:45:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 351 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap (Mike Riddle) Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap (John Higdon) Radios, was Re: Tungsten W ? Can It Be Unlocked? (Danny Burstein) Can't Find a Source For This Kind of Switch (Jean Gagnon) Spectrum for All (Monty Solomon) Smilow v. S.W. Bell Mobile Sys., Inc. (Monty Solomon) Information Process Patents in the U.S. and Europe: Policy (Monty Solomon) Just How Open Must an Open Network be For an Open Network to be (M Solomon) Connection Discrepancies: Unmasking Further Layers of the Digital(Solomon) The Processed Book (Monty Solomon) Draft Bush Executive Order on Classified National Security (Monty Solomon) Re: EarthLink Introduces Unlimited Voice Broadband (tonypo1@cox.net) Re: EarthLink Introduces Unlimited Voice Broadband (John R. Levine) Re: Last Laugh! was Re: President Bush Signs National No Call List (Thomas) Monitoring and Managing Genset (Marijan Preprotic) Re: Skimming the Cream (Jim Van Nuland) 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: Mike Riddle Reply-To: mriddle%spamers.die@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: Solitary, Poor, Nasty, Brutish & Short Subject: Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 13:28:57 GMT joe@obilivan.net wrote: > As a CPA who has more than passing knowledge of the subject, a very > small percentage of households are involved with more than one > personal tax return ... presuming the couple are married. If there > are unrelated persons in the household, then there is often more than > one return per household. But, does the TurboTax software license > permit multiple returns on one copy of the software in such > circumstances? TurboTax allows more than one return per license; in fact, they encourage it from time to time. Mom and Pop may file a joint return. Kids file if they have college funds or part-time jobs. Grandmother asks for help. In the not-too-distant past it was not unusual for us to prepare four or five returns, all for immediate family and a couple of elderly relatives who needed help. Turbotax has not released any data to support their conclusory allegation that software theft is a real problem. One would think that in light of all the criticism they would do so, instead of blaming a technically literate minority who understand what the software is really doing. Mike Riddle /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign mriddle@spamfree.papillion.ne.us \ / Respect for open standards "To Reply Remove the Obvious" X No HTML/RTF in email / \ No M$ Word docs in email ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:54:22 -0800 In article , joe@obilivan.net wrote: > I think your logic is more likely in the "BS" category than their's. > A vast majority of people who use TurboTax prepare one federal return > per software license. Yes, that's probably the norm. There are also families that have many returns, more than you might imagine. > As a CPA who has more than passing knowledge of the subject, a very > small percentage of households are involved with more than one > personal tax return ... presuming the couple are married. I'm not sure how being a CPA makes you such an authority on families and software utilization, but I can tell you that I personally know many families that file multiple returns. > But, does the TurboTax software license > permit multiple returns on one copy of the software in such > circumstances? A question you might have investigated before telling me I was full of BS. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Radios, was Re: Tungsten W ? Can It Be Unlocked? Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 07:23:06 +0000 (UTC) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) writes: > Trying to use an unlocked Tungesten W on Sprint would be like trying > to tune an AM radio to receive FM. Different transmission protocols. Cough, cough. Bad analogy. You can, indeed, receive and listen to (standard FM broadcast) signals using an AM radio provided, of course, that your unit can tune to the frequencies. You won't get the wideband fm fidelity, but you'll certainly have adequate and reasonably clear audio. Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: jeannot@gmavt.net (Jean Gagnon) Subject: Can't Find a Source For This Kind of Switch Date: 18 Mar 2003 06:14:12 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I am bringing a second phone line to my house. I do NOT want to change all my phones in the house, but I want them to automatically connect to any line that rings. However after a call, the system (switch) should always revert to the same line, because I want to make all my outgoing calls from the same line. The other solutions like 2-line phones, call waiting, etc ... are unacceptable. These are my parameters. It looks hopeless from here, but I can't believe I'm the first guy with that problem. Thanks, guys! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Radio Shack has some autoswitches which serve two lines but default to a single line for outgoing calls. I forget the part number off hand. Another solution might be to get a 'virtual second line' from your telco (it is sometimes called 'distinctive ringing'). Telco gives you a second line, aliased to the first line. You have only one line for outgoing call purposes, but incoming calls can be dialed on either number. You get a regular ring or a ring-ring line, depending on what was dialed by the caller, so you can detirmine what answer-phrase is appropriate. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Spectrum for All Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 12:11:06 -0500 By Lawrence Lessig Why sell wireless spectrum to the highest bidder? Maybe the FCC should offer it up for free, columnist Lawrence Lessig suggests, redefining it as a form of public property-with minimum regulations. A generation from now, when policy types look back to the first decade of the 21st Century, there is no doubt they will think of a "Powell" as one of the most important policy makers of our time. But I'm betting it will be Michael, not Colin, Powell. I'm a big fan of the balance and wisdom of the Secretary of State. Yet the more I see of his son, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, the more convinced I am that Michael Powell could shepherd us to perhaps the most important policy change to affect the technology industry, and hence the economy, in 50 years. Just as the former Soviets remember their Chairman Mikhail (Gorbachev) as the father of their latest revolution, so too, will we remember our Chairman Michael (Powell) as the father of the most important revolution that technology could begin-and for a similarly brilliant strategic reason. ... http://www.cioinsight.com/article2/0,3959,932615,00.asp ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:39:00 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Smilow v. S.W. Bell Mobile Sys., Inc. SMILOW v. S.W. BELL MOBILE SYS., INC. (03/07/03 - No. 02-1760) A decision decertifying a class action brought by and on behalf of wireless phone customers for breach of contract is reversed, as claims of most class members are too small to vindicate individually, and common issues of law and fact predominate. To read the full text of this opinion, go to: http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/1st/021760.html http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-1760.01A ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:47:19 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Information Process Patents in the U.S. and Europe Information process patents in the U.S. and Europe: Policy avoidance and policy divergence by Brian Kahin Abstract Patents on software and business methods appear to have a pivotal position in today's economy, yet they have remained a policy backwater in which scope of patentable subject matter has expanded without legislative input. This is changing as Europe struggles with patent reform. A push by the European Commission to validate and promote software patents has been opposed by many companies and professionals, and especially the open source community. In this process, it has become clear that Europe opposes the broad non-technical patents on business methods that are now available in the U.S., signaling a major rift in international standards of patentability. Recent hearings held by competition agencies in the U.S. show severe problems of overpatenting that extend beyond software to much of the ICT sector. These problems have been ignored by the Commission, which despite a pro forma effort to address economic issues, clearly feels more comfortable framing the issue in legal terms. In outlining what a properly developed policy framework would look like, the paper stresses the need to understand why software is different from other technologies, why the disclosure function of the patent system is failing, the build-up of risk and uncertainty and its effect on industry structure, and the international political economy of information process patents. http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_3/kahin/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:50:47 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Just How Open Must an Open Network be For an Open Network to Be by Jonathan Sallet Abstract In 2003, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will decide in multiple contexts the extent to which governmental action should be used to maintain the "openness" of telecommunications and Internet networks. At the same time, the European Union will put into effect its new, comprehensive Access Directive. 2003 may, therefore, be a critical year for the future of governmental policy towards the "openness" of next-generation networks. This paper argues that the debate between "open" and "closed" networks has been insufficiently precise and, therefore, has failed to bring to policy makers' attention critical factors of decision. That is because the choice between "open" and "closed" networks is not binary; rather it consists of different policy bases operating from different perspectives on the network. Arguments for or against governmental opening of a network can be premised on a variety of disciplinary regimes that include, for example, engineering principles, economic theory, social philosophy and legal analysis. Often ignored is the plain fact that these disciplines do not always line up with each other. This will be critical to understand if in the future policy makers are asked to weigh claims of economic theory -- say the need to encourage investment -- against claims of social philosophy -- say the value of free speech and experimentation. Nor do contentions necessarily operate at the same perspective. From a user's perspective, the network can include the activities of an end user, competitive network provider, an independent content/software provider, or the network owner itself. Thus a claim of an end user's "right" to access content through a network may shed little light on the claim of a competitive network provider to use that same network. This paper demonstrates the interplay of the policy bases and network perspectives with four examples: Access to Regional Bell Operating Company (RBOC) networks; access to U.S. cable networks; the European perspective as demonstrated in the Access Directive; and, the architecture of the Internet itself. Along the way, the paper also notes, as an aspect of future analysis, the extent to which the Internet as an "idea" influenced public policy in a manner that departed from normal interest-group politics. The paper posits, as an example, a decisional template that could be employed, for each perspective on the network, to distinguish between policy disciplines. The paper concludes by noting those circumstances that reinforce the continuing importance of the "open/closed" network question. The goal of this paper is not to advocate for any particular policy outcome. It is, rather, to demonstrate that current policy analysis would benefit from applying greater analytical precision to the question of whether - and why - governments should act to open next-generation networks. Finally, the paper includes an addendum reviewing regulatory activity in February 2003. http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_3/sallet/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:53:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Connection Discrepancies: Unmasking Further Layers Connection discrepancies: Unmasking further layers of the digital divide by Elizabeth Davison and Shelia R. Cotten In assessing the integration of the Internet into society, scholars have documented that certain sectors of the population are disadvantaged by their lack of access to computer resources. The disadvantaged have traditionally included the less educated, non-whites, females, the elderly and lower income people. Scholars are now beginning to address differences in Internet experiences among Internet users, but most studies fail to account for the type of connection people use to access the Internet. The purpose of this study is to expand the level of information surrounding Internet connections. This study finds that (1) most Internet data sources fail to ask questions about types of Internet connections; (2) broadband users experience the Internet differently; and, (3) in determining who is likely to spend more time online, the type of connection is more important than other digital divide demographics such as education, race or gender. Subsequently, those engaged in the exploration of our Internet society should start controlling for how Internet users connect to the World Wide Web. http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_3/davison/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:54:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Processed Book by Joseph J. Esposito The "processed book" is about content, not technology, and contrasts with the "primal book"; the latter is the book we all know and revere: written by a single author and viewed as the embodiment of the thought of a single individual. The processed book, on the other hand, is what happens to the book when it is put into a computerized, networked environment. To process a book is more than simply building links to it; it also includes a modification of the act of creation, which tends to encourage the absorption of the book into a network of applications, including but not restricted to commentary. Such a book typically has at least five aspects: as self-referencing text; as portal; as platform; as machine component; and, as network node. An interesting aspect of such processing is that the author's relationship to his or her work may be undermined or compromised; indeed, it is possible that author attribution in the networked world may go the way of copyright. The processed book, in other words, is the response to romantic notions of authorship and books. It is not a matter of choice (as one can still write an imitation, for example, of a Victorian novel today) but an inevitable outcome of inherent characteristics of digital media. http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_3/esposito/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 01:03:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Draft Bush Executive Order on Classified National Security FAS Note: The following is a draft Bush Administration revision of Executive Order (EO) 12958 on national security information policy. When finalized, the new executive order will define information classification and declassification policy. This draft document was circulated among executive branch agencies for comment in March 2003. http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/drafteo.html ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: EarthLink Introduces Unlimited Voice Broadband Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 07:35:55 GMT In article , joe@obilivan.net says: > Vonage seems like a great idea for the first line, too, for anyone who > already has broadband, lives in an area where they can keep their > present number (local number portability) and if they make many toll > calls. With the inclusion of caller id and voice mail, that is quite > an attractive package. > Any idea whether they hammer the account with FCC access charges, and > the usual such surcharges? > Seems like this concept could eventually wipe out TPC (The Phone > Company ;-) Nah -- the cable companies like Cox will put them out of business due to bandwidth caps. Total allowed daily download is 2GB on Cox's network. I'm pretty sure my regular usage plus a Vonage phone would blow that away. While I'm on the subject -- apparently Cox has some capacity problems with it's switch in this area. Frequent reports of all circuits busy and inability to complete calls to other Cox customers have been reported. Tony ------------------------------ Date: 18 Mar 2003 11:02:27 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: EarthLink Introduces Unlimited Voice Broadband Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Vonage seems like a great idea for the first line, too, for anyone who > already has broadband, lives in an area where they can keep their > present number (local number portability) and if they make many toll > calls. With the inclusion of caller id and voice mail, that is quite > an attractive package. I like my Vonage phone, but it's not a good choice for your only phone line. If you don't mind losing the ability to call 911 (calling the POTS number of your local police department is not the same thing), and it's OK with you if your phone drops dead when your power fails or your cable service screws up or your ISP has a route flap and loses contact with Vonage's ISP in New Jersey, I suppose you might want to use it as your only phone. On the other hand, if you find that quality of service adequate, you can probably find a cell phone package for $40/mo with more minutes than you'll use, and your cell phone has a battery so it'll be more reliable. > Any idea whether they hammer the account with FCC access charges, > and the usual such surcharges? No, they fall through the cracks. Access charges are a crock that should have gone away 20 years ago (they're really part of your regular monthly service charge but telcos like to blame them on the government even though they get 100% of the money) but Vonage users get a free ride when calls to or receiving calls from high cost areas supported by USF. If VoIP is as successful as it looks like it will be, I presume we'll see the USF adjusted so it's fairly assessed on all phone users since all phone users benefit from it. 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: Julian Thomas Subject: Re: Last Laugh! was Re: President Bush Signs National No Call List Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 11:50:26 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In , on 03/13/03 at 05:48 PM, Richard D G Cox may have used oatmeal boxes, old string, and new, used, and recycled electrons to say (at least in part): >>> Telemarketers say the registry will devastate their business. >> Their point being? > That the only reason they're telemarketers is that there's nothing else > they can do? They can buy a "do it yourself" spamming kit. Julian Thomas: jt . jt-mj @ net http://jt-mj.net remove letter a for email (or switch . and @) In the beautiful Finger Lakes Wine Country of New York State! Boardmember of POSSI.org - Phoenix OS/2 Society, Inc http://www.possi.org "Unix _IS_ user friendly... It's just selective about who its friends are." ------------------------------ From: Marijan Preprotic Subject: Monitoring and Managing Genset Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 09:46:11 +0100 Organization: Ye 'Ol Disorganized NNTPCache groupie Does anybody know, is there some company that have more then 100 (20 at least) diesel generators, and they (at least 10 at different locations) all have remote monitoring and managing (remote test, start stop functions, reset functions...) via LAN and (or) modem connections from one or more operation and maintainence centers. Thanks, Marijan ------------------------------ From: Jim Van Nuland Subject: Re: Skimming the Cream Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 09:36:08 UTC Organization: Silicon Valley Public Access Link joe@obilivan.net wrote: > John, > Surely you jest in your wonderment about SBC. You know that Pacific > Sell has never been a price leader. They are counting on the stupid > to sign up. Well ... sometimes ... I switched to SBC long-distance just yesterday. No minimum or monthly fixed fee, 10 cents/minute 24/7/anywhere. I told her that SBC has to get much more competitive on the cents/minute, as I intend to use a prepaid calling card at 3.2 cents/min for most of my calls. She enthusiastically commented that her daughter is using one of those. So I have cheap LD, and SBC is helping. I'm rid of the $1.95/month from Vartec (Dime Line). And no more separate Vartec bill. Jim Van Nuland, San Jose (California) Astronomical Association ------------------------------ 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 #351 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 18 22:36:11 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2J3aBo21653; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 22:36:11 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 22:36:11 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303190336.h2J3aBo21653@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 #352 TELECOM Digest Tue, 18 Mar 2003 22:35:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 352 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap (north end of horsey) Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap (John Higdon) Re: Skimming the Cream (Rich Greenberg) Re: Can't Find a Source For This Kind of Switch (Paul A Lee) Re: EarthLink Introduces EarthLink Unlimited Voice Broadband (Mark Atwood) Re: EarthLink Introduces EarthLink Unlimited Voice Broadband (J Kelly) Re: Screen Machine (Joey Lindstrom) Blowing Away the Cap (Joey Lindstrom) A New Communications Paradigm: Earthphone From Five Star Tel (Eworldwire) Assessing Reliability of Phone Services (Gail M. Hall) PluggedIn: Going to a Hotspot? Take a PC and Wireless Card (Monty Solomon) Inmarsat Deploys Extra Satellite in Middle East (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: the north end of the horsey Subject: Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 15:03:49 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 13:43:47 GMT, joe@obilivan.net wrote: > As a CPA who has more than passing knowledge of the subject, a very > small percentage of households are involved with more than one > personal tax return This is either a troll or an ignorant CPA. 1. A competent CPA would know that sometimes married couples file separatly -- that's two returns. 2. Common sense says that most kids tax returns (ie minors over 13) are so simple, they can file 1040-EZ without a CPA. I wouldn't buy TurboTax for a 1040-EZ. But if I had to fill out one (or all) of my kids tax returns, and I had turbotax, I would use it. 3. I'm not an expert, but I seem to recall that there are some reasons to file tax returns for children under 13. 4. TurboTax is bought by those with middle-class incomes. The poor don't have computers, the rich have accountants. I suspect that those who only file 1040EZ don't buy Turbotax; i suspect that its generally bought only by those who file a more complicated set of forms. So, to generalize, I bet that Turbotax has a high percentage of customers who are middle class, with kids and/or aging parents. They may also have siblings (or in-laws) who need their help with taxes. I suspect that the amount of piracy is very, very small, and that people are legitimately using turbotax, and preparing multiple returns. IMO, when Intuit realizes that the rate of piracy is significantly less than they stated, they may price turbotax on a per-return scheme. > ... presuming the couple are married. If there > are unrelated persons in the household, then there is often more than > one return per household. But, does the TurboTax software license > permit multiple returns on one copy of the software in such > circumstances? RTFM ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 01:41:21 GMT On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 13:43:47 GMT, joe@obilivan.net posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > I think your logic is more likely in the "BS" category than their's. > A vast majority of people who use TurboTax prepare one federal return > per software license. > As a CPA who has more than passing knowledge of the subject, a very > small percentage of households are involved with more than one > personal tax return ... presuming the couple are married. If there > are unrelated persons in the household, then there is often more than > one return per household. But, does the TurboTax software license > permit multiple returns on one copy of the software in such > circumstances? I am sure most people who buy/license TurboTax indeed use it only for a single return. There is no such limitation in the license agreement, though. The 2001 agreement said it could be used on a single computer; you could make one backup for your personal use; it can't be given, rented, resold, etc., and that "You may not use the Software to prepare tax returns, schedules or worksheets on a professional basis (i.e., for a preparer's or other fee)." There is no other limitation on using it to prepare multiple tax returns on your own machine (i.e., on a nonprofessional, unpaid basis). In fact, the software allows you to save multiple tax return files, under different names. If it were intended to allow preparation of only one return, Intuit would not have included this option -- and, of course, the program would be much less attractive to those who do need to prepare multiple returns for family members. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:17:13 -0800 In article , Charles.B.Wilber@Dartmouth.EDU (Charles B. Wilber) wrote: > And that is exactly what I did. I used my bought-and-registered copy > of TurboTax to prepare my personal tax return and those of my two > dependent children. If I am now to believe that I twice pirated > Intuit's software I will certainly find another program to use next > year. Just from the responses in this thread to the matter of preparing multiple returns, it would appear that a significant number of those "extra" returns that were filed by Intuit customers were within a household or family. Unless it explicitly says in bold letters somewhere on the box or in the program itself "For the preparation of one return only!", Intuit might want to consider that a three returns filed for every one program copy sold ratio might have a non-nefarious cause. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Skimming the Cream Date: 18 Mar 2003 14:24:54 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , Jim Van Nuland wrote: > I switched to SBC long-distance just yesterday. No minimum or > monthly fixed fee, 10 cents/minute 24/7/anywhere. I told her that SBC > has to get much more competitive on the cents/minute, as I intend to > use a prepaid calling card at 3.2 cents/min for most of my calls. She > enthusiastically commented that her daughter is using one of those. If you don't plan to use the SBC LD, just switch to NO PIC and avoid part of the fees disguised as taxes. SBC will still hit you, but with less. It also protects you from a visitor making LD calls without your knowledge. 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: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Can't Find a Source For This Kind of Switch Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 14:40:35 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V22 #351, jeannot@gmavt.net (Jean Gagnon) wrote (in part): > I am bringing a second phone line to my house. I do NOT want to change > all my phones in the house, but I want them to automatically connect > to any line that rings. However after a call, the system (switch) > should always revert to the same line, because I want to make all my > outgoing calls from the same line. Can you run a cable pair to each phone location? A Panasonic KX-T30810 might do the job. I have a KX-T61610 at home, and it definitely will. You can plug a hybrid set or a 2500 set into each station port. You can program the system to hunt the lines for outgoing calls and/or exclude any line(s) from outgoing calls, all with dial '9' access. You can also program each line to ring an incoming call to any/all available stations, or only some stations, or only one station. You will need one KX-T display phone for programming. The KX-T30810 and KX-T61610 won't handle caller ID internally, but they should pass the CID data through to a caller ID phone on a station port, as long as the call is coming in on a line that is programmed to ring through to the station with the CID phone. You should be able to get a used, refurbished KX-T30810 for under $300. Add another $100 for the display phone. Find a dealer at http://www.telecom-mart.com or http://www.thewwbn.com. Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why wouldn't distinctive ringing from telco do the same job a lot cheaper, with no cables to run or special phones to buy? He'd have the two numbers he wants, with all outgoing calls being forced onto one default line. If he wanted caller-ID or call waiting or other special features he could get them all. People could dial in on either number and the ringing cadence would tell him which line they were on. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mark Atwood Subject: Re: EarthLink Introduces EarthLink Unlimited Voice Broadband Date: 18 Mar 2003 12:53:31 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) writes: > As far as I know, Vonage is the only VoIP vendor that gives you a real > phone number, without which you might as well use the free voice chat > provided by AOL's AIM and other chat programs. Packet8 does as well. (I have Packet8 service. It works well.) Mark Atwood | Well done is better than well said. mra@pobox.com | http://www.pobox.com/~mra ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: EarthLink Introduces EarthLink Unlimited Voice Broadband Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 13:26:55 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On 16 Mar 2003 17:55:49 -0500, johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote: >>> EarthLink Becomes First Major Nationwide ISP to Deploy Full-Scale >>> Voice-over-IP Solution to End-Users >> Also see http://www.vonage.com for a similar service that isn't tied >> to an ISP. > It's not a similar service, it's the exact same thing. Earthlink is > reselling Vonage. > As far as I know, Vonage is the only VoIP vendor that gives you a real > phone number, see also: http://www.iconnecthere.com/Nonmembers/services/receive.asp Been thinking of trying them for outgoing. Would try Vonage but they have no numbers in Iowa. If they ever add Cedar Rapids I'll give them a try, gotta be better than Qworst. J Kelly remove _YourPants_ to reply by email. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are no numbers in Kansas either, but I have thought about it otherwise for outgoing calls. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 15:04:33 -0700 Subject: Re: Screen Machine Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 01:44:43 -0500 (EST), Ray Normandeau wrote: > Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 16:03:39 PST > From: Ray Normandeau
Subject: Screen Machine > > >DON'T NOT POST my email address. So why didn't you post his email address, Pat? He specifically told you to. :-) -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 15:11:05 -0700 Subject: Blowing Away the Cap Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 13:44:52 -0500 (EST), tonypo1@cox.net wrote: > Nah -- the cable companies like Cox will put them out of business due to > bandwidth caps. Total allowed daily download is 2GB on Cox's network. > I'm pretty sure my regular usage plus a Vonage phone would blow that > away. I don't know the exact specs on Vonage's service, but typically a voice-over-IP setup utilizes compression. Therefore, again without any knowledge of the specs, I would HIGHLY doubt you could beat the 2 gig cap even if you used your Vonage phone 24 hours a day. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Would that two gig cap be *only* for the Vonage useage, or combined with all his other work of uploads and downloads? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:28:42 -0500 From: Eworldwire Subject: A New Communications Paradigm: Earthphone(TM) From Five Star Telecom SAN FRANCISCO/ EWORLDWIRE /March 18, 2003 --- Today Five Star Telecom took the wraps off its 'earthphone(TM)' Internet Telephony solution, so named because the use of 9-digit phone numbers allows these devices to be used anywhere in the world to both make and receive calls. The ability to receive calls from any location is thought to be unique, as is the ability to deliver crystal clear reception over dialup. Earthphones(TM) not only enable free, high fidelity telephony over the Internet, but also offer 'anytime, almost anywhere' functionality. 'Almost' indicates the need for an Internet connection, which is rapidly become semi-ubiquitous via the rapid installation of Wi-Fi hot spots. If Wi-Fi access is free then so are the calls. Thus, the new communication paradigm is a combination of totally free telephony over the Net (the early promise of Internet telephony) with similar reachability to that of cellular (no location dependency). In addition, earthphones work over dial-up connections, can pass through corporate firewalls, and connect to PBXs. The latter feature is enabled when one or more earthphones are connected to the trunk lines. This allows mobile workers to talk to colleagues and interconnect offices and conference rooms, again calls are free; they can also break out to the public network and make calls at local or national rates. In the US the term Lata (Local Access and Transport Area) is used to describe the geographic area handled by the local phone company. Outside that area toll charges begin; calls made inside the Lata are not metered. Since earthphone enables a de facto global Lata the company has registered the name Global Local Lata (TM). Sy Richardson, President and founder: "Earthphones have a unique 9-digit code. To call another party, once you launch the application, you simply pick up the phone -- dial tone is established immediately -- and dial nine digits. Nothing could be simpler; you use regular phones the same way but now the calls are free. There is no service charge, no need to enter IDs and account numbers." Earthphones are small hardware boxes that weigh in at a mere 3oz/84g and as illustrated, they connect to a USB port on the PC, and are used with regular analog phones. Both attachments are powered via the USB port. The PC powers the hardware earthphone box and phone. Boxes also connect to the PBX, enabling mobile workers to connect to the PSTN. The same phone can also be employed for regular telephony. Hearing is believing. Bill Brady, Director of Business Development: "Historically Internet Telephony has been associated with poor quality and even loss of signal. This is no longer the case; the technologies employed by earthphones result in call quality as good as that of the public network and that is far superior to cellular. It has to be heard to be believed." Visitors to the site (www.fivestartel.com) can watch and listen to a video and also by listening to recordings made to and from Australia, California, India, Israel, the Netherlands and Pakistan. Please contact: Sy Richardson (President) EMAIL: sy.richardson@fivestartel.com PHONE: 415.328.9900 Jill McAuliff (Media Relations) EMAIL: jill.mcauliff@fivestartel.com PHONE: 415.331.5231 with questions or to set up a demonstration or interview. HTML: http://www.eworldwire.com/wr/031803/fivestartelecom.htm ONLINE NEWSROOM: http://www.eworldwire.com/profile/fivestartelecom.htm LOGO: http://www.eworldwire.com/profile/fivestartelecom.htm CONTACT: Sy Richardson (President) EMAIL: sy.richardson@fivestartel.com PHONE: 415.328.9900 Jill McAuliff (Media Relations) EMAIL: jill.mcauliff@fivestartel.com PHONE: 415.331.5231 URL: http://www.fivestartel.com Copyright 2003 Eworldwire, All rights reserved. Press Relase Distribution By EWORLDWIRE http://www.eworldwire.com (973)252-6800. ------------------------------ From: Gail M. Hall Subject: Assessing Reliability of Phone Services Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:38:48 -0500 Reply-To: gmhall@apk.net Spring will soon be here, and that means T-storms, whether you mean thunder storms or tornados. And this year brings the possibility of terrorist attacks. Some people are going whole hog for wireless and have converted away from wired phone service to wireless altogether. But I am wondering about something. Don't those wireless phone services need electricity from the power companies to operate? Or do those towers have some self-contained power supply that will continue to function if the power goes out. I can clearly remember times when we lost power from the power company, and that includes some periods of up to 3 and 4 days at a time, although that doesn't happen every year. Usually the electricity comes on within 24 hours. I can also remember a few times when we lost phone service from our wire line. It might be a day or two before it got fixed, but the instances are much fewer. When we lost electricity for those 4 days a few years ago, we still had our phone service and our gas service, so we could talk to people and cook our food at home. I haven't had a wireless phone for long enough to test it when our power is out. So I don't know if it works or not. In another thread people have talked about phone service via computer and the fact it needs electricity to operate. Also, it's not set up to pass along location information to 911 centers. Even from a laptop on battery power, you won't have power for more than a couple hours. Same with a wireless phone. My battery has to be charged after talking on it for 2 or 3 hours. I can charge it from the automobile "cigarette lighter" connection, and that could work if our power goes out. But would we get a signal from the wireless service? I have thought about getting a cordless phone, but as I understand it, they require electricity from the wall. In a power outage, I would still have to have a regular telephone. These are issues we don't see in the advertisements at all. So how are those wireless phone transmitters powered? Do they have backup power available when disaster cuts off the electricity from the power company? Gail in Ohio USA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:14:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: PluggedIn: Going to a Hotspot? Take a PC and Wireless Card By Caroline Humer NEW YORK, March 18 (Reuters) - The key to getting into a hotspot isn't knowing the right people, it's having the right equipment: a notebook computer, a wireless networking card and a credit card. So-called "hotspots" are popping up around the world, allowing computer users to log onto the high-speed Internet through wireless network access points in public parks, cafes and hotels. That means you can check e-mail or get the latest headlines from a comfy lounge chair in the hotel lobby or while sipping a cappuccino. Sound like something only the most-wired computer users can figure out? It's not. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32458766 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:15:23 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Inmarsat Deploys Extra Satellite in Middle East WASHINGTON, March 18 (Reuters) - Global satellite communications company Inmarsat said on Tuesday it has deployed a fifth satellite to the Middle East region to handle the expected increased demand from the news media and aid agencies as a war in Iraq looms. News organizations are one of the biggest users of the company's Global Area Network, which allows television networks like ABC, the BBC, NBC and CNN to connect videophones and run live broadcasts from the field. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32460813 ------------------------------ 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 #352 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 19 14:40:20 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2JJeKF26775; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:40:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:40:20 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303191940.h2JJeKF26775@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 #353 TELECOM Digest Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:40:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 353 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Malignant Text Ambushes Europe Cell Phones (Monty Solomon) Cellular Carriers Under Siege (Monty Solomon) Telecom & Telephony Advertisers find Value in Bundled Packages (Don) Re: Assessing Reliability of Phone Services (John Higdon) Re: Blowing Away the Cap (John R. Levine) Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap (joe@obilivan.net) Re: EarthLink Introduces Unlimited Voice Broadband (No Name) Re: Can't Find a Source For This Kind of Switch (Rich Campbell) Miniature RJ11 Jack (Davidoff0707) GETS (and "Telco X" Customer Service) (John R. Covert) Re: Skimming the Cream (John Higdon) Telecom Student Hoping For Some Assistance (C Chambers) Thank You (CGoodlife@aol.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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Malignant Text Ambushes Europe Cell Phones Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 11:47:42 -0500 By Ben Charny Staff Writer, CNET News.com NEW ORLEANS -- A short text message is spelling death for cell phones in Europe. The wireless e-mail, among the one billion sent each day on the continent, can freeze or completely disable two cell phones made by German handset maker Siemens, spokesman Jacob Rice said here on Tuesday. The e-mails contain a single word, taken from the phone's language menu, surrounded by quote marks and preceded by an asterisk, such as "*English" or "*Deutsch," Siemens said. Opening the short-text message on a Siemens 35 series cell completely disables it, Rice said. Siemens 45 series phones are less affected and can be resuscitated after about two minutes of work, Rice said. Both phones are sold only in Europe. The phones are not the victim of a denial of service attack, as suggested by some participating in an e-mail string on Bugtraq, a popular security e-mail list, Rice said. ... http://news.com.com/2100-1039-993197.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This sounds to me a lot like a condition which used to (still does? I don't think so) occur on computers with email. Someone could send you a piece of email with certain words in the text, quoted a certain way, and it would cause your computer to do some ugly things. This was back in the 'early days' of computer hacking, and sending text from one computer to another, either telnetting or otherwise connecting from one computer to a 'socket' or 'port' on another computer over the net would cause this to happen if certain strings of words were transmitted and quoted a certain way. Whatever took place exactly is way in my distant memory. I dislike sounding so vague on this but I just do not remember details. I guess it had never occurred to the computer experts that such a thing would happen, which is how people took advantage of it. It was one of those 'security through obscurity' things which used to be how computers and the internet operated many years ago. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cellular Carriers Under Siege Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 11:58:26 -0500 SPECIAL REPORT: THE SQUEEZE ON WIRELESS As more rivals, such as Wi-Fi outfits, ISPs, and even radio broadcasters, encroach on their turf, the wireless providers may need to merge. Ron Lachman, a venture capitalist in Chicago, is one of the more intense users of mobile communications you'll find anywhere. He subscribes to wireless services from Palm, AT&T Wireless (AWE ), and Sprint PCS (PCS). But he says he does 98% of his wireless e-mailing and instant messaging via Wi-Fi, a wireless method of connecting to the Internet via a laptop. When traveling, he picks hotels that offer Wi-Fi connections or connects via T-Mobile's Wi-Fi service, a network of Wi-Fi hotspots around the country. He finds Wi-Fi faster and cheaper to use than a cell phone. In fact, "if money were more of an object for me, I'd cancel one of my [cell-phone] subscriptions," he says. The mass of people without Lachman's deep pockets could come to the same conclusion, too. Trying to make consumers think twice before renewing their cell-phone contracts, companies are storming the gates of the nation's wireless carriers with alternative technologies and services. TIME OF WEAKNESS. The threat comes at a time when the wireless carriers are vulnerable after years of pell-mell expansion. The Big Six -- Verizon Wireless, Cingular, AT&T Wireless, Sprint PCS, Nextel (NXTL , and T-Mobile -- have billions in debt. Their revenue growth has slowed to 20% annually from the triple-digit pace of the mid-1990s, delaying sustained profitability for some to 2004 or 2005 -- a decade or so after they started in the business. Now, the carriers find themselves under attack in every cellular market, from data transmission to voice calls. The rivals range from Wi-Fi providers and radio broadcasters to Internet service providers (ISPs). If that weren't enough, proposed legislation that would let customers keep their phone numbers no matter which carrier they move to threatens to further intensify wireless competition -- and worsen the industry's losses. ... http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2003/tc20030318_0236_tc106.htm ------------------------------ From: dpanek@altara.com (Don) Subject: Telecom & Telephony Advertisers Find Value in Bundled Packages Date: 19 Mar 2003 08:10:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ New Jersey - March 17, 2003 - During times of economic downturns and consolidation, telecom companies are pulling back the reigns on marketing and advertising. While marketshare is still important, many companies are finding it a challenge to maintain as much marketing and advertising exposure as possible, yet conserve precious dollars. Fortunately there is a solution available that delivers long term consistent advertising and exposure at prices that will make the most fraugal of CFOs sigh with relief. www.telephonyworld.com, a leading telecommunication resource site published by New Jersey based Creative Design Concepts has created a "total telecom marketing package" that has been successfully providing advertisers of all sizes with a bundled annual advertising package for a whole lot less than the cost of a single ad elsewhere. The telephonyworld site caters to nearly 2000 unique visitors daily who primarily come to the site to research solutions and make decisions on purchasing. The site's content and buyer's guides cover the spectrum of telecom solutions from voicemail, IP Telephony, wireless, call centers and all in between. The complete marketing package has been available for a while and was conceived after developing over 300 relationships with vendors all over the world. Chief editor Don Panek said, "after talking to so many marketing people managing dwindling budgets, we decided to give them some real value by bundling key advertising vehicles that would normally be separate ad buys". For the low annual price of $1995, vendors are getting a full page microsite in the buyer's guide, unlimited news and press release disemination which is also immediately displayed on the GOOGLE news site, and best of all qualified leads from the telephonyworld RFP system. RFP leads are sent via e-mail directly to the advertisers so they can bid on opportunities. Currently the site pulls in about 6 to 10 new RFPs per week averaging $10K to $25K. This translates into hundreds of thousands of impressions delivered to taregeted prospects. Frequency in advertising is very important, yet when cutting costs, the first thing that companies scale back on is usually advertising frequency. The telephonyworld marketing package solves this by giving advertisers exposure 24x7 for a whole year to highly targeted traffic for one price. Over the last two months telephonywolrd has signed more that 12 new telecom vendors to the program who have recognized the benefits and are taking advantage of the qualified leads and exposure. Companies interested in taking advantage of the program can get details and order securely on-line at http://www.telephonyworld.com/submit/listing.htm About TelephonyWorld.com Since 1998 telephonyworld has been providing telecommunication and telephony content to millions of visitors. The site has over 40,000 registered members and serves almost 2000 daily visitors. Community features include discussion groups, buyer's guides and plenty of news, tutorials, content and more. About Creative Design Concepts Creative Design Concepts publishes on-line communities that make a difference. Current properties include TelephonyWorld.com, CRMdirectory.com, and TabletComputing.com. The company is planning to launch 5 more technology sites this year, creating a highly active community of over 300,000 members. For more info contact Don Panek at donp@cdconline.com or 732-432-0375 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Assessing Reliability of Phone Services Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 21:07:19 -0800 In article , Gail M. Hall wrote: > Don't those wireless phone services need electricity from the power > companies to operate? Or do those towers have some self-contained power > supply that will continue to function if the power goes out. Just like the regular phone company, the systems operate on floating batteries with generator backup. No big deal. > I can also remember a few times when we lost phone service from our wire > line. It might be a day or two before it got fixed, but the instances > are much fewer. You don't have that problem with a wireless phone. No wires to fall down. > I haven't had a wireless phone for long enough to test it when our power > is out. So I don't know if it works or not. Of course it does. > Same with a wireless phone. My battery has to be charged after talking > on it for 2 or 3 hours. I can charge it from the automobile "cigarette > lighter" connection, and that could work if our power goes out. But > would we get a signal from the wireless service? Yes, you would. > So how are those wireless phone transmitters powered? Do they have > backup power available when disaster cuts off the electricity from the > power company? How many times do you have to ask the question? The answer is "yes" each time. Just like I have backup power at my home in the event of utility power failure. Of course, power goes off here more than anywhere else in the country, so backup power is a big thing here. 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: Blowing Away the Cap Date: 19 Mar 2003 02:18:32 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> Nah -- the cable companies like Cox will put them out of business due to >> bandwidth caps. Total allowed daily download is 2GB on Cox's network. >> I'm pretty sure my regular usage plus a Vonage phone would blow that >> away. POTS phones are 8KB/sec, Vonage does some compression, so let's guess 5 KB/second. That's 18MB/hour. If you're on the phone five hours a day, which is a lot for anyone, that's only 90 MB out of the 2GB quota. 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: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 11:12:49 GMT Organization: Cox Communications John Higdon wrote: >> As a CPA who has more than passing knowledge of the subject, a very >> small percentage of households are involved with more than one >> personal tax return ... presuming the couple are married. > I'm not sure how being a CPA makes you such an authority on families and > software utilization, but I can tell you that I personally know many > families that file multiple returns. Only have more than passing knowledge about tax returns. Did I imply that I am an expert on how families use software? My knowledge is based on those who have accountants, enrolled agents, or tax attorneys prepare their returns. There is lots of professional literature on who does what with tax returns. ------------------------------ From: No Name Subject: Re: EarthLink Introduces Unlimited Voice Broadband Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:38:20 GMT Organization: Cox Communications On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 07:35:55 GMT, tonypo1@cox.net wrote: > While I'm on the subject -- apparently Cox has some capacity problems > with it's switch in this area. Frequent reports of all circuits busy and > inability to complete calls to other Cox customers have been reported. My problem (East prov) with Cox tel, is more than usual number of phone rings, no one there. Also a lot of disconnects half way through the conversation. Seems to have improved a bit since I complained to cox about my slow internet. With all my complaining, I got a total of 9 days credit. ------------------------------ From: Rich Campbell Subject: Re: Can't Find a Source For This Kind of Switch Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:51:50 GMT Simple. Get some 2 line KSU-less phones and order the second line as ground start. You will be able to answer the ringing line but not make out going calls on it. Paul A Lee wrote in message news:telecom22.352.5@telecom-digest.org... > In TELECOM Digest V22 #351, jeannot@gmavt.net (Jean Gagnon) wrote (in part): >> I am bringing a second phone line to my house. I do NOT want to change >> all my phones in the house, but I want them to automatically connect >> to any line that rings. However after a call, the system (switch) >> should always revert to the same line, because I want to make all my >> outgoing calls from the same line. > Can you run a cable pair to each phone location? > A Panasonic KX-T30810 might do the job. I have a KX-T61610 at home, and it > definitely will. > You can plug a hybrid set or a 2500 set into each station port. You > can program the system to hunt the lines for outgoing calls and/or > exclude any line(s) from outgoing calls, all with dial '9' access. You > can also program each line to ring an incoming call to any/all > available stations, or only some stations, or only one station. > You will need one KX-T display phone for programming. > The KX-T30810 and KX-T61610 won't handle caller ID internally, but > they should pass the CID data through to a caller ID phone on a > station port, as long as the call is coming in on a line that is > programmed to ring through to the station with the CID phone. > You should be able to get a used, refurbished KX-T30810 for under > $300. Add another $100 for the display phone. > Find a dealer at http://www.telecom-mart.com or http://www.thewwbn.com. > Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 > Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 > Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 Doh ... you don't want to change out all your phones. Sorry ignore my last post. You'll need a phone system that has at least 1 analog port then. Jean Gagnon wrote in message news:telecom22.351.4@telecom-digest.org: > I am bringing a second phone line to my house. I do NOT want to change > all my phones in the house, but I want them to automatically connect > to any line that rings. However after a call, the system (switch) > should always revert to the same line, because I want to make all my > outgoing calls from the same line. > The other solutions like 2-line phones, call waiting, etc ... are > unacceptable. These are my parameters. > It looks hopeless from here, but I can't believe I'm the first guy > with that problem. > Thanks, guys! > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Radio Shack has some autoswitches which > serve two lines but default to a single line for outgoing calls. I > forget the part number off hand. Another solution might be to get a > 'virtual second line' from your telco (it is sometimes called > 'distinctive ringing'). Telco gives you a second line, aliased to the > first line. You have only one line for outgoing call purposes, but > incoming calls can be dialed on either number. You get a regular ring > or a ring-ring line, depending on what was dialed by the caller, so > you can detirmine what answer-phrase is appropriate. PAT] ------------------------------ From: davidoff0707@aol.com (Davidoff0707) Date: 19 Mar 2003 14:54:20 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Miniature RJ11 Jack I am looking for an ultra small miniature (micro) RJ 11 jack for a portable and size restricted application. The x-jack on PCMCIA modems looks promising, however I need some type of an analogue to that version. What can you recommend, and where can it be purchased (www, tel#, etc). Thanks in advance. -David Davidoff ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 10:58:59 EST From: John R. Covert Subject: GETS (and "Telco X" Customer Service) Customer Service is so bad these days at so many companies, that I do not wish to single out "Telco X" by their real name. Original email: Shouldn't [Telco X] be routing 1-710-627-GETS to its proper destination, as other carriers do? /john Reply: Dear John, Yes if you dial the number properly, then it should connect to the proper destination. Please feel free to contact me if you have any further inquiries. Sincerely, Customer Service Got me hackles up with that reply: Customer Service, You wrote: >Yes if you dial the number properly, then it should connect to the >proper destination. What do you mean by "dial the number properly"? I'm not sure whether you were trying to insult me or not. But here is what I did. I picked up the phone. I dialed 1 7 1 0 6 2 7 4 3 8 7 . Is that dialing it properly? When I call that number from my cellphone, or from other phones, I am connected to the Government Emergency Telephone System. But from my [Telco X] phone, I am not connected. I think I have dialled it properly. At this time of National Emergency, I think it is important that [Telco X] be able to complete calls to this number. I also think that you should be more careful about what you write when you answer a question from a customer. Regards/john [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: John is quite correct of course. Customer service is horrible at many telcos these days. And depending on your authority to use a/c 710 for calls during these times we are in (I do not know about John, have never made inquiry and do not wish to second- guess him) you should be able to access 710 from *any phone, anywhere, anytime*. Curious about whether or not it would work correctly from here in Independence, I tried it. It didn't even ring first. The call set up instantly, gave a slight tone, then a recorded message said 'please enter your pin'. Of course I have no PIN (they do not give them out to Usenet moderators!) so I could not go further. But it seems to work, and rather promptly at that. Thats from 620-331, Southwestern Bell, John. It seems rather shocking to me that any telco would not have that properly configured. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Skimming the Cream Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 20:00:06 -0800 In article , richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) wrote: > If you don't plan to use the SBC LD, just switch to NO PIC and avoid > part of the fees disguised as taxes. SBC will still hit you, but with > less. It also protects you from a visitor making LD calls without > your knowledge. The only gotcha with that is that "no PIC" cannot be "locked" against PIC change. In other words, you do run the risk of being slammed from "no carrier" to MCI as your PIC. 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: Begging pardon, John. *My* 'local' business office of Southwestern Bell in Fort Worth, Texas says that No PIC can be locked like anything else. The only hassle for me is that since the Kansas Commission allows them to charge for no PIC to make up for lost money otherwise on default dialing, they charge $4.00 per month for it here in Kansas. $4.00 per month for doing nothing, or nothing per month for doing something, and what most people do is nothing pro-active, and let their one plus go to Southwestern Bell at some outrageous amount per call-minute. Maybe telco does not allow for No PIC to be locked in California however. Makes sense to me! After all, it is TPC and their antics. PAT] ------------------------------ From: C Chambers Subject: Telecom Student Hoping for Some Assistance Organization: MediaCom High Speed Internet Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 02:26:35 GMT I am a Telecommunications student and I am wanting to put together a website for telecommunications info. I am wanting to set up something that has things from basic wiring to terms, etc. I know that there are quite a few websites out there, this is mainly a project to pass the time. I am hoping that I can get some assistance with some links that might be useful for the site. Thanks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are welcome to take the links from our web site for your own. Just go to http://telecom-digest.org and begin copying over to your new site. From there you can click over to the page of 'useful links' and begin using them. I regard all my work on the web site and this Digest as open source, and invite you or anyone to learn from it. Obviously if you use *my exact words* and my .gifs and .jpg things I would like some credit. PAT] ------------------------------ From: CGoodlife@aol.com Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 08:32:12 EST Subject: Thank You I have been a subscriber and have enjoyed your newsletter for some time. I JUST read the notice at the bottom about helping to support your efforts, and will be sending a contribution out to you this week. As an aside, I am employed by Qwest Communications out of our Philadelphia sales office. Would be happy to field any specific questions about the company that come your way, as long as certain anonymity can be maintained if the questions run along "corporate", instead of service/technology lines. I only offer this as your readers seem more interested in hard facts and real application than the garbage I read in other newsletters. Thank you again for your newsletter! Chris [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are quite welcome, Chris. My idea, twenty-five years ago when I started 'Telecom Topics' then later took over TELECOM Digest and comp.dcom.telecom, was to make it possible -- and fun -- for everyone who wanted to do so to know 'everything there was to know about The Telephone Company'. When I started, there was (for all practical intents) only one Telephone Company for most people, and we have come a long ways from that point. I'll be the first to admit that I am not the finest moderator/editor to be found on Internet; there are many others who are better. Nor do I stick to 'just the facts' all the time as Jack Webb in his deadpan role as 'Sergeant Joe Friday' would admonish those he interviewed. I tend to digress a great deal these days, in part because of my brain desease which has caused much neurlogical damage and in the early days of my brain aneurysm a very distasteful -- really quite horrible -- experience I had with the 'authorities' when I was unable (like being at the tail end of a three month coma) to defend myself at all. So many of the long-time people here have accused me of 'left wing crap' and many others have accused me of 'right wing extremism' when as a matter of fact I try to be libert- arian in my beliefs and attempt to be consistent in my, well, -- digressions -- as I speak on non-telecom-related topics, such as now. So when someone like you comes along and says 'the check is in the mail' to Post Office Box 50, Independence, KS 67301-0050, or suggests that they visited the web site or used any PayPal template to make a credit card donation to 'editor@telecom-digest.org' I really feel like a few people 'out there' appreciate my efforts. I will admit however that Jon Solomon (my predecessor here years ago) probably could have made a better choice. 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 #353 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 19 23:37:21 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2K4bKK29890; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 23:37:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 23:37:21 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303200437.h2K4bKK29890@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 #354 TELECOM Digest Wed, 19 Mar 2003 23:37:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 354 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson SAC 710 (GETS) Not Working From Some Phones/Telcos/etc (Mark J Cuccia) Re: Assessing Reliability of Phone Services (Jack Adams) Re: Assessing Reliability of Phone Services (Bob Goudreau) Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap (John Higdon) Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap (Larry & Wanda Finch) Siemens 8825 Call Waiting and Voicemail Features? (Rich Heimlich) Re: Can't Find a Source For This Kind of Switch (Paul A Lee) DSL Filter Question (Rich Greenberg) 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, 19 Mar 2003 15:06:19 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: SAC 710 (GETS) Not Working From Some Phones/Telcos/etc Pat replied to John Covert, regarding "Telco-X" not routing to the GETS platform on 710-NCS-GETS: > John is quite correct of course. Customer service is horrible at many > telcos these days. It's not just telcos. It's any/every utility, government services, and most "private" businesses dealing with the general public as well. These days, you get LOUSY customer service at ALL of these! :( > And depending on your authority to use a/c 710 for calls during these > times we are in (I do not know about John, have never made inquiry and > do not wish to second-guess him) you should be able to access 710 from > *any phone, anywhere, anytime*. Curious about whether or not it would > work correctly from here in Independence, I tried it. It didn't even > ring first. The call set up instantly, gave a slight tone, then a > recorded message said 'please enter your pin'. Of course I have no PIN > (they do not give them out to Usenet moderators!) so I could not go > further. But it seems to work, and rather promptly at that. Thats from > 620-331, Southwestern Bell, John. It seems rather shocking to me that > any telco would not have that properly configured. Well, it all depends, considering the state of telcos these days. Even though Neustar-NANPA, Telcordia-TRA, the US Federal Government's OMNCS-GETS, and so forth have attempted to alert all segments of the telephone industry in the US, the rest-of-the-NANP, and even the rest-of-the-world, about the existance of +1-710, there will *ALWAYS* be things that (unfortunately) slip through the cracks. First, for routing to the GETS platform, and then throughout the (conterminous) US, only AT&T, MCI-Worldcom, and US-Sprint-LD have the actual "whistles and bells" of non-blocking routing and alternate routing (above and beyond what is 'normal') capabilities that is the very *purpose* of GETS. If you are inter-LATA-PIC'd to someone *other* than AT&T, MCI-Worldcom, or US-Sprint-LD, your "straight" 1+/0+ calls to 710-anything will most likely fail in that LD carrier's toll-switch translations, and you will either get some kind of recording from that LD carrier, or SS7'd back to a recording from your local telco. However, it "could" happen that this "other" LD carrier has arrangements with AT&T/MCI/Sprint to hand-over such calls to them. Where your landline phone is inter-LATA-PIC'd to someone "else", your best choice is to dial 101-0288+ for AT&T, 101-0222+ for MCI, or 101-0333+ for Sprint, before dialing 1+/0+ 710-anything. Your local telco's switch will thus route the call to AT&T/MCI/Sprint directly or via the LATA access tandem if necessary. You might be in a situation where 101-XXXX+ "CAC" dialing won't work, either for 1+ (and 011+) sent-paid type calls only, or for ALL calls. Or you might be in a situation where 710 doesn't work. GETS has three "carrier specific" 800/888 type numbers, one is for AT&T, one is for MCI, the third for Sprint, which more-or-less do the same thing that dialing 1-710-NCS-GETS does. Wireless carriers in the US are "supposed" to be able to handle 710 calls, and are encouraged to LEARN about it, by both industry groups (USTA, NECA, Telcordia, Neustar/NANPA, ATIS, etc.) and government/ regulatory/etc. But again, things "fall thru the cracks". In some cases, it isn't that the wireless carrier doesn't have 710 loaded into the MTSO translations ... it's that you frequently can't dial 101-XXXX+ on most wireless these days (at least not for 1+/011+ type calls, and maybe not even for 0+/01+ type calls as well). And if your wireless carrier doesn't route to AT&T/MCI/ Sprint for inter-LATA, and doesn't have special translations to specifically route 710 to AT&T or MCI or Sprint, then most likely you are unfortuantely 'SOL' on trying to reach any 710 number. The US Fed Govt's OMNCS-GETS organization *IS* aware of such situations. Then there are CLECs, as well as small independent telcos ... they may or may not really know about 710 or how to properly hand the call over to AT&T/MCI/Sprint. OMNCS-GETS in VA/DC *IS* aware of such, and is trying to use industry support groups alert all segments of the telco industry about 710. There are COCOT payphones as well. And we all know how customer UN-friendly these can be. These days, since COCOT owners are able to register through clearinghouses to get their "pound of flesh" on 800/etc. and 0+ special billed calls placed from their phones (i.e., billed to card, billed collect which really includes 800/888/etc, billed 3rd pty, and such), more and more (though still not all) COCOTs are recognizing 888, 877, and 866 (and even future but not yet in service 855, 844, 833, 822) toll free SACs and as coin-FREE to the calling end-user. The Fed. Govt's OMNCS-GETS and the payphone industry groups are trying to alert the COCOT "industry" that 1+ calls to 710 are *FREE*, should be routed to AT&T/MCI/Sprint despite what the chips have as default, or what the default PIC is, and that the COCOT owner will get "compensation" for the "use of 'their' phone". In other words, 1+ to 710 (at least for 1-710-NCS-GETS) is to be treated JUST like 800/888/877/etc. And then there are PBXes. 1+ calls to 710 (at least 710-NCS-GETS) are supposed to be FREE. I know that our PBX here at work, for toll-calls billed to company toll codes, does NOT 'block' NPA codes dialed up front anymore, except for 900. I can dial 9+1+ten-digits (NXX-NXX-xxxx), and if the NPA-NXX office code is truly LOCAL or FREE (including 800-NXX, 888-NXX, etc), then the call goes thru. If the NPA-NXX code is toll, or not yet assigned, then I am returned a "stutter dialtone" from the PBX to key in my company-toll-auth-code. If I were to use 900-NXX, I get a re-order (fast busy) right away after 9-1-900-nxx-xxxx. I tried 9-1-710-NCS-GETS, and instead of routing to the GETS platform, or else routing to the vacant code recording of the non-AT&T/MCI/Sprint toll carrier our PBX defaults directly to, I got a stutter dialtone for me to enter my company toll-code (NOT a "GETS" auth code though). I didn't key in my toll-code, but why should I if our PBX is SUPPOSED to treat (9)-1-710-NCS-GETS as "FREE". And even if I did key in my toll auth code, would I even get to the GETS "platform" anyhow? I tend to doubt it. And, I am unable to use 101-XXXX+ "CAC" codes to force the call to AT&T/MCI/ Sprint. AND ... then there's Canada! When the GETS concept was first being impelemented in the mid-1990s, the (at the time) Bellcore NANPA "Information Letter" explained that all telcos and providers in the US and Canada were to open up 710 as a valid (and free) special area code in switch translations. I know that in discussions here in the Digest in Feb/March 1996, there was an ongoing thread about 710-NCS-GETS, and several from *overseas* countries posted things about trying +1-710-NCS-GETS and getting through to either a live "GETS assistance operator", or else the automated GETS platform! Thus, I would have expected Canada, our "good neighbor" to the north, and integral part of the NANP (even moreso than the NANP-Caribbean!), would have simply opened up SAC 710 in the local central offices as well as in the toll switches, and routed calls southbound to AT&T/MCI/or Sprint. Of course, I could "understand" that many wireless carriers, most CLECs, and a lot of new generation payphones, as well as smaller or mid-size Canadian competitive LD carriers, might not know about 710, or not route it properly. Well only recently, I found out from my friends in Toronto, that Bell Canada (incumbent) LEC landline central offices reject dialing 1+/0+ calls to 710. However, one of my Toronto friends also has a second line with Sprint-Canada (Call-Net) CLEC (of course PIC'd to Sprint-Canada-CLEC) has no problem reaching 1+710-NCS-GETS. The call is routed to the GETS tone/platform! From the CLEC and competitive Canadian LD carrier! I inquired as to WHY SAC 710 (after over eight years and especially since 9/11/2001) is being blocked at most (if not all) Bell and Telus local c.o.switches! (although it works from Sprint-Canada-CLEC landlines in Toronto ON). I was told that in 1994, when the US Fed Govt's OMNCS-GETS organization was implementing GETS, they wanted the Canadian telco industry to be "fully integrated" into all of the GETS "whistles and bells" of "extra-ordinary alternate and non-blocking routing and call completion", just like US-based AT&T/MCI/Sprint would be doing. HOWEVER, there would be little-to-no-compensation to the Canadian telco industry for their work and involvement in such a project!!! (I have *NO* idea as to if/how the US telco industry has been compensated for the actual implementation and call routing procedures of GETS, though... but I do know that calls to 710 are handled "like" 800/888/etc. type calls, so carriers do get revenue and COCOT owners are also compensated for allowing such calls, "as if" it were just like 800/888/etc. from "their" phones or networks). Since the Canadian telco industry was not going to be reimbersed for their (requested/demanded) "integral" part of all (US-based) GETS 'whistles and bells' special alternate routings, they more or less told the GETS group to "forget it", that they weren't 'required' to open up the 710 SAC in their networks at all! Now since 9/11/2001, both the US Fed Govt OMNCS-GETS and the Canadian telco industry (and Canadian Govt/regulatory) are beginning to come to a compromise. It could be that 710 will be opened up in "all" Canadian telco switches and tandems, but the "full GETS integration" of extra- ordinary routings (as practised in the US) will not be implemented. Rather, it will be handled more like "POTS" calls, or how 710 (and POTS) calls from OVERSEAS are routed to the US... simply *RECOGNIZE* (+1)-710- and route the call southbound to the US from Canada, similar to how most overseas foreign countries route +1-710- to US Gateways. There are still issues to be hammered out, such as compensation for per-call rates (a-la- 800/888/etc.) for both carriers/networks/telcos, AND payphone owners (COCOTS now exist in Canada too, for several years now), special routings/translations to "force" the call southbound, but ONLY to AT&T/MCI/Sprint (since Canada can also send southbound traffic to Qwest, Global Crossing, etc, who don't have GETS capabilities), and such. Also, since there *ARE* three Carrier-specific 800/888 type numbers to reach the GETS platform (one toll-free nmbr for AT&T, one for Sprint, one for MCI) that work throughout the US *AND* work originating from Canada, there might be some in the Canadian telco industry who question WHY there also needs to be this 'unique' 710 code and 710-NCS-GETS number to reach the GETS platform ... Maybe the 710-NCS-GETS number has special treatments WITHIN the LEC and initial set-up routing TO the GETS platform, which an 800/888 type number might not have... of course, once one reaches the GETS platform and has keyed in (or quoted to a live GETS opr) their GETS account number, routing FROM the platform throughout the (conterminous) US will ahve the special treatments ... Anyhow ... while we would *EXPECT* that 710 (or at least 710-NCS-GETS) to be available from 99.9% of phones in the US (and Canada), there are ALWAYS going to be obstacles of one kind or another, due to the competitive and lackadaisical, or just CONFUSED nature of today's telco industry, especially when it comes to CLECs, wireless, PBXes, payphones, small town and rural independents, etc. and possibly even larger BOC and independent incumbent LECs/telcos! :( At least there are those three specific carrier-specific 800/888 type numbers, dialable from throughout both the US *AND* Canada, to reach the GETS platform, in case one is unable to dial 1+710-NCS-GETS, which MOST "unusual" or "nonstandard" origination situations SHOULD be able to handle. (I tend to doubt that OMNCS-GETS would want GETS to be available from a prison-inmate payphone! Most do NOT allow access to 800/888/etc and I doubt any would allow 1+ calling to SAC 710! :-) Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mark, in your (as usual) good and very encyclopedic reply to John above, you neglected to account for the former 809 area and all those places. What happens there, any ideas? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jack Adams Subject: Re: Assessing Reliability of Phone Services Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 12:57:09 -0500 Organization: Lucent Technologies Gail M. Hall wrote in message news:telecom22.352.11@telecom-digest.org: -----8======== > So how are those wireless phone transmitters powered? Do they have > backup power available when disaster cuts off the electricity from the > power company? > Gail in Ohio USA Base Stations (Those little CEV (controlled environment vault) huts you see near the towers) for Cellular Systems provide the RAN (Radio Access Network) that makes your cellular phone mobile. Most of the base stations that I have seen are all provided with battery backup capability that typically will run the base station for quite a while (Typically engineered for 8 hours on battery). Your cellular phone will continue to work during all but the most prolonged of commercial power outages. In fact, during very long power outages, mobile power (telco trucks) are used on these remotes (including wireline remote switching modules and DSL terminals) to recharge the batteries during sustained (multi day) power outages that can occur during these disasters. Of course your normal (Central Office powered) telephone will continue to operate since the source of its power is backed up by sophisticated diesel or gas turbine (newer) powered generators. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:22:07 PST From: Bob Goudreau Reply-To: BobGoudreau@nc.rr.com Subject: Re: Assessing Reliability of Phone Services John Higdon wrote: > In article , Gail M. Hall wrote: >> Don't those wireless phone services need electricity from the power >> companies to operate? Or do those towers have some self-contained power >> supply that will continue to function if the power goes out. > Just like the regular phone company, the systems operate on floating > batteries with generator backup. No big deal. No big deal ... until the batteries and/or generator conk out. We had a major ice storm here in central North Carolina in December. Some of the hardest-hit customers were without power for a week. Fortunately, my home was down for only 23 hours, though many surrounding neighborhoods were down even longer due to overhead (vs. underground) power lines. When the power in my neighborhood went down that morning, I immediately checked my wireless service (Sprint PCS). At first, all was well; the usual 5 bars of antenna strength. But about three hours later, service suddenly ceased -- no signal at all, even the analog (AMPS) fallback. My presumption is that the delayed Sprint outage corresponded with the loss of power to their nearby cell sites, followed eventually by exhaustion of battery or generator fuel. We (and zillions of other people) quickly gravitated to the limited areas of the metro region that still had power (or quickly got it back) later that day, and I observed that my service was fine in those places. (I kept calling our wireline home phone to see if the answering machine would pick up in order to test if power had been restored). After a dark and chilly night spent at home, power returned the next morning. Not long after, so did my Sprint signal and service. My BellSouth wireline was functional the entire time, thanks to the fact that I live in a neighborhood with buried utility lines. Other people weren't always so lucky; ice-laden trees can bring down overhead phone lines as well as electricity lines. (Of course, the unluckiest folks are the ones who live in neighborhoods with overhead sewage lines; those *really* cause a mess when they fall down :-)). Bob Goudreau Cary, NC ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:29:42 -0800 In article , joe@obilivan.net wrote: > Only have more than passing knowledge about tax returns. Did I imply > that I am an expert on how families use software? You are the one who introduced the claim about being a CPA. If you did not intend it to be a statement of authority regarding the topic at hand (software and its use by licensees), the intent was not obvious. > My knowledge is based on those who have accountants, enrolled agents, > or tax attorneys prepare their returns. There is lots of professional > literature on who does what with tax returns. Obviously, my personal observation is at odds with those theories. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Larry & Wanda Finch Subject: Re: Intuit's TurboTax at Center of Anti-Piracy Flap Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 01:22:51 GMT joe@obilivan.net wrote: > Michael D. Sullivan wrote: >> On Fri, 14 Mar 2003 22:50:48 -0500, Monty Solomon posted the following >> to comp.dcom.telecom: >>> According to Intuit, the Internal Revenue Service said it received >>> 15 million tax returns prepared with desktop versions of TurboTax >>> during the 2001 tax filing season. Meanwhile, Intuit sold 5.5 million >>> desktop copies of TurboTax. >> The conclusion that they are being ripped off by 2/3 of the return >> filers is BS. A paying user of a single licensed copy of TurboTax can >> file multiple returns. For example, husband and wife filing separate >> returns, instead of jointly, and also filing returns for children over >> 13. One can also use TurboTax to prepare your aged parents' return, >> your dumb brother's, etc. You can't use the standard version to >> prepare returns for others commercially. In other words, it is >> entirely to be expected that considerably more returns would be filed >> with TT than the number of copies licensed or "sold." That's not to >> deny that there undoubtedly is piracy, but it's not 2/3 by a long >> shot. > I think your logic is more likely in the "BS" category than their's. > A vast majority of people who use TurboTax prepare one federal return > per software license. > As a CPA who has more than passing knowledge of the subject, a very > small percentage of households are involved with more than one > personal tax return ... presuming the couple are married. If there > are unrelated persons in the household, then there is often more than > one return per household. But, does the TurboTax software license > permit multiple returns on one copy of the software in such > circumstances? I seriously doubt that only a small percentage are involved with one return. My children all have UTMA/UGMA accounts; that means 3 returns (1 joint, 2 for the kids). I suspect that most married Turbotax users face similar situations; folks who don't have enough money to shelter money for their kids are unlikely to use (or need) a tax program. Larry Finch N 40° 53' 47" W 74° 03' 56" ------------------------------ From: Rich Heimlich Subject: Siemens 8825 Call Waiting and Voicemail Features? Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:47:31 -0500 Reply-To: agrajag@comcast.net I JUST bought the Siemens 8825 system after trying to replace my 18 year-old DuoFone that was just fine but lacked new features. I tried AT&T and GE and both were a fiasco of crap. I probably should have researched longer as I could find no middle ground between $80 2-line phones and $300 2-lines phones like this one. Anyway, I'm setting things up a couple of items are coming to mind: First, I'm with Verizon in NJ and we have Caller-ID and Call Waiting/Caller-ID, etc. The manual mentions this whole option of Advanced Call Waiting features like Send to Voicemail, Call Back, Please Hold and 3 Way Call. These sound like features from the phone company but the manual isn't clear. I can't see how the phone can provide such features and a call to Verizon has gotten a "Huh?" reply. Anyone know if these are out of reach to me? Second, I have voicemail with Verizon (it comes with their new Freedom flat-rate plan) and like it. I have gotten the phone to work with it by disabling the voicemail in the phone but have I acted too quickly? Does typical phone system voicemail exceed what I get with this or should I tell the phone company to just enable it in case the phone is busy and use the phones voicemail? Third, I can set a speed dial number to the Mail button for Verizon voicemail. Can I also insert a pause in that and then send my passcode? Lastly, the cordless satellite phone is pretty much extra for me. I really just wanted a SOLID home business-level phone but I'm wondering if I can just sit this next to the base and, if I'm on a call and need to move around, quickly switch over and start walking around or is it more convoluted than that? *** RTH *** [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Generally those 'advanced features' you talked about are set up sort of like speed dialing numbers to the various telco features. For instance, I had a two phones like that once, and one of the buttons was 'do not disturb'. In setting up the phones and programming I found out that meant I could _dial_ *70 before a call and telco would suspend call-waiting (return a busy to a caller or forward them direct to voice mail). The object of this 'do not disturb' button was to speed dial *70 first. So I could go off hook, press the 'do not disturb' button then dial the remainder of the dialing string. I also had a button called 'check voice mail' and it was programmable (by me) with the number I dialed to reach voice mail. I think you may find all those buttons do is function as speed dials for whatever you would otherwise dial to use the telco feature. 'Call Back' I *think* refers to speed dialing *66 or *69 or whatever number telco assigns to have you call back to the last person who called you (which is all telco stores in its scratchpad memory anyway). PAT] ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Can't Find a Source For This Kind of Switch Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 16:13:47 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V22 #352, I wrote (in part): > In TELECOM Digest V22 #351, jeannot@gmavt.net (Jean Gagnon) wrote > (in part): >> I am bringing a second phone line to my house. I do NOT want >> to change all my phones in the house, but I want them to >> automatically connect to any line that rings. However after a >> call, the system (switch) should always revert to the same line, >> because I want to make all my outgoing calls from the same line. ... > A Panasonic KX-T30810 might do the job. I have a KX-T61610 at > home, and it definitely will. To which our esteemed editor noted (in part): > Why wouldn't distinctive ringing from telco do the same job a lot > cheaper, with no cables to run or special phones to buy? ... > People could dial in on either number and the ringing cadence would > tell him which line they were on. Because Jean specifically stated, "I do NOT want to change all my phones in the house, but I want them to automatically connect to any line that rings." And, maybe he's fortunate enough to have home runs or enough prewire pairs to his current phones. On the KX-T, you can use whatever kind of "standard" [2500] set (except the _one_ KX-T hybrid phone required for programming) on _any_ of the station ports. And, you can program each of the lines ("trunks") to ring at any (idle) station(s) and answer the call that is ringing in at a station, because the call will "automatically connect" when the ringing station station is answered. Only some two-line phones will do that. On others, you have to key up the ringing line. There are undoubtedly several ways to accomplish what Jean is looking to do. I simply presented one alternative that, based on personal, daily experience over time, would do just as he asked. Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your solution certainly was a good one if Jean already has two (or more) *lines* into his house. I was thinking more in terms of a person having *one line* but several phones in his house. Either way would work, I guess. PAT] ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: DSL Filter Question Date: 19 Mar 2003 20:40:34 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? I am installing DSL and have a question that thier "help" desk wasn't sure of. This guy didn't even seem to know what a 2 line jack was. I am not sure if I can use the filters I was sent. The EXCELSUS Z-BLOCKER model Z-D25OP2J is marked as being a "Dual DSL filter". Its a small box with a short wire with a modular plug on one end, and 2 modular jacks on the other end, one marked for a phone, and the other for the DSL modem. Does this mean it contains 2 filters and will filter both line 1 and line 2 of a 2 line jack, or is the "dual" just that it has 2 jacks, one filtered and one not, and the filter is on line 1? If only one line is filtered, can I get a similar filter that filters line 2? My DSL is on line 2 of a 2 line jack. Is it possible to get a filter with wire pigtails that I can mount inside the wall box? I do not see such filters listed. If available, I would like to buy 2-3 such filters. I am going to replace the wall jack with a dual jack. One will be wired line1+line2, and the other will have line 2 only, wired to the line 1 position. This will let me connect the DSL modem, which insists on being a line 1 device. I will use the inline filters for 2 other 2 line devices. 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 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You NEVER want to put a filter on the line used for the modem/DSL. On the other hand you always want to filter everything else downstream on the same line such as phones or answering machines, etc. A filter on the DSL line with slow you down to a very slow speed. Other phones anywhere on the same pair must be filtered in order to make them usable at 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 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 #354 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 20 00:56:38 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2K5ubp01218; Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:56:38 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:56:38 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303200556.h2K5ubp01218@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 #355 TELECOM Digest Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:57:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 355 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Federal Agencies Lax With SSNs (Monty Solomon) GPS Satellite Network Goes to War (Monty Solomon) Surveillance Nation (Monty Solomon) Three Wireless Flavors In One (Eric Friedebach) Miscellaneous Pat-isms (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Malignant Text Ambushes Europe Cell Phones (Dave Garland) Re: Assessing Reliability of Phone Service (tonypo1@cox.net) 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, 19 Mar 2003 14:59:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Federal Agencies Lax With SSNs http://www.politechbot.com/p-04561.html Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 00:35:41 -0500 From: Declan McCullagh Subject: FC: Privacy villain of the week: Federal agencies lax with SSNs Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 16:57:39 -0500 From: J Plummer Subject: NCP: Privacy Villain of the Week: Federal Agencies Lax with SSNs Privacy Villain of the Week: Federal Agencies Lax with SSNs A report out this month reveals something shocking but sadly not altogether unexpected - federal agencies are incredibly lax when it comes to protecting the integrity of your Social Security numbers. The report was requested by the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee and issued by the Social Security Administration Office of the Inspector General(OIG), after being compiled by the OIGs of 15 different federal agencies. The findings were shocking: = All but one of the 15 agencies participating in the study lacked adequate security controls over private contractors' access to and use of SSNs. = One agency had allowed contractor employees access to its database, including SSNs, before their background checks were completed. = Another didn't ensure contractors couldn't access databases after they stopped working for the agency. = Private contractors keeping personal identification information in unlocked cabinets, in storage rooms, and on desktops after working hours. = One agency didn't even know exactly which contractors had access to SSNs. = Nine agencies had inadequate controls over SSNs stored on computers. = Two federal agencies even had poor controls over non-Government and/or non-contractor access to SSNs. The lessons to be drawn from this debacle are eveident. Federal agencies have no financial incentive to respect the privacy of citizens -- their continued existence and growing budgets are virtually assured. At least when a business treats sensitive consumer data so shoddily, they face the prospect of consumer backlash and attendant financial hurt or ruin. Efforts should be made to bar the federal government from using the SSN as an identifier for anything but Social Security accounts. (At least one such effort is underway in the Congress right now. And perhaps even more importantly, efforts such as those by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators to create mandatory government databases of fingerprints or other biometric identifiers should be resisted. Such databases would retain all the problems we see now with loss of privacy and identity fraud, with the potential for even more ruinous consequences, such as faked fingerprints planted at a crime scene. The revealing report of the IG shows that trusting the government to protect your privacy is a fool's game. And the negligent agencies have revealed themselves as Privacy Villains. By James Plummer The Privacy Villain of the Week and Privacy Hero of the Month are projects of the National Consumer Coalition's Privacy Group. Privacy Villain audio features now available from FCF News on Demand. For more information on the NCC Privacy Group, see www.nccprivacy.org or contact James Plummer at 202-467-5809 or via email. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/ Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 16:20:41 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: GPS Satellite Network Goes to War By Alan Boyle MSNBC March 19 - The Global Positioning System started out decades ago as a satellite-based network for military location and navigation, but in the past few years it's spawned a host of civilian applications - including high-tech direction-finders for automobiles and hikers. Now GPS is going to war again, raising questions about what happens on the homefront. ... http://www.msnbc.com/news/887551.asp ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Surveillance Nation Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 17:30:58 -0500 Webcams, tracking devices, and interlinked databases are leading to the elimination of unmonitored public space. Are we prepared for the consequences of the intelligence-gathering network we're unintentionally building? By Dan Farmer and Charles C. Mann April 2003 Route 9 is an old two-lane highway that cuts across Massachusetts from Boston in the east to Pittsfield in the west. Near the small city of Northampton, the highway crosses the wide Connecticut River. The Calvin Coolidge Memorial Bridge, named after the president who once served as Northampton's mayor, is a major regional traffic link. When the state began a long-delayed and still-ongoing reconstruction of the bridge in the summer of 2001, traffic jams stretched for kilometers into the bucolic New England countryside. In a project aimed at alleviating drivers' frustration, the University of Massachusetts Transportation Center, located in nearby Amherst, installed eight shoe-size digital surveillance cameras along the roads leading to the bridge. Six are mounted on utility poles and the roofs of local businesses. Made by Axis Communications in Sweden, they are connected to dial-up modems and transmit images of the roadway before them to a Web page, which commuters can check for congestion before tackling the road. According to Dan Dulaski, the system's technical manager, running the entire webcam system-power, phone, and Internet fees-costs just $600 a month. The other two cameras in the Coolidge Bridge project are a little less routine. Built by Computer Recognition Systems in Wokingham, England, with high-quality lenses and fast shutter speeds (1/10,000 second), they are designed to photograph every car and truck that passes by. Located eight kilometers apart, at the ends of the zone of maximum traffic congestion, the two cameras send vehicle images to attached computers, which use special character-recognition software to decipher vehicle license plates. The license data go to a server at the company's U.S. office in Cambridge, MA, about 130 kilometers away. As each license plate passes the second camera, the server ascertains the time difference between the two readings. The average of the travel durations of all successfully matched vehicles defines the likely travel time for crossing the bridge at any given moment, and that information is posted on the traffic watch Web page. To local residents, the traffic data are helpful, even vital: police use the information to plan emergency routes. But as the computers calculate traffic flow, they are also making a record of all cars that cross the bridge-when they do so, their average speed, and (depending on lighting and weather conditions) how many people are in each car. ... http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/farmer0403.asp [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just as an example, a software program I have here called 'WebCam Watcher' offers in excess of two thousand cameras in various parts of the world which you can view with a click of a mouse. Add your own cams to the total repertoire if you wish. That two thousand mentioned above are the non-pornographic ones, things like busy street intersections (four alone at Times Square in New York), a few in the Los Angeles area including Santa Monica pier, etc. Cams are all over the place for you to look at. If you want the pornographic ones, then WebCam watcher offers a few thousand of those also. I have previously mentioned http://www.cameraware.com which is 99.44 percent pure porn, with thousands of cameras running online at one time and I have already mentioned the Porn Worm Harvestor (http://thumbgal.com) which gladly works its way around the net gathering up all the porn camera images it can find, etc. It would indeed seem that cameras are where the action is at this year, as Monty mentions. With all three of these, WebCam Watcher, Cameraware and the porn worm harvestor you could not possibly begin to see all the cam images available just on the net alone. And cameras are cheap: fifty dollars gets you a rather decent little thing which plugs right in to modern computers which recognize them immediatly and eagerly set them up for you to use, without any hassle (or very few hassles) at all. KABcam is a nice little easy to install/use bit of software to run at your own site. Everyone, it seems, is getting into cameras. Good idea or bad? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Three Wireless Flavors In One Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 17:56:17 -0600 Organization: Purity Of Essence/Plant Operational Error Reply-To: Eric Friedebach Arik Hesseldahl, 03.19.03, Forbes.com NEW YORK - With all the wireless devices on the market, there still isn't one that is flexible enough to work in all the wireless environments you might find yourself in. Such a device would not only be a mobile phone that could travel anywhere in the world, but it would also manage all your personal data like a PDA, work on Wi-Fi wireless networks for Internet access and also be able to connect to other devices as needed via Bluetooth. It's possible to combine all three types of wireless connectivity into a single device, but usually it means buying a device that is both a phone and a PDA with Bluetooth, then adding a Wi-Fi card. Chipmaker Texas Instruments says it has built up a chipset that would form the basis of just such a handheld, and it has been showing off a concept device it calls WANDA at the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet trade show in New Orleans this week. http://www.forbes.com/2003/03/19/cx_ah_0319tentech.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:28:35 -0700 Subject: Miscellaneous Pat-isms Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:40:20 EST, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This sounds to me a lot like a > condition which used to (still does? I don't think so) occur on > computers with email. Someone could send you a piece of email with > certain words in the text, quoted a certain way, and it would cause > your computer to do some ugly things. This was back in the 'early > days' of computer hacking, and sending text from one computer to > another, either telnetting or otherwise connecting from one computer > to a 'socket' or 'port' on another computer over the net would cause > this to happen if certain strings of words were transmitted and quoted > a certain way. Whatever took place exactly is way in my distant > memory. I dislike sounding so vague on this but I just do not remember > details. I guess it had never occurred to the computer experts that > such a thing would happen, which is how people took advantage of > it. It was one of those 'security through obscurity' things which used > to be how computers and the internet operated many years ago. PAT] I'll use this to segue to another FidoNet bit of fun: the "mail bomb". When setting up your "mailer" (most FidoNet-style bulletin boards used a separate "front end" for actually exchanging mail -- if a user called in, the "front end" would exit to an errorlevel, and your batchfile would trap that errorlevel, load the BBS, and allow the user to login), you could easily configure it however you liked -- any sysop name, any BBS name, any node number. There was also no caller-ID back in those days, so a prankster could easily masquerade as anybody else, or simply pick an unused node number and start sending mail to people. Later, they added a few security features, like passwords and a database dip to the nodelist, but even those folks running more-advanced software like that frequently did not implement these extra features. Now, tie that in with what somebody else (sorry, forgot who it was) said about compressed mail. By default, there were only two "standard" ways of transmitting mail (be it "netmail" or "echomail"), and that was either in plain text, or compressed with the "ARC" archiver. HOWEVER, if any two sysops wished to use another compression program, for mail between those two systems, they were free to do so. Indeed, when I was playing Net Echo Coordinator, I made sure my system could send and receive all the various compression formats ... ARC, ARJ, ZOO, LZH, LHA, RAR, and that danged upstart ZIP. :-) There were freely-available programs that you could run instead of ARC, which would "sniff" the file you were unpacking (the suffix wouldn't tell you, because the suffix was always two letters and a number, with the letters being the first two letters of the current day of the week), then call the correct program to perform the decompression. The RAR archiver is what really made mailbombs practical and effective. :-) It introduced something called "solid mode", which basically means that if you have a whole whack of ".txt" files and you compress them together, RAR will treat the entire pile of ".txt" files as one big ".txt" file. That just refers to how it handles things internally - to the user, they're still separate files. But it made a big difference in how well RAR could compress data. Now, putting these two ideas together ... You could create a 100 kilobyte netmail message, addressed to some sysop you didn't like, filled with nothing but "space" characters. Then you duplicate this message thousands of times, to the point where unpacking them will cost about 100 megabytes of disk space. Back then, hardly ANYBODY had that much disk space. :-) You compress 'em all up with RAR. RAR compresses the first file down to 1 or 2 kilobytes, max. RAR then realizes that each of the other files are EXACT DUPLICATES of the first file, and then DOES NOT STORE the additional files. It just stores a "pointer" back to the first file. Result: you can transmit, in 2K, a "mail bomb" that will cripple most of the bulletin boards of that era. Once those systems ran out of space, things would screw up big-time. :-) As Ed Whalen, host of the world famous "Stampede Wrestling" used to say, it would be "a malfunction at the junction". :-) Now, *I* never did anything this nasty to anybody, but I know folks that did ... :-) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: John is quite correct of course. Customer > service is horrible at many telcos these days. And depending on your > authority to use a/c 710 for calls during these times we are in (I do > not know about John, have never made inquiry and do not wish to second- > guess him) you should be able to access 710 from *any phone, anywhere, > anytime*. Curious about whether or not it would work correctly from here > in Independence, I tried it. It didn't even ring first. The call set > up instantly, gave a slight tone, then a recorded message said 'please > enter your pin'. Of course I have no PIN (they do not give them out to > Usenet moderators!) so I could not go further. But it seems to work, > and rather promptly at that. Thats from 620-331, Southwestern Bell, John. > It seems rather shocking to me that any telco would not have that > properly configured. PAT] I tried it from my line at the office here in Calgary, AB, Canada. Using dialtone provided by CLEC Sprint Canada, also Sprint Canada LD service. I never heard a ringtone - what I heard was a soft beep, then silence, then a recorded announcement saying "please stay on the line, an operator will be with you shortly". I'm surprised it went through at all from Canada. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Begging pardon, John. *My* 'local' > business office of Southwestern Bell in Fort Worth, Texas says that No > PIC can be locked like anything else. The only hassle for me is that > since the Kansas Commission allows them to charge for no PIC to make > up for lost money otherwise on default dialing, they charge $4.00 per > month for it here in Kansas. $4.00 per month for doing nothing, or > nothing per month for doing something, and what most people do is > nothing pro-active, and let their one plus go to Southwestern Bell at > some outrageous amount per call-minute. Maybe telco does not allow for > No PIC to be locked in California however. Makes sense to me! After > all, it is TPC and their antics. PAT] I've recently gone off Sprint Canada as my local dialtone provider, at least for my home line (they're pretty good for business lines though). They advertise themselves as being cheaper than the ILEC, and they are ... marginally ... but they also now charge a $2.95 "System Access Fee", which makes them MORE expensive than Telus. In an effort to avoid this fee, I switched to another LD carrier. The fee did not disappear. I called them to complain, and they said they'd be happy to get rid of the fee ... but cautioned me that my "low basic rate" was conditional upon also having Sprint Canada as my LD carrier, and that if I removed it, my "low basic rate" would go up by a whopping $10 per month. Complete rip-off, and false advertising to boot. Telus also charges a $2.95 fee but (and I really hate defending these people, given my email address and all) it's only there if you've got their LD service, and if you choose to switch to another provider *OR* select no carrier, the fee comes off. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are quite welcome, Chris. My idea, > twenty-five years ago when I started 'Telecom Topics' then later took > over TELECOM Digest and comp.dcom.telecom, was to make it possible -- > and fun -- for everyone who wanted to do so to know 'everything there > was to know about The Telephone Company'. When I started, there was > (for all practical intents) only one Telephone Company for most people, > and we have come a long ways from that point. I'll be the first to > admit that I am not the finest moderator/editor to be found on Internet; > there are many others who are better. Yeah, there are. :-) Seriously, there's *ALWAYS* somebody "better", but the question is: "are you good enough?", and the answer is "yes, quite". > Nor do I stick to 'just the facts' all the time as Jack Webb in his > deadpan role as 'Sergeant Joe Friday' would admonish those he > interviewed. BTW, have you seen the new "Dragnet", starring Ed "Al Bundy" O'Neill as Friday? It's actually VERY good, but a LOT more graphic than Jack Webb's shows (either one of 'em) ever were. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I hardly ever watch television, so no, I have not seen it. Now and again I watch 'TVLand' and its old re-runs of Barney Miller, 'I Love Lucy', and 'The Brady Bunch' but that's about all. Time-Warner sold out the local system to Cable One as of January 1, but the same two people (a woman and her husband) run it that used to work for Time-Warner. They're in the same building downtown where it always was; they just painted a new sign on the front door. The woman works in the office; her husband drives around town in a newly repainted truck repairing the wires, etc. When he drives down my street, he still looks very suspiciously at my DISH antenna, but after the time when he pulled up and and told me he would give me three months for free of premium HBO shows, etc if I would sign a form authorizing his son to climb on my roof and take away the DISH stuff, he has had nothing more to say except the day during the winter when ice and strong winds got my cable line mixed up in a tree branch in my back yard and he had to get it all untangled. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Malignant Text Ambushes Europe Cell Phones Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:00:44 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when Pat wrote: > This sounds to me a lot like a > condition which used to (still does? I don't think so) occur on > computers with email. Someone could send you a piece of email with > certain words in the text, quoted a certain way And still does, with some html-enabled mail programs. In the old days, a (fairly harmless) equivalent was to tell the BBS caller that he could activate the secret sysop menu by typing +++ATH (doing so would cause his modem to think it had received a command to hang up). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh yes, the old +++ATH joke. The last time I saw that one, it was some fool on Compuserve who was telling everyone it was a 'secret way' to get the time clock to turn off. That was back when CIS customers were mostly on plans for a certain number of hours per month, etc. You bet the clock turned off ... as you were dumped from the chat group you were in. PAT ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: Assessing Reliability of Phone Services Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 05:44:10 GMT In article , bobgoudreau@nc.rr.com says: > No big deal ... until the batteries and/or generator conk out. > We had a major ice storm here in central North Carolina in December. > Some of the hardest-hit customers were without power for a week. > Fortunately, my home was down for only 23 hours, though many surrounding > neighborhoods were down even longer due to overhead (vs. underground) > power lines. My power comes in underground, while the telephone lines are aerial. > We (and zillions of other people) quickly gravitated to the limited > areas of the metro region that still had power (or quickly got it back) > later that day, and I observed that my service was fine in those places. > (I kept calling our wireline home phone to see if the answering machine > would pick up in order to test if power had been restored). After a > dark and chilly night spent at home, power returned the next morning. > Not long after, so did my Sprint signal and service. > > My BellSouth wireline was functional the entire time, thanks to the > fact that I live in a neighborhood with buried utility lines. Other > people weren't always so lucky; ice-laden trees can bring down overhead > phone lines as well as electricity lines. (Of course, the unluckiest > folks are the ones who live in neighborhoods with overhead sewage lines; > those *really* cause a mess when they fall down :-)). My phone service ALWAYS works. Only when the outside plant guys screw up and steal my pair do I lose phone service. But power is terrible. It goes out for 5-10 hours at a stretch every couple of weeks. And it's just my block. Walking down the street you find that Narragansett Electric has decided to do maintenance. Yeah, right. I've never seen so much corrosion in a manhole. Tony ------------------------------ 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 #355 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 20 12:58:27 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2KHwQp04620; Thu, 20 Mar 2003 12:58:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 12:58:27 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303201758.h2KHwQp04620@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 #356 TELECOM Digest Thu, 20 Mar 2003 12:58:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 356 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: SAC 710 (GETS) Not Working in Some Cases (Mark J Cuccia) American Samoa Phone Update (Mark J. Cuccia) U.S. TV Networks Jump in as War in Iraq Starts (Monty Solomon) Verizon Sets 10 Million Lines For Hi-Speed Web Upgrade (Monty Solomon) Bad Customer Service (was 710) (John David Galt) Re: Proxim Tsunami MP.11 Product Family (scott) Re: DSL Filter Question (Tom Schmidt) AT&T WS Service Getting Worse in California? (rb) Re: Screen Machine (Ray Normandeau) Re: Assessing Reliability of Phone Services (Charles Cryderman) 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, 20 Mar 2003 00:33:57 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: SAC 710 (GETS) Not Working in Some Cases Pat replied to my previous post: > reply to John above, you neglected to account for the former 809 area > and all those places. What happens there, any ideas? I have no idea ... if the (incumbent landline) telcos in the (non-US) NANP-Caribbean have done what they "should", then they have opened up NANP SAC-NPA 710 in their translations, and route the call to the US mainland via AT&T or MCI or Sprint. I would assume that the *US* parts of the NANP-Caribbean, at least the incumbent landline telcos (VeriZon-GTE-PRTel NPAs 787 now overlaid with 939; VITelco in the US Virgin Islands NPA 340), have been properly instructed by the US Government, AT&T, MCI, Sprint, and VeriZon (GTE), and possibly representative from industry forums of ATIS (INC, NIIF, etc) to program it in their switches and how to route 710 to the US mainland. Similarly, I would expect GTE-now-VeriZon Hawaiian Telco (NPA 808) to have properly loaded 710 into their switches and hand the calls over to AT&T/MCI/Sprint ... I would expect AT&T-Alascom and GCI-Alaska, as well as MOST (if not all) of the (incumbent landline) local telcos in 907 Alaska to have done the proper translations and routings with SAC 710. GTE-now-VeriZon in Saipan/Mariana Islands (NPA 670), Guam Tel Authority (NPA 671), and American Samoa Telco (Country Code +684; next year to become NPA 684 within Country Code +1/NANP) -- I would expect too that AT&T, MCI, Sprint, VeriZon (GTE/Hawaii), the US Federal Government, and possibly representative from industry forums of ATIS (INC, NIIF, etc) have instructed them to load NANP SAC-NPA 710 into translations and route it via AT&T/MCI/Sprint to the mainland US. That covers all "non-conterminous" US locations of the NANP, in the Caribbean and the Pacific ... As I mentioned in the earlier post, many "overseas/international" locations do recognize +1-710- in their networks and gateways, and route such dialed calls originating from their countries to the US, just as any other "POTS" call to +1 in the US (or even Canada) would be routed. These overseas points of origination which route +1-710 to the US do NOT form an "integral" part of GETS specialized extraordinary routings and call treatments though ... It is quite possible that not every country or country code in the world which has dial service to +1 NANP/US necessarily even recognizes +1-710 though. I don't have a list of which countries do and which do not allow calls to +1-710. I have only seen vague references to statements that "more than 100 countries worldwide" will complete dialed calls to +1-710. Whether the Dominican Republic and the various (former) British entities (Cable and Wireless) allow basic routed calls to NPA 710 all depends on prior negotiations between the island governments/telcos (C&W mostly), and the various US/NANP entities (telco and government). I don't know if the alternative "carrier specific" 800/888 numbers can be dialed as such from the (non-US) NANP Caribbean -- if not, then 1-800-USA-ATT-1 (1-800-872-2881) for AT&T-USA-Direct from the non-US NANP Caribbean will work to route to a US-mainland-based AT&T OSPS card/opr. platform. At this platform, the calling party should be able to dial (1)-710-NCS-GETS, or one of the 800/888 numbers. I don't know if Sprint and MCI's 800- dialups for Card/Opr services from overseas will allow completion to SAC 710 or any (US-based) 800/888 numbers though. The incumbent landline telco (there are CLECs and competitive wireless as well) in the Dominican Republic (retained NPA 809) is CoDeTel, a long-time subsidiary of GTE-now-VeriZon. I tend to think that GTE/VeriZon has seen to it that SAC NPA 710 works properly from their operations in the Dominican Republic. Cable and Wireless is the dominant provider in the (former) British NANP-Caribbean, basically English speaking. That would lead me to believe that (at least) C&W has opened up SAC-NPA 710 to be dialable form their NANP-Caribbean (but not US) locations. Of course, this *is* speculation. I have never seen any formal list of which countries/country-codes are presently able to dial to the NANP (US) for +1-710, and which countries and country codes still haven't. MJC ------------------------------ From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: American Samoa Phone Update Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 11:50:00 CST On Monday 3 March 2003, I wrote that there was a telco industry teleconference regarding American Samoa joining the NANP, changing from Country Code +684, to Area Code 684 as part of Country Code +1; i.e., +684 changes to +1-684 > It was decided that *TENTATIVELY*, American Samoa will become part of > the NANP effective Saturday 2-October-2004. This will actually start > a permissive period of dialing (for those carriers which allow dual > dialability though), where American Samoa will be dialable as *BOTH* > +684 (as it is presently) as well as optionally as +1-684 (NANP method). > Six months later, on Saturday 2-April-2005, American Samoa is supposed > to become dialed *ONLY* as a NANP location +1-684, and Telcos and LD > Carriers are "supposed" to stop routing calls to American Samoa if one > still dials as "country code" +684, and instead are supposed to begin > routing such calls dialed the old way as +684 to an "intercept" > recording of some kind, informing one that American Samoa now is > supposed to ONLY be dialed as a part of the NANP +1-684 (area code 684 > within the NANP). This "intercept" period is "supposed" to last at least > *TWO* years, ending on Monday 2-April-2007, when +684 is supposed to be > fully reclaimed by the ITU for ultimate re-assignment to another > (Pacific region) country/territory/location, if necessary. > The "test number" hasn't been determined as of now. > Neustar-NANPA is supposed to issue a Planning Letter issued regarding > this, to be issued no later than Monday 24-March-2003 at their website > under page: > http://www.nanpa.com/planning_letters/planning_letters_2003.html The test number was identified today, Thursday 20 March 2003, being: +1-684-633-0001 It is already working NOW, it *CAN* be dialed, but at this time, ONLY as +684-633-0001 (i.e., 00-684-633-0001 from "most" of the world, 01(1)-684-633-0001 from the NANP), where one is dialing a call to COUNTRY code +684, since American Samoa is not yet actually part of the NANP. It is giving an announcement that one has reached the test number for 684, American Samoa! However, it returns BILLING/ANSWER supervision! :( (more on that futher down) But this will migrate over to +1-684-633-0001, as part of the NANP, and will eventually be dialable as such when telcos and carriers both in the NANP and throughout the world, begin to open up +1-684 in their translations and routings. The official date for permissive dialing of both methods (new/ultimate +1-684 as well as old/to be obsolete +684) begins Sat-2-October-2004 (over a year from now), and mandatory dialing of the NANP-ONLY numbering/ dialing (+1-684 ONLY) is supposed to start Sat-2-April-2005, six months after permissive/parallel dialing starts. I don't know if it would have been possible for American Samoa to have activated a test number that could ONLY have been dialable as +1-684-nxx-xxxx and rejected if dialed as +684-nxx-xxxx during any time prior to mandatory use of +1-684. Yes, the recorded validation/greeting announcement on (+1)+684-633-0001 does return answer/billing supervision. But this MIGHT be because American Samoa Telecom wants to have AT&T (and possibly other carriers?) open up forward voicepath -- this announcement is on a local voicemail platform, and American Samoa Telecom probably wants one to LEAVE a msg after the announcment, as to where one is calling from, what carriers (if known) were used, etc. AT&T (and some other carriers?) usually does NOT allow forward voicepath (except in a few specific rare instances) until the distant end has returned answer/billing supervision (known as toll-fraud control, to prevent one from tone-signaling to trick the network on call connections not yet in a billing state, or to prevent one from relaying messages on such calls not yet in billing). The American Samoa Telecom announcement on (+1)+684-633-0001 is quite informative and detailed, explaining the distance/location of American Samoa in the south Pacific, w/r/t Hawaii's location, and the fact that American Samoa is the only territory south of the Equator which flies the American Flag as an American territory. More information regarding American Samoa's migration to the NANP next year, +684 changing to +1-684, can be found from NANPA's website, www.nanpa.com -- or from my earlier post to TELECOM Digest on Monday 3-March-2003. Mark J. Cuccia mccucia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 01:53:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. TV Networks Jump in as War in Iraq Starts By Ben Berkowitz LOS ANGELES, March 19 (Reuters) - U.S. television networks fought a battle on Wednesday night to be first with news of war as the long-awaited U.S. campaign to oust Saddam Hussein as leader of Iraq began. NBC said it was first on air with Tom Brokaw broadcasting news of the first explosions at 9:32 p.m. EST, followed by former CNN Gulf War correspondent Peter Arnett on MSNBC at 9:34 p.m. CNN had preliminary reports at 9:36 p.m., while CNN and Fox both went with firmer news of the attacks at 9:39 p.m. Data for ABC and CBS was not immediately available. But CBS News anchor Dan Rather might have won the evening's medal for most colorful phrasing when he declared "Good morning Baghdad" as the sunrise bombing started. After breaking into regular programming to report the first U.S. bombing in the war, the coverage was pulled back as people realized that Wednesday's attack was not the start of the main military thrust. By 8 p.m. PST (11 p.m. EST), CBS, ABC and Fox affiliates on the West Coast had gone back to regularly scheduled programming, while NBC stayed with war coverage. The networks, which have been primed for weeks for the start of a conflict, went to a mix of footage of Baghdad and reports from correspondents embedded with military units in the field as news first trickled in around 9:30 p.m ET. Almost immediately, the networks, both broadcast and cable, began jockeying for position in the race to claim first reporting on the news of the war. "We know the president is going to come on at 10:15 (p.m. EST), so the war effectively is underway," Brokaw, anchoring NBC's covering on both the main broadcast network and cable channel MSNBC, said. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32488248 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder how Bush would like it if some foreign power unilateraly decided that he was an 'evil dictator' and set about in the air and on the land dislodging him from power. What an immoral and insane thing Bush is doing! Bush referring to Damn Sam as an 'evil' terrorist dictator? Mister Pot, meet Mr. Kettle. The USA has plenty of room for terrorist evil dictators *they like*. I expect the Iraqi people to form an alliance with North Korea and end it all sometime soon. Goodbye, United Nations, it was nice knowing you. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 01:54:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Verizon Sets 10 Million Lines For Hi-Speed Web Upgrade NEW YORK, March 19 (Reuters) - Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE:VZ) will upgrade 10 million telephone lines to carry high-speed Internet services in suburban and rural markets, the nation's largest telephone company said on Wednesday, adding it would weigh transmitting services with fiber-optics cables and wireless technology. By the end of the year, more high-speed services will be available on 46 million lines, or 80 percent of the company's telephone lines. New technology will allow it to reach customers who live farther away from central equipment. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32483896 ------------------------------ From: John David Galt Subject: Bad Customer Service (was 710) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 23:47:10 -0800 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society > PAT replied to John Covert: >> John is quite correct of course. Customer service is horrible at many >> telcos these days. Mark J Cuccia wrote: > It's not just telcos. It's any/every utility, government services, and > most "private" businesses dealing with the general public as well. > These days, you get LOUSY customer service at ALL of these! :( This is important to me, too. I'd like to hear about any phone companies serving California that are exceptions; I'd switch like a shot! In particular, I hate having to wait on hold for long periods of time before I can report a problem with a company's service. I realize it is expensive and maybe impractical for them to hire enough operators to have all calls go directly to human beings; but why don't any companies at least use some of the cheap alternatives that avoid the need to hold, such as accepting voice mail or e-mail? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The reason most do not, I think, is because most people will not use them instead of holding to talk to a real person. If customers cannnot get through to a human as desired, many will just abandon the call and try again later. It may be an unrealistic expectation by folks -- to get instant or even slightly delayed -- response by a human, but that is how people are. PAT] ------------------------------ From: scott_broome@heatco.co.uk (scott) Subject: Re: Proxim Tsunami MP.11 Product Family Date: 20 Mar 2003 03:28:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Does anyone know where I can purchase these units in the UK?. And also has anyone any experience of using them they might like to share?. Scott Monty Solomon wrote in message news:: > Based on 802.11b and Proxim's Wireless Outdoor Router Protocol Delivering > 20-40% Faster Performance > SUNNYVALE, Calif., Feb. 18 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Proxim > Corporation (Nasdaq: PROX), a leading provider of high-performance > wireless local area networking (WLAN) and wireless wide area > networking (WWAN) products, today announced the Tsunami MP.11, a new > family of economical wireless outdoor point-to-multipoint solutions > enabling campus connectivity, security and surveillance, and > residential last-mile access. > The Tsunami MP.11 product family includes two subscriber units - > an Enterprise Subscriber Unit for businesses and a Residential > Subscriber Unit for homes. The product family also includes the > Tsunami MP.11 Base Station Unit, which can connect up to 100 > Subscriber Units of either type. > The Tsunami MP.11 base station, when paired with the Enterprise > Subscriber Unit, offers a reliable 11 Mbps solution customized for > businesses, campuses, schools, hospitals and other enterprises needing > WAN connectivity. When paired with the Residential Subscriber Unit, it > becomes the ideal residential last mile access system. The Tsunami > MP.11 products are targeted to provide value- oriented connectivity > for customers not requiring additional carrier-class features provided > by Proxim's Tsunami MP and Tsunami MP Active Interference Rejection > (A.I.R.) products. Tsunami MP.11 can be used in conjunction with > Proxim's carrier-class Tsunami point-to-point and multipoint products > that offer speeds up to 960 Mbps total capacity for large-scale > deployments. > http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/02-18-2003/0001892817&EDATE= ------------------------------ Reply-To: Tom Schmidt From: Tom Schmidt Subject: Re: DSL Filter Question Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 12:58:51 GMT Rich Greenberg wrote in message news:telecom22.354.8@telecom-digest.org: > I am installing DSL and have a question that thier "help" desk wasn't > sure of. This guy didn't even seem to know what a 2 line jack was. > I am not sure if I can use the filters I was sent. The EXCELSUS > Z-BLOCKER model Z-D25OP2J is marked as being a "Dual DSL filter". > Its a small box with a short wire with a modular plug on one end, > and 2 modular jacks on the other end, one marked for a phone, and the > other for the DSL modem. > Does this mean it contains 2 filters and will filter both line 1 and > line 2 of a 2 line jack, or is the "dual" just that it has 2 jacks, one > filtered and one not, and the filter is on line 1? If only one line is > filtered, can I get a similar filter that filters line 2? > My DSL is on line 2 of a 2 line jack. Is it possible to get a filter > with wire pigtails that I can mount inside the wall box? I do not see > such filters listed. If available, I would like to buy 2-3 such filters. > I am going to replace the wall jack with a dual jack. One will be wired > line1+line2, and the other will have line 2 only, wired to the line 1 > position. This will let me connect the DSL modem, which insists on > being a line 1 device. I will use the inline filters for 2 other 2 line > devices. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You NEVER want to put a filter on the > line used for the modem/DSL. On the other hand you always want to > filter everything else downstream on the same line such as phones or > answering machines, etc. A filter on the DSL line with slow you down > to a very slow speed. Other phones anywhere on the same pair must be > filtered in order to make them usable at all. PAT] 2-line filters are designed to address your problem where DSL is on line 2 rather then 1. I assume a 2-line filter is a pass though on line 1 and the filter is on line 2. I've never actually used on so I don't know. Another option that may be more convienient is to use a POTS/DSL splitter. This connects close to the Telco NID. It eliminates the need to install microfilters at each phone. The down side is it requires a dedicated run from the splitter to the DSL modem. http://www.corningcablesystems.com/web/library/litindex.nsf/$ALL/COP-67-EN/$ FILE/COP-67-EN.pdf /Tom ------------------------------ From: ron1200@excite.com (rb) Subject: AT&T WS Service Getting Worse in California? Date: 20 Mar 2003 06:46:37 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Is it just me, or has AT&T wireless (TDMA) service in Northern California deteriorated quite a lot in the last week or so? -Ron ------------------------------ From: rayta@msn.com (Ray Normandeau) Subject: Re: Screen Machine Date: 20 Mar 2003 06:48:57 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Joey Lindstrom wrote in message news:: > On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 01:44:43 -0500 (EST), Ray Normandeau wrote: >> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 16:03:39 PST >> From: Ray Normandeau
> Subject: Screen Machine >> DON'T NOT POST my email address. > So why didn't you post his email address, Pat? He specifically told I am a stickler for good grammar and I write for a couple of newspapers. But I do some of my proofreading after publication. Anyhow, strangely enuff, my own original message does not show up in the NG via Google. Email above invalid. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well it was posted in Usenet. I post via newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu, news.alt.net, and other sites. I examine the postings afterward via kc.sbcglobal.net, news.terraworld.net, iecc.com, and it was in all those sites. It also was in my own version of Usenet news, http://telecom-digest.org/TELECOM_Digest_Online, where the last couple months with a couple thousand messages are stored. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Charles Cryderman Subject: Re: Assessing Reliability of Phone Services Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 10:48:07 -0500 In TD V22 #352 Gail from Ohio asked: > Spring will soon be here, and that means T-storms, whether you mean > thunder storms or tornados. And this year brings the possibility of > terrorist attacks. Some people are going whole hog for wireless and > have converted away from wired phone service to wireless > altogether. But I am wondering about something. Don't those wireless > phone services need electricity from the power companies to operate? > Or do those towers have some self-contained power supply that will > continue to function if the power goes out. Well Dear Gail, all of these sites will have a minimum of 8 hours of battery back. They all should as well have a generator on site hooked to the UPS (uninterrupted power system). If properly managed, with a 250 gallon supply of fuel for the generator, could keep the site on the air for nearly 30 days. Back when I was stationed at the Frankfurt DCS site in the early eighties, we did some testing and analysis and found that in the event of commercial power failure we could continue to operate for about 4 weeks. This is back when the Army was still using analog radios and multiplex equipment that were very power hungry. What we did was run the batteries dang near dead. We then run on the generators until the batteries were at full power then go back on them and kill the generator. But again this all depends on the maintenance team and their attention to detail. The batteries must be checked and maintained at peak levels as well as the generator. We had one maintenance guy in Frankfurt that like to pencil-whip the readings and damn near trashed our big 250 Kw German and the Army Tactical Field generator we had on site. The local German power company had a scheduled outage and when the power went down neither system came up. Talk about having a bad day. Chip Cryderman ------------------------------ 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 #356 ****************************** From Scott.A@sjcomms.co.uk Fri Mar 21 06:38:22 2003 Received: from mintaka.lcs.mit.edu (mintaka.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.36]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h2LBcLw08601 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 06:38:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from server.nbv.ch ([81.201.194.89]) by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu (8.12.8/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h2LBc9UA067006 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 06:38:20 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from Scott.A@sjcomms.co.uk) Received: from vserv1.vsnet.com.br (SRV1 [213.29.0.20]) by server.nbv.ch with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2655.55) id G8MF48ZH; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 11:58:11 +0100 Message-ID: <00000b430201$00007dc5$0000687d@mx2.africaonline.co.zw> To: From: "Gina Hampton" Subject: 15 Cents Per Minute on Long Distance Conferencing 10194 Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 02:51:01 -2000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
click here to be removed from future mailings.
Long Distance Conference C= alls
Only 15 Cents Per Min.
We offer an extr= emely easy to use conferencing service that only costs a fraction of what most companies charge. No set-up fees or contracts.
Stream Call Anyw= here Over The Web For
Only $.05 cents Per Minute.
Click Here For More Info
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 21 17:10:30 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2LMAUV11399; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 17:10:30 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 17:10:30 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303212210.h2LMAUV11399@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 #357 TELECOM Digest Fri, 21 Mar 2003 17:10:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 357 Inside This Issue: Have a Happy Start of Spring! Re: DSL Filter Question (Joey Lindstrom) Re: DSL Filter Question (Rich Greenberg) Re: GETS (and "Telco X" Customer Service) (John R. Covert) Military Phones in the Gulf (Pete Romfh) Vodafone Network Solution (Wole Isaac) Cisco to Acquire Linksys for $500 Million in Stock (Monty Solomon) Television Scores Big Hit in Iraq War (Monty Solomon) Roaming charges: Wireless Trendspotting (Monty Solomon) Re: Malignant Text Ambushes Europe Cell Phones (Rich Greenberg) Siemens Gigaset 8825 Report (Rich Heimlich) Re: U.S. TV Networks Jump in as War in Iraq Starts (IERaider) Re: Inmarsat Deploys Extra Satellite in Middle East (Shalom Septimus) Sodomy Insane (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: Joey Lindstrom Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 11:15:08 -0700 Subject: Re: DSL Filter Question Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 23:37:21 -0500 (EST), Rich Greenberg wrote: > I am installing DSL and have a question that thier "help" desk wasn't > sure of. This guy didn't even seem to know what a 2 line jack was. > I am not sure if I can use the filters I was sent. The EXCELSUS > Z-BLOCKER model Z-D25OP2J is marked as being a "Dual DSL filter". > Its a small box with a short wire with a modular plug on one end, > and 2 modular jacks on the other end, one marked for a phone, and the > other for the DSL modem. > Does this mean it contains 2 filters and will filter both line 1 and > line 2 of a 2 line jack, or is the "dual" just that it has 2 jacks, one > filtered and one not, and the filter is on line 1? If only one line is > filtered, can I get a similar filter that filters line 2? It's the latter. For filtering line two, you could re-wire the jack that you plug into the "input" end so that "line 2" comes in on the "line 1" wire pair. You'd then need to reverse this on the output. The filter is only designed for a one-line "residential" sorta setup, but you can work around it. > My DSL is on line 2 of a 2 line jack. Is it possible to get a filter > with wire pigtails that I can mount inside the wall box? I do not see > such filters listed. If available, I would like to buy 2-3 such filters. > I am going to replace the wall jack with a dual jack. One will be wired > line1+line2, and the other will have line 2 only, wired to the line 1 > position. This will let me connect the DSL modem, which insists on > being a line 1 device. I will use the inline filters for 2 other 2 line > devices. > 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 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You NEVER want to put a filter on the > line used for the modem/DSL. On the other hand you always want to > filter everything else downstream on the same line such as phones or > answering machines, etc. A filter on the DSL line with slow you down > to a very slow speed. Other phones anywhere on the same pair must be > filtered in order to make them usable at all. PAT] OK, I think I'm getting a bit confused here but it SOUNDS like the two of you are talking about two different things. Here in Calgary, my ISP now handles this filtering issue differently than they did at the start. Today, you buy a "self-install kit", which basically means you get the DSL modem (pre-programmed and ready to go) along with several "filters" which you plug in to each jack in the house (all designed for use as "line 1"). You plug the DSL modem into an *UNFILTERED* line, as Pat says. Result: DSL modem and telephones don't interfere with each other. But what they used to do, and what it SOUNDS like Rick has, is install something called a "POTS Splitter" at the demarc. They take the incoming (from telco) wire pire, run it into this POTS Splitter, and then there are TWO pairs of wires coming out. One, the "telephone" out, you connect to your wiring block where the incoming line used to go. The other, you connect directly to the wiring run TO THE JACK THAT WILL BE USED FOR DSL. This jack will not have dial-tone on it. The result is a better, cleaner solution that pretty much works the same way, but usually requires a tech to come out to your house to install. Since the self-install kit requires no such visit, that's the way they're going now. (My POTS splitters also have modular jack outputs, but not a modular jack input -- otherwise, it sounds just like what Rich has). -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: DSL Filter Question Date: 21 Mar 2003 07:40:44 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , Tom Schmidt wrote: > Rich Greenberg wrote in message > news:telecom22.354.8@telecom-digest.org: >> I am not sure if I can use the filters I was sent. The EXCELSUS >> Z-BLOCKER model Z-D25OP2J is marked as being a "Dual DSL filter". >> Its a small box with a short wire with a modular plug on one end, >> and 2 modular jacks on the other end, one marked for a phone, and the >> other for the DSL modem. I have since found out that yes, this does filter both lines. The manufacturer's web site is www.excelsus-tech.com, and a note to the support address brought a quick answer and a .pdf of the data sheet. > Another option that may be more convienient is to use a POTS/DSL > splitter. This connects close to the Telco NID. It eliminates the > need to install microfilters at each phone. The down side is it > requires a dedicated run from the splitter to the DSL modem. > http://www.corningcablesystems.com/web/library/litindex.nsf/$ALL/COP-67-EN/$ > FILE/COP-67-EN.pdf I took a look at this device and its WAY overkill. What I would really like to get is a little box with 4 leads that I could punch down on my home 66-block. 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: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 13:57:40 EST From: "John R. Covert" Subject: Re: GETS (and "Telco X" Customer Service) BTW, I called up the VP of Customer Service at "Telco X" yesterday morning. By 6pm the GETS routing problem was fixed! So even though the typical frontline customer service rep is useless, when you get a real problem to the right person, it can be fixed. /john ------------------------------ From: Pete Romfh Subject: Military phones in the Gulf Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 22:41:09 -0600 Organization: Not Organized We have a debate raging though our office. One group says that the phone systems being used in the command centers are Cisco. The other camp says they saw Avaya phones on various newscasts. Does anyone know firmly what types of PBX's and stations the military is using in their operations centers in the Gulf? A lot of political weight rides on the answer because the Cisco supporters say, "They're reliable enough for our combat troops to rely on". Pete Romfh, Telecom Geek & Amateur Gourmet. promfh at texas dot net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 22:32:24 PST From: WOLE ISAAC Subject: Vodafone Network Solution Dear Sir, Please permit me to express my heart to you. I am in posession of a GSM Vodafone Handset MN-1, but ever since I bought it, it has being giving lots problems. I have tried using different lines with it, but no improvement. The latest version of the problem is the Network problem, it states NO NETWORK on the screen. With this, I am unable to receive or make call with the handset. And is not up to 2 Months that I bought it. Kindly assist in the solution to the problem of the handset. Even some of the technicians here in Nigeria I took it to said they have no software solution to the handset. I look forward to solution from you, hence, my making contact with you. Hope to hear from you soon. My GSM phone number is: 234 80 23457791 Yours Faithfully, Wole Ogundalu. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Can *anyone* help our Nigerian reader with this problem? *Please* write direct to him, but a copy of your reply to the Digest would be appreciated. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 03:57:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cisco to Acquire Linksys For $500 Million in Stock Cisco to acquire Linksys for $500 mln in stock - Mar 20, 2003 08:37 AM (Reuters) - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32493210 SAN JOSE, Calif., March 20 (Reuters) - Cisco Systems Inc. (NASDAQ:CSCO), the No. 1 maker of equipment that directs Internet traffic, said on Thursday it will buy privately held Linksys Group, a provider of home networking products, for about $500 million in stock, its third deal announced so far this year. The San Jose, California-based company said it expects the deal to close in the fourth quarter of Cisco's 2003 fiscal year. Copyright 2003, Reuters News Service ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 04:01:11 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Television Scores Big Hit in Iraq War By Merissa Marr, European media correspondent LONDON, March 20 (Reuters) - Television celebrated its own victory in America's assault on Iraq on Thursday as the world scrambled to tune into images of war, featuring everything from gas-mask clad presenters to patriotic Iraqi songs. Television networks from Australia to America cleared their schedules to pump out footage of the United States pounding targets across Iraq, with many turning to round-the-clock coverage and dropping advertising from their channels. "This is very much a visual story right now so people are turning to television for their news," said Robert Boyle, head of Price Waterhouse Coopers' European media team. Television coverage ranged from the Hollywood-like drama of U.S. reporting to scenes on Iraqi television of sword-carrying locals singing "Long live Iraq and may God save Saddam". In Kuwait, stations kept viewers informed on when to expect the next round of Iraqi-fired Scud missiles, interrupting broadcasts with emergency sirens. And in China, state channel CCTV, which normally vigorously vets its broadcasts, took the unusual move of showing President George W. Bush's address live. Aside from the sheer drama of images of war, television was expected to benefit from more detailed reporting than in previous conflicts, greater interactivity with the Internet, and high-tech gadgets beaming the latest pictures from front lines. While the first Gulf War in 1991 reshaped the television map, this war was once again expected to highlight its primary role in covering world-changing events. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32503195 ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Roaming Charges: Wireless Trendspotting Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 14:23:23 -0500 Excerpt from IBM developerWorks technology, Issue 11 - 2003 Mar 20 WIRELESS ZONE | Trendspotting http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/wireless/?ca=dnt-411 ::: Roaming charges: Wireless trendspotting ::: After some careful observation, Larry is ready to reveal his seven predictions for wireless technology's development trends. See what the near future will mean for the work we're doing. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/wi-roam8.html?ca=dnt-411 ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Malignant Text Ambushes Europe Cell Phones Date: 20 Mar 2003 14:31:41 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , Dave Garland wrote: > And still does, with some html-enabled mail programs. In the old days, > a (fairly harmless) equivalent was to tell the BBS caller that he > could activate the secret sysop menu by typing +++ATH (doing so would > cause his modem to think it had received a command to hang up). A few years ago while I was still on Netcom, their modem bank was not set to ignore "+++", and if I programmed it to send the "+++" to me, the modem would go into command mode and would be dead from the outside until someone reset it. I tried to explain it to their so called support and they did not get it. Simple to do from unix, just enter "echo +++" going slowly enough that I didn't trigger my own modem, then enter. 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: Rich Heimlich Subject: Siemens Gigaset 8825 Report Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 23:20:12 -0500 Reply-To: agrajag@comcast.net Pros: Awesome array of features. Very clean look. Decent audio sound. Cons: Many features are just not fully functional The Bottom Line: It might work for some but if you have Verizon it won't work and many features do not work regardless of your phone company. Buyer beware. I bought the 8825 after wanting to find a decent 2-line phone and failing with the typical Staples and OfficeMax level of phones (all at about $70). What I wanted was a solid corded business phone with excellent features. The cordless handset, for me, is an extra that would have been nice but not needed. So, I setup the 8825 and I'm just blown away by all the fantastic features and the ability to set seemingly endless parameters to get the phone just the way I like it. I then get a few calls and the trouble starts. On the plus side, everyone thought I sounded great and they sounded perfectly fine to me as well. But the first bad problem is well known. I couldn't get the various volumes on the phone to a level I liked. Nothing was loud enough with the possible exception of the ringer and handset volume. The speaker was so low at level 9 that I had to struggle to hear it in a quiet home office. The headset volume was also low. Then I ran into a surprising user interface flaw. I went to delete all the caller ID entries at once and could find no way to do it but to delete them all one at a time with the Delete button. I then called support and was told there was a way to do it but it required roughly 10-15 button presses traversing the menu system to do it! Are they kidding? All of my past and current CallerID phones have this ability and they're all cheaper units. I then got my first call-waiting call and the sound it made on the line was entirely unacceptable. All previous phones I've owned kept this sound very light and hardly noticeable. On this unit, the system virtually locks out the sound of the other party for a moment resulting in a very awkward moment for both the other party and the caller. Worse, after the tone, my volume mysteriously rose several levels making it very difficult for me to finish the call (I had to hold the phone away from my ear). While on my first calls I also noticed that once in a while the other party would say, "What was that?" followed by the volume rising again mysteriously for NO reason as no one was calling to trigger callerID. When I asked what the party thought they heard they each said it sounded like I slipped and hit a button on the phone. I hadn't touched anything. I use Verizon and like their standard voicemail service. It's not great but it does work and allows for taking messages when I'm on the phone and such. This phone claims to work just fine with that once you setup the Mail button to call the Verizon voicemail number. I did that and tried it out. Sure enough it worked. The light came on, I hit the button and it dialed Verizon and got my messages. I later, with the help of customer service, found out how to add pauses to numbers (oddly, the minus volume button) and got it to enter my passcode. Finally something working great with the phone. But that didn't last long. I was on the line with someone when another caller called in. I let them go to voicemail but they apparently left no message as when I completed my call, the Mail light didn't go on. So I was surprised when I went to dial my next call to hear the stutter tone on the line telling me I had a message. Sure enough I did have a message and the phone missed it. Further testing showed that, without fail, if I am on the line and a message is left, this phone will not catch it. Not good. All the other phones in the house, tested on the same line had no trouble seeing these messages so it's not the phone line (as support suggested). I then figured that I'd try out the built-in answering system and found it to be lacking. The sound quality of the recording is very poor compared to all other options I've used. My own last name didn't even come out right. Worse, the unit refused to record my entire short message. No matter what I tried, it would back up and cut off the "you" in the "thank you" part of my message. I finally had to resort to saying "thank you 't'" making a final short sound, which got cut off to leave my intended message intact. Just leaving blank space after the recording had no effect. The end result is that I'm now sitting here with a $300 phone that has fantastic advanced features but cannot work with one of the biggest telephone companies and would result in me not knowing about important messages and annoying customers and I on the phone with clicks and eerie volume rises. Calls to customer service almost all ended with "Oh, just do a system reset and everything will work". Yeah, okay. Tried, and as I was already certain of, it had no impact except to start me setting up everything again. I am so impressed with the feature set and options that I kept trying to talk myself into keeping the phone. I took the first one back and picked up a replacement hoping for a defective first unit. No luck. The second phone worked exactly like the first. I will keep an eye on Siemens for the future. Perhaps their next version of this phone will address these issues but for now, if you have Verizon, I would avoid this phone at all costs. Recommended: No! *** RTH *** ------------------------------ From: IERaider@yahoo.com (IERaider) Subject: Re: U.S. TV Networks Jump in as War in Iraq Starts Date: 21 Mar 2003 10:25:13 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder how Bush would like it if some > foreign power unilateraly decided that he was an 'evil dictator' and > set about in the air and on the land dislodging him from power. What > an immoral and insane thing Bush is doing! Bush referring to Damn Sam > as an 'evil' terrorist dictator? Mister Pot, meet Mr. Kettle. The USA > has plenty of room for terrorist evil dictators *they like*. I expect > the Iraqi people to form an alliance with North Korea and end it all > sometime soon. Goodbye, United Nations, it was nice knowing you. PAT] Re: Can you tell me the last time President Bush gassed 250,000 of his own people? We are going to eliminate a dictator that has, over 30 years, caused the deaths of nearly 2 million men and women, sons and daughters. OPEN YOUR EYES!!! IDIOT!!! [TELEOCOM Digest Idiot's Note: I try to follow the news very closely, but I honestly do not remember ever reading (which I assume is all you did, unless you know the man or one of his close associates personally) of the deaths of 250,000 persons, either en-masse or serially as a result of gas, with the exception being of one Adolph Hitler. Nor do I know of the deaths of 'nearly two million men and women, sons and daughters over a thirty year period'. I mean, I know some of you do not like Saddam, and neither do I. But you do not do your cause any good by making up stories about his governorship of Iraq. Can you quote some reliable source where you read these statistics? And since when did such horrible deaths and mistreatment ever mean anything to the United States? There have been a lot of dictators in office over the years the USA has ignored when it was convenient to do so. But it seems whenever there is someone the president does not like for *whatever* reason, it always becomes quite convenient to place the reasons for his righteous anger on things like mistreatment of the citizens, or how "our troops died for your right to live in America and vote", etc. Try to be more original, okay? Instead, why not talk about the things that matter in this country, like oil production and political power, and how Dubya and his two daughters will not go to fight as long as there are tuff young guys they can send to do it instead. Oh, I know my beloved deseased brain has pretty much left me out of the loop, so I probably don't have any idea what I am talking about. I never do. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Shalom Septimus Subject: Re: Inmarsat Deploys Extra Satellite in Middle East Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 13:40:26 -0500 Reply-To: druggist@pobox.com On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:15:23 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > WASHINGTON, March 18 (Reuters) - Global satellite communications > company Inmarsat said on Tuesday it has deployed a fifth satellite to > the Middle East region to handle the expected increased demand from > the news media and aid agencies as a war in Iraq looms. Have they announced what the "country code" will be for this bird? I know they already use +871 through +874 for the ones they already have. (I can't seem to get through to www.inmarsat.org right now.) Shalom use Reply-To:, From: is a spamtrap and is seldom read. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 12:13:51 -0700 Subject: Sodomy Insane Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Thu, 20 Mar 2003 12:58:27 -0500 (EST), editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder how Bush would like it if some > foreign power unilateraly decided that he was an 'evil dictator' and > set about in the air and on the land dislodging him from power. What > an immoral and insane thing Bush is doing! Bush referring to Damn Sam > as an 'evil' terrorist dictator? Mister Pot, meet Mr. Kettle. The USA > has plenty of room for terrorist evil dictators *they like*. I expect > the Iraqi people to form an alliance with North Korea and end it all > sometime soon. Goodbye, United Nations, it was nice knowing you. PAT] George W. Bush didn't murder his way to the top. George W. Bush doesn't continue to murder to stay on top. George W. Bush doesn't commit military atrocities against his own people. George W. Bush doesn't torture and "disappear" prisoners. George W. Bush has yet to claim Canada or Mexico for the USA. The United Nations has been revealed for what it is. A wishy-washy organization that hasn't the balls to actually follow through on its many, many resolutions against Iraq. Good riddance. Sincerely, A Canadian utterly ashamed at his own government's stance in this thing. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info [TELECOM Idiot's Left-Wing Idiodicy: As I said to the other correspondent in this issue who told me about all the poor people who had been given gas, if YOU did not personally see these things happen, would you please quote a reliable source or report AT THE TIME IT DID HAPPEN who can give other than an urban-legend type account of it? Otherwise I may have to lodge a complaint with the authorities about how gaseous you have become in recent weeks (gag, gag!) And the United Nations is such a wishy-washy organization that even President Dubya does not bother to follow them, does he? Here is a war-limerick, compliments of Steven Botts George Bush took a look at Saddam, stepped back, then said "Hell and Goddamn! If the U.N. won't stop him, I'll smack him and bop him, And if that won't do it, then BLAM, BLAM!" "Jesus is better than Allah!" screamed George, "And Saddam better follow!" "By God, if he will not get Saved, Then sure as Hell, he's gonna be paved. And next, we'll take on Hezbollah." Said Saddam to his country, "Don't cry, We'll have nuclear weapons by and by, You just have to have patience, Till we can buy them from agents When we give North Korea a try." Whatever you do, don't insult King Dubya by telling him he is parading naked on the White House lawn. That's almost as bad as accusing someone of being mentally ill; having dillusions of grandeur. 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 #357 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 21 22:58:50 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2M3wnx13115; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 22:58:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 22:58:50 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303220358.h2M3wnx13115@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 #358 TELECOM Digest Fri, 21 Mar 2003 22:59:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 358 Inside This Issue: Happy First Day of Spring! ReplayTV maker Sonicblue to File For Bankruptcy (Monty Solomon) Re: Postamble and Variable Length Packets (Robert Bonomi) Re: DSL Filter Question (Robert Bonomi) Re: Telecom Student Hoping for Some Assistance (Herb Stein) Re: Military Phones in the Gulf (Paul A Lee) Re: Sodomy Insane (Joey Lindstrom) More Words About Sodomy Insane (cbkiteflyer@yahoo.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: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 18:48:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ReplayTV Maker Sonicblue to File For Bankruptcy SANTA CLARA, Calif., March 21 (Reuters) - Consumer electronics maker Sonicblue Inc.(NASDAQ:SBLU) said on Friday it plans to file for bankruptcy and that it signed deals to sell the assets of its main product lines for $52.5 million. Sonicblue said it agreed to sell its Rio unit, which made the first mainstream device to play music in the popular MP3 format, and its ReplayTV digital video recorder unit to D&M Holdings (TOKYO:6735) of Japan for $40 million, plus the assumption of about $5 million in liabilities. D&M is the parent company of established audio equipment makers Denon Ltd. and Marantz Japan Inc. The company plans to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the northern district of California, San Jose division. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32515095 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Postamble and Variable Length Packets Organization: Not Much From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 01:21:04 GMT In article , Swami wrote: > Hi, > I have a couple of questions related to multiple access at the > physical layer: > 1. Do you know of any protocol/commercial product/research on variable > length packets (I mean completely variable, and not, say, one among a > set of lengths) for multiple access? There is an additional constraint > that we do not know the packet length until after we have transmitted > all the bytes. So this would mean that the datalink layer will not be > able to place the length field in front. IP protocol supports variable-length "trailer" packets, _if_ enabled on the interface. It _does_ require the length of the trailer at the beginning of the trailer, however. As for your 'problem' of not knowing the length, untill after _transmission_ the cure for that is *trivial*. You _buffer_ the data until the full packet of data has been accumulated. Then, you *DO* know the actual byte count, and can insert it into the header. This is 'no brainer' stuff. and the way _all_ traditional 'variable length' packet systems work. There is no reason _not_ to buffer -- the receiving system can't do _anything_ with *any* part of the data until the _entire_ packet has been received. > 2. Is there any protocol/product/research papers on sending a > postamble at the physical layer level (I mean the decision is taken by > the software/hardware closest to the point of transmission)? This is > mainly to solve the peroblem mentioned above. If you also happen to > know of any other means to solve the above problem, do let me know. > Any links/pointers on this topic would be of immense help. > Thanks and Regards, > Swami. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: DSL Filter Question Organization: Not Much From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 01:32:52 GMT In article , Rich Greenberg wrote: > I am installing DSL and have a question that thier "help" desk wasn't > sure of. This guy didn't even seem to know what a 2 line jack was. > I am not sure if I can use the filters I was sent. The EXCELSUS > Z-BLOCKER model Z-D25OP2J is marked as being a "Dual DSL filter". > Its a small box with a short wire with a modular plug on one end, > and 2 modular jacks on the other end, one marked for a phone, and the > other for the DSL modem. > Does this mean it contains 2 filters and will filter both line 1 and > line 2 of a 2 line jack, NO. > or is the "dual" just that it has 2 jacks, one filtered and one not, > and the filter is on line 1? If only one line is filtered, can I > get a similar filter that filters line 2? It is a single-line (phone line) filter. The 'phone' jack is filtered, the 'dsl' jack is not. > My DSL is on line 2 of a 2 line jack. Is it possible to get a filter > with wire pigtails that I can mount inside the wall box? I do not see > such filters listed. If available, I would like to buy 2-3 such filters. Use a 'two line' *splitter*, from Radio Shack, e.g., in _front_ of the DSL filter. it has _separate_ jacks for 'line 1', and 'line 2'. Then you plug the DSL filter into the 'line 2' jack. and the DSL modem into the DSL jack _there_, with your phone in the 'phone' jack. > I am going to replace the wall jack with a dual jack. One will be wired > line1+line2, and the other will have line 2 only, wired to the line 1 > position. This will let me connect the DSL modem, which insists on > being a line 1 device. I will use the inline filters for 2 other 2 line > devices. This works, too. Recommend, for completeness, that you make the 'other' jack have 'line 2' on pair 1, *and* 'line 1' on pair 2. ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: Telecom Student Hoping for Some Assistance Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 19:34:34 -0600 C Chambers wrote in message news:telecom22.353.12@telecom-digest.org: > I am a Telecommunications student and I am wanting to put together a > website for telecommunications info. I am wanting to set up something > that has things from basic wiring to terms, etc. I know that there > are quite a few websites out there, this is mainly a project to pass > the time. I am hoping that I can get some assistance with some links > that might be useful for the site. > Thanks. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are welcome to take the links from > our web site for your own. Just go to http://telecom-digest.org and > begin copying over to your new site. From there you can click over to > the page of 'useful links' and begin using them. I regard all my work > on the web site and this Digest as open source, and invite you or > anyone to learn from it. Obviously if you use *my exact words* and > my .gifs and .jpg things I would like some credit. PAT] Not that I have anything either, But it is free. -- Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Military Phones in the Gulf Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 17:46:37 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V22 #357, Pete Romfh wrote (in part): > Does anyone know firmly what types of PBX's and stations the military > is using in their operations centers in the Gulf? So far, I have caught several definite glimpses of Avaya 8410D or 8411D sets (or their MILspec or TEMPEST cousins) in news reports coming from on board US Navy vessels. As for reliability out in the desert, I'd bet that whose silicon is INside doesn't matter much if you can't keep out the silicon that's OUTside ... Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 15:53:26 -0700 Subject: Re: Sodomy Insane Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Fri, 21 Mar 2003 17:10:30 EST, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > [TELECOM Idiot's Left-Wing Idiodicy: As I said to the other correspondent > in this issue who told me about all the poor people who had been given > gas, if YOU did not personally see these things happen, would you please > quote a reliable source or report AT THE TIME IT DID HAPPEN who can > give other than an urban-legend type account of it? I didn't personally witness the Holocaust, either, but that doesn't mean I don't believe it happened. Although I cannot speak for that other person's claim (250,000 people gassed), much of Saddam's butchery is WELL DOCUMENTED, by multiple sources, to the point where I don't think the onus should be on us to "prove" Saddam is a bad guy. The onus is on you to prove that he is not. As for the USA having left brutal dictators in power in the past, but now suddenly Hussein is a problem ... well, you're the one who keeps saying Bush is mentally ill. Yeah, he's mentally ill: he's the first US president to realize that leaving these guys in power just ain't acceptable anymore. Mark my words -- history is going to look at George W. Bush as one of the greatest leaders in the history of the world. (Reagan, too) -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info [TELECOM Digest Editor's Right Wing Rant: Well, you certainly skirted the issue totally didn't you ... I did not ask you to 'prove' anything; simply to document in one or more instances, about these things you say happened. You say it is 'well documented by multiple sources' would you PLEASE give one or more such sources? Regarding the generic 'Holocuast', not being a personal aquaintence of Mr. A. Hitler and being too young to remember it personally, I could not document that either, but I have read many books and articles and heard countless speakers who attested to it and I believe it also. I believe Hitler did gas Jews and gay people and selected others who he didn't like. All I asked you to do in this case was present the documents of one or more your 'multiple sources'. There is no such thing as 'one holocaust fits all' you know. But oh no, you evaded my question totally, tossed in the generic 'Holocaust' to add a bit of guilt to it for me, and pronounced that the onus was not on you to prove anything. Take it easy on a old brain-deseased man, would you please? Or does an answer like that work okay on others you quarrel with, i.e. that "it is so common, they should know, and you are not going to tell them if they don't know." Oh well, someone else DID answer the question of providing documents in the next message of this issue, so let's see what he has to say. If you *must* reply to this, try to keep it down to 2-3 K of text, would you please? I have to edit it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 18:57:30 CST From: cbkiteflyer@yahoo.com Subject: More Words About Sodomy Insane and Mr. Bush Pat wrote: > [TELECOM Idiot's Left-Wing Idiodicy: As I said to the other correspondent > in this issue who told me about all the poor people who had been given > gas, if YOU did not personally see these things happen, would you please > quote a reliable source or report AT THE TIME IT DID HAPPEN who can > give other than an urban-legend type account of it? Pat, Are you denying that gassing took place at all, or are you simply challenging the numbers? Anyway, here ya go: http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemical_weapons/chemkurd.html There's about 5 articles to choose from. Good enough for you? As far as Mister Pot and Mr. Kettle, when it comes to a choice between freeing oppressed people by getting rid of a murderous thug and being labeled a hypocrite, I'll take the label any day. The excuse of "Why pick on me? You let everybody else get away with it?" doesn't even work in grade school, much less geopolitics. Or are you saying it's OK as long as we eliminate ALL the tyrants? No? Didn't think so. Sincerely, -- Clive Dawson [Right Wing Editor's Rant: I am not denying anything or reducing the numbers, etc. I am simply trying to be intellectually honest enough to say I do not know. Bear in mind, I had a brain aneurysm on November 29, 1999, became comatose that same evening and came out of the coma sometime in February, 2000. Then I was in an 'intense therapy' program at Kansas Rehabilitation Hospital for another month, in Topeka. Then after a five or six month saga where I only wish I could have been lucky enough to be subject to Mr. Hussein's alleged gas attacks, I went to a nursing facility for more long-term therapy. For a year or so now, I have been back at the Digest, trying to tell my ass from my elbow as my (doctor's evaluated) permanent brain desease controls much of my life. So pardon me if I am not as current on news of the day as I was in early 1999. I will look at your phrusa.org site and see if it deals in factual evidence or just urban legend. Thank you for the hint on this. Joey was unwilling to even do that much. Freeing an oppressed people you say?? That's rich ... what about all the people in South Africa and China and Cuba, and Guatemala and other places who need a touch of Dubya's helping hand? Oh, but do their dictator bosses have oil we need to survive, or have they openly mocked the style of fundamentalist Christianity Bush pretends to have when he chats with his buddies Dobson, Farwell, Pat Robertson and others? No, I didn't think so. That 'oppressed people' routine and all those alleged gassings are sort of a convenient excuse aren't they? I'll see what phruasa.org has to say about it. Again, thanks for taking pity on a tired, old, brain-deseased man. If I don't appear here with any more issues .. well you'll know it was just Dubya doing his thing: declaring me a threat to national security and taking me away with no lawyer or chance to speak. 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 #358 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 23 02:07:05 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2N774418841; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 02:07:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 02:07:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303230707.h2N774418841@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 #359 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Mar 2003 02:07:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 359 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Postamble and Variable Length Packets (Darryl Smith) Re: DSL Filter Question (John R. Levine) Re: Military Phones in the Gulf (tonypo1@cox.net) Internet Services and PABX (Sanjeev Maniks) Fax Recovery (lucky) Unsolicited Faxes (Jeff Brewster) Re: DHCP Router With NAT Passthrough?? (CBoone@Earthlink.Net) Telecom Digest Archives CD - Shipping Delays (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Sodomy Insane (Steven J. Sobol) You Are Right and Joey Lindstrom et al. Are Wrong (R.G. Levin) Is an Illegal War a High Crime and Misdemeanor? (Patrick Townson) Re: More Words About Sodomy Insane and Mr. Bush (joe@obilivan.net) Re: More Words About Sodomy Insane and Mr. Bush (3yeadqp02@sneakemail.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: Darryl Smith Subject: Re: Postamble and Variable Length Packets Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 15:11:03 +1100 The X-25 and AX25 protocols do not send any data about the length of the packet ever. The only way that you know that the packet has ended is that a FLAG character is sent at the end of the packet, and you then count back two bytes for the CRC. The AX25 specification states that the maximum payload is 256 bytes, but there is no such actual limitation apart from some not being able to received by some implementations. Many people have implemented it with quite large packets. Papers on the use of AX25 and its structre can be found on www.tapr.org, and there are about 20 years of conference proceedings available from TAPR -- including one about 17 years ago on sending code inside packets (which sun tried to patent in the mid-1990's with Java) and a 1990 paper on MACA which became the major building block to 802.11. Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: DSL Filter Question Date: 21 Mar 2003 23:40:00 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> My DSL is on line 2 of a 2 line jack. Is it possible to get a filter >> with wire pigtails that I can mount inside the wall box? I do not see >> such filters listed. If available, I would like to buy 2-3 such filters. Yes. Radio Shack has surface mount wall jacks with the DSL filter inside. It's wired on line 1, but with some tweezing you should be able to move it to line 2. If you have flush mount wall jacks I'd just get an in-line filter and plug that in front of your 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 ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: Military Phones in the Gulf Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 05:08:38 GMT In article , palee@riteaid.com says: > In TELECOM Digest V22 #357, Pete Romfh wrote > (in part): >> Does anyone know firmly what types of PBX's and stations the military >> is using in their operations centers in the Gulf? > So far, I have caught several definite glimpses of Avaya 8410D or > 8411D sets (or their MILspec or TEMPEST cousins) in news reports > coming from on board US Navy vessels. Ick, ick, ick. That was one of Lucent's bad series of phones. I admin'd a G3i with a mixture of 7406D's, 8410D's and various models of 2500 sets with and without hold, message lights, etc. The 8410D's broke down quite a bit more than the 7406D's did. And the hands free on the 8410D sounded tinny. Only good phones they made were the 74xx and 6xxx series stuff. The 8xxx series is cheap garbage. Tony ------------------------------ From: Sanjeev Maniks Subject: Internet Services and PABX Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 00:27:26 -0700 Hiya, I'd like to use the existing telephone extensions at a small motel to provide Internet Services to each of the (20) rooms. They have a Nortel Nextas MX-1 PABX - I have found little information about this product on the web. Further I'd like use the existing billing system on the PABX to monitor Internet usage. The Internet Access will be provided via the wireless medium (IEEE 802.11 standard). I've very limited experience on PABXs, and would appreciate any ideas/pointers. Thanks, Sanjeev "Perfection is reached not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." A.Saint-Exupery ------------------------------ From: lucky" Subject: Fax Recovery Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 07:39:41 UTC Organization: Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG I am recording all phone calls, voice and fax, on my pc. So I have a .wav file also for every fax received or transmitted with the external stand-alone analogue fax machine. There is a way to decode these .wav file into the original image? Simply send 'sound' to modem seem do not work. I think a 'softmodem' that analyze and decode wave stream may be a solution. Suggestions? Regards. lucky lu Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG ------------------------------ From: jeffbrewster@hotmail.com (Jeff Brewster) Subject: Unsolicited Faxes Date: 22 Mar 2003 12:50:42 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi everyone, I know this has probably been discussed a lot, but I can't really find any info for my situation. To start, I do not, nor have ever owned a fax machine. Last July I moved into my new apartment and shortly after having my phone connected (Verizon, live in NY), I started receiving fax calls. Sometimes they come with caller ID info (if that's the case, I try to look up the company/individual to find their business number and call them to remove me), but usually the calls come up as "Out of Area" or "Private Caller". The calls come all day long, sometimes at 2 or 3 in the morning also (last night I received a call at 3:53am). What exactly can I do to stop this nonsense? Especially with the blocked numbers? The calls drive me nuts. They fill up my voicemail box with annoying beeping messages, and at least once a week they call early enough to wake me up. Any info you guys can provide will be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Jeff [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The easy way out might be by having telco change the number. I think it would be quite rare if you wound up getting two 'sour' numbers in a row. If you have only had the number since last July, how important is it that you keep the same number? PAT] ------------------------------ From: CBoone@Earthlink.Net Subject: Re: DHCP Router With NAT Passthrough?? Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 04:23:14 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Well I thank those who replied direct. BUT none of the group postings were really helpful. I dont have time to put together a 486 firewall with Linux, etc. I WOULD like to see if something SMALL like a router/firewall for what I NEED is out there already. Please reply IF YOU DO KNOW of such a router. I have never used IPsec. I know VPN is not what I am looking for; its almost like NAT but reversed (9 123.456.789.xxx IPs on the WAN is translated to 192.168 internal addresses; hope that explains it better, and the 10th is used as the gateway IP). CBoone@Earthlink.Net wrote: > I have a T1 with a ATT managed Cisco router at the office, have 10 > static IPs on it ... ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 22:02:35 -0700 Subject: Telecom Digest Archives CD - Shipping Delays Reply-To: joey@garynuman.info For those of you who are expecting Telecom Digest Archives CD's in the mail, and/or those who plan to make a contribution to the Telecom Digest sometime in the near future and will be getting one of these CD's as a thank-you: please be advised that these discs are shipped from Canada (not Kansas), and that I'm encountering some shipping delays lately. With the heightened security surrounding the conflict in Iraq and the increased risk of terrorism, I'm told that EVERYTHING that Canada Post hands over to USPS is being searched. This is causing delays -- usually, 6-9 business days is normal. Lately, 3-4 weeks has been closer to the mark. I recently shipped a pair of hard drives to each of two individuals in the USA, one in Minnesota and one in New York state. Both took 3 weeks. Similarly, a single CD I mailed to a fellow in Texas also took 3 weeks. More recently, I shipped two boxes of DVD-R discs to a lady in Pennsylvania. These were separate boxes, mind you. Both took 27 days, and arrived on the same day. ALL of these people reported that their shipments had been opened and examined by Customs officials. So, when your CD takes a while to arrive, please be patient and PLEASE don't dump all over Pat. It's Dubya's fault, after all. :-) / From the desk of Joey Lindstrom / I went to the cinema, and the prices were: Adults $5.00, children $2.50. / So I said, "Give me two boys and a girl." / --Steven Wright ------------------------------ From: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: Sodomy Insane Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 04:05:55 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC > From Joey Lindstrom (joey@telussucks.info): > As for the USA having left brutal dictators in power in the past, but > now suddenly Hussein is a problem ... well, you're the one who keeps > saying Bush is mentally ill. Yeah, he's mentally ill: he's the first > US president to realize that leaving these guys in power just ain't > acceptable anymore. > Mark my words -- history is going to look at George W. Bush as one of > the greatest leaders in the history of the world. (Reagan, too) Um, getting rid of Saddam is the correct move, and it's something Daddy should have done in '91. However, George W. Bush is still a flaming moron. Don't give him more credit than he is due. You live in Canada. Consider yourself lucky. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ Date: 21 Mar 2003 20:20:34 -0800 From: R.G. Levin Subject: You Are Right and Joey Lindstrom et al. Are Wrong Hiya Pat: Subject line says it all, brain anueryism notwithstanding! The "holier than thou" attitude in this country is obviously prevalent from the lowliest beaurocratic "torpedo," the policeman, to the leader of the junta in Washington! I'm afraid the emperor has no clothes, but many folks are too blind to see this (or possibly are under hypnosis!) Obviously your brain still works better than Joey Lindstrom's! Robert G. Levin [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I feel certain you helped Joey have a fine weekend when he wakes up Sunday morning and goes to check mail and sees how you took his name in vain in this letter. You, and Steve Sobol in the message before this one. I guess my one, really major proplem with this whole Iraq mess in the past week has been the utter arrogance the USA has displayed for such a long time now toward other countries with different ideas, and their total disregard for what the U.N. wants to do. The USA also seems to have total contempt for the ideas of the World Court, Interpol, etc. But if USA wants someone extradited, all hell breaks lose if the other country does not cooperate. The real problem seems to be the attitude of the USA president that somehow *he* has a monopoly on truth, justice and fairness. No one else, in his opinion and the opinion of many citizens can quite do things as well, or perfectly as he can. Here is an example, from a recent press conference: A question came up, have Iraqi troops surrendered 'yet'? Bush was not quite sure of the answer but one of his advisors pointed out that in fact many of the troops were 'fighting back' and that in fact a number of civilians had recently joined in the fighting against the USA troops. With fire in his eyes, Bush observed, "they wouldn't dare, would they? Any Iraqi citizen who harms some of our troops will be punished; brought to trial when *we* have finished this war!" No one, it seems, has any right to object to what Bush is doing over there. Just stand there and take your punishment, along with one of the little propoganda food packages the soldiers hand you as they go along, provided you did not 'fight back' or stand up for your country (Iraq). No one has a right to support their country, it seems, unless Bush has decided its okay. Arrogance! PAT] ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: Fw: Is an Illegal War a High Crime and Misdemeanor? Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 22:38:28 -0600 Found a couple days ago in another newsgroup. ----- Original Message ----- From: Newsgroups: alt.religion.unitarian-univ Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 1:55 PM Subject: Is an illegal war a high crime and misdemeanor? > Evidently, getting caught in a perjury trap was enough of a high > crime to get Clinton impeached. How does bombing Baghdad back to > Mesopotamian times without a congressional declaration of war > compare? > Greg Shenaut [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Greg, best not call attention to Dubya's mental illness and his obvious desire to please the fundamentalist Christians who voted him in (barely) as he now appeases them by helping to hasten Armageddon which they have wanted for so long. PAT] ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: More Words About Sodomy Insane and Mr. Bush Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 06:58:00 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Perhaps this Usenet group should be renamed. cbkiteflyer@yahoo.com wrote: > Pat wrote: >> [TELECOM Idiot's Left-Wing Idiodicy: As I said to the other correspondent >> in this issue who told me about all the poor people who had been given >> gas, if YOU did not personally see these things happen, would you please >> quote a reliable source or report AT THE TIME IT DID HAPPEN who can >> give other than an urban-legend type account of it? > Pat, > Are you denying that gassing took place at all, or are you simply > challenging the numbers? Anyway, here ya go: > http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemical_weapons/chemkurd.html > There's about 5 articles to choose from. Good enough for you? > As far as Mister Pot and Mr. Kettle, when it comes to a choice > between freeing oppressed people by getting rid of a murderous thug > and being labeled a hypocrite, I'll take the label any day. > The excuse of "Why pick on me? You let everybody else get away with > it?" doesn't even work in grade school, much less geopolitics. > Or are you saying it's OK as long as we eliminate ALL the tyrants? > No? Didn't think so. > Sincerely, > -- Clive Dawson > [Right Wing Editor's Rant: I am not denying anything or reducing the > numbers, etc. I am simply trying to be intellectually honest enough to > say I do not know. Bear in mind, I had a brain aneurysm on November > 29, 1999, became comatose that same evening and came out of the coma > sometime in February, 2000. Then I was in an 'intense therapy' program > at Kansas Rehabilitation Hospital for another month, in Topeka. Then > after a five or six month saga where I only wish I could have been > lucky enough to be subject to Mr. Hussein's alleged gas attacks, I > went to a nursing facility for more long-term therapy. For a year or > so now, I have been back at the Digest, trying to tell my ass from my > elbow as my (doctor's evaluated) permanent brain desease controls much > of my life. So pardon me if I am not as current on news of the day as > I was in early 1999. I will look at your phrusa.org site and see if it > deals in factual evidence or just urban legend. Thank you for the hint > on this. Joey was unwilling to even do that much. > Freeing an oppressed people you say?? That's rich ... what about all > the people in South Africa and China and Cuba, and Guatemala and > other places who need a touch of Dubya's helping hand? Oh, but do > their dictator bosses have oil we need to survive, or have they > openly mocked the style of fundamentalist Christianity Bush pretends > to have when he chats with his buddies Dobson, Farwell, Pat Robertson > and others? No, I didn't think so. That 'oppressed people' routine and > all those alleged gassings are sort of a convenient excuse aren't > they? I'll see what phruasa.org has to say about it. Again, thanks for > taking pity on a tired, old, brain-deseased man. If I don't appear > here with any more issues .. well you'll know it was just Dubya doing > his thing: declaring me a threat to national security and taking me > away with no lawyer or chance to speak. PAT] ------------------------------ From: 3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com Subject: Re: More Words About Sodomy Insane and Mr. Bush Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 21:39:44 +0200 ~ To reply by e-mail, insert "Telecom Digest" in the subject line ~ On Fri, 21 Mar 2003 18:57:30 CST, in comp.dcom.telecom Pat wrote: > Freeing an oppressed people you say?? That's rich ... what about all > the people in South Africa Ahem ... Pat, I know you've been ill and all, but I'm sure even you must have noticed that the "oppressor" in South Africa was offically "abolished" in the early 1990's ... the ANC has been The Government here for quite some years and now offically there aren't any more oppressed people .... The "poor people" are now "free to vote in a democracy" - never mind that by and large they're no better off now - ... but that is, as they say, really a whole different show :-)) > other places who need a touch of Dubya's helping hand? Oh, but do > their dictator bosses have oil we need to survive, or have they Shucks, we (well officially at least) have no dictators .. or oil either for that matter ... pity ... Cheers, Frank R [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes siree, there are no more oppressed people in South Africa. Haven't been for years. The fact that AIDS in Africa (in general) and South Africa (particularly) is at a level worse than it ever has been anywhere else is a mere coincidence. The fact that violent crimes of a sexual nature are rampant in South Africa is just a coincidence also. The fact that the government they have there is more corrupt than anything Damn Sam could produce is just happenstance also. No, South Africa is a model of good government, isn't it, Nelson and his wife Winnie be damned. At one point 30-35 years ago I seriously considered migrating to South Africa to live. Now that place gives me the total creeps. Nope, the only evil dictator in the world is Sodomy Insane (he's Moslem, you know) and Dubya has detirmined he must be eliminated, no matter what the cost to our nation, the UN or the rest of the world. By God, if he won't get Saved, he'll sure as Hell get paved. George can explain it to you better than I can. 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 #359 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 23 20:46:46 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2O1kkI23142; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 20:46:46 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 20:46:46 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303240146.h2O1kkI23142@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 #360 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Mar 2003 20:46:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 360 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson BellSouth, Area Plus, Calling to Independent Telcos (Mark J Cuccia) Re: Unsolicited Faxes (joe@obilivan.net) Re: Unsolicited Faxes (3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com) Re: DSL Filter Question (Rich Greenberg) Wireless Hits the (Hot) Spot (Monty Solomon) Re: More Words About Sodomy Insane and Mr. Bush (Dave Phelps) protestwarrior.com (Joey Lindstrom) Yeah, I'm Wrong (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, 23 Mar 2003 17:25:13 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: BellSouth, Area Plus, Calling to Independent Telcos I subscribe to an optional calling plan from BellSouth called "Area Plus". In Fall 1996, "Area Plus" was an enhanced option to LOS (Local Optional Service), the LOS giving me highly discounted calling within 40 miles of my ratecenter and wirecenter and also within my LATA, though not necessarily everything in my LATA depending on the size of my LATA. There were two "rings" outside of the basic untimed unlimited local calling area. The first "ring" was "capped" with unlimited calling for the LOS monthly fee. The outer "ring" was "uncapped" with the billing clock always ticking but the rates were highly discounted. The 1996 "Area Plus" option basically gave me unlimited calling throughout *BOTH* "rings" of LOS, for a fixed monthly fee. Then, in Summer 1998, BellSouth extended the unlimited (for a (higher) fixed monthly fee) optional Area Plus to cover the ENTIRE LATA! Now, I get the following letter transcribed below from BellSouth, which now says that Area Plus customers (I don't know what the intent is for LOS customers, since I haven't been an 'LOS' customer, only an Area Plus customer, since Fall 1996), may see changes regarding the plan if you call *INDEPENDENT Telco* ratecenters/wirecenters/ NPA-NXX codes within your LATA-wide Area Plus calling area. I assume this also applies to NPA-NXX codes serving CLECs and wireless customers who are also in those independent ratecenters. I wonder if this is just a Louisiana thing, or if BellSouth is doing this in other states of its nine-state region. (Southern Bell: NC, SC, GA, FL ; South Central Bell: KY, TN, AL, MS, LA). BTW, when the La.PSC and South Central Bell (and the independent LECs) in Louisiana worked out the original 'LOS' plan in 1990/91, both Bell and independent telco areas each offered respective LOS for comparable charges. However, I don't think that any independent telco has ever offered "unlimited" Area Plus type calling. Anyhow, here is the letter I received, transcribed below. I do have some further questions/comments which follow: ----------- March 20, 2003 Effective April 23, 2003, customers subscribing to BellSouth Area Plus service may experience a change in the way calls dialed or forwarded into certain Independent Company (ICO) exchanges are billed. Beginning April 23, 2003, if you have substantial calling to the exchanges listed in this notice, you may see additional usage charges on your bill. The first 1,000 minutes each month of calling to the involved exchanges will continue to be included in your service at no additional charge. Usage in excess of 1,000 minutes per month will be billed at 8-cents per minute. Call description information will appear on the bill for calls that exceed the 1,000 minute allowance. [BOLD] This billing will apply only for calls to the exchanges listed in this notice that are not part of your basic local calling area.[/BOLD] Exchanges included in your basic local calling area are shown on the Customer Guide pages in the front of your BellSouth telephone directory. [BOLD] There will be no billing change for calling into BellSouth exchanges or for calling into ICO exchanges in your basic local calling area. Area Plus service plan customers will continue to call on an unlimited basis into BellSouth exchanges and basic local area ICO exchanges.[/BOLD] This billing change is expected to affect less than 2-per-cent of current BellSouth Area Plus service plan customers. Please check the enclosed list to see if you place frequent calls to someone in the listed locations. As guidance, calling to listed locations that are not included in your basic local calling area must total almost 17 hours per month for you to be impacted by this change. High call volume into exchanges subject to the 1,000 minute threshold may be the result of dial-up access to the Internet. To avoid additional charges, you should contact your Internet Service Provider (ISP) to see if a basic local calling area access number is available. If such a number is not available, you may want to consider switching to another provider. Also, there may be a better plan that meets all of your long distance calling needs. When choosing long distance service, you should consider all long distance calling -- within your calling zone, intra-state, and inter-state -- to obtain the most cost effective plan. If you receive a bill prior to September 1, 2003, with significant usage charges that are the result of this billing change, you may call the number listed below to have the charges removed. Should you have questions concerning this change, please call your BellSouth representative at 1-888-757-6500. Thank you, BellSouth NEW ORLEANS CALLING ZONE -- INDEPENDENT COMPANY EXCHANGE NAMES GALLIANO GARYVILLE GOLDEN MEADOW GRAND ISLE LAROSE LEEVILLE RESERVE TELEPHONE NUMBER PREFIXES FOR EXCHANGES LISTED ABOVE AREA CODE: 985 PREFIXES (First 3-digits of telephone number): 325, 396, 475, 479, 535, 536, 632, 672, 693. 724, 742, 787, 798, 820 ----------- Garyville and Reserve LA ratecenters are the "Reserve Telephone Company". LaRose, Golden Meadow, Galliano, Leeville (Lafourche Parish), Grand Isle are "LATELCO, the Lafourche Telephone Company". Note that while it doesn't apply to my originating ratecenter/wirecenter, there *ARE* instances in Louisiana of EAS (local) between adjacent or nearby Bell and independent telco ratecenters. And there are also instances of in-TER-LATA EAS (local) both pre-existing as well as "new" post-divestiture, both intra-state and even in-TER-state! But even that doesn't apply to my originating location. But with ratecenter consolidation occurring, does anyone know of specific situations where a traditionally "Bell-incumbent" ratecenter and a traditionally "independent-incumbent" ratecenter have been consolidated? When that occurs, can the independent telco extend to being a "CLEC" in the traditional Bell area, and vice versa, can the "Bell" extend to be a "CLEC" in the traditional independent area? Or do they usually respect each others' traditional territory? Ratecenter consoliation has been happening much more frequently over the past several years (starting late 1990s), to both conserve numbering/code assignments, as well as for "efficiency" of paperwork and database maintenance and operations. But I don't know if a Bell and an independent telco ratecenter have actually yet consolidated? I hope that this "first step" at poking holes into the Area Plus plan will be the ONLY step, and that calls to EAS-ratecenter-based wireless and CLEC prefixes won't be next. And with portability, how does one really know that the call is going to a CLEC. Also, this coming November, there is SUPPOSED to FINALLY be porting between cellular and landline (but within the same ratecenter). I'm hoping that this "first attempt" at tearing down Area Plus will become "moot" if hopefully the PSC can order BellSouth to expand base-rate EAS (local) between New Orleans and the Reserve Telco ratecenters, as well as between New Orleans and the Latelco ratecenters. Also, with some of the (basic) EAS/local enhancements over the past three years in Louisiana, which are for "all" customers, included "new" EAS between BellSouth and independent telco ratecenters. While the New Orleans Metro ratecenter had an expanded (basic) local/EAS calling area put into place in early 1991, it didn't extend as far as Reserve Telco and Latelco. But if it did, it might have been difficult or impossible for BellSouth to tamper with the previously existing Area Plus service plan tariff. Hopefully, there can be precedent to even consolidate adjacent/nearby ratecenters of BOTH Bell and the independents with each other! :) Mark J. Cuccia New Orleans LA mcuccia@tulane.edu ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: Unsolicited Faxes Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 10:07:04 GMT Organization: Cox Communications One solution is to add Privacy Manager to the line. None of those out-of-area calls will get through. Verizon markets the feature under a different name, but they have it in most areas now. Jeff Brewster wrote: > Hi everyone, > I know this has probably been discussed a lot, but I can't really find > any info for my situation. To start, I do not, nor have ever owned a > fax machine. Last July I moved into my new apartment and shortly > after having my phone connected (Verizon, live in NY), I started > receiving fax calls. Sometimes they come with caller ID info (if > that's the case, I try to look up the company/individual to find their > business number and call them to remove me), but usually the calls > come up as "Out of Area" or "Private Caller". The calls come all day > long, sometimes at 2 or 3 in the morning also (last night I received a > call at 3:53am). > What exactly can I do to stop this nonsense? Especially with the > blocked numbers? The calls drive me nuts. They fill up my voicemail > box with annoying beeping messages, and at least once a week they call > early enough to wake me up. Any info you guys can provide will be > greatly appreciated! > Thanks, > Jeff > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The easy way out might be by having > telco change the number. I think it would be quite rare if you wound > up getting two 'sour' numbers in a row. If you have only had the number > since last July, how important is it that you keep the same number? > PAT] ------------------------------ From: 3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com Subject: Re: Unsolicited Faxes Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 18:13:12 +0200 ~ To reply by e-mail, insert "Telecom Digest" in the subject line ~ On 22 Mar 2003 ,(Jeff Brewster) wrote: > any info for my situation. To start, I do not, nor have ever owned a > fax machine. Last July I moved into my new apartment and shortly > What exactly can I do to stop this nonsense? Especially with the > blocked numbers? The calls drive me nuts. They fill up my voicemail You obviously have a PC -- are you using a modem with dial-up ??? If so, the simple solution would be to allow the PC to pick up a few of these faxes - might get you enough information to find out the sender's details. There are enough free / demo fax software packages around that it needn't cost you anything. Of course if you're not using a dial up, that makes life teeny bit more complicated, but considering that a fax modem needn't be the latest and greatest form, you might be able to pick one up somewhere for next to nothing ... *ANY* fax capable modem should be adequate ... > box with annoying beeping messages, and at least once a week they call > early enough to wake me up. Any info you guys can provide will be > greatly appreciated! Come to think of it, do these calls come at more or less "definite times" ?? If you know anybody with a fax machine/modem, perhaps foward calls to that number during one of those times - assuming you have call forwarding available, that is. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The easy way out might be by having > telco change the number. I think it would be quite rare if you wound Shucks Pat, lets not give up so easily !!! Anyway, that doesn't really *solve* the problem -- just shunts it of to the next poor so-and-so who gets that number ... [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've told here a couple times in the past about the aberrant fax machine at First National Bank of Chicago which (due to misprogrammed speed dialing) was placing calls to a family in Germany during (Germany's) overnight hours and how the family frantically complained to Bundespost who in turn leaned sort of hard on AT&T who in turn leaned sort of hard on Illinois Bell who in turn breathed heavily on First National Bank when polite requests to correct the situation fell on deaf ears because ... (well you know how bureacracies and customer service departments pay no attention to anyone until *their* supervisor comes along on a warpath, hell-raising scene, which is what had to happen at FNB-Chicago.) You should have also mentioned to him that 'Call Blocker' might be a solution (*60 in most locations). You can often times 'block last call recieved' whether you know the number or not. PAT] ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: DSL Filter Question Date: 23 Mar 2003 16:09:55 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , Robert Bonomi wrote: > In article , Rich Greenberg > wrote: >> I am not sure if I can use the filters I was sent. The EXCELSUS >> Z-BLOCKER model Z-D25OP2J is marked as being a "Dual DSL filter". >> Its a small box with a short wire with a modular plug on one end, >> and 2 modular jacks on the other end, one marked for a phone, and the >> other for the DSL modem. >> Does this mean it contains 2 filters and will filter both line 1 and >> line 2 of a 2 line jack, > NO. >> or is the "dual" just that it has 2 jacks, one filtered and one not, >> and the filter is on line 1? If only one line is filtered, can I >> get a similar filter that filters line 2? > It is a single-line (phone line) filter. The 'phone' jack is filtered, > the 'dsl' jack is not. Sorry Robert, but you are wrong. I went to the manufacturers web site (www.excelsus-tech.com) and found the specs for that model number. It does indeed contain 2 filters, so both line 1 and line 2 out of the "phone" jack are filtered. You are correct that the "DSL" jack is line 1 and line 2 and is not filtered. 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 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But YOU DO NOT WANT any filters on the DSL 'side' of a line, ever. It has to be wide open to push the stuff out at high speed. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 02:42:47 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wireless Hits the (Hot) Spot As Apple launches its next generation of 'Wi-Fi' products, the computer maker is confident it can adapt to potential compatibility issues By David Zeiler: The Mac Experience Sooner or later, you'll go wireless. Since 1999 Apple has sold a technology it calls "Airport" allowing Mac users to connect to a network via a base station that broadcasts a signal to any Mac equipped with a $99 Airport card. All current Mac models include a slot for such a card. As long as the Mac remains within the 300-foot range of the base station, which itself can be plugged into an Internet connection, that Mac can connect to printers or other Macs on the network as well as surf the Net. The very same technology exists for Windows users, and its use is spreading rapidly. As more and more people experience the freedom of wireless computing with a laptop, they're finding they don't want to live without it. According to a February report from Instat/MDR of Scottsdale, Ariz., shipments of wireless equipment to home users in 2002 grew by 160 percent over the previous year. http://www.sunspot.net/technology/custom/pluggedin/bal-mac032003,0,5290226.column ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: More Words About Sodomy Insane and Mr. Bush Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 09:55:37 -0600 Organization: www.tippenring.com So things in South Africa aren't as good as the US. What do you want us to do about it? That is their problem. Iraq is our problem because of the instability Hussein introduces in the area. We don't trust him to stay in his own borders. Additionally, he has failed to uphold his end of an agreement for 12 years. If that agreement isn't enforced, everyone will think they can get away with it. If South Africa wants the US to get involved more than we already are, then they need to realistically threaten or attack our allies, start killing their own people, etc. In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to 3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes siree, there are no more oppressed > people in South Africa. Haven't been for years. The fact that AIDS in > Africa (in general) and South Africa (particularly) is at a level > worse than it ever has been anywhere else is a mere coincidence. The > fact that violent crimes of a sexual nature are rampant in South Africa > is just a coincidence also. The fact that the government they have > there is more corrupt than anything Damn Sam could produce is just > happenstance also. No, South Africa is a model of good government, isn't > it, Nelson and his wife Winnie be damned. At one point 30-35 years ago > I seriously considered migrating to South Africa to live. Now that > place gives me the total creeps. Nope, the only evil dictator in the > world is Sodomy Insane (he's Moslem, you know) and Dubya has detirmined > he must be eliminated, no matter what the cost to our nation, the UN > or the rest of the world. By God, if he won't get Saved, he'll sure as > Hell get paved. George can explain it to you better than I can. PAT] Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you said in your first three lines is what I would like to see everywhere. The USA should mind its own business all the time, unless *directly attacked* Whether or not 9/11/01 qualified as an 'attack' or rather as I say 'mass murder' will have to be decided. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 02:37:37 -0700 Subject: protestwarrior.com Reply-To: joey@garynuman.info From the "Our Mission" page of www.protestwarrior.com (which is a laugh-riot website, well worth viewing). "War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." -- John Stuart Mill War IS an ugly thing, but as long as nations and leaders exist that detest freedom, sometimes it is the only way to secure a lasting peace. Most leftist anti-war protesters and pundits don't understand this. They state that this use of force is always unnecessary -- that war, ANY war, is never good. Some of them, born into the luxury of American freedom, believe that liberty can exist passively, that somehow the world's natural state will always settle into utopian harmony. Others, in an attempt to absolve themselves from the unearned guilt they harbor living in a nation of prosperity and wealth, try to buy morality on the cheap by pronouncing themselves for the 'good'. To them, the derivation of the 'good' is based on a simple, yet peculiar standard: the powerful and competent are wicked, while the feeble and impotent are innocent - regardless of the context. That is why they defend Iraq instead of America, and the Palestinian "resistance" instead of Israel. These leftists usually carry the loudest megaphones. And left unchallenged, their voices are heard disproportionately, demoralizing our troops, and emboldening dictators around the world -- dictators who dream of the day the "Great Satan" disappears from the face of the earth. However, their self-righteous messages go silent quickly when the truth of history and reality is thrown back in their face, as I experienced myself. It's time to turn up the juice on OUR megaphones, as we will never keep our supreme values of liberty and justice without the will to fight for them. -Kfir Alfia (kfir@protestwarrior.com) / From the desk of Joey Lindstrom / / I had taken a partner once before- but, damnation, no matter how / many times you get your fingers burned, you have to trust people. / Otherwise you are a hermit in a cave, sleeping with one eye open. / There wasn't anyway to be safe; just being alive was deadly / dangerous.. fatal. In the end. / -- Daniel Boone Davis, "The Door Into Summer" / (Robert Heinlein) ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 01:21:51 -0700 Subject: Yeah, I'm Wrong Reply-To: joey@garynuman.info KILLFILE ALERT: I'm about to speak on the Iraq issue. Feel free to skip. Do not feel free to whinge about whether or not it's off-topic. We live in extraordinary times and are experiencing extraordinary events. The views and opinions of people that we have come to know and respect IN THIS FORUM are of great interest to many. If that does not describe you, please skip these messages, but please also relax about it -- this topic will eventually go away. Pat: you said I wimped out by not providing links to stories detailing Saddam's atrocities -- a man who has killed (directly or through his military) more people than the US military has in its entire history. Well, sorry, but I guess I made a mistake in assuming you'd actually RESEARCHED an issue that you profess such strong feelings about and make such sweeping statements about, and that you were actually up on current events. I understand your reasons for NOT having been able to stay current, but c'mon ... before saying such outrageous things like George W. Bush is mentally ill, couldn't you have done us a favour and done a BIT of looking around to see what the stink was about? (Where's your link to the medical story that gives details of Dubya's mental illness?) Oh, but wait. If "Dubya" is in favour of something, then it's axiomatic: it must be bad, and any reaction against it must be good. It sure feels good, anyways. The problem is that the facts don't support it. Not that that ever matters to liberals. You want some links? I'll give you links. Let's start with this one: http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030321-023627-5923r The interesting part of this story is towards the bottom and is easily missed. Remember all those "human shield" peaceniks that went to Iraq to try to prevent the bombing? Well, some of them turned up in Jordan recently: ----- A group of American anti-war demonstrators who came to Iraq with Japanese human shield volunteers made it across the border today with 14 hours of uncensored video, all shot without Iraqi government minders present. Kenneth Joseph, a young American pastor with the Assyrian Church of the East, told UPI the trip "had shocked me back to reality." Some of the Iraqis he interviewed on camera "told me they would commit suicide if American bombing didn't start. They were willing to see their homes demolished to gain their freedom from Saddam's bloody tyranny. They convinced me that Saddam was a monster the likes of which the world had not seen since Stalin and Hitler. He and his sons are sick sadists. Their tales of slow torture and killing made me ill, such as people put in a huge shredder for plastic products, feet first so they could hear their screams as bodies got chewed up from foot to head." ----- The other assertion that you and others continually make is that the average Iraqi on the street supports Saddam and is anti-American. Yes, I can understand why you might believe that, after having watched so many carefully-orchestrated anti-USA protest marches through the streets of Baghdad (but ask any reporter how quickly the signs come down and the marchers disappear once the cameras are shut off). (An aside: where is *YOUR* link to the story that asserts average, unarmed Iraqi citizens are literally fighting the invading soldiers? Hmmm?) But it's not the truth, Pat. Here is truth (from a left-wing newspaper, too): http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,919627,00.html Another argument against this conflict is that the UN hasn't authorized it. Well, excuse me. Maybe the US should ask for Iceland's permission while they're at it. The Security Council's job is to stop monsters like Hussein (and/or whoever would presume to be the next Hitler). They have failed every single time they've had such an opportunity. But the Security Council, and the UN in general, are not a higher authority, and the US does not require their "permission" to do this. The UN is not sovereign. To Robert G. Levin - gee, I'd love to debate you, but you've given me no facts to debate you on. "You Are Right and Joey Lindstrom et al. Are Wrong" - hey, it sounds right, it *FEELS* right, so therefore it *MUST* be right, huh? Levin, you are an intellectual lightweight. If you're going to say that I'm wrong, then back it up. You make yourself look like a six-year-old. To Pat re: your crosspost from another newsgroup about whether Dubya's actions rise to the level of a high crime and/or misdemeanor, and thus impeachable. By a vote of 296-133 (70%) in the House and 77-23 (77%) in the Senate, Congress authorized President Bush to use the United States armed forces ˘ as he determines to be necessary and appropriate ˘ to protect the nation ˘ against the continuing threat posed by Iraq. ˘ The war resolution gives the President the power to decide if and when to take military action against Iraq, with or without the consent of the United Nations Security Council. So if you're going to impeach the "dictator" Bush, you better impeach the democratically-elected congress-critters who authorized him to do what he's doing. Good luck. To Steven J. Sobol: I do consider myself lucky that I live in Canada, for the most part. I am still proudly Canadian, but that pride is tarnished today. Our Prime Minister, a man whose dictatorial powers DWARF Bush's and are almost on a par with Hussein's, has chosen to side with France and Germany on this one. Jean Chretien, a man who speaks out of both sides of his mouth, has defied the majority of Canadians by not only refusing to involve Canada in this directly, but even refused a compromise that would've seen Canadian troops heading to Afghanistan, there to relieve American troops that could then be redeployed to Iraq. For this, I'm lucky? Idon't think so. This is going to hurt Canada's relationship with the USA quite badly, and it's a damned shame because the average man/woman on the streets of Canada *SUPPORTS* the USA. Yes, "Daddy" should have rid the world of Saddam in '91, but I blame the Democrats in Congress for that one. They knew they couldn't win in '92 unless they could somehow reign in HW's victory, and they did just that. As for Dubya being a flaming moron, c'mon: let's see some facts to support it. Don't confuse his stilted speaking style and his various "Bushisms" for low intelligence. The man is VERY intelligent, and he has surrounded himself with some very intelligent people - Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, just to name a few. And y'ever notice how he never gets any credit for having two black people, one of which is a black woman, in such high positions in his cabinet? No credit at all ... but people will call him a racist bastard at any opportunity. (Either that, or they'll call Powell and Rice traitors to the black cause.) That said, I cringed when, during his announcement that the war was underway, he actually said "nuculer". To paraphrase Dennis Miller, "I don't think you should be allowed to VOTE on this shit until you learn how to PRONOUNCE it". :-) / From the desk of Joey Lindstrom / / "Don't argue with superior beings." / --Everything I Need To Know I Learned From Babylon 5 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Didn't I say in a note yesterday that when Joey woke up Sunday morning, checked the mail and news how he would be furious to read the responses from people who had crossed him and disagreed with him? Was I correct? I spent some time yesterday reading the commentaries in phrusa.org and found them very interesting. Generally I trust the thoughts of Physicians for Human Rights. Saddam really is a pretty awful character, which I did not totally disagree with before but having my memory refreshed with some specific facts was good. What still puzzles me a little is the *timing* on the whole thing. And why, with so many years of abuse by Saddam, Bush thought we had to act on it *right this minute* without doing a few things first: He could have prepared a sort of 'fact sheet' giving references, something like was done for me here a couple days ago with the phrusa references and lots of others. He could have used this 'fact sheet' thing to declare a state of national emergency and stated *why* immediate action was required. He could have been a better commuicator. I think also it would have been appropriate to set a sort of absolutely final deadline where the UN was concerned and made it plain he was going to continue without them after that point. When the inspectors asked for a bit more time -- hey, as many years as it has been going on, why not give them a month more if needed, and make it plain -- without any questions -- that the USA would continue at that point. As has been pointed out here in recent days, the man is an absolute idiot, which is putting it mildly. And he does have a reputation (undeserved in my opinion) of following along with whatever the most fundamentalist Christians expect of him, and you know many of them are looking forward to the Armageddon which they feel is due any day. So Bush associates with those people and gets a bit dirty also. Who can be blamed for thinking it is a strange coincidence that all these things happen so quickly? That's how I feel, that it is most peculiar to say the least. And the general arrogance of the USA does not help any either, the feelings so prevalent that 'my country is always right' and 'God Bless America' and all that stuff. I would like to see how President Carter (if he was still in office, or back for a second term) would have handled it. I am sure it would have been an improvement. If Bush had even said something like "I am sorry it has come to this point" ... but there has never been a humble word come out of his mouth that I know of. 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 #360 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 25 01:12:45 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2P6CiK03803; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 01:12:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 01:12:45 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303250612.h2P6CiK03803@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 #361 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Mar 2003 01:12:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 361 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #375, March 24, 2003 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: BellSouth, Independent LECs, etc. (Mark J Cuccia) Two Line Telephones (Tim) Wanted: Colorado: Unwanted Computers and Parts (Joseph) MobiSys 2003, First International Conference Mobile Systems (Alex Walker) Re: DHCP Router With NAT Passthrough?? (Robert Bonomi) Circuit Court Upholds Anti Junk Fax Law (Josh Collens) Re: Unsolicited Faxes (Jeff Brewster) Last Laugh! Art Brothers and Pole Line Construction (Al Gillis) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 10:21:37 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #375, March 24, 2003 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 375: March 24, 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: ** Bell, Axia Settle SuperNet Dispute ** Price Cap Approvals Produce Customer Rebates ** SaskTel Says Shaw Fees Are Discriminatory ** Videotron, Unions Reach Agreement ** Microcell Restructuring Approved ** Bell Sells Toronto.com Stake ** Nortel Meeting to Vote on Reverse Split ** CRTC to Review PIC Rates ** CRTC Urges Action on Broadcast Theft ** Cisco Buying Linksys ** Telus Mobility Expands Atlantic 1X Coverage ** Minacs Appoints COO ** AirIQ Acquires Vehicle Location Patents ** A Clarification on Nexxia ** New Options for Wireless LAN Security ============================================================ BELL, AXIA SETTLE SUPERNET DISPUTE: Bell West will take over construction of the rural portion of Alberta's SuperNet, previously subcontracted to Axia NetMedia, as part of a settlement of the companies' two-month-old dispute. Axia is still under contract with the Alberta government to manage and operate the network. (See Telecom Update #372) ** Calgary-based Platinum Communications says it has established the first high-speed link to Alberta schools from SuperNet, connecting five schools in Chinook. PRICE CAP APPROVALS PRODUCE CUSTOMER REBATES: The CRTC has approved most of the price changes filed by Aliant, Bell Canada, MTS, SaskTel, and Telus to comply with new price cap rules, retroactive to June 1, 2002. Changes include reductions in DNA and Megalink rates: the telcos must issue rebates to affected customers. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2003/dt2003-14.htm http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2003/dt2003-15.htm http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2003/dt2003-16.htm http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2003/dt2003-17.htm http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2003/dt2003-18.htm ** The CRTC has not yet ruled on the telcos' request for a two-month extension on the deadline for their 2003 price cap filings. (See Telecom Update #374) SASKTEL SAYS SHAW FEES ARE DISCRIMINATORY: SaskTel has complained to the CRTC that Shaw has unduly disadvantaged the telco's TV distribution service by demanding that it pay more to carry pay-per-view channels than Shaw charges others. VIDEOTRON, UNIONS REACH AGREEMENT: Videotron has reached a tentative agreement with unions representing 2,200 workers who have been on strike for 10 months. The agreement will now be voted on by the cableco's unionized employees. MICROCELL RESTRUCTURING APPROVED: Microcell Telecom has emerged from bankruptcy protection, following approval of its restructuring plan by creditors and the Quebec Superior Court. The creditors now own 99.9% of Microcell. (See Telecom Update #364) BELL SELLS TORONTO.COM STAKE: Bell Sympatico has sold its 50% share of the city site Toronto.com to its partner, Torstar. The partnership was established five years ago as part of Bell's push into the Web content business. NORTEL MEETING TO VOTE ON REVERSE SPLIT: On April 24, Nortel shareholders will be asked to authorize a stock consolidation, at a ratio to be selected by the Board within the next year, of between five to 10 old shares to one new share. (see Telecom Update #351) ** Nortel's Board is recommending against shareholder proposals to phase out stock options and to penalize executive pay for poor performance. CRTC TO REVIEW PIC RATES: Responding to an application by Primus Canada, the CRTC has launched a review of the charges paid by competitive long distance providers to incumbent telcos for database changes when a customer chooses a different long distance carrier. The current rates have not been reviewed in over five years. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2003/pt2003-2.htm CRTC URGES ACTION ON BROADCAST THEFT: On March 20, the CRTC hosted a broadcasting industry meeting on theft of satellite and cable TV signals. The participants agreed to report at least annually on efforts to eliminate signal piracy, and the Commission agreed to review overall progress in its annual Broadcasting Monitoring Report. ** Following the meeting, CRTC Chairman Charles Dalfen called on government departments and agencies to intensify their efforts to combat broadcast piracy. CISCO BUYING LINKSYS: Cisco Systems has agreed to buy Linksys, which makes wired and wireless networking equipment for homes and home offices, for US$500 million in stock. TELUS MOBILITY EXPANDS ATLANTIC 1X COVERAGE: Telus Mobility's 1X higher-speed wireless data service now reaches an additional 500,000 residents of the four Atlantic provinces through activation of its reciprocal roaming agreement with Aliant Mobility. MINACS APPOINTS COO: Call centre outsourcer Minacs Worldwide has appointed Bob Cariglia, previously a VP with Freightliner Truck, as Chief Operations Officer, effective April 1. AIRIQ ACQUIRES VEHICLE LOCATION PATENTS: AirIQ, which provides vehicle tracking services, has acquired full ownership of a series of patents for the use of wireless location in vehicle recovery. The Pickering, Ontario-based company previously owned 50% of the patents. A CLARIFICATION ON NEXXIA: Last week's item on Bell Nexxia being folded back into Bell Canada may have caused some confusion. Although Nexxia will no longer be a separate corporation, it will continue as a distinct group within Bell to serve national customers. NEW OPTIONS FOR WIRELESS LAN SECURITY: In the last year, wireless LANs have proliferated in organizations across Canada -- and most are wide open to hackers and eavesdroppers. The March issue of Telemanagement features an in-depth report on the security measures you should be implementing now and preparing for in the near future. Also in this issue: ** "Deploying Wi-Fi in the Real World" ** "Telecommuting Tools for Tight Budgets" ** "Instant Messaging Gains a Foothold in Business" To subscribe to Telemanagement, call 800-263-4415 ext 500 or go to http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.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 2003 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 05:36:20 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: BellSouth, Independent LECs, etc. In my recent post on the changes to Area Plus service plan customers, at least in Louisiana, with BellSouth changing the way calls to (non-EAS) independent telco ratecenters will now be classified, I wrote (towards the very endof my post): > Also, with some of the (basic) EAS/local enhancements over the past > three years in Louisiana, which are for "all" customers, included > "new" EAS between BellSouth and independent telco ratecenters. While > the New Orleans Metro ratecenter had an expanded (basic) local/EAS > calling area put into place in early 1991, it didn't extend as far as > Reserve Telco and Latelco. The year listed for the expansion of EAS (local) w/r/t the New Orleans Metro ratecenter was _2001_, and NOT 1991 !! I 'mis-typed', and skewed it by ten years! :( During 1999 and 2000, the Louisiana state legislature and BellSouth (along with the incumbent independent local telcos throughout the state) had an agreement on a change (a streamlining) in the way telco (and utility) property would be taxed. It resulted in a savings to the telcos. And these savings were to be passed on to the customers, either in (one-time) "rebates", or overall rate reductions, OR (as it was agreed to), in the expansion or enhancement of BASIC plan EAS/local calling areas throughout various parts of the state. The increased EAS/local calling areas began taking effect starting in LATE 2000 and throughout 2001, and continued into Summer 2002. Some of the later EAS expansions were not even listed on the original "short list" of ratecenter pairs to become local to each other! :) The La.PSC website has a page listing these, with links to click to more detailed .pdf files on each siuation: "Expanded Local Calling Area Service" http://www.lpsc.org/HeadlinesTeleExpLocalCallArea.htm The last items on this PSC list was for July 2002. However, I found yet another EAS/local enhancement, from the BellSouth website, to take effect this year (in either April or May, I don't remember offhand). And this more recent enhancement was also not on the original "short list" of proposed EAS enhancements from back in 2000. The enhancements agreement was to allow complete local/free "parish-wide" calling (Louisiana doesn't use the term 'county', but rather 'parish'). However, I can find situations where there really is NOT yet complete and full local/free calling throughout certain specific parishes ... Some of it is even intra-LATA, not the more difficult-to-approve-for-EAS inter- LATA. But it usually is where there is an independent telco involved. Lafourche Telco (LATELCO)'s ratecenter of Grand Isle LA is actually within Jefferson Parish, not Lafourche Parish. It is only reachable by road by driving down Louisiana State Hwy.#1 through Lafourche Parish, but the town of Grand Isle is jurisdictionally part of Jefferson Parish. The *remainder* of Jefferson Parish does have full and complete EAS within "itself", especially since the 2001 enhancements. However, unless one subscribes to the *optional* enhanced plans of LOS or Area Plus, it would still be an intra-LATA toll call to call between Grand Isle and the rest of Jefferson Parish. And since Grand Isle is Latelco rather than BellSouth, I wonder what this means for "high call volume" customers on LOS or Area Plus who live in the "rest of" (BellSouth parts of) Jefferson Parish who call Grand Isle ?? Telco wirecenter and ratecenter boundaries don't necessarily neatly follow political jurisdictinoally boundaries! For the most part, these expansions of BASIC Local/EAS, as well as the optional LOS and Area Plus service plans, benefit the more rural customers, who previously have had rather limited local calling areas, in some cases, ONLY within their own ratecenter! And where they can now call anything/everything in their own parish "locally" (although this is still not yet 100% realized), it has helped when they need to call "POTS" numbers of the courthouse or other parish services which were previously a toll call. Customers in the larger towns and cities already have rather large EAS or local calling areas. However, with the always increasing "flight to the suburbs/exurbs" and new "bedroom communities", expanded local/EAS calling as well as the optional LOS and Area Plus can help the "city" customers who need to call friends/relatives/etc. who have now relocated to the suburbs/exurbs, where such calling had previously been toll. Anyhow, I would hope that the La.PSC will look into making further EAS/local calling situations available for ALL customers in a given area, especially between ratecenters which have traditionally been served by different incumbent LECs ... i.e., one Bell, the other independent, OR between different adjacent independent telcos ratecenters. This would eliminate, or at least "reduce" the possibility of LOS and Area Plus customers having to deal with this recently announced new 'restriction' that I discussed in my previous post. And now that BASIC local/EAS in various parts of the state has been expanded further over the past two+ years, I *REALLY* think that it is about time for Bell/incumbents and the La.PSC to start working on signficant *RATECENTER CONSOLIDATION" efforts throughout the state. In the long run, such consolidation will help ease the use of NXX c.o.codes and numbering in general, because there will be fewer (although larger) ratecenters for *potential* CLECs (and wireless providers) in their need for 'initial' office codes for potential customers and service. And it also "streamlines" paperwork and administrative database management in such documents as Tariff filings, the LERG/RDBS/BIRRDS/etc., the front pages of local telephone books on local calling, bill inserts, and so forth. Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA ------------------------------ From: rtoshow@yahoo.com (Tim) Subject: Two Line Telephones Date: 24 Mar 2003 20:28:29 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ One of many items that I have on eBay. Here is a link to my auctions: http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&include=0&userid=skyline_sales&sort=3&rows=25&since=-1&rd=1 Just copy & paste that in your browser. If it doesn't work, go to www.ebay.com and do a search by seller. seller id: skyline_sales Good luck ! ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Wanted: Colorado: Unwanted Computers and Parts Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 00:58:35 GMT Colorado - Denver area Looking for unwanted computers, monitors, parts, software, network equipment, any speed, condition or age.WOrking or not, complete or not. Units will be recycled out into the community. Will pick up! Any number of units. Doorstop computers are fine! Also will take any unwanted software. So contact us and clear out those doorstops you have gathering dust in the basement! We can handle things even Goodwill won't take. These days, it's getting to be a lot. If security is an issue, we will remove all data from hard drives according to Dept. of Defense standards before removal. It is not my intent to disrupt but to ask for things people do not need anymore. Thank You! ->Posted by Ozum (http://ozinsight.com/) ->All-in-one yEnc newsreader, scanner and freeware autoposter. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 15:14:07 -0800 From: Alex Walker Reply-To: alex@usenix.org, alex@usenix.org Organization: USENIX Subject: MobiSys 2003, The First International Conference on Mobile Systems MobiSys 2003 May 5-8, 2003 - San Francisco, CA, USA http://www.usenix.org/mobisys03 http://www.sigmobile.org/mobisys/2003 Register by April 14, 2003 and SAVE! The First International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services (MobiSys 2003) is a new forum for presenting the best cutting-edge research on supporting, enabling, and coping with mobility in systems software, applications, and services. Just added: "How Should We Evaluate Systems Contributions to Ubicomp?" Because ubicomp systems always have a human in the loop, some of the traditional criteria by which classical systems work has been evaluated are not easily applied to ubicomp. This panel will take a hard look at evaluation criteria, including metrics, tactics, and possible new collaborations. Our panelists are academic researchers and industry practitioners who have architected, designed, implemented, and deployed mobile or ubiquitous computing systems to actual users. * Presentations, tutorials, demo & poster sessions, and BOFs will cover the latest innovations in many important areas, including: -security -location management -application support -mobile architectures -sensor networks -energy management -analysis of mobile networks -application mobility -systems techniques for solving mobility problems The conference will begin with a full day of technical tutorials on: *Programming Wireless Sensor/Effector Networks of TinyOS Motes - David Culler and members of the TinyOS team *An Intro to Wearable Computing - Bradley Rhodes and Thad Starner *Mobile Networking - Thomas F. La Porta *802.11 Wireless Network Security - Bernard Aboba and Dan Simon, Microsoft * Keynote: Bob Brodersen of the Berkeley Wireless Research Center and the University of California at Berkeley MobiSys 2003 is jointly sponsored by the USENIX Association and ACM SIGMOBILE in cooperation with ACM SIGOPS ------------------------------ Subject: Re: DHCP Router With NAT Passthrough?? Organization: Not Much From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 00:29:04 GMT A cisco PIX 505, at about US$400 will do everything you need, and then some. There _is_ a non-trivial learning-curve on setup/configuration. In article , wrote: > Well I thank those who replied direct. BUT none of the group > postings were really helpful. I dont have time to put together a > 486 firewall with Linux, etc. I WOULD like to see if something SMALL > like a router/firewall for what I NEED is out there already. > Please reply IF YOU DO KNOW of such a router. I have never used > IPsec. I know VPN is not what I am looking for; its almost like > NAT but reversed (9 123.456.789.xxx IPs on the WAN is translated to > 92.168 internal addresses; hope that explains it better, and the > 10th is used as the gateway IP). > CBoone@Earthlink.Net wrote: >> I have a T1 with a ATT managed Cisco router at the office, have 10 >> static IPs on it ... ------------------------------ From: Josh Collens Subject: Circuit Court Upholds Anti Junk Fax Law Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 23:01:51 -0500 Great News: The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a law that requires fax machine operators to opt-in before receiving fax advertising. From privacy.org: "The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit has upheld the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) of 1991 against a First Amendment challenge. In the case, Missouri v. American Blast Fax, junk fax company Fax.com and Wal-Mart argued that the law violated the First Amendment because it imposes fines upon companies that send fax advertisements without the consent of the recipient. The case is the latest court victory for opt-in privacy laws." http://caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/022705P.pdf ------------------------------ From: jeffbrewster@hotmail.com (Jeff Brewster) Subject: Re: Unsolicited Faxes Date: 23 Mar 2003 21:54:39 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ 3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com wrote in message news:: > You obviously have a PC -- are you using a modem with dial-up ??? If > so, the simple solution would be to allow the PC to pick up a few of > these faxes - might get you enough information to find out the > sender's details. There are enough free / demo fax software packages > around that it needn't cost you anything. Of course if you're not > using a dial up, that makes life teeny bit more complicated, but > considering that a fax modem needn't be the latest and greatest form, > you might be able to pick one up somewhere for next to nothing ... > *ANY* fax capable modem should be adequate. Yes, I have a PC, but I have a cable modem and don't even have/care to have a regular modem anymore (home networking is way too nice :-)) > Come to think of it, do these calls come at more or less "definite > times" ?? If you know anybody with a fax machine/modem, perhaps > foward calls to that number during one of those times - assuming you > have call forwarding available, that is. The calls come at random times, everyday of the week. Since I work 9-5, I check my caller ID/voicemail when I get home and always have multiple calls scattered throughout the day. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The easy way out might be by having >> telco change the number. I think it would be quite rare if you wound > Shucks Pat, lets not give up so easily !!! Anyway, that doesn't > really *solve* the problem -- just shunts it of to the next poor > so-and-so who gets that number ... I think this solution is pretty easy also, but I don't feel it should be my responsibility to change when someone else is violating my privacy :-) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've told here a couple times in the > past about the aberrant fax machine at First National Bank of Chicago > which (due to misprogrammed speed dialing) was placing calls to a > family in Germany during (Germany's) overnight hours and how the > family frantically complained to Bundespost who in turn leaned sort > of hard on AT&T who in turn leaned sort of hard on Illinois Bell who > in turn breathed heavily on First National Bank when polite requests > to correct the situation fell on deaf ears because ... (well you know > how bureacracies and customer service departments pay no attention to > anyone until *their* supervisor comes along on a warpath, hell-raising > scene, which is what had to happen at FNB-Chicago.) > You should have also mentioned to him that 'Call Blocker' might be a > solution (*60 in most locations). You can often times 'block last > call recieved' whether you know the number or not. PAT] I am curious about a *60-type feature. I am going to give Verizon a call tomorrow and see if they have any information. The Privacy Manager feature they have sounds best, and wouldn't be too big of a deal because the only "Out of Area" or "Private Caller" calls that I receive that AREN'T faxes/telemarketers are one of my roommates calling from work (the PBX at our office blocks outgoing caller ID). Thank you for the replies, and if anyone else has anything else to add or a similar experience, please say so! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *60 has helped me a lot. I don't worry any longer (or as much) about unwanted calls. At the conclusion of the (usually telemarketing, sometimes nuisance, repeated wrong number) call, I just punch *60 #01# and that's the last I hear of them. *60 seems to have better luck at killing telemarketers more than privacy manager or similar. *60 (pause) #01# adds 'the last call received, whether or not the number is known' to the blocked call list. It cannot seem to catch all cell phones, or Direct-Inward-Dial type numbers (for instance, our local city government here in Independence uses DID behind a centrex on the 620-332 exchange, and it won't catch those, but who wants to block them anyway? [Everyone else in town is on 620-331]). An interesting thing about *60 service: To find out whether or not a given number is 'blockable' or not, try adding it (being sure to then remove the block afterward if you do not actually want it blocked). You dial *60, listen to the menu given, then enter the desired number. Telco has to 'ping' the number (quite literally) to see what sort of system it is, etc. If the responding exchange answers the ping promptly enough then a recorded message tells you 'the number has been added to your blocked call list.' If the responding exchange does not answer the ping quickly enough, or answers it negatively, then the recorded message tells you 'the number you wish to block cannot be blocked *right now*; try again in a few minutes'. I haven't yet met a telemarketer who couldn't be pinged and banished. Its a great backup or alternative to some old 'do not call' list, ditto with unwanted fax calls. I just let the fax machines/telemarketers then squabble with telco about it, forever if they want as long as they leave me alone. You can only hold about ten blocked numbers at one time, so you have to now and then clean out the list, removing the oldest entries. By the way, having it read off the directory of blocked numbers to you is not a *back door* way to get numbers which called you with *67. For those, the directory read-out calls it a 'private number'. But if you *think* you know what the number was which called you and attempt to add/delete it by entering the number (rather than #01) Call Blocker will confirm it if it was on your list. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Last Laugh! Art Brothers and Pole Line Construction Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 19:31:55 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: An unkind, but sort of funny story about two different nationalities. After reading the story, go back and substitute whatever nationalities you want. In the story, these are used for illustritive purposes only. PAT] I'm sure most of the old timers here have heard of Art Brothers of Beehive Telephone company fame. Well, here a little story my wife found and it has Art written all over it! Sorry for the "Un-PC"ness but I thought it was funny! Enjoy! There was a Utah phone company that had several miles of pole line to install. They wanted to hire only one crew to do this work. The boss looked over the best two bids and was having a hard time deciding which crew should get the job. The construction foreman suggested they have a "bake-off" between the Irish crew and the Polish crew. So the boss and the foreman met with both teams and said: "Here's what we'll do. Each team will install poles out on the new state highway for a day. The team that installs the most poles gets the job." So both teams headed right out and went to work. At the end of the shift, the Irish guys came back and the foreman asked them how many they had installed. They said that it was tough going, but they'd put in twelve. A little later, the Polish guys came back and they were totally exhausted. The foreman said, "Well, how many poles did you guys install?" The team leader wiped his brow and sighed, "We got three in." The foreman gasped, "Three? Why, those Irish guys put in twelve!" "Yeah," said the Polish leader, "but you should see how much they left sticking out of the ground!" ------------------------------ 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 #361 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 25 03:25:16 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2P8PF705006; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 03:25:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 03:25:16 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303250825.h2P8PF705006@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 #362 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Mar 2003 03:25:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 362 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Limitations Doom HP's Digital Media Receiver (Mike Hasemann) Re: Military Phones in the Gulf (Paul A Lee) Re: Siemens 8825 Call Waiting and Voicemail Features (SELLCOM Tech Support) Liability For Public Internet Access (Bright) Climate of Intimidation (Monty Solomon) Re: BellSouth, Area Plus, Calling to Independent Telcos (joe@obilivan.net) Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong (Josh Collens) Re: More Words About Sodomy Insane and Mr. Bush (Josh Collens) Re: Protestwarrior (Charles Cryderman) Re: U.S. TV Networks Jump in as War in Iraq Starts (Ed Ellers) Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong (George Hand) Last Laugh! Mr. Ed (was Re: Remembrances of Fidonet) (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: netdeveloper_1@yahoo.com (Mike Hasemann) Subject: Re: Limitations Doom HP's Digital Media Receiver Date: 24 Mar 2003 05:43:39 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ What's wrong with that? To me, this is the perfect product -- and one I've been looking to find for quite some time. Its a true jukebox and the beauty of it is, you can access the same songs from more than one location in the house. As for the tv, what else would you like to view the songs from? As far as I'm concerned, a tv is perfect -- its cheap. And I love that I can connect the thing to my stereo. I've already got all my cd's burned to one of my hard drives (80Gig drive) and have been using windows media player as the jukebox software. To be able to connect something to my stereo (as opposed to my computer speakers) is a deal. What more could you ask for? Monty Solomon wrote in message news:: > By Mike Langberg > Mercury News > Hewlett-Packard's new Digital Media Receiver at $299 is a noble > attempt to create a new type of consumer product but delivers so > little value that I'm convinced we'll all look back in a year or two > and marvel at how the company had the courage to ship such a thing. > The DMR (www.hp.com/go/digitalmediareceiver) is one of the first > entrants in an emerging field I call 'home entertainment networking' > -- devices that move music, pictures and ultimately video from a > personal computer to televisions and stereo systems elsewhere in the > house. > There's an obvious need for home entertainment networking, as more > and more people assemble huge collections of digital pictures and > songs on their PC's hard drive. No one wants to listen to music only > in front of a PC, or force family and friends to gather around a > computer monitor to look at snapshots from last summer's vacation. > The problem is that it's not yet possible to make such a device easy > to use, versatile and inexpensive. You only get two out of three: > easy to use and inexpensive, but not versatile; or easy to use and > versatile, but too costly. > HP took the first route, opting for easy to use and inexpensive -- > ending up with a box that has significant limitations. > The DMR, which reached store shelves early this month and is also > available direct from HP (www.hpshopping.com), resembles a small > cable-TV converter and must be set up near a television set. > http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/5328842.htm ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Military Phones in the Gulf Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 14:20:34 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V22 #359, tonypo1@cox.net wrote (in part): > In article , palee@riteaid.com > says: >> So far, I have caught several definite glimpses of Avaya 8410D or >> 8411D sets (or their MILspec or TEMPEST cousins) in news reports >> coming from on board US Navy vessels. >> Ick, ick, ick. That was one of Lucent's bad series of phones. I > admin'd a G3i with a mixture of 7406D's, 8410D's and various models > of 2500 sets with and without hold, message lights, etc. > The 8410D's broke down quite a bit more than the 7406D's did. And the > hands free on the 8410D sounded tinny. > Only good phones they made were the 74xx and 6xxx series stuff. > The 8xxx series is cheap garbage. I've heard good things about the 64xx sets, but I haven't used them. I've had a couple hundred 8410D and 8410B sets for over six years and have not had any remarkable problems with them. All but one or two replacements have been necessitated by someone spilling something into the phone. For a time, I saw a higher rate failures on the replacement 8410D sets we were sent under the maintenance agreement from AT&T/Lucent/Avaya. I have the impression that there were at least three design levels, and that the earliest and the latest are the strongest. The speakerphone on the 8410D could sound hollow, if you did not optimize the mic after moving the phone. Once optimized, the speakerphone on an 8410D could perform admirably, even when some voices were coming from 10 feet away. As for the 7400 series, my most vivid recollections include: - the R type handset -- top heavy, clumsy, and pointy enough to actually hurt if you happened to bump your chin with it - the "Chiclet" feature keys -- virtually no tactile feedback made it easy to drop a call or double key - the flimsy plastic key and face overlay that would wear through with anything more than modest use - the oozing adhesive that held the overlay on, making it almost impossible to insert or remove a desi strip, once the set had been used much It's interesting how two people can have such different perspectives, without either of them necessarily being wrong. Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Siemens 8825 Call Waiting and Voicemail Features? Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 17:34:59 -0500 Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Rich Heimlich posted on that vast internet thingie: > Second, I have voicemail with Verizon (it comes with their new Freedom > flat-rate plan) and like it. I have gotten the phone to work with it > by disabling the voicemail in the phone but have I acted too quickly? > Does typical phone system voicemail exceed what I get with this or > should I tell the phone company to just enable it in case the phone is > busy and use the phones voicemail? You should be able to use both. The telco voicemail will only work if your line is busy or if your phone is disconnected or power failure whatever. If you just purchased an 8825 there is a $50 rebate. 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. ------------------------------ From: brightwell_151@yahoo.co.uk (Bright) Subject: Liability For Public Internet Access Date: 24 Mar 2003 04:28:19 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hello folks, If my company provides a facility for external partners to connect to the Inetner (suitablly firewalled away from our internal services) what liability are we opening ourselves up for and how do we mitigate it. Clearly, we don't have much control over the PC being used ... it may be riddled with virus/worms and may go on to attack another site using our Internet connection. This isn't quite the same as an Internet cafe (which can at least control the state of the PC as they manage it), but I guess it is pretty similar to the service that many hotels provide ... does anybody know what they do to mitigate a potential PR hit (or even legal action) from another site who have been attacked from their internet connection? Or, taking it a stage further, it is similar to the liability faced by ISPs. Now... ISPs get you to sign an agreement that you won't misbehave and potentially they can disconnect any sites that contravene this agreement, however, does this cover them? (What if the damage has already been done? ... is the agreement sufficient to transfer the liability to the user) ... do they have to have a special insurance to cover for such eventualities. Note: We don't plan to provide this service to the public ... only to visiting representatives of partner companies so we don't really expect malicious activity, however, a malignant virus/worm is a possibility. Thanks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I posed this question to the fellow who operates our local ISP here in Indy. He said a couple times they have had someone come along who wanted to (his term) 'play games with other computers and networks on the internet' but that every new user they acquired definitly had a period of 'probation' until the person could be trusted. He has a couple of 'young whippersnappers' on his staff manning a 'help desk' type environment who know *just exactly* how to deal with troublesome users. Although they take new users without a lot of questions at first, the two whippersnappers get a note from the office each day of new users, and they literally just camp on the account, monitoring it closely for a couple days. He said to me, "if the new user is too stupid to make trouble, that's good. We don't have to watch them only a couple hours, observe what they are going to do on line; write their email letters, use the various net look-up services, check out a few pages, etc. Its the smart ones we have to spend a bit more time on. If they get a new account here and don't have to call us once or twice to learn how to login, don't ask us to how to set up their web sites, and just in general know more than is good for them ... those, we watch a bit longer, a full day or two." He said their contract with users allows service monitoring as the ISP finds appropriate, etc. He concluded saying "the really bad guys prefer to hide under rocks; they think we won't see them or maybe they think we are the dumb ones. If there is the slightest hint that one of the smarter users is bad or is going to go sour, (after all, the dumb users *don't know how to hack* so they're not going to be a problem) then one of the whippersnappers will cut the guy off so fast and place his account on hold. When the user then gets an email note telling him to visit us in the office (or in the case of out of town users) telling him to 'review our TOS closely, sign it and fax it back to us with a copy of his picture ID or driver's license showing his correct street address, telephone number, etc' that seems to get rid of the troublesome users who could cause trouble for the company. None of those guys wants attention given to him; they would prefer we did not know for sure who they were or where they were at. Some of the troublesome users don't even bother to respond to our inquiry letter or fax back legible copies of their ID cards, etc, but the ones who do know that we know who they are, and that we run things here; they do not. In the signed letter the 'smarter users' are required to sign and fax back with their ID, etc, they promise to obey TOS and to release the ISP from any liability as well as assume legal responsibility for all possible hassles. He said underage users (and most of the really brilliant users are younger kids) have to have a parent submit ID and a signed TOS. In the signed TOS the user promises not to spam, not to hack, not to phreak, not to be a nuisance to other users, etc. Until they respond positively to the letter telling them to print out the TOS, sign it, submit it with valid ID -- or visit them in the office -- then they stay off the ISP. At 6 PM or 4 AM, there will be a young whippersnapper watching them for the first couple days. He said to me in conclusion he only wished all his users were old grandmothers learning how to write/use email, etc for the first time but it just is not realistic. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 01:38:37 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Climate of Intimidation With the nation at war and terror fears rising, Attorney General John Ashcroft and his allies are pressing for more checks on civil liberties. - - - - - - - - - - - - By Tim Grieve March 24, 2003 | As the United States marches toward Baghdad and braces for terrorist reprisals back home, Attorney General John Ashcroft may see in America's orange-alert fears and us-against-them attitude a target of opportunity he cannot resist. The man who pushed the USA PATRIOT Act through a terrified Congress in the days after Sept. 11 may be planning a new assault on civil liberties in the wake of the war on Iraq. In February, the Center for Public Integrity uncovered a confidential Justice Department draft of the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003. The legislation picks up where the PATRIOT Act left off -- more wiretaps and secret searches, government access to credit reports and other personal records, a database of DNA samples, and provisions allowing the attorney general to revoke the U.S. citizenship of anyone who provides assistance to a group the government considers a "terrorist" organization. The draft drew a barrage of criticism from across the political spectrum. The Lawyers Committee for Human Rights called it a "Department of Justice wish list" that would "endanger core civil liberties," while William Safire denounced it as both an "assault" and an "abomination." Although the 120-page draft had the detailed look of a proposal ready for congressional consideration, the Justice Department quickly downplayed it as merely the brainstorming of low-level staff. When pressed about the proposed security measure at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing earlier this month, Ashcroft offered a strange response. ... http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/03/24/liberties/ ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: BellSouth, Area Plus, Calling to Independent Telcos Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 05:30:07 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications If you had internet phone service ala Vonage.com, you could toss such a letter in the trash. Mark J Cuccia wrote: > March 20, 2003 > Effective April 23, 2003, customers subscribing to BellSouth Area Plus > service may experience a change in the way calls dialed or forwarded > into certain Independent Company (ICO) exchanges are billed. > Beginning April 23, 2003, if you have substantial calling to the > exchanges listed in this notice, you may see additional usage charges > on your bill. The first 1,000 minutes each month of calling to the > involved exchanges will continue to be included in your service at no > additional charge. Usage in excess of 1,000 minutes per month will be > billed at 8-cents per minute. Call description information will appear > on the bill for calls that exceed the 1,000 minute allowance. > [BOLD] This billing will apply only for calls to the exchanges listed > in this notice that are not part of your basic local calling > area.[/BOLD] Exchanges included in your basic local calling area are > shown on the Customer Guide pages in the front of your BellSouth > telephone directory. > [BOLD] There will be no billing change for calling into BellSouth > exchanges or for calling into ICO exchanges in your basic local > calling area. Area Plus service plan customers will continue to call > on an unlimited basis into BellSouth exchanges and basic local area > ICO exchanges.[/BOLD] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But my question is, using Vonage or a similar internet phone arrangment, who pays for calls that have to go off net. Until everyone gets internet (let alone internet phone service) and vonage (and similar) get located in every central office) there will be phone calls that someone has to pay telco for. Who is going to pay for those? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Josh Collens Subject: Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 23:08:15 -0500 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What still puzzles me a little is the > *timing* on the whole thing. And why, with so many years of abuse by > Saddam, Bush thought we had to act on it *right this minute* without > doing a few things first: Nothing has been simply *right this minute* The crawl to war has been taking place for over a year and every opportunity has been afforded to Iraq to disarm. Clearly it did not. Sept 11 was a big wake up call about just how far the people who hate America are willing to go and why they must be stopped first. Fortunately we now have a President who received the message and is taking option rather than kicking the can down the street again. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why should Iraq have to be the ones to disarm? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Josh Collens Subject: Re: More Words About Sodomy Insane and Mr. Bush Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 22:58:13 -0500 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you said in your first three > lines is what I would like to see everywhere. The USA should mind > its own business all the time, unless *directly attacked* Whether or > not 9/11/01 qualified as an 'attack' or rather as I say 'mass murder' > will have to be decided. PAT] Unfortunately, isolationism has been tried throughout USA's history, and each time it turned out to be a huge sorry regret, including allowing Germany's Nazis to violate its Versailles peace treaty conditions in the 1930s. The 1991 Gulf War cease-fire came with a short list of conditions, and none have been met by Iraq. Seventeen UN resolutions have come and gone, with no achieved results. Inspections have shown to be ineffective, and the inspectors cannot even explain how Iraq could have possibly fired the missiles which it "didn't have." The only reason why inspectors went back to Iraq was because of the threat of force, the only thing that Hussein can comprehend. The U.S. should not or can not rely on the restraint or sanity of a brutal tyrant who has already engaged in mass torture, killings, and invading other countries. ------------------------------ From: Charles Cryderman Subject: Re: protestwarrior Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 15:33:31 -0500 Pat, In TD V22 #360 you asked "why now". Well sir, I think the "why now" has much to do with the ways the world is at this point in time. We need to now work at securing the safety of US citizens. With Sodomy in power, no mater where we went with the war on terrorism would never end and cost more in terms of dollars spent and lives lost. The French know that we are on the hit list for every extremist group out there. They know that we'd fight in the streets of downtown America before they'd be targeted. What they aren't looking at is: to an extremist they as well as you and I are the evil that needs to be taken care of. We're just number one. I would loved to have had the Iraq issue resolved within the UN. But France made sure that would never happen, by promising to veto anything that had to do with force. Yes, the inspectors could have used more time but with the French having decided that no force is to be used, more time for the inspectors would have done nothing but made Sodomy find more hiding places and he is very good at that. Now in an earlier issue of TD to mentioned the fact that the President pulled out of the "World Court" One thing I have noticed about the debate about this body was the fact that no one ever talks about the fact that had the USA signed it would have been a violation of the Constitution. Now, I have not read it myself, but from what I have been able to find out about it, as well as some commentator's statements, the treaty does not have the same protections as is guaranteed by the Constitution for the accused. No member of our government can do anything to lessen that and had Bush went ahead with it there would most likely had been a challenge to it in the courts, which I see would be a waste of time and money. Now I must say that you are the best Moderator on the net and I hope you live forever so as the TD will continue to be the best place for honest communications about communications. Thanks for that Pat. Chip Cryderman [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for your commentary. I have often thought that *honest, complete* communications would solve most all of the world's ills. The trouble, time and time again, is that people *do not understand* what the other person is really saying. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: U.S. TV Networks Jump in as War in Iraq Starts Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 23:14:52 -0500 PAT, the TELECOM Digest Editor, noted: > I wonder how Bush would like it if some foreign power unilateraly decided > that he was an 'evil dictator' and set about in the air and on the land > dislodging him from power. President Bush was duly elected under our Constitution, and his powers are constrained by that Constitution. Saddam Hussein was elected by no one, and answers to no one but himself. Big difference. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What makes you think Sodomy wasn't put in office by some standards which were/are acceptable to the Iraqi people? After all, Queen Elizabeth was not elected by anyone, was she? But her being in the position she is in is acceptable to the British people. How well do you *really know* what the Iraqi people want? PAT] ------------------------------ From: George Hand Subject: Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 00:41:37 -0500 Organization: Mountain Cablevision So Joey Lindstrom calls himself "a proud Canadian" and then trashes our Prime Minister? His dictatorial powers dwarf Bush's? Chretien can't lock POW's up in dog cages in the Carribean sun and deny them access to lawyers. He doesn't hold them for over a year without charges ... in Canada we have rules about the treatment of prisoners and no-one, not even the Prime Minister, can ignore them! Lindstrom doesn't speak for all Canadians ... a lot of them are glad that we are keeping out of this dirty little business! Most of the time that the UN Security Council passes resolutions condemming dicators, they are vetoed by guess who? The good ol'USA! All 18 resolutions calling upon Israel to pull back to it's original borders and stop building new settlements in the occupied terrotories have be vetoed by the US ... enough said? If you want to know what tyrants do elsewhere in the Middle East, try going to www.guardian.co.uk and doing a search for "Rachel's e-mails". They were the e-mails from the woman killed by an Israeli bulldozer while trying to stop the demolition of Palestinian houses ... it makes chilling reading ... so when is the US going to invade Israel to rid the world of another psychopath? (Just so there is no misunderstanding, that is sarcasm). Dubya may be intelligent under that Texan hick exterior but he's not bright enough to realize that he needs a coherent foreign policy and that he needs to talk to the rest of the world with respect. A couple of month's ago, NATO invoked a clause in its constitution which said that an attack on any member of NATO is an attack on all members and offered the US any aid it needed. What did the US do? It ignored it! That's why France and Germany said they would veto any resolutions calling for war, they were p***ed off at being treated like they didn't matter. Yes, I know France isn't a member of NATO, but they are members of the EU with Germany and there is a closeness between both countries. If you want help from your friends, don't insult them and then expect that they will jump to your aid ... first rule of diplomacy! Second rule is treat them well when they come to call, don't dump them in an office with some secretary to entertain them and pretend to be too busy to see them. Third rule: don't call, go and visit! You'll learn a lot about the problems they face and then maybe you'll understand when they have to say no for their own political survival! I'm sure that tomorrow morning, when he reads this, he'll be apopletic! Tough, Lindstrom, everyone's entitled to their opinion and I'm exercising mine democratic right to mine! My proof is on the net, I'm not going to search out the links for Lindstrom, I'm sure he can figure out how to use Google! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You said 99 percent of what I am thinking. Almost my entire problem with the Iraq thing lately has been the total arrogance of Bush toward not only Saddam, but the people who could be friends of the USA. He literally dumps on everyone all the time, and does not care. You bend over backward for your friends, they will do the same for you. I mean, look at how the prisoners are being held in Guantanomo Bay and elsewhere by Bush, not allowed to have any contact or communication with the outside world, not even allowed to have lawyers. Is that really what the United States has become? Bush has got such nerve, really. The Canadian Prime Minister is right to keep his mouth shut and stay out of it even though Joey is 'so ashamed' of him. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 12:05:26 -0600 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Last Laugh! Mr. Ed (was Re: Remembrances of FidoNet) Jack wrote: > "A host is a host from coast to coast > & no one will talk to a host that's close > Unless the host (that isn't close) > is busy, hung or dead" > (Which, for those never exposed to "classic" American television, is a > takeoff on the theme song for "Mister Ed", a show about a talking > horse. I'm surprised Hollywood hasn't tried to make that one into a > full length feature movie yet!) Imagine my surprise when I was reading an anthology recently and ran across a story called "Dr. Atwood and Mr. Ed" by Walter Brooks. It is unquestionably the inspiration for the TV series. I don't know when the stroy was written, but the anthology was copyrighted in 1948. 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 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 #362 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 25 15:39:00 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2PKd0Y08872; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:39:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:39:00 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303252039.h2PKd0Y08872@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 #363 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:39:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 363 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson So Long, SonicBlue (Monty Solomon) Re: DHCP Router With NAT Passthrough?? (Clarence Dold Re: Unsolicited Faxes (3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com) VoIP Billing Software for Sale (Ree) Re: Communication Between PABX (foo) War Causing Inmarsat Network Congestion? (t-sphere) The Absolutely Last Day of This (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong (Steve Michelson) Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong (Peter Dubuque) Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong (Richie Kennedy) Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong (John Higdon) Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong (Robert Levin) Re: protestwarrior (John Higdon) In an Effort to End This Thread ... (Joey Lindstrom) In an Effort to Repair my Computers ... (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: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 01:33:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: So Long, SonicBlue - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32547401 ------------------------------ From: dold@99.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: DHCP Router With NAT Passthrough?? Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 07:08:19 UTC Organization: a2i network CBoone@earthlink.net wrote: > Well I thank those who replied direct. BUT none of the group > postings were really helpful. I dont have time to put together a > 486 firewall with Linux, etc. I WOULD like to see if something SMALL > like a router/firewall for what I NEED is out there already. If you didn't like any of the solutions, it may be that you haven't decribed your problem very well. You've presented what you want as the solution, but it may not be the solution that is actually needed, or even workable. There is probably very little that is needed in networking that isn't available pretty cheaply today. I offered a solution that mapped external IP addresses to internal NAT addresses. When I didn't hear anything from you, I assumed that it was a workable solution for you. What are you really trying to accomplish? ------------------------------ From: 3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com Subject: Re: Unsolicited Faxes Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 13:54:00 +0200 ~ To reply by e-mail, include "Telecom Digest" in the subject line ~ On 23 Mar 2003 21:54:39 -0800, you , jeffbrewster@hotmail.com (Jeff Brewster), wrote: > Yes, I have a PC, but I have a cable modem and don't even have/care to > have a regular modem anymore (home networking is way too nice :-)) I was really only suggesting for a day or so - just long enough to catch a fax or two .... > I am curious about a *60-type feature. I am going to give Verizon a If I was aware of this, I would have suggested it -- but I was looking at it from my own perspective, and that's not an option that we have here (Cape Town, South Africa) In fact I'd never heard of it until this thread !! (It does sound like the solution to your problem though) For myself, if/when fax machines start calling our voice numbers, I simply reroute to the PC monitoring for faxes (we have a small 6 x 16 pabx in the house, which of course makes life much simpler !!!!) Which brings me to a "way back when" thought -- when I was just a wee lad, I remember my (late) father being very proud of the fact that we had a radio in just about every room in the house -- I wonder what he'd say about my setup today -- phones everywhere except the bathrooms, one of them being a DECT cordless that "lives" in my pocket, a cell router linked into the system, (well, within the next few days anyway), three cells phones in the house, TV's in most rooms, several PC's in various rooms, all networked together. Of course part of the reason for all of this is because we (myself and the mrs) both work from home, but even then, it hardly seems exceptional .... how the world has changed in the past several decades !!!! Cheers, Frank R [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Those poor, oppressed people in South Africa! I wonder if The Telephone Company could be induced to send over troops of telephone workers to fight there for the rights of the citizens not to be tortured by telemarketers and aberrant fax machines and to have *60 and Privacy Manager on request. As President Roosevelt once said, every African is entitled to a cell router and a PBX in their home. That was humour, Frank; a bit of sarcasm to start of this day. PAT] ------------------------------ From: capricorn75@softhome.net (Ree) Subject: VoIP Billing Software for Sale Date: 25 Mar 2003 04:21:01 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Dear Sirs!!! I have a wide range of VoIP billing Software at a low price. Newest releases. It offers: Call Accounting, Post-paid Billing, Prepaid Billing Prepaid Calling Card Operation Inter-gateway Settlement Internet access, web design, web hosting, e-commerce services Web interface for Customers, Sales Agents, and Customer Service Representatives. And much more. Feel free to mail me: capricorn75@softhome.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: capricorn75@softhome.net sends me this message almost daily. Normally I pitch it in the trash almost daily, but lately he has toned it down somewhat, so it is time to reward him by printing it ONE TIME ONLY since he eliminated the 'sale prices' and most of the exclamation marks (!) this time around. Starting tomorrow I will trash it again. PAT] ------------------------------ From: di00enad@ing.hj.se (foo) Subject: Re: Communication Between PABX Date: 25 Mar 2003 07:13:01 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ > It would help if you told us the make and model of PBX on either side of > the link. It is a BusinessPhone 150 at one side and a C4T1E1 PCI-card at the other side. ------------------------------ From: danopunkt@yahoo.com (t-sphere) Subject: War Causing Inmarsat Network Congestion? Date: 25 Mar 2003 01:31:20 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ My users in the Gulf region are reporting problems connecting to the Inmarsat network. Error messages are: "Call spacing too short"; or "Error 14C2H." They are all using TT-3080A M4 Messengers with service provided by Stratos. Has anyone heard that the Inmarsat network is being overloaded by use associated with the war? (Media, NGOs, military, etc.) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 14:14:01 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: The Absolutely Last Day of This This thread (under its various names, 'Yeah, I am Wrong", "Sodomy Insane", other names, etc) absolutely has to come to an end today. It is getting way out of control. It does not really belong here (although that has never stopped me in the past), but it is getting ridiculously off of topic. The rest of the messages in this issue are the Last Words on the Topic by our readers. Psst, don't tell anyone, but after I send out this issue of the Digest, if *one or two more only* arrive which crossed in the mail with this FINAL issue, I will probably print them as a kindness to the guys who worked them up and mailed them in. (I honestly hope none show up however.) PAT ------------------------------ From: Steve Michelson Subject: Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 07:06:22 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Pat, I don't want to get drawn into this political discussion, but I want to point out that Bush did prepare a fact sheet. Two, actually over the past few months. Very sobering reading. They should be on the white house web site, if you want to try to find them. They detail the attrocities of the Saddam regime over the years. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Didn't I say in a note yesterday that > when Joey woke up Sunday morning, checked the mail and news how he > would be furious to read the responses from people who had crossed him > and disagreed with him? Was I correct? > I spent some time yesterday reading the commentaries in phrusa.org and > found them very interesting. Generally I trust the thoughts of Physicians > for Human Rights. Saddam really is a pretty awful character, which I > did not totally disagree with before but having my memory refreshed > with some specific facts was good. > What still puzzles me a little is the *timing* on the whole thing. And > why, with so many years of abuse by Saddam, Bush thought we had to act > on it *right this minute* without doing a few things first: He could > have prepared a sort of 'fact sheet' giving references, something like > was done for me here a couple days ago with the phrusa references and > lots of others. He could have used this 'fact sheet' thing to declare > a state of national emergency and stated *why* immediate action was > required. He could have been a better commuicator. I think also it > would have been appropriate to set a sort of absolutely final deadline > where the UN was concerned and made it plain he was going to continue > without them after that point. When the inspectors asked for a bit > more time -- hey, as many years as it has been going on, why not give > them a month more if needed, and make it plain -- without any questions -- > that the USA would continue at that point. As has been pointed out > here in recent days, the man is an absolute idiot, which is putting it > mildly. And he does have a reputation (undeserved in my opinion) of > following along with whatever the most fundamentalist Christians > expect of him, and you know many of them are looking forward to the > Armageddon which they feel is due any day. So Bush associates with > those people and gets a bit dirty also. Who can be blamed for thinking > it is a strange coincidence that all these things happen so quickly? > That's how I feel, that it is most peculiar to say the least. And the > general arrogance of the USA does not help any either, the feelings so > prevalent that 'my country is always right' and 'God Bless America' > and all that stuff. I would like to see how President Carter (if he > was still in office, or back for a second term) would have handled it. > I am sure it would have been an improvement. If Bush had even said > something like "I am sorry it has come to this point" ... but there > has never been a humble word come out of his mouth that I know of. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Peter Dubuque Subject: Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:09:42 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Josh Collens wrote: > Nothing has been simply *right this minute* The crawl to war has been > taking place for over a year and every opportunity has been afforded > to Iraq to disarm. Clearly it did not. Sept 11 was a big wake up call > about just how far the people who hate America are willing to go and > why they must be stopped first. Fortunately we now have a President > who received the message and is taking option rather than kicking the > can down the street again. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why should Iraq have to be the ones to > disarm? PAT] Tony Blair sums it up: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,916790,00.html Peter F. Dubuque - peterd@panix.com - Enemy of Reason(TM) O- ------------------------------ From: Richie Kennedy Subject: Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 16:38:17 -0000 Organization: route56.com Josh Collens wrote in news:telecom22.362.7 @telecom-digest.org: > Nothing has been simply *right this minute* The crawl to war has been > taking place for over a year and every opportunity has been afforded > to Iraq to disarm. Clearly it did not. Sept 11 was a big wake up call > about just how far the people who hate America are willing to go and > why they must be stopped first. Fortunately we now have a President > who received the message and is taking option rather than kicking the > can down the street again. To which the moderator noted in response: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why should Iraq have to be the ones to > disarm? PAT] I would think it was because he was ordered to do so as a result of the cease-fire in the '91 Gulf War. The agreement called for 90 days, we gave him 12 years. With that, the cease fire is null and void, and officially, we NEVER ceased hostilities with Iraq. An Observation: The American Legion's qualifications for membership currently allows anyone who has seved in the 5 branches since 8/2/1990 to become a member. Richie Kennedy route56@route56.com · www.route56.com "If you don't look ahead, nobody will...." ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:25:16 -0800 In article , Josh Collens wrote: > Nothing has been simply *right this minute* The crawl to war has been > taking place for over a year and every opportunity has been afforded > to Iraq to disarm. Clearly it did not. Sept 11 was a big wake up call > about just how far the people who hate America are willing to go and > why they must be stopped first. Fortunately we now have a President > who received the message and is taking option rather than kicking the > can down the street again. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why should Iraq have to be the ones to > disarm? PAT] Iraq has shown in numerous incidents over the past decade plus that it doesn't know how to properly play with its toys. More importantly, Iraq has shown that it is not deterred by the concept of MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction). Many people believe (with good evidence) that Iraq would not hesitate to use any arrow in its quiver without the slightest hesitation, even if it meant a massive retaliation. Remember, Saddam has repeatedly shown no regard or concern for his own people, whom he would sacrifice in an instant if it meant his own survival. If Iraq had been the "other" superpower rather than the USSR, we would probably have had nuclear armageddon long ago. Nations that would not hesitate to use any weapon regardless of the consequences are considered very dangerous by the world community at large. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:51:46 -0700 Subject: Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Tue, 25 Mar 2003 03:25:16 EST, George Hand wrote: > So Joey Lindstrom calls himself "a proud Canadian" and then trashes > our Prime Minister? His dictatorial powers dwarf Bush's? Chretien > can't lock POW's up in dog cages in the Carribean sun and deny them > access to lawyers. He doesn't hold them for over a year without > charges ... in Canada we have rules about the treatment of prisoners > and no-one, not even the Prime Minister, can ignore them! He could and he would, if he found it expedient to do so. I'm not going to get into Chretien's record with you in this forum, but believe me, it's a lot sorrier than Bush's. Bottom line: any new law that Chretien wants, Chretien gets. The Canadian parliament votes on party lines pretty much exclusively, with penalties for opposing your party pretty severe. This happens less frequently in the USA and in fact such voting is viewed critically as being too "partisan". Bush can't have a Republican Senator who votes against him immediately expelled from the Republican Party. > Lindstrom doesn't speak for all Canadians ... a lot of them are glad > that we are keeping out of this dirty little business! I do not claim to speak for ALL Canadians -- nobody could or should. But the folks you're talking about weren't at the Saddledome last night, apparently. Last week, a bunch of buffoons in Montreal booed the Star Spangled Banner before a hockey game between the Montreal Canadiens and (iirc) the New York Islanders. Hey, express your opinion all you want, but that's just plain offensive. So, last night, when the Calgary Flames hosted the Phoenix Coyotes, that same anthem received a very, very loud ovation from the opening notes, which got louder and louder as the anthem progressed to conclusion. Lots of wet eyes in the building, lemme tell ya. But hey, we're just a bunch of rednecks, right? Our opinions aren't "enlightened" like liberal opinions, therefore they're irrelevant. (And we're the intolerant ones?) > Tough, Lindstrom, > everyone's entitled to their opinion and I'm exercising mine > democratic right to mine! My proof is on the net, I'm not going to > search out the links for Lindstrom, I'm sure he can figure out how to > use Google! h... when did I ever say, or even infer, that you weren't entitled to your own opinion? I happen to disagree with it, on the basis of a better understanding of the history involved (and I base this upon what you've said, much of which shows a definite lack of such understanding), but I defend your right to it. Because unlike Iraqis, we have that right. The Iraqis will be gaining that right shortly. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 19:56:11 -0800 (PST) From: Robert Levin Subject: Re: Yeah, I'm Wrong Joey Lindstrom: You must feel a little bit threatened by my previous posting, to say the least, otherwise you wouldn't be throwing such a tantrum! I do not wish to acknowledge the ridiculously blinded, hypnotized, and mindlessly obedient attitude which you manifest towards the moronic "Christian" theocrat occupying our White House any further than to simply point out several rather obvious fallacies to the "weapons of mass destruction" excuse that the junta is proffering as the bullshit "reason" behind this invasion of Iraq. Firstly, it is apparently acceptable for the United States and several other countries (such as France and India and China) to possess, test, etc. the ultimate WMD, the A-bomb, and yet it is NOT acceptable to the junta for other countries to allegedly possess the same technology. Rather arrogant attitude, huh? Secondly, in the history of humans on this planet, only one country has ever actually USED these ultimate weapons of mass destruction against civilians (or anyone, for that matter,) and of course once again that country is ... the good old US of A. So far there is ABSOLUTELY no proof whatsoever of Iraq having such devices, but if they WERE to have them, it is NOT OUR BUSINESS! As for the use of poison gas against the Kurds, the use of poison gas during the twentieth century is not unique to the legal government of Iraq, but ... guess what ... the good old USA has used it in the past as well! Same with the Germans, Herr Lindstrom! In fact, the USA has the largest stockpile of poison and nerve gases in the world, stored I believe in either Oregon or Idaho in a large underground facility. Why is it OK for the USA to have something and yet not OK for another country to have the same thing? I wonder how we'd react if some dipshit halfway across the world suddenly decided that he didn't like the way WE run OUR country and decided therefore to invade us and force THEIR customs on us! Just because we don't approve of a foreign government or with their lawful head of state, does not mean that we have ANY right to invade them and force our brand of "democracy" or "Christianity" or anything else up their asses or down their throats. I don't know what sort of bullshit they teach you Canadians, but here in the USA we were taught (at one time, anyway) to stand up to bullies, and to think for ourselves. At this time in history it would seem as though the United States government, in all of it's terrible might and arrogance, is the biggest bully around! Everyone is entitled to their opinion, even when theirs is wrong, kid! By the way, Lindstrom, you appear even MORE of an intellectual lightweight than I for wishing to "debate" someone who makes himself "look like a six year old!" Frankly, I don't have time for you goddamn beer swilling Canadian slobs anyhow, you guys are STILL groveling little lickspittles to your English lords and masters, you really don't have much of a national identity (just try to name an item of Canadian cuisine, for instance -- beer doesn't count) and frankly I wouldn't walk across the street to spit on ANY of you if your TOQUE was on fire! Until next we meet, I shall remain as always Yours With Great Disdain, Robert G. Levin P.S.: How do can you tell when a politician is lying? Whenever you see his lips move! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well! As they say on Yahoo Messenger, ':O' (or a big round moon-like shocked face with a wide-open mouth and big round unbelieving eyes). I guess you put Joey in his place. Too bad he gets no chance to answer back publicly in this forum since I arbitarily decided to close the thread as of this issue. I should have printed your message last night when it arrived here, in order to give Joey a chance to wind up and expel his venom in this FINAL issue on the thread. Oh well, we will all get over it, the war will eventually end and we can without regret get back to talking about the latest Telephone Company policies and practices. And Mr. Levin, *you* say Joey is the bigot around here? PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: protestwarrior Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 09:48:53 -0800 In article , Charles Cryderman wrote: > I would loved to have had the Iraq issue resolved within the UN. But > France made sure that would never happen, by promising to veto > anything that had to do with force. Yes, the inspectors could have > used more time but with the French having decided that no force is to > be used, more time for the inspectors would have done nothing but made > Sodomy find more hiding places and he is very good at that. It is absolutely astounding how many people fail to see that by declaring "force" to be off the table of remedies, the ultimate use of force is assured. If Saddam Hussein had been convinced that the UN would present a united front, using force if necessary, to enforce the provisions of its resolutions, the chances of seeing his compliance would have been greatly increased. France, by promising that it would veto any use of force, signalled the Iraqi government that it had nothing to fear from the UN, and that it had no incentive to comply with its resolutions. One could almost sense the increase in the boldness of the Iraqi government with each pronoucement from the French ambassador. I hear people frequently utter the phrase, "the inspections were working; the inspectors should have been given more time." By what measure were the inspections "working"? Blix himself admitted that they had found no proscribed weapons. What the team did "find" were those marginal weapons that the regime spoon-fed the inspectors to prolong the process ... which could literally have gone on forever, or until money ran out and the nations involved got tired of playing the game. What is happening right now is something that would have happened sooner or later. The timing may be bad, and the US ends up being the heavy, but ultimately the Saddam regime would have had to have been defused by someone. 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: John, you are prolly correct; events like this are always very sad for me, and I still say it is too bad that Bush and many Americans have to be so damn arrogant about it all. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 11:42:05 -0700 Subject: In an Effort to End This Thread ... Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info ... can we at least agree on one important issue? There are a lot of very heated opinions being expressed, on a topic that is not generally accepted to be anything to do with telecom. The one important issue is this: regardless of which side of the issue you're on, and regardless of how much of an idiot you think people on the other side are, let's try to understand that EACH OF US FIRMLY BELIEVES, STRONGLY, THAT WHAT WE ARE ARGUING FOR IS MORALLY "RIGHT". I feel sure that I can speak for Pat: he feels that this invasion is "wrong" and morally indefensible, and argues for another path that would be more "right". I (and I speak only for myself and those I've spoken to and emailed directly on this) also feel quite strongly that I am arguing for actions that are morally "right", and that to FAIL to have taken this military action would have been "wrong" and morally indefensible. That's why we're getting so heated here. We feel we're "right", and therefore the other side must be "wrong" and maybe even veering toward "evil" - after all, they're arguing for actions opposite to what we feel is "right". I believe Pat feels he's "right". I know I feel I'm "right". What we disagree on is how best to accomplish what's "right". We're not likely going to convince each other of our view of how to do that, so can we just agree to disagree, and agree that however misguided we may feel the other person is, they are doing so from what they HONESTLY BELIEVE is a position of "doing the right thing", and get back to Telecom-related issues? -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are also right, Joey. You do have some unfinished business from this issue (see message from Mr. Levin), but I trust you know how to use private email and will use it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 14:32:49 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: In an Effort to Repair my Computers ... I would like to ask mdickens to contact me *once again, please* with a valid email address. Its not YOUR fault, it is mine. Somehow in the rush of war messages, etc your reply 'Remember Me' (a non-war related; computer-fixing related) message got shoveled out with the spam by accident early today. Notice how I was up at 3 this morning with the last issue prior to this one going out? That's when it happened. Sorry. 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 #363 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 27 02:39:52 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2R7dqs17062; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 02:39:52 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 02:39:52 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303270739.h2R7dqs17062@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 #364 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Mar 2003 02:40:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 364 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Why the Dogs of Cyberwar Stay Leashed (Monty Solomon) PayPal Tightens Transaction Reins (Monty Solomon) English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked (Monty Solomon) CDT Releases New Report on Origins of Spam (Monty Solomon) Policy Post 9.08: New CDT Report Shows How Spammers Can Get ID (M Solomon) FTC's National Telemarketing Do Not Call Web Site to Launch (Monty Solomon) Satellite Phones Make A Comeback For War (Monty Solomon) Microsoft Limits E-Mail to Fight Spam (Monty Solomon) Join computerrepair.com (Gabe Miano) Do all PBXs Have the Same CDR/SMDR Port? (hiral) What Flavor CO do I Have? (Mike O'Dorney) Vonage Line (joe@obilivan.net) Re: Fax Recovery (nde_plume@hotmail.com) Re: War Causing Inmarsat Network Congestion? (Ian Okey) Long Distance Liability (Jim Langridge) Revision G For Antennae Tower Implementation (waveinspector) Dialogic and WAV Prompts (Clint Lord) Re: Unsolicited Faxes (3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com) Last Laugh! was Re: VoIP Billing Software for Sale (John P. 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: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:54:42 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Why the Dogs of Cyberwar Stay Leashed The United States could try out its much-hyped "cyberwarfare" capabilities in Iraq ... but it would probably be illegal. By Mark Rasch Mar 24, 2003 As the U.S. and U.K. campaign to "shock and awe" the Iraqi leadership and population continues, as "bunker buster" bombs hit the Iraqi Presidential palaces and coalition forces attempt to disrupt the command and control of the Iraqi military, one widely-reported offensive capability is nowhere in sight: the United States has not yet officially used the tools of cyberwarfare. The U.S. military has reportedly developed impressive offensive cyberwar capabilities, including the ability to use microwave or other electronic impulses to disrupt or destroy electronic components. If this is true, why have we not yet seen an all out cyberwar? ... http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/149 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 18:04:34 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: PayPal Tightens Transaction Reins http://go.hotwired.com/news/ebiz/0,1272,58208,00.html/wn_ascii New rules at PayPal dictate what users can and can't purchase using the online payment service. Fruit in X-rated shapes is OK, but mountain lion parts are not. By Christopher Null. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 18:08:07 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked http://go.hotwired.com/news/politics/0,1283,58200,00.html/wn_ascii Arab satellite TV network Al-Jazeera launched an English-language website Monday. On Tuesday, its Web host says it was hit with a denial- of-service attack, but an Al-Jazeera representative blames the problem on unexpectedly high traffic. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 18:26:47 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CDT Releases New Report on Origins of Spam From: CDT Info Subject: CDT Headline: CDT Releases New Report on Origins of Spam Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:45:39 -0500 CDT has released a new report based on a six month project entitled "Why Am I Getting All This Spam?" The results offer Internet users insights about what online behavior results in the most unsolicited commercial email and also debunk some of the myths about spam. March 19, 2003 Why Am I Getting All This Spam?" HTML version: http://www.cdt.org/speech/spam/030319spamreport.shtml Why Am I Getting All This Spam?" Acrobat version: http://www.cdt.org/speech/spam/030319spamreport.pdf More on Spam: http://www.cdt.org/speech/spam/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 18:27:47 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Policy Post 9.08: New CDT Report Shows How Spammers Can Get From: CDT Info Subject: Policy Post 9.08: New CDT Report Shows How Spammers Can Get Your E-Mail Address Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 09:13:15 -0500 CDT POLICY POST Volume 9, Number 8, March 19, 2003 A Briefing On Public Policy Issues Affecting Civil Liberties Online from The Center For Democracy and Technology Contents: (1) New CDT Report Shows How Spammers Can Get Your E-Mail Address (2) Spam "Harvesters" Target Web Sites, Newsgroups (3) Privacy Policies and Exercising Choice Can Help Users Limit Spam (4) Tips for Avoiding Spam http://www.cdt.org/publications/pp_9.08.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 18:25:54 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FTC's National Telemarketing Do Not Call Web Site to Launch on From: CDT Info Subject: CDT Headline: FTC's National Telemarketing Do Not Call Web Site to Launch on July 1 Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 15:06:50 -0500 FTC's National Telemarketing Do Not Call Web Site to Launch on July 1 The Federal Trade Commission has announced that the Web site allowing consumers to put their telephone numbers on the national registry to stop telemarketing calls will launch in July. The FTC will also have a toll free number to call. The FTC expects overwhelming demand for the project and is therefore rolling out the toll free number beginning on the west coast and heading east throughout the summer. March 26, 2003 The FTC The National "Do Not Call" Registry Page http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/edcams/donotcall/index.html Comments of CDT and others to FTC supporting "Do Not Call" list [pdf] March 28, 2002 http://www.cdt.org/privacy/020328cpg-dnc-comments.pdf CDT comments to FCC on "Do Not Call" December 9, 2002 http://www.cdt.org/privacy/021209cdt.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 19:46:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Satellite Phones Make A Comeback For War Satellite Phones Make A Comeback For War - Mar 25, 2003 10:00 AM (Forbes.com) - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32565784 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 19:47:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Limits E-Mail to Fight Spam REDMOND, Wash. (AP) -- To cut down on junk e-mail, Microsoft Corp. is capping the number of e-mails that users of its free Hotmail service can send each day. By limiting to 100 the number of messages that could be sent in a 24-hour period, Microsoft's MSN division hopes to stop people from using its service to send the unsolicited messages, known as spam. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32572257 ------------------------------ From: gabemiano@hotmail.com (Gabe Miano) Subject: Join Computerrepair.com Date: 26 Mar 2003 14:22:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ We are building a "portal" for computer service providers, network engineers and technical consultants. Already about 70 companies a day are searching for service providers, and we've only been online for about a week. It would definitely be smart to sign on early. It does not cost anything, and any addtional exposure for your business is a good thing. You register at computerrepair.com describing your services, coverage area, rates and so on. When companies look for computer service providers they may contact you for service or repair. You have nothing to lose and the domain is one that gets a lot of traffic for obvious reasons. Take a look at it. It takes about 10 minutes to complete the sign on process. Also please tell your friends. Our goal is to get national coverage by August 2003. http://www.computerrepair.com/ No Downside - All Upside ------------------------------ From: hiralvalia@yahoo.com (hiral) Subject: Do All PBXs Have the Same CDR/SMDR Port? Date: 26 Mar 2003 21:41:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I would be thankful if someone can tell me whether all PBXs have the same CDR/SMDR port: in terms of the connector, pin-configurations, etc. also, is the cable that connects the PBX to a computer's serial port easily available? Thank you, Hiral ------------------------------ From: modorney@aol.com (Mike O'Dorney) Subject: What Flavor CO do I Have? Date: 26 Mar 2003 13:24:41 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ How do I tell what type of Central Office (DMS100, etc.) a phone number has? Is there a service, like www.dslreports.com, that tells the type of CO? ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Vonage Line Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 13:58:23 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Got my Vonage service up and running last Friday. Sounds as good as any wireline connection. And, since I already had a router it was out of the box plug-and-play. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There were two messages about Vonage here recently. One of them (Vongage?) had you buying the instrument then paying a monthly fee. The other one just had you buy the instrument the nothing further. Which one was that? PAT] ------------------------------ From: nde_plume@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Fax Recovery Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 20:43:27 -0500 Organization: Bell Sympatico On Sat, 22 Mar 2003 07:39:41 UTC, lucky" wrote: > I am recording all phone calls, voice and fax, on my pc. > So I have a .wav file also for every fax received or transmitted with > the external stand-alone analogue fax machine. There is a way to > decode these .wav file into the original image? Simply send 'sound' > to modem seem do not work. I think a 'softmodem' that analyze and > decode wave stream may be a solution. Suggestions? Use a modem and software to receive faxes, it would be easier to setup and operate. And it'll probably even take less space to storing files compared to using the .wav files. > Regards. > lucky lu ------------------------------ From: ian_okey@hotmail.com (Ian Okey) Subject: Re: War Causing Inmarsat Network Congestion? Date: 26 Mar 2003 00:38:12 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ danopunkt@yahoo.com (t-sphere) wrote in message news:: > My users in the Gulf region are reporting problems connecting to the > Inmarsat network. Error messages are: "Call spacing too short"; or > "Error 14C2H." They are all using TT-3080A M4 Messengers with service > provided by Stratos. Has anyone heard that the Inmarsat network is > being overloaded by use associated with the war? (Media, NGOs, > military, etc.) Are you using the old IOR or the new 5th region IND-W that Inmarsat have put into service to provide extra capacity. With all the broadcasters around it is hardly surprising that there is some congestion. Ian ------------------------------ From: Jim Langridge Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 08:48:41 -0500 Subject: Long Distance Liability Hello Pat, Here's one for the Digest. Maybe someone out there can answer. While going over long distance bills for the past year, I found accounts being billed and paid that should have been cancelled when the office they were associated with moved. When I contacted LD carrier, they said they had never been informed to close the accounts. Since the phone lines/numbers associated with the accounts were no longer active most the charges were small monthly charges, except for one. One of the numbers had been re-activated/re-assigned by a different LEC. The LD carrier was still providing service to that number. The residence to which that number is assigned makes about $2-3K worth of phone calls per month to Switzerland and the Philippines. I have asked the LD carrier to credit us for the roughly $30K we have paid in the past year since the calls were not made by anyone associated with my company. They refused, saying that my company was still responsible for all the charges up to the time I asked them to terminate the account. I know this is more a legal question than a technical one. Shouldn't the LD carrier credit us for the long distance and go after the John Doe who has the telephone number assigned to him now? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well yeah, they should go after him, but they are lazy. Don't you have some notes around there dealing with the call that was made to the carrier requesting cancellation? Make copies of them for the carrier as your proof. Also, do you still have *any* working accounts with that carrier? You should *put a hold on all accounts payable to the company as of NOW*. Hopefully you have enough due them on other accounts that you will be able to recover your $30 K in a month or two or three before the carrier gets too suspicious and cuts you off. If they complain (and they will) hold to the posture that you paid in advance for service on disconnected lines. PAT] ------------------------------ From: saintpb@eudoramail.com (waveinspector) Subject: Revision G for Antennae Tower Implementation Date: 26 Mar 2003 06:45:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Please, actually I want to configure a tower to support various kind of data links with several antennas but it should be implemented with only one tower. Anyone have experience with this kind of situation? What are the standards to build a tower for this use? Anyone have a guide or info? ------------------------------ From: Clint Lord Subject: Dialogic and WAV prompts Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 11:20:37 -0700 Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/ We are running Dialogic D/240SC T1 cards and using Visual Voice 5.0 Pro to control the card. Everything is working great, except for on certain machines we can't play WAV prompts. We setup the machines exactly the same (software wise) and we've even swapped Dialogic cards from one machine to the other. It seems like it has something to do with the particular machine setup, but we can't seem to figure it out. Is there some special Windows or hardware level setup that enables the Dialogic cards to play wav files? A couple interesting notes: 1. It plays vox files with no problem and the IVR's work great and 2. I acts like it's playing the wav file, but you hear nothing through the handset. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. Clint Lord ------------------------------ From: 3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com Subject: Re: Unsolicited Faxes Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 02:07:53 +0200 ~ To reply by e-mail, include "Telecom Digest" in the subject line ~ On Tue, 25 Mar 2003 13:54:00 +0200, in comp.dcom.telecom Pat wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Those poor, oppressed people in South > Africa! I wonder if The Telephone Company could be induced to send > over troops of telephone workers to fight there for the rights of the Well shucks Pat, most of the people here would welcome it with open arms -- there's this common delusion that "The American Phone Systems would be Heaven to deal with" ..... I'm waiting with glee to see what happens when they have to deal with alternate calling plans, slamming etc etc ... (I've been reading here for a long while now - seen what happens with your telco's). > citizens not to be tortured by telemarketers and aberrant fax machines Oddly enough we don't really have a major telemarketer problem (yet) ... wayward faxes are another story - for eg: I recently had faxes from somebody in Namibia who wanted a booking confirmed at some or other establishement in Cape Town, and was sending to my number which most definitely isn't connected to that establishment (and in fact I couldn't even find it in the local directory) ... went on for days, with the sender getting more and more frantic at the lack of response to her faxes ... and I wasn't about to waste a long distance call to correct her. Remember that I receive faxes on an old PC, so there's no consideration of paper wastage either ... > and to have *60 and Privacy Manager on request. Yes please .... soon please :-)) > As President Roosevelt > once said, every African is entitled to a cell router and a PBX in Actually, I suppose I should admit that the setup I described is common only to a fairly narrow "band" of society in this country, and there are still vast numbers without landline phones, but it's certainly not unusual amongst the technologically enabled worldwide. (And I should add that *many* of those local landlineless people have cellphones -- very often the seemingly most unlikely, low-income people walk around with a modern mobile in their pockets) Talking of junk faxes -- I may have mentioned that I have been dabbling with something called Snappy Fax (www.snappysoftware.com) ($19-95 or so to purchase) as a replacement for my beloved but aging and increasingly "left behind" Bitfax ... Snappy is a nice package anyway, but I was delighted to find that it has the facility to handle "annoying faxes" by simply hanging up on them the moment it gets the "signature" from the sending fax machine ... not the telco caller-id, but the "sender id" that appears on the very top of the fax. It's the *principle* that tickles me, even if it isn't going to solve the world's problems. > a bit of sarcasm to start of this day. Yes Pat, I've noticed ... you're starting to become your acerbic old self that you used to be .... :-)) (But don't change -- I kinda like it, even if I don't always agree with you!) Cheers, Frank R ------------------------------ From: John P. Marshall Subject: Last Laugh! was Re: VoIP Billing Software for Sale Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 13:34:44 -0500 Organization: I.S. Associates, Inc. FYI, the billing software he sells "at a low price" is pirated. Ree wrote in message news:telecom22.363.4@telecom-digest.org: > Dear Sirs!!! > I have a wide range of VoIP billing Software at a low price. Newest > releases. It offers: > Call Accounting, > Post-paid Billing, > Prepaid Billing > Prepaid Calling Card Operation > Inter-gateway Settlement > Internet access, web design, web hosting, e-commerce services > Web interface for Customers, Sales Agents, and Customer Service > Representatives. > And much more. > Feel free to mail me: capricorn75@softhome.net > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: capricorn75@softhome.net sends me this > message almost daily. Normally I pitch it in the trash almost daily, > but lately he has toned it down somewhat, so it is time to reward him > by printing it ONE TIME ONLY since he eliminated the 'sale prices' and > most of the exclamation marks (!) this time around. Starting tomorrow > I will trash it again. PAT] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why doesn't that surprise me at 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 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 #364 From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 27 22:44:36 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2S3iZk22315; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 22:44:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 22:44:36 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303280344.h2S3iZk22315@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 #365 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Mar 2003 22:45:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 365 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked (Linc Madison) EPIC Alert 10.06 (Monty Solomon) America Online Launches The Morning After on AOL Television (Monty Solomon) Re: What Flavor CO do I Have? (Jack) Re: What Flavor CO do I Have? (burris) Re: What Flavor CO do I Have? (Joseph) Re: What Flavor CO do I Have? (J Kelly) Re: U.S. TV Networks Jump in as War in Iraq Starts (Ed Ellers) Re: Do All PBXs Have the Same CDR/SMDR Port? (kietlak) Re: Do All PBXs Have the Same CDR/SMDR Port? (Carl Navarro) Re: Vonage Line (John R. Levine) New Scam? (John Higdon) Panasonic KX-TG1000N - Turn Off Ringer (Tavish Muldoon) USRobotics Conference Link (Brian Denuyl) Re: Revision G for Antennae Tower Implementation (J Kelly) Re: More Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush (cbkiteflyer@yahoo.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: Linc Madison Subject: Re: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:33:47 -0800 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > http://go.hotwired.com/news/politics/0,1283,58200,00.html/wn_ascii > Arab satellite TV network Al-Jazeera launched an English-language > website Monday. On Tuesday, its Web host says it was hit with a > denial-of-service attack, but an Al-Jazeera representative blames > the problem on unexpectedly high traffic. The nauseatingly jingoistic dreck that was placed on the Al-Jazeera web site by an admitted hacker, was not "unexpectedly high traffic," nor was it merely "denial of service." I also saw signs that the hacker(s) hijacked the DNS for the aljazeera.net domain. Both www.aljazeera.net and english.aljazeera.net currently point to placeholder pages; the latter says "This Page has Been Taken Over By Saimoon Bhuiyan." That's not the "Freedom 2003" idiots that hacked it in the first place, but I'm not sure that it's Al-Jazeera, either. The placeholder page for www.aljazeera.net says it is the "Future Home of a Dotster Registered Domain," which I find suspicious. Here, both www. and english.aljazeera.net point to 216.34.94.186, which is owned by Cable and Wireless / Exodus. That address is also listed in SPEWS, , because the host has some rather unsavory spammy customers. That one single IP address is also listed in the Spamhaus Block List (SBL) because of the spam outfit email-list.us. A check of other blocklists shows about 20 lists that block that IP address, including ORDB, NJABL, OSRELAY, OSDUL, OSSOCKS, OSPROXY, SPAMCOP, RSL, MONKEYSUPL, MONKEYSFORMMAIL, DSBLLIST, DSBLUNCONFIRMED, DSBLMULTI, DEVNUL, SSFABEL, OPM, INTERSIL, IPWHOIS, ABL, JIPPG-ABUSE, JIPPG-DUL, NOMOREFUNN, BRAINERD, ASSHOLES, SORBS, DRBL-WORK-CROCO, and BSPQUERY. If Al-Jazeera jumped to a new provider, they didn't do their homework first. If you can pull up the real Al-Jazeera web sites from where you are, please check the actual IP address you're reaching (using "nslookup" or similar) and see if it matches 216.34.94.186. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 08:55:42 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EPIC Alert 10.06 ======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 10.06 March 26, 2003 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.06.html ======================================================================= Table of Contents ======================================================================= [1] PATRIOT Act Secrecy Challenged; DoD Appeals EPIC FOIA Victory [2] EPIC Testifies at European Parliament on Air Travel Privacy [3] Senate Wants Answers on Controversial Air Security System [4] EPIC Launches FOIA Gallery; Issues Privacy Report on WHOIS [5] Data Industry Initiates Anti-Privacy Credit Campaign [6] News in Brief [7] EPIC Bookstore: The Naked Society [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.06.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 15:34:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: America Online Launches The Morning After on AOL Television America Online Launches The Morning After on AOL Television with Exclusive Video from 'The Bachelor' -- Enhanced for AOL for Broadband Users - Mar 27, 2003 03:03 PM (BusinessWire) NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 27, 2003-- Weekly Video Offers Exclusive, Firsthand Interviews with the Bachelorettes the Morning After Each New Episode New Feature Kicks Off Today at AOL Keyword: The Morning After America Online, Inc., the world's leading interactive services company, has launched a new The Morning After(TM) feature on AOL(R) Television. The new feature will break exclusive interviews with the bachelorettes of the hit reality series "The Bachelor" every Thursday -- the morning after each new weekly episode. The interviews were taped after the program's weekly rose ceremony and only AOL members, including those using the AOL for Broadband service, will have access to this special, exclusive footage. The new program will be available at AOL Keyword: The Morning After. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32612614 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:48:37 -0500 From: Jack Subject: Re: What Flavor CO do I Have? On 26 Mar 2003 13:24:41 -0800, modorney@aol.com (Mike O'Dorney) wrote: > How do I tell what type of Central Office (DMS100, etc.) a phone > number has? Is there a service, like www.dslreports.com, that tells > the type of CO? Try the page at http://www.telcodata.us/ - it gives this information for many (but not all) exchanges. Try doing a lookup by area code and exchange, then in the "Misc" column, click on "See Detailed information about this switch." You can also look up a switch directly if you know the CLLI code, but most users will find it more convenient to simply look up by area code and exchange. This is more likely to work if you are looking up an exchange served by a major phone company, and not so likely if it's a small independent, CLEC, or wireless company. Jack ------------------------------ From: burris Subject: Re: What Flavor CO do I Have? Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 08:17:33 -0500 Post your NPA-NXX and I will give you a list of features that your CO has. Mike O'Dorney wrote: > How do I tell what type of Central Office (DMS100, etc.) a phone > number has? Is there a service, like www.dslreports.com, that tells > the type of CO? ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: What Flavor CO do I Have? Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 06:57:49 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On 26 Mar 2003 13:24:41 -0800, modorney@aol.com (Mike O'Dorney) wrote: > How do I tell what type of Central Office (DMS100, etc.) a phone > number has? Is there a service, like www.dslreports.com, that tells > the type of CO? Who's your telco? Qwest (formerly USWest) has a web page that tells you the location of the CO as well as the type of equipment that's in the CO as well as when the current switching equipment went on line. Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group. ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: What Flavor CO do I Have? Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 19:15:13 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On 26 Mar 2003 13:24:41 -0800, modorney@aol.com (Mike O'Dorney) wrote: > How do I tell what type of Central Office (DMS100, etc.) a phone > number has? Is there a service, like www.dslreports.com, that tells > the type of CO? Look at www.telcodata.us . ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: U.S. TV Networks Jump in as War in Iraq Starts Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 20:42:25 -0500 PAT, the TELECOM Digest Editor, noted: > What makes you think Sodomy wasn't put in office by some standards which > were/are acceptable to the Iraqi people? The known facts, which are that he basically got where he is by the point of a gun. > After all, Queen Elizabeth was not elected by anyone, was she? But her > being in the position she is in is acceptable to the British people. The British monarch is not the head of the government -- the Prime Minister is, and s/he is elected by the House of Commons, which *is* elected by the people of the United Kingdom. > How well do you *really know* what the Iraqi people want? That's the whole point -- we don't know, because Saddam won't allow the sort of free elections that would reveal the truth. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You contradict yourself in the same article. You close by saying 'we dont know, because Saddam, etc.' but you began your reply by saying 'the known facts are that he got into office with the point of a gun.' Now do we, or don't we know? Or is it more convenient to say he 'took office at the point of a gun'? If you will recall, in 1776 a group of British patriots overthrew the British government here in America to start the United States. I am sure there were many British people who did not care for that either. And please do not make a subjective decision and say 'oh, but that was different'. Everything is different, everything is the same. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kietlak Subject: Re: Do All PBXs Have the Same CDR/SMDR Port? Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 00:43:51 +0100 Organization: news.onet.pl > I would be thankful if someone can tell me whether all PBXs have the > same CDR/SMDR port: in terms of the connector, pin-configurations, > etc. No. kietlak ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Do All PBXs Have the Same CDR/SMDR Port? Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 08:11:47 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online -- Northeast Ohio On 26 Mar 2003 21:41:46 -0800, hiralvalia@yahoo.com (hiral) wrote: > I would be thankful if someone can tell me whether all PBXs have the > same CDR/SMDR port: in terms of the connector, pin-configurations, > etc. also, is the cable that connects the PBX to a computer's serial > port easily available? What would you guess? Sometimes between each manufacturer the port is the same style ... Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Vonage Line Date: 27 Mar 2003 09:56:06 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There were two messages about Vonage > here recently. One of them (Vongage?) had you buying the instrument > then paying a monthly fee. The other one just had you buy the > instrument the nothing further. Which one was that? PAT] There's a signup fee of $30, then $40/mo for unlimited outgoing in North America, or $26 for unlimited in your local area (defined as some nearby area codes) and 500 minutes elsewhere, 3.9 cpm for excess minutes. Incoming calls and 800 calls are always free. The signup kit includes a Cisco ATA 186 which costs about $150 to buy. If you need a router, they'll sell you one of those too, cheap. Calls outside the US and Canada cost what they cost, fairly low rates listed on their web site. There's a 14 day trial period during which you can return the kit and owe nothing, otherwise there's a $40 termination fee. I presume they want the ATA back if you quit but their terms of service neglect to say that. It's programmed only to work on Vonage's system with passwords that appear impossible to reset. If you're referred by an existing subscriber like, say, me, both the new and old subscriber get a one-time $40 credit. The referrals work by e-mail address, the old sub tells Vonage to send a friend an invitation message, if the friend signs up they get the credit. 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: John Higdon Subject: New Scam? Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 07:19:18 -0800 I am now getting calls (with an 800 CID) that sound as though they are from a predictive dialer. After a pregant pause, a recorded voice says, "Oh, I'm sorry. I have the wrong number. Goodby." I'm told by my friends who don't have Privacy Manager that they sometimes receive calls such as these without any CID. I can't imagine what is going on here. Fax number harvesters just disconnect when they get a human voice (and besides, at some point, folks are actually going to go after fax spammers since the law is now on their side). I suspect that the device is recording how the line is answered, but other than to determine business lines from residential ones, it is anyone's guess what the entity behind this device is trying to achieve. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: tmuldoon@spliced.com (Tavish Muldoon) Subject: Panasonic KX-TG1000N - Turn Off Ringer Date: 27 Mar 2003 07:19:04 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hello, I have a Panasonic 2.4 ghz phone, a base station and 2 phones. I can turn off the ringer on the phones -- but not the base station. Since I bought these phones used there is no manual. Any idea how I turn off/on the ringer to this base station? Any help? Thanks, Tmuld ------------------------------ From: Brian Denuyl Subject: USRobotics Conference Link Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:59:04 -0500 I have two USRobotics conference link speakerphones (CS1055) and neither has the adapter box to connect the phone line and power the thing. Does anyone know the pinouts of the connector on the bottom? Thanks! ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Revision G for Antennae Tower Implementation Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 19:14:27 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On 26 Mar 2003 06:45:46 -0800, saintpb@eudoramail.com (waveinspector) wrote: > Please, actually I want to configure a tower to support various kind > of data links with several antennas but it should be implemented with > only one tower. > Anyone have experience with this kind of situation? What are the > standards to build a tower for this use? Anyone have a guide or info? I don't understand the question. Are you asking about building a tower (the structure itself) or how to do the data links? Be more specific. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:49:20 CST From: cbkiteflyer@yahoo.com Subject: Re: More Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush Pat wrote: > How well do you *really know* what the Iraqi people want? PAT] You're right ... We don't really know. Why don't we try to ask several hundred thousand of them? Oh, I'm sorry, we can't. It seems Saddam has had them all killed. Pat, this is getting silly. With all due respect to your fine skills as the TD moderator, and with sympathy for the health problems that you have suffered, it's pointless to debate this with you until you have the opportunity to get back up to speed on some of the basic facts surrounding the issues; facts that are commonly acknowledged by folks on both sides of the debate, but which you don't seem to be aware of. One of these facts is that Saddam is responsible for the deaths of more Muslims than any other person in modern history. People accuse Bush of being a cowboy and lacking in diplomatic skills. They ask what right does the US have to interfere with what's going on in another country. In fact, what we are witnessing is a re-writing of some of the "time-honored rules of diplomacy" which were put in place by the Europeans and evolved over hundreds of years. One of these rules is that it is nobody else's business what happens behind the "sovereign" borders of a country. This is what has let brutal dictators and tyrants flourish. In short, just because Bush can be ARROGANT and RUDE, does not necessarily mean he's WRONG. (Unless you subscribe to the liberal point of view where "image" and "style" and "PC" are everything.) I'm sure you are aware of the saying "The only thing required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." I think Bush realizes that brutality and repression is not just the private business of a "sovereign" nation. It is a *human* issue that should concern all of us. This goes much further than the Manifest Destiny of the 19th century where the main goal was to bring civilization to the "backward heathens". And it's not a question of conquering or colonizing these nations. Why do you think the first and biggest debate which preceeds each of these actions is always "How are we going to get out? What's our exit strategy" It's because we are NOT interested in staying in, we are interested in making it possible for the people to have an opportunity for self-government. Then we leave, as we did in Germany and Japan, probably the two closest models of what our intention with Iraq is. Both of these countries went on to become thriving members of the world community. You asked: > Freeing an oppressed people you say?? That's rich ... what about > all the people in South Africa and China and Cuba, and Guatemala and > other places who need a touch of Dubya's helping hand? Guess what? Maybe this is their wakeup call. The best we can hope for is that they will clean up their acts. The second best scenario is that their own population will be inspired to throw the rascals out. Finally, since you and others seem so convinced that this is "ALL ABOUT OIL" (one of the most popular of the current liberal cliches along with "TAX CUTS FOR THE -- all together now -- RICH!") here's a challenge: Give us your best prediction as to what will happen with the oil situation in Iraq after this is over which will prove you were right. My prediction is that Iraq's oil will remain Iraq's oil for them to produce and sell as they please. If you've got a different prediction, let's have it. Quick, you don't have too much time ...! As far as Sodomy's weapons of mass destruction go, the one thing that is certain is that the US will look for them and either find some or not. Either way, there's gonna be one helluva giant "I TOLD YOU SO" launched by one side or the other. Cheers, Clive Dawson [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, if you are trying to cause me to have another heart attack, you are doing a damn good job! Their oil will remain their oil but my prediction is Saddam or his predecessors will place a 'war surcharge' on sales to the USA and USA sympathizers and force us to buy it through some third party. Either they will refuse to sell it to us at all or make it prohibitively expensive. Why, it may even come to the point that Bush will declare war (again!) on the Iraqi people and take the oil by force whether they like it or not. Did you notice how the very first thing the troops did when they arrived was deploy soldiers to guard the oil wells, of which there are about two thousand in Bagdhad alone? Maybe Saddam will try to strike a deal with the USA. "You need oil to survive, I need nuclear weapons to survive'; let's help each other out." And Bush may decide to go along with it. As I said earlier this week, this thread is supposed to be closed. 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 #365 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 28 01:56:49 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2S6une24618; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 01:56:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 01:56:49 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303280656.h2S6une24618@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 #366 TELECOM Digest Fri, 28 Mar 2003 01:57:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 366 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: What Flavor CO do I Have? (John Higdon) Time to Charge for Online Magazines Including People (Monty Solomon) Wider-Fi (Monty Solomon) Hughes to Get Bids From Cablevision, Others - Sources (Monty Solomon) Re: T-Mobile GSM: Jammed by AT&T?? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked (Henry) FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and TV Networks (Michael D. Sullivan) 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 Subject: Re: What Flavor CO do I Have? Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 20:09:00 -0800 In article , Jack wrote: > This is more likely to work if you are looking up an exchange served > by a major phone company, and not so likely if it's a small > independent, CLEC, or wireless company. Being intimately familiar with the ILEC hardware in this LATA, I put the site to the test. It is a pretty cute site that managed to correctly identify each NPA/exchange with its appropriate CO. Unfortunately, however, the site's weakest feature is its identification of CO switch type. On a number of inquiries, the link didn't even produce another page. Other queries returned flat-out wrong answers e.g. claiming a 5ESS was a DMS-100, etc. In all fairness, this could be a "stale data" problem rather than a hard-core error. What was surprising was its moderate accuracy with data regarding CLECs. I looked up a number of them (including mine) and found reasonably correct material. What errors existed were understandable from a standpoint of knowing the inner workings of the entities listed. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 00:07:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Time to Charge For Online Magazines Including People NEW YORK, March 27 (Reuters) - Time Inc., owned by AOL Time Warner (NYSE:AOL) said on Thursday it would charge for the online editions of 14 of its magazines starting with People and Entertainment Weekly on Monday. People and Entertainment Weekly's Internet editions will be out of bounds to readers except to America Online members, subscribers to the specific magazines, or people who buy the newsstand edition. In the following weeks, magazines such as Teen People, Real Simple and In Style will follow the same route. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32623660 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My goodness, that's going to be a real loss to the rest of the internet, isn't it. Note my sarcastic answer. I wonder how they will detirmine who the 'newstand purchasers' of their trashy magazines are for the purpose of giving them admission to the websites. Our local PBS radio station, KRPS at 88.9 FM is in the midst of a fund raising drive; they are trying to raise 89 thousand dollars to stay on the air for another year or so. This message from Monty Solomon, along with the almost endless chatter about money on KRPS reminds me it is about time to have a share day here; maybe over the weekend or the start of next week. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 00:04:49 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wider-Fi A little-known standard called Wi-Fi turned into the hottest technology of the year and shook the wireless industry to its core. Now its successors hope to leave Wi-Fi in the dust. That sound you hear, that incessant tapping on laptops at the corner cafe, the local park and the airport lounge, is music to the ears of the beleaguered tech industry. Wi-Fi, the magical wireless link that lets all those tappers blast data short distances at 200 times the speed of a dial-up modem for no extra cost, has turned into the only bright note punctuating Silicon Valley's indigo mood. Only three years old, Wi-Fi, a once-obscure wireless standard with the ungainly real name of IEEE 802.11, went supernova last year, selling 18 million connections -- one of the fastest adoption rates of any consumer technology in history. Tens of thousands of Wi-Fi "hotspots" have sprouted around the country. Some McDonald's now offer a free link with the purchase of a combo meal. In March, Intel kicked off a $300 million-plus marketing blitz for a new brand, Centrino, that packages together a new laptop microprocessor with a Wi-Fi receiver. Now it looks like history may repeat itself. In January the industry group that spawned Wi-Fi released a new standard that may put the old one to shame. It extends the wireless range of Wi-Fi from roughly 300 feet to several miles and lets signals bounce around obstacles and penetrate walls; it also fixes security flaws and adds high-quality phone calls. This new standard is dubbed 802.16a by the Institute of Electrical Electronics Engineers , which disdains catchy names. Some are calling it Wi-Max, but a better tag might be Wider-Fi. Meanwhile, a rival group at IEEE is working on 802.20--a kind of Mobile-Fi that promises speedy links in cars and trains traveling at speeds that can exceed 120 miles an hour. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32622361 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 00:08:08 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Hughes to Get Bids From Cablevision, Others - Sources By Jeffrey Goldfarb NEW YORK, March 27 (Reuters) - Cablevision Systems Corp. (NYSE:CVC) is expected to throw its hat in the ring for DirecTV as one of four suitors planning to submit a bid by Friday to take over at least part of General Motors Corp.'s (NYSE:GM) satellite TV business, according to people familiar with the situation. Also expected to bid are Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. (AUS:NCP), John Malone-led Liberty Media Corp. (NYSE:L) and local telephone provider SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC), these people said on Thursday. However, a deal between Liberty and News Corp. announced on Thursday evening cast some doubt on whether Malone would proceed with an offer. The four companies will outline their offers -- which are likely to include the tax consequences and structural aspects -- for DirecTV's parent Hughes Electronics Corp. (NYSE:GMH) and will provide actual dollar figures next week, they added. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33624434 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: T-Mobile GSM: Jammed by AT&T?? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 03:15:52 GMT >> If I understand correctly, AT&T is rolling out a GSM service as well. >> T-Mobile claims that AT&T is using abnormally high signal levels, >> which cause T-Mobile phones to be unstable or totally unusable in the >> affected area. > Someone handed you a load of horse hockey on that one. If AT&T or any No one knows why, but the AT&T signals clearly affect T-Mobile's signals. This has been demonstrated over and over again. In fact, one way people have tracked AT&T's trials has been by following T-mobile problems. > several times a day to make the service perform correctly. Also every > mobile device that I know of that accesses a GSM network has the > ability to manually choose a network. You don't need to get another > phone though there are differences between phones in how they do in > regard to how well they handle weak RF. From what it sounds like in > your situation you are in a marginal reception area and that's part of > the reason you're having difficulty holding a T-Mobile signal. Whatever the reason, some phones do well when T-Mobile and AT&T are in the same area, and some do not. I know this from personal experience. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 04:35:52 GMT On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:33:47 -0800, Linc Madison posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > In article , Monty Solomon > wrote: > Both www.aljazeera.net and english.aljazeera.net currently point to > placeholder pages; the latter says "This Page has Been Taken Over By > Saimoon Bhuiyan." That's not the "Freedom 2003" idiots that hacked it > in the first place, but I'm not sure that it's Al-Jazeera, either. The > placeholder page for www.aljazeera.net says it is the "Future Home of > a Dotster Registered Domain," which I find suspicious. > Here, both www. and english.aljazeera.net point to 216.34.94.186, > which is owned by Cable and Wireless / Exodus. [stuff about spam deleted] > If Al-Jazeera jumped to a new provider, they didn't do their homework > first. > If you can pull up the real Al-Jazeera web sites from where you are, > please check the actual IP address you're reaching (using "nslookup" or > similar) and see if it matches 216.34.94.186. I pulled up english.aljzeera.net and it resolved to 213.30.180.219. Even though I called up the English page, the Arabic page was displayed. It didn't appear to be hacked -- but of course I couldn't read it. The DNS record was just updated: 27-Mar-2003 23:31:41 EST. The IP is from a block assigned to ATT Global in France. This fits with the announcement that al-jazeera was moving to a new server located in Europe. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry) Subject: Re: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 07:32:10 +0200 Organization: Elisa Internet customer Linc Madison wrote: > If you can pull up the real Al-Jazeera web sites from where you are, > please check the actual IP address you're reaching (using "nslookup" or > similar) and see if it matches 216.34.94.186. It's Friday morning, about 0530 GMT. The page english.aljazeera.net loads but it is entirely in Arabic. The IP resolves to 213.30.180.219. Whois, last updated six and a half hours ago (Thursday, 17:51 EST) finds no match for that IP. cheers, Henry ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and TV Networks Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 05:39:08 GMT This has really degenerated. Response to rampant nonsense follows. I know everyone wants to end this thread and Pat says it will be closed, so I will not follow up in the interest of getting back to telecom issues. Nevertheless, I need to get this off my chest, and hope Pat is willing to post this as one last gasp. On Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:49:20 CST, cbkiteflyer@yahoo.com posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: [snip] > Pat, this is getting silly. With all due respect to your fine skills > as the TD moderator, and with sympathy for the health problems that > you have suffered, it's pointless to debate this with you until you > have the opportunity to get back up to speed on some of the basic > facts surrounding the issues; facts that are commonly acknowledged by > folks on both sides of the debate, but which you don't seem to be > aware of. One of these facts is that Saddam is responsible for the > deaths of more Muslims than any other person in modern history. Most of them some time ago, I believe. After that, we had Gulf War I. And then Bush I stopped and let Saddam go on ruling his country. Since then there have not been massive slaughters, have there? And recently? I thought not. He's actually been lying pretty low. So why now? Sure, the guy's evil. So are most dictators. Lots of them are our "friends." The PRC has been responsible for a huge number of innocent deaths over the years. Have we intervened? No, we've rewarded their steps toward openness to US investment and trade. Nor did we intervene in Rwanda when massive evil was done. The US has never taken on the role of avenging innocent deaths worldwide by forcing regime change. While we should, unquestionably, put great pressure on other nations that are "evil" to clean up their act and protect human rights, there are good reasons for the US not to take on the role of more-or-less-unilaterally acting as a world police department with respect to what happens within a given country's borders. > People accuse Bush of being a cowboy and lacking in diplomatic skills. > They ask what right does the US have to interfere with what's going on > in another country. In fact, what we are witnessing is a re-writing > of some of the "time-honored rules of diplomacy" which were put in > place by the Europeans and evolved over hundreds of years. One of > these rules is that it is nobody else's business what happens behind > the "sovereign" borders of a country. This is what has let brutal > dictators and tyrants flourish. Simply put, we have no more right to interfere with what's going on within the borders of another country militarily than Hitler did. When one country sends its armed forces into another to intervene in "internal affairs," without that country having attacked another, that is a hostile act known as invasion, or war. It is contrary to not just the time honored rules of diplomacy, but to stable international relations and the interest of peace. The only time a nation should militarily intervene in the internal affairs of another is when there is an international consensus that this is necessary in the interest of peace. That is the very reason the US advocated creation of the League of Nations after WWI and the United Nations after WWII. The Bush II doctrine of preemptive war is contrary to the interests of world peace and stability because it knows no limits -- it is characterized by throwing off the constraint of needing consensus and allowing unilateral action indistinguishable from an unprovoked act of war. It is the war of the jungle -- whoever has the biggest armed forces can do whatever it wants to a country without defenders. Under this doctrine, China, for example, is free to invade South Korea, Taiwan, or India simply because it says that those countries are harboring evildoers of one sort or another from China's perspective. India is free to attack Pakistan without becoming an outcast because Pakistan has WMD and has mistreated Hindu minorities. > In short, just because Bush can be ARROGANT and RUDE, does not > necessarily mean he's WRONG. (Unless you subscribe to the liberal > point of view where "image" and "style" and "PC" are everything.) Bush sure is arrogant and rude. He's also a goddamn idiot who lets the deluded warmongers Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz make war on a country that had NOT taken hostile action against the US or its allies, even though its leadership is unquestionably despicable and evil. And he does this even though world opinion, including that of many of our closest allies, is decidedly against doing so. His "arrogance" and "rudeness" will have consequences that will haunt us for many, many years. > I'm sure you are aware of the saying "The only thing required for evil > to triumph is for good men to do nothing." I think Bush realizes that > brutality and repression is not just the private business of a > "sovereign" nation. It is a *human* issue that should concern all of > us. This goes much further than the Manifest Destiny of the 19th > century where the main goal was to bring civilization to the "backward > heathens". The main goal of Manifest Destiny was not to bring civilization to the backward heathens (presumably you mean the American Indians). It was to wipe them out (or, failing that, herd them onto reservations) and steal their land and resources and permit our population to expand into the space cleared -- and, of course, create immense business and graft opportunites (railroad land grants, in the short term). If you are comparing the Bush II doctrine to Manifest Destiny, you are probably right -- this goes well beyond it. And that's not a compliment. Bush II doesn't give two s--ts about brutality and repression. His buddy Ashcroft has shown that domestically, and Bush's continued tolerance of innumerable brutal and repressive regimes worldwide shows it internationally. It really offends me to hear Bush II cast his role in moral terms. I agree that "the only thing required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." (I believe that was Churchill.) That philosophy does not amount to a mandate to invade every country one views as evil. There are plenty of other ways to counter evil. Most of them involve building international consensus. > And it's not a question of conquering or colonizing these nations. > Why do you think the first and biggest debate which preceeds each of > these actions is always "How are we going to get out? What's our exit > strategy" It's because we are NOT interested in staying in, we are > interested in making it possible for the people to have an opportunity > for self-government. Then we leave, as we did in Germany and Japan, > probably the two closest models of what our intention with Iraq is. > Both of these countries went on to become thriving members of the > world community. And what is our exit strategy in Iraq? In Afghanistan? In the "War on Terrorism"? As to the latter, I believe the Bush II answer is -- it will end when there is no more (state-sponsored?) terrorism. Simply put, there is no exit strategy. Say we off Saddam and his principal cronies. Is that the end? Or do we stay in Iraq until there are no evil, repressive dudes left and there are no al-Qaeda or other known terrorist sympathizers left? If the population resents our presence and acts accordingly does that mean that we stay until they have heeled under? Sort of like the Israelis in their occupied territories? Great exit strategy. > TELECOM Digest Editor noted: >> Freeing an oppressed people you say?? That's rich ... what about >> all the people in South Africa and China and Cuba, and Guatemala and >> other places who need a touch of Dubya's helping hand? Then you replied: > Guess what? Maybe this is their wakeup call. The best we can hope > for is that they will clean up their acts. The second best scenario > is that their own population will be inspired to throw the rascals > out. But I thought you said the Bush II doctrine obliged us to kick out all oppressive regimes. Why wait for things to get so bad that the locals throw them out? We didn't wait for that in Iraq. (Oh, wait, those other repressive regimes don't have lots of oil; the best they can do is cigars and diamonds, so forget it....) > Finally, since you and others seem so convinced that this is "ALL > ABOUT OIL" (one of the most popular of the current liberal cliches > along with "TAX CUTS FOR THE -- all together now -- RICH!") here's a > challenge: Give us your best prediction as to what will happen with > the oil situation in Iraq after this is over which will prove you were > right. My prediction is that Iraq's oil will remain Iraq's oil for > them to produce and sell as they please. If you've got a different > prediction, let's have it. Quick, you don't have too much time ...! Frankly, I don't think this is all about oil, although that is one motivating factor. I agree that once we have implanted a puppet regime that is sufficiently subservient, the oil will remain Iraq's to do with as they please, and US contractors and wholesalers will be pleased to assist the puppet regime. Imperialism has advanced a lot since the 1800s; we no longer need to have ExxonMobil or its equivalent OWN the wells. As long as the oil is sold into the world market (and it will be), ExxonMobil will get all it wants. And Halliburton will be happy to operate the wells as a contractor. And Bechtel will build new wells for their "owner," Iraq. > As far as Sodomy's weapons of mass destruction go, the one thing that > is certain is that the US will look for them and either find some or > not. Either way, there's gonna be one helluva giant "I TOLD YOU SO" > launched by one side or the other. Oh, the US will find them, whether they are there or not. Just like the Chicago Police will find drugs or weapons when they do a raid, whether they are there beforehand or not. The US has tremendous credibility. Just look at all the good tips they gave to the UN inspectors about where to look. I'm sure that the international community will accept our findings as completely unbiased. On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 20:42:25 -0500, Ed Ellers posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > PAT, the TELECOM Digest Editor, noted: >> What makes you think Sodomy wasn't put in office by some standards which >> were/are acceptable to the Iraqi people? > The known facts, which are that he basically got where he is by the > point of a gun. And our strongman got where he is by the point of a 5-4 Supreme Court. Bush II actually lost the popular vote -- the first resident of the White House to have done so. He wasn't put in office by the American people. I agree that Saddam Hussein wasn't put in office by the Iraqi people; he was put there by supporting the overthrow of the illegitimate King and then supplanting the dictator he helped into office. Nobody has ever had any claim to be the legitimate leader chosen by the Iraqi people, unlike in the US (but Bush ain't the one chosen). >> After all, Queen Elizabeth was not elected by anyone, was she? But her >> being in the position she is in is acceptable to the British people. As a technical matter, while the British monarch is not elected, it's not inevitably predetermined who the monarch will be. The monarch is determined in accordance with laws enacted by Parliament (to which the Royal assent is given), and Parliament has changed those laws (known as Acts of Succession) on numerous occasions with the specific intention of enthroning one or another chosen individual and keeping out another. This has proven to be much better than the former method, namely changing the succession through military action. > The British monarch is not the head of the government -- the Prime > Minister is, and s/he is elected by the House of Commons, which *is* > elected by the people of the United Kingdom. Minor disagreement: I believe the Prime Minister is chosen by the party holding the majority in the House of Commons, in accordance with party rules. The Labor Party, for example, has an electoral system for selecting the Party Leader (i.e., Prime Minister if the party holds a majority in the Commons) that is not strictly based on MPs' votes -- unions and other affiliated organizations get votes as well. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now, we are finished? By the by, Attorney Sullivan, a good conclusion to this, ummm, 'thread'. 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 #366 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 28 20:52:47 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2T1qk129638; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 20:52:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 20:52:47 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303290152.h2T1qk129638@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 #367 TELECOM Digest Fri, 28 Mar 2003 20:53:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 367 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Do All PBXs Have the Same CDR/SMDR Port? (David Clayton) Use a Firewall, Go to Jail ?? (Jack) Use a Firewall, Go to Jail (Monty Solomon) Re: New Scam? (Zed**3) Re: New Scam? (Rich Greenberg) Re: New Scam? (Daryl R Gibson) Re: War Causing Inmarsat Network Congestion? (t-sphere) New Link For Your Consideration (hot telecom) Re: T-Mobile GSM: Jammed by AT&T?? (Joseph) Re: Panasonic KX-TG1000N - Turn Off Ringer (Rich Greenberg) March 2003 Web Server Survey (Monty Solomon) Wireless Video Comes Stateside (Eric Friedebach) Re: Unsolicited Faxes (SELLCOM Tech Support) Re: U.S. TV Networks Jump in as War in Iraq Starts (David Wolff) Re: Why the Dogs of Cyberwar Stay Leashed (David Clayton) Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and TV Networks (John Higdon) Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and TV Networks (Dan W. Johnson) Letters From Baghdad (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: David Clayton Subject: Re: Do All PBXs Have the Same CDR/SMDR Port? Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:45:48 +1100 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au hiralvalia@yahoo.com (hiral) contributed the following: > I would be thankful if someone can tell me whether all PBXs have the > same CDR/SMDR port: in terms of the connector, pin-configurations, > etc. also, is the cable that connects the PBX to a computer's serial > port easily available? In my experience *most* PBX's do have a serial port for this, or you can get an additional one for the purpose, (usually at an exorbitant cost). The cabling can vary because some PBX's manufacturers didn't (still don't?) understand serial data comms that well, (the Nortel range of 10 years ago immediately spring to mind, I hope that they are better at it these day ...). Sometimes it is a "standard" serial cable, other times you have to purchase a proprietary cable. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 13:18:44 -0500 From: Jack Subject: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail??? I'm trying to figure out if this is sensationalism, or a very real threat. This news item appeared yesterday on BroadbandReports.Com: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail Bills twist the DMCA into another odd shape Massachusetts, Texas, South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Alaska, Tennessee, and Colorado are all preparing to consider bills that would extend the reach of the DMCA in such a way that could ban the possession, sale, or use of technologies that "conceal from a communication service provider ... the existence or place of origin or destination of any communication". This would in effect criminalize technologies such as firewalls and NAT. Even encrypted email, which obscures the "To" line of the email from your ISP via encryption, could be included under the various legislations' vague language. This item was found at: http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/27104 And it links to a site at: http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/ (Scroll down to the March 26, 2003 entry) I look at this and I think, this can't be right -- it has to be a case of sensationalizing the news. This may be bad legislation, but it can't be that bad (or stupid), can it? I mean, after all, who doesn't use a firewall of some kind these days? What next, will they outlaw hard drives? Please tell me that this is not as bad as it sounds! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes it can be, and is true. Dubya and his agents want everyone to be out in the public view where they can be seen. Its part of the war on terrorism, you know, and how the brave American patriots are sacrificing for the Good of Our Country. Just like having your private parts groped in airport security lines and red tags denying you the right to travel freely. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 15:36:25 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/archives/000336.html March 26, 2003 Use a Firewall, Go to Jail The states of Massachusetts and Texas are preparing to consider bills that apparently are intended to extend the national Digital Millennium Copyright Act. (TX bill; MA bill) The bills are obviously related to each other somehow, since they are textually similar. Here is one example of the far-reaching harmful effects of these bills. Both bills would flatly ban the possession, sale, or use of technologies that "conceal from a communication service provider ... the existence or place of origin or destination of any communication". Your ISP is a communication service provider, so anything that concealed the origin or destination of any communication from your ISP would be illegal -- with no exceptions. If you send or receive your email via an encrypted connection, you're in violation, because the "To" and "From" lines of the emails are concealed from your ISP by encryption. (The encryption conceals the destinations of outgoing messages, and the sources of incoming messages.) Worse yet, Network Address Translation (NAT), a technology widely used for enterprise security, operates by translating the "from" and "to" fields of Internet packets, thereby concealing the source or destination of each packet, and hence violating these bills. Most security "firewalls" use NAT, so if you use a firewall, you're in violation. If you have a home DSL router, or if you use the "Internet Connection Sharing" feature of your favorite operating system product, you're in violation because these connection sharing technologies use NAT. Most operating system products (including every version of Windows introduced in the last five years, and virtually all versions of Linux) would also apparently be banned, because they support connection sharing via NAT. And this is just one example of the problems with these bills. Yikes. UPDATE (6:35 PM): It's worse than I thought. Similar bills are on the table in South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Alaska, Tennessee, and Colorado. UPDATE (March 28, 9:00 AM): Clarified the paragraph above about encrypted email, to eliminate an ambiguity. Posted by Edward W. Felten at 01:04 PM [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dubya is afraid you may be going to send notes of sympathy to the Iraqi people and he wants his people to be able to read all your email. ------------------------------ From: gc@radix.net (Zed**3) Subject: Re: New Scam? Date: 28 Mar 2003 19:39:26 GMT Organization: Spontaneous In article , John Higdon wrote: > I am now getting calls (with an 800 CID) that sound as though they are > from a predictive dialer. After a pregant pause, a recorded voice > says, "Oh, I'm sorry. I have the wrong number. Goodby." I'm told by my > friends who don't have Privacy Manager that they sometimes receive > calls such as these without any CID. > I can't imagine what is going on here. Fax number harvesters just > disconnect when they get a human voice (and besides, at some point, > folks are actually going to go after fax spammers since the law is now > on their side). I suspect that the device is recording how the line is > answered, but other than to determine business lines from residential > ones, it is anyone's guess what the entity behind this device is > trying to achieve. What time of day do you get these calls? I have voice mail (telco provided) on my home phone. When I get home late a night there are frequently one or two recorded messages from telemarketers waiting for me. That is, my voice mail recorded a recorded sales pitch. It always gives an 800 number to call. These come at random times during the day, when working people are not likely to be home (e.g., 9:23am, 11:30am,...). Here is my hypothesis for what you are hearing (if these calls come during the day): These telemarketing systems are actually looking for voice mail / message recorders for their sales pitch. If they get a human, they hang up. Why? The response rate is probably quite low, but, as with spam, it is cheap compared to hiring people to make the calls and so a low reponse rate can still be profitable. ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: New Scam? Date: 28 Mar 2003 11:32:42 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , John Higdon wrote: > I am now getting calls (with an 800 CID) that sound as though they are > from a predictive dialer. After a pregant pause, a recorded voice > says, "Oh, I'm sorry. I have the wrong number. Goodby." I'm told by my > friends who don't have Privacy Manager that they sometimes receive > calls such as these without any CID. I suspect they are looking for answering machines to leave recorded pitches on. 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: Daryl R Gibson Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 10:05:51 -0700 Subject: Re: New Scam? On 27 Mar 2003 at 22:44, John Higdon wrote: > I am now getting calls (with an 800 CID) that sound as though they are > from a predictive dialer. After a pregant pause, a recorded voice > says, "Oh, I'm sorry. I have the wrong number. Goodby." I'm told by my > friends who don't have Privacy Manager that they sometimes receive > calls such as these without any CID. Most likely, it's a robotic telemarketer which looks for answering machines. A Wall Street Journal story a few months ago mentioned these things. If a human answers, it hangs up. If an answering machine answers, it plays a sales pitch. Daryl ---------------------------------------------------------------- "As you ramble through life, brother, no matter what your goal, keep your eye upon the doughnut, and not upon the hole" --Dr. Murray Banks, quoting a menu ---------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.drgibson.com http://www.salesstar.com Personal Motivation and Positive Attitude ------------------------------ From: danopunkt@yahoo.com (t-sphere) Subject: Re: War Causing Inmarsat Network Congestion? Date: 27 Mar 2003 23:09:53 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ ian_okey@hotmail.com (Ian Okey) wrote in message news:: > danopunkt@yahoo.com (t-sphere) wrote in message > news:: >> My users in the Gulf region are reporting problems connecting to the >> Inmarsat network. Error messages are: "Call spacing too short"; or >> "Error 14C2H." They are all using TT-3080A M4 Messengers with service >> provided by Stratos. Has anyone heard that the Inmarsat network is >> being overloaded by use associated with the war? (Media, NGOs, >> military, etc.) > Are you using the old IOR or the new 5th region IND-W that Inmarsat > have put into service to provide extra capacity. With all the > broadcasters around it is hardly surprising that there is some > congestion. > Ian I've told my users to try finding the IOR-W bird, but haven't heard back from them yet. I'm wondering what times of day Inmarsat has the most and least traffic. It's possible my users could transmit during off-hours. Do you know if these statistics are available? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 06:31:51 EST From: hot telecom Subject: New Link For Your Consideration Please consider the following for inclusion in your list: www.hottelecom.com. Hot Telecom, offers the lowest price, highest quality telecommunication reports and consulting to the international telecommunication community. It presently offer telecom market analysis for the following countries and region: South America (to come in the next 2 weeks) Argentina Bolivia Brazil Chile Colombia Ecuador Paraguay Peru Uruguay Venezuela The next regions and countries to be published will be South-East Asia in April 2003 and North-East Asia in May 2003. China and India will also be part of the April reports. Do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Regards, Isabelle Paradis General Manager hot telecom t: +1 514 270 1636 f: +1 514 270 0006 e: paradis@hottelecom.com w: www.hottelecom.com ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: T-Mobile GSM: Jammed by AT&T?? Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 07:37:40 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 03:15:52 GMT, joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote: > No one knows why, but the AT&T signals clearly affect T-Mobile's > signals. This has been demonstrated over and over again. In fact, > one way people have tracked AT&T's trials has been by following > T-mobile problems. > Whatever the reason, some phones do well when T-Mobile and AT&T are in > the same area, and some do not. I know this from personal experience. But it's *not* a T-Mobile or AT&T problem. It's a problem with the specific phones most notably Samsungs and some Ericssons. It's not a problem for Nokia or Motorola handsets at all. Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group. ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Panasonic KX-TG1000N - Turn Off Ringer Date: 28 Mar 2003 11:31:06 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , Tavish Muldoon wrote: > Hello, > I have a Panasonic 2.4 ghz phone, a base station and 2 phones. I can > turn off the ringer on the phones -- but not the base station. > Since I bought these phones used there is no manual. > Any idea how I turn off/on the ringer to this base station? Open it up and cut (or splice a switch in) the wire to the ringer. 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: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 15:40:41 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: March 2003 Web Server Survey http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/03/ ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Wireless Video Comes Stateside Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 17:00:49 -0600 Organization: Purity Of Essence/Plant Operational Error Reply-To: Eric Friedebach Arik Hesseldahl, 03.28.03, Forbes.com NEW YORK - Just when you've gotten the hang of text messaging by wireless phone, a new kind of wireless phone messaging -- complete with digital photos -- comes along. Taking messaging another step forward, T-Mobile this week announced what it says is the first-of-its-kind video messaging service for mobile phones in the United States. The unit of Germany's Deutsche Telekom has launched a service that lets its customers send 10-second video clips to any e-mail address. Its service requires a video-capable phone, and T-Mobile has one in mind it would like to sell you: Nokia's 3650. The phone is eye-catching, with its rounded dial-pad and the lens on the back of its earpiece. T-Mobile is offering it for $200 after a rebate. Eventually, T-Mobile plans to support the service on more phones. http://www.forbes.com/2003/03/28/cx_ah_0328tentech.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Unsolicited Faxes Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:16:15 -0500 Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com jeffbrewster@hotmail.com (Jeff Brewster) posted on that vast internet thingie: > I know this has probably been discussed a lot, but I can't really find > any info for my situation. To start, I do not, nor have ever owned a > fax machine. Last July I moved into my new apartment and shortly > after having my phone connected (Verizon, live in NY), I started > receiving fax calls. Sounds like you inherited someone elses FAX number. Other than hooking up a FAX number and then contacting the FAX senders the best option might be to request/demand a new number from the phone company. 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. ------------------------------ From: dwolffxx@panix.com (David Wolff) Subject: Re: U.S. TV Networks Jump in as War in Iraq Starts Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 06:47:28 UTC Organization: Public Access Networks Corp. In article , Ed Ellers wrote: > PAT, the TELECOM Digest Editor, noted: >> What makes you think Sodomy wasn't put in office by some standards which >> were/are acceptable to the Iraqi people? > The known facts, which are that he basically got where he is by the > point of a gun. >> After all, Queen Elizabeth was not elected by anyone, was she? But her >> being in the position she is in is acceptable to the British people. > The British monarch is not the head of the government -- the Prime Minister > is, and s/he is elected by the House of Commons, which *is* elected by the > people of the United Kingdom. >> How well do you *really know* what the Iraqi people want? > That's the whole point -- we don't know, because Saddam won't allow the sort > of free elections that would reveal the truth. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You contradict yourself in the same > article. You close by saying 'we dont know, because Saddam, etc.' but > you began your reply by saying 'the known facts are that he got into > office with the point of a gun.' Now do we, or don't we know? Or is > it more convenient to say he 'took office at the point of a gun'? If > you will recall, in 1776 a group of British patriots overthrew the > British government here in America to start the United States. I am > sure there were many British people who did not care for that either. > And please do not make a subjective decision and say 'oh, but that was > different'. Everything is different, everything is the same. PAT] No it's not. We know that " ... he basically got where he is by the point of a gun" because, at the Baath party convention, he accused about a third of the Baath party officials of being enemies of the state and had his killers lead them out and execute them. We know *that* because he videotaped the process and distributed copies of the tape to make sure that everyone in the country knew that he would not hesitate to kill anybody and everybody who got in his way. Using nerve gas on your own citizens when they revolt also leads me to suspect that that's not what the people of Iraq wanted. Well, not the 50,000 or so who died. I guess they don't complain much any more. The American revolution did not involve deliberate massacres of civilians or mass executions, by either side. (Well, the Brits may have killed some civilian rioters just before the big event, but it wasn't a policy of terrorizing their own citizens.) Thanks -- David (Remove "xx" to reply.) ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Why the Dogs of Cyberwar Stay Leashed Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:45:46 +1100 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au Monty Solomon contributed the following: > The United States could try out its much-hyped "cyberwarfare" > capabilities in Iraq ... but it would probably be illegal. > By Mark Rasch Mar 24, 2003 > The U.S. military has reportedly developed impressive offensive > cyberwar capabilities, including the ability to use microwave or other > electronic impulses to disrupt or destroy electronic components. If > this is true, why have we not yet seen an all out cyberwar? Possibly because the "enemy" isn't that sophisticated and if they used 'em, then the "on the spot" journalists would have the arse blown out of their equipment? 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: John Higdon Subject: Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and TV Networks Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 08:20:57 -0800 In article , Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now, we are finished? By the by, Attorney > Sullivan, a good conclusion to this, ummm, 'thread'. PAT] Except for the fact that "Attorney Sullivan" in his lengthy screed seems to have conveniently neglected the unanimously-passed UN resolutions in play on the world stage while pontificating on the president's lack of justification to invoke military action. With regard to Sullivan's obligatory and gratuitous reference to Hitler (which should in and of itself end the thread instantly): he neglected to state which League of Nations resolutions (if any) the Nazi leader was enforcing. If we are going to make comparisons, let us make them legitimate, no? I would say that the arguments on both sides of this discussion have been myopic to say the least. The reality now is that we are there, and any retreat short of accomplishing our stated objective would be most detrimental to this country's future. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: panoptes@iquest.net (Daniel W. Johnson) Subject: Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and TV Networks Date: 28 Mar 2003 12:55:22 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Michael D. Sullivan wrote in message news:: > And our strongman got where he is by the point of a 5-4 Supreme Court. > Bush II actually lost the popular vote -- the first resident of the > White House to have done so. What reference are you using, and what numbers does it have for Benjamin Harrison (1888), Rutherford B. Hayes (1876), and John Quincy Adams (1824)? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 19:53:34 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Letters From Baghdad Putting a Human Face on the Horrors of the US-Led War in Iraq A very nice fellow who is a resident of Baghdad was regularly writing to Internet readers and had been for several months. A few days ago, his daily email things quit arriving, and those of us who read his words are wondering if he is okay or not. It has us a little bit worried, to say the least. He is not a 'journalist' or newspaper reporter; just a regular person who had the misfortune to be a resident of Baghdad, Iraq, once Bush went on his hissy fit. Toward the end of his daily 'columns' his blog was being picked up and distributed by Google. We hope he is okay, but just out of commission for awhile; as you may have heard, the USA chose to completely wreck the Iraqi phone system a couple days ago; the entire five story telephone exchange building in Baghdad was deliberatly bombed out of existence. As Raed Jarrar (his name) inquired in one column recently, 'is the way to liberate Iraq supposed to be by bombing the hell out of all of us? Yes, Raed, I guess so, at least Dubya has told us so. You can read his most recent (and older, archived) blogs on the net at http://dear_raed.blogspot.com. I began reading his columns back around the time of the *PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS* in Irag on September 22. You can email him directly at raidjarrar@yahoo.com or his friend salampax@nme.com . I sure hope the USA-led 'liberation' did not kill him and his friends. :( But it does have me worried. I've never known an *actual person* in that part of the world before. It leaves me feeling very sad tonight. :( 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 #367 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 29 14:11:09 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2TJB8Q04445; Sat, 29 Mar 2003 14:11:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 14:11:09 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303291911.h2TJB8Q04445@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 #368 TELECOM Digest Sat, 29 Mar 2003 14:11:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 368 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson U.S. Lifts FBI Criminal Database Checks (Monty Solomon) Wireless Mushrooms (Monty Solomon) Here's a New Headset With a Split Personality (Monty Solomon) A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (Monty Solomon) Transient Microsoft Passport Security Vulnerability (Monty Solomon) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail??? (John Higdon) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail??? (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail??? (Dave Phelps) Update on $1.25 Charge to call 800-555-Tell from Verizon Wireless (S Sobol) Smart Term Macros (VP) Iraqi Oil (Ross McMicken) Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and TV Networks (Mike Sullivan) Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and (Raymond D. Mereniuk) For Sure This Time! FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush (Greg Wilson) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 09:39:49 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Lifts FBI Criminal Database Checks http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.65.html#subj4 Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 18:15:30 +1100 (EST) From: Peets Subject: U.S. Lifts FBI Criminal Database Checks The Justice Department has lifted a requirement that is supposed to ensure the accuracy and timeliness of information about criminals and crime victims before it is added to the National Crime Information Center database, which includes data about terrorists, fugitives, warrants, people missing, gang members, and stolen vehicles, guns, and boats. Records are queried increasingly by the nation's law enforcement agencies to help decide whether to monitor, detain or arrest someone. The records are [supposedly] inaccessible to the public, and police have been prosecuted in U.S. courts for misusing the system to find, for example, personal information about girlfriends or former spouses. [RISKS has noted at least two such cases resulting in deaths of the identified persons.] Officials said the change, which immediately drew criticism from civil-liberties advocates, is necessary to ensure investigators have access to information that can't be confirmed but could take on new significance later, FBI spokesman Paul Bresson said. [...] Critics have noted complaints for years about wrong information in the computer files that disrupted the lives of innocent citizens, and the FBI has acknowledged problems. In one case, a Phoenix resident was arrested for minor traffic violations that had been quashed weeks earlier; in another, a civilian was misidentified as a Navy deserter. [Source: Ted Bridis, AP, 25 Mar 2003; PGN-ed] http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=542&u=/ap/20030325/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/fbi_database_4&printer=1 The AP story can also be found here http://news.lycos.com/news/story.asp?section=Politics&storyId=686431 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 09:53:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wireless Mushrooms http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.65.html#subj6 Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 14:52:47 -0500 From: brian-h seborg Subject: Wireless mushrooms Many articles have covered wireless security issues from a technical perspective including the weaknesses in WEP, the fixes to WEP (fast-packet keying), and recommendations for securing a wireless network (802.1x, suppress SSID broadcast, etc.), and I suspect that we in the technical community have a pretty clear understanding that tried and true network security solutions like SSL, SSH, firewalls, IPSec, two-factor authentication, etc. can be brought to bear to secure wireless networks in the same way we have used them to secure Internet and dial-up connections for years. The question is, do non-technical users have any knowledge of these things? My own experience is that the answer is "no." ISPs, especially those offering DSL and high-speed cable modems aren't doing much if anything to make up for this deficit even though they are now delivering wireless routers to customer's homes. I have noticed that in the last month three more access points have popped up in my neighborhood. Of the five I can see, only one has WEP turned on and all are broadcasting their SSIDs (making them visible to even a novice). As I drive around in my car, I can easily connect to four of these access points. Further, when I checked to see if I can connect to the default administrative port, I can do so on all but the WEP protected one, and on three, I see they have not reset the default admin password, meaning I could, if I were a bad guy, reconfigure their router either rendering it useless (until they re-initialize it), or opening it to the Internet. The fact that insecure access points are springing up like mushrooms makes it likely that we will begin to see a rash of hacked home users unless the high-speed Internet providers wake up and begin providing guidance to their customers about how to properly secure their wireless routers. In the case where Internet providers are supplying the wireless gear, it would seem prudent that they would supply each device with a default safe configuration (random SSID, SSID broadcast suppressed, random admin username, random admin password, etc.). Unfortunately, like usual, appropriate measures are unlikely to be taken until security breaches begin to get noticed and customers begin to complain. In the meantime, as good neighbors, we might consider performing a high-tech neighborhood watch informing neighbors that their home networks are insecure. :-) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 01:00:17 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Here's a New Headset With a Split Personality By WALTER S. MOSSBERG Lots of people carry multiple electronic gadgets, but two popular examples, wireless phones and portable music players, often clash. Using one usually means disconnecting the other. Take, for example, the case of someone listening to music on a portable player when his cellphone rings. If he hears the call at all, and the chances are slim, he would have to scramble to turn off the music, yank off the headphones and answer the call. And what if that person uses a hands-free headset for his cellphone? The scenario gets even more complicated -- stop music, pull headphones off, search for phone, insert hands-free earpiece into the ear, and finally answer the call. Now, a nine-week-old company called Skullcandy (www.skullcandy.com) has created a seemingly simple way to use both devices in harmony. Their $29.95 product, the Portable LINK, looks like a basic set of headphones with two plugs at the end of its cord -- one for the cellphone and the other for the music player. A small microphone is built into the cord for hands-free talking. The LINK is supposed to work by playing the phone's ringing sound through the headphones on top of the music that is playing. After hearing the ring, you answer the call by either pressing the small function button on the headphone cord, or by setting your phone to auto-answer mode, which requires no button pressing. You can talk over the music, or turn the music volume down with a knob on the headphone cord. But does it really work? http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/solution-20030326.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have observed the same behavior with my cell phone (Cingular, Nokia 5165) and a small (credit card size and only a bit thicker than a credit card) digital tuning FM receiver I got from Radio Shack, The radio fits in my shirt pocket; the phone is clipped on my belt. Through the radio earphones, if the phone 'rings' I hear a distinct loud hum in the earphones for the several seconds the cell carrier is signaling me to answer the phone, but once I answer the phone -- even if I leave the earphone covering my free ear and playing music -- the hum goes away. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 01:21:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Suresh Ramasubramanian's job is to stop junk e-mail from ever getting to your in box. But for every spammer he blocks, a dozen more rise up. By Michelle Delio March 27, 2003 | It was the end of another 12-hour day filled with hostility, deception and confusion, and an exhausted Suresh Ramasubramanian, a systems administrator at a Hong Kong ISP, was finally getting ready to head home. On his way out the door he happened to take one last look at the network status and noticed that a mail bomb -- a flood of incoming spam messages -- had just begun. Ramasubramanian realized he probably wouldn't be getting any sleep that night. He spent the next eight hours struggling to block the spam attack and contain the damage. The huge volumes of mail the spammer was sending -- several hundred thousand messages at a time from different Internet protocol (IP) addresses at the rate of 20,000 every 10 minutes -- was clogging his servers and seriously slowing down mail service to his legitimate users. Stopping a spam surge usually isn't rocket science; skilled workers can trace and trap a spam flood within a few minutes by determining what IP address the spam is coming from and then blocking access to the spammed servers from that IP address. Unfortunately, expert spammers can also switch IP addresses as quickly as the blocks are applied. Ramasubramanian wasn't surprised to see that each time he located the IP address the spammer was spewing from and blocked it, the spammer quickly jumped to another IP address. http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/03/27/spam_fighter/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:01:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Transient Microsoft Passport Security Vulnerability http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.65.html#subj11 Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 16:05:18 -0500 From: "James Van Bokkelen" Subject: Transient Microsoft Passport security vulnerability When a laptop arrived last week with a sacrificial Windows XP Home Edition installed on it, we combined curiosity with a testing opportunity, and analyzed its network traffic with our NetIntercept tool. After using UDP-based protocols to locate resources, and HTTP and HTTP over SSL to register itself, the WinXP installer asked if we wanted to create a .NET Passport account. We agreed. After an initial exchange with host nexus.passport.com using HTTP over SSL, subsequent HTTP connections used normal HTTP on port 80. We were quite surprised by several POST commands to register.msnia.passport.net. Each contained plaintext answers to the previous screen's questions. All the critical data necessary to hijack the .NET passport was exposed: name, birthday, ZIP, gender, occupation, password and secret question/answer. A more detailed analysis can be found at http://www.sandstorm.net/passport This took place on the morning of 14 Mar 2003. Microsoft was informed as soon as we made our way through the obfuscation protecting the proper channels, and they assured us the problem was being worked on. Testing on 17 Mar led us to believe it was fixed, and Microsoft confirmed this later in the day. They told us the problem had been introduced as part of routine web site maintenance earlier in the week. Because it didn't involve customer software, they didn't plan to issue a security bulletin. The risks associated with maintaining systems are well known; I expect an enormous number of people have studied that particular set of transactions since the Passport roll-out. However, any others who looked during the period of vulnerability apparently didn't inform Microsoft. Presumably we won't hear more unless a rash of identity theft generates publicity. Although I've been involved with the Internet for years, I had avoided using my credit card over the net until this month. Given current tools, I'll feel compelled to read the page source before I do so again. ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail??? Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:01:01 -0800 In article , Jack wrote: > Massachusetts, Texas, South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Alaska, > Tennessee, and Colorado are all preparing to consider bills that would > extend the reach of the DMCA in such a way that could ban the > possession, sale, or use of technologies that "conceal from a > communication service provider ... the existence or place of origin or > destination of any communication". What business is it of your ISP what the origin or destination might be of your communications? > I look at this and I think, this can't be right -- it has to be a case > of sensationalizing the news. This may be bad legislation, but it > can't be that bad (or stupid), can it? I mean, after all, who doesn't > use a firewall of some kind these days? What next, will they outlaw > hard drives? Please tell me that this is not as bad as it sounds! Who cares? I'd like to see them try to enforce it. The use of a VPN (common technology that isn't going away just because of stupid legislators) makes any such law moot. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 03:00:59 GMT On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 15:36:25 -0500, Monty Solomon posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/archives/000336.html > March 26, 2003 > Use a Firewall, Go to Jail > The states of Massachusetts and Texas are preparing to consider bills > that apparently are intended to extend the national Digital > Millennium Copyright Act. (TX bill; MA bill) The bills are obviously > related to each other somehow, since they are textually similar. > Here is one example of the far-reaching harmful effects of these > bills. Both bills would flatly ban the possession, sale, or use of > technologies that "conceal from a communication service provider ... > the existence or place of origin or destination of any > communication". Your ISP is a communication service provider, so > anything that concealed the origin or destination of any > communication from your ISP would be illegal -- with no exceptions. Despite all of the scare talk in the postings on freedom-to-tinker.com and dslreports.com regarding these bills, the bills themselves don't support the concerns expressed. Both bills bar concealment etc. only if done with intent to steal service or otherwise defraud the provider. If your provider permits only one device to be connected without an extra payment, it would be fraud, and thus prohibited, to use a router to evade that payment requirement. However, nothing in either bill (in their present form, as represented in the links from the above site) would bar the typical DSL customer from installing a NAT router, using Windows ICS, etc. Nor would either bill make it illegal to send encrypted email, mung your address in the "from" line, or anything else that doesn't defraud the provider. > If you send or receive your email via an encrypted connection, you're > in violation, because the "To" and "From" lines of the emails are > concealed from your ISP by encryption. (The encryption conceals the > destinations of outgoing messages, and the sources of incoming > messages.) > Worse yet, Network Address Translation (NAT), a technology widely > used for enterprise security, operates by translating the "from" and > "to" fields of Internet packets, thereby concealing the source or > destination of each packet, and hence violating these bills. Most > security "firewalls" use NAT, so if you use a firewall, you're in > violation. > If you have a home DSL router, or if you use the "Internet Connection > Sharing" feature of your favorite operating system product, you're in > violation because these connection sharing technologies use NAT. Most > operating system products (including every version of Windows > introduced in the last five years, and virtually all versions of > Linux) would also apparently be banned, because they support > connection sharing via NAT. > And this is just one example of the problems with these bills. Yikes. > UPDATE (6:35 PM): It's worse than I thought. Similar bills are on the > table in South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Alaska, Tennessee, and > Colorado. > UPDATE (March 28, 9:00 AM): Clarified the paragraph above about > encrypted email, to eliminate an ambiguity. > Posted by Edward W. Felten at 01:04 PM Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail??? Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 00:32:53 -0600 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , unspammable-4729 @workbench.net says: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes it can be, and is true. Dubya and > his agents want everyone to be out in the public view where they can > be seen. Its part of the war on terrorism, you know, and how the brave > American patriots are sacrificing for the Good of Our Country. Just > like having your private parts groped in airport security lines and > red tags denying you the right to travel freely. PAT] Give me a break, Pat. Is 'Dubya' involved in everything that you perceive as bad? These are *state* laws. 'Dubya' is just the Prez. Why would he possibly care what goofy laws the states are trying to pass? Do you think the state legislators really need help drafting stupid legislation? Read through your own state laws sometime. I'm sure you'll find some of them quite entertaining -- and they were written without Dubya's help. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Update on $1 Charge to Call 800-555-Tell From Verizon Wireless Phone Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 02:57:36 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This header arrived here without any text included. I *assume* Steve was either asking for an update on the topic from readers, or attempting to make an update. Please re-submit the comment or inquiry. Thanks. PAT] Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ From: VP Subject: Smart Term Macros Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 05:32:33 -0500 Is anyone out there in Telecom Digest Land familiar with the macro programming language used by the Smart Term Terminal program. I'm in need of a relatively simple program, however not being familiar with the programming language I could use an assist. I tried for two days to get it to work, but was only partially successful. If anyone can help, please email me at victor@snet.net I will be truly greatful !!! Thanks !!!! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 08:29:11 -0600 From: Ross McMicken Subject: Iraqi Oil [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, if you are trying to cause me to have another heart attack, you are doing a damn good job! Their oil will remain their oil but my prediction is Saddam or his predecessors will place a 'war surcharge' on sales to the USA and USA sympathizers and force us to buy it through some third party. Either they will refuse to sell it to us at all or make it prohibitively expensive. Why, it may even come to the point that Bush will declare war (again!) on the Iraqi people and take the oil by force whether they like it or not. Did you notice how the very first thing the troops did when they arrived was deploy soldiers to guard the oil wells, of which there are about two thousand in Bagdhad alone? Maybe Saddam will try to strike a deal with the USA. "You need oil to survive, I need nuclear weapons to survive'; let's help each other out." And Bush may decide to go along with it. As I said earlier this week, this thread is supposed to be closed. PAT] Pat, one country alone cannot place a war surcharge on oil. Oil is a commodity, with prices determined by the market place. If Iraq withholds oil the price will rise, but Iraq will get no revenue. If they refuse to sell to us at all, we'll buy oil elsewhere. It really is that simple. There are no oil wells in Baghdad. Iraq's big fields are in the North and Southeast. Of course the oil fields in the South are guarded by US/British troops. Given Saddam's propensity for destroying wells, it would be remiss not to prevent such destruction. Ross McMIcken ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and TV Networks Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 02:32:43 GMT On 28 Mar 2003 12:55:22 -0800, Daniel W. Johnson posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > Michael D. Sullivan wrote in message > news:: >> And our strongman got where he is by the point of a 5-4 Supreme Court. >> Bush II actually lost the popular vote -- the first resident of the >> White House to have done so. > What reference are you using, and what numbers does it have for > Benjamin Harrison (1888), Rutherford B. Hayes (1876), and John Quincy > Adams (1824)? I erred. I should have said "the first resident of the White House in modern times to have done so." > In article , Michael D. Sullivan > wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now, we are finished? By the by, Attorney >> Sullivan, a good conclusion to this, ummm, 'thread'. PAT] > Except for the fact that "Attorney Sullivan" in his lengthy screed > seems to have conveniently neglected the unanimously-passed UN > resolutions in play on the world stage while pontificating on the > president's lack of justification to invoke military action. The UN is responsible for enforcing UN resolutions. The US is not. The UN chose not to enforce via invasion. We violated the clear consensus of the Security Council when we invaded. It's noteworthy that Bush II said a few weeks back that he wanted the Security Council to vote our resolution up or down, no matter what. When it appeared that we not only would be vetoed by at least three members, but would be voted down by a majority, he decided to invade. I don't call that enforcement of UN resolutions. I call that unilateral hostile action. > With regard to Sullivan's obligatory and gratuitous reference to > Hitler (which should in and of itself end the thread instantly): he > neglected to state which League of Nations resolutions (if any) the > Nazi leader was enforcing. If we are going to make comparisons, let us > make them legitimate, no? (I was kind of hoping that the gratuitous reference to Hitler would end the thread, in accordance with "Godwin's law," but I wasn't really "comparing" Bush to Hitler, as you well know.) I didn't suggest that Hitler was enforcing anything other than his own claims (e.g., the Sudetenland, the Germans in Poland). Bush II is _claiming_ to enforce UN resolutions, but (a) the UN resolutions pointedly don't authorize us to enforce them, (b) the UN chose to enforce them through inspections instead of invasion, and (c) there isn't any UN resolution regarding regime change in Iraq. > I would say that the arguments on both sides of this discussion have > been myopic to say the least. The reality now is that we are there, > and any retreat short of accomplishing our stated objective would be > most detrimental to this country's future. If accomplishing the stated objective (which one? WMD, regime change, or the global eradication of terrorism?) involves a drawn-out war that expands to other countries, wrecks national economies worldwide, and results in the institution of US-hating fundamentalist Islamic regimes throughout the middle east, I think that stopping short of that would indeed be better for our country's future. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) [Moderator Hitler's Note: I *do intend* to end this thread pretty quick now. I know I said that a few days ago, and I meant it then, but this time I mean it even more. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Raymond D. Mereniuk Organization: FBN Technical Services Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:03:34 -0700 Subject: Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and panoptes@iquest.net (Daniel W. Johnson) wrote: >> And our strongman got where he is by the point of a 5-4 Supreme Court. >> Bush II actually lost the popular vote -- the first resident of the >> White House to have done so. > What reference are you using, and what numbers does it have for > Benjamin Harrison (1888), Rutherford B. Hayes (1876), and John Quincy > Adams (1824)? In addition, isn't the system intended to work this way? Isn't the idea to allow the voters in low population states some protection from voting tends in high population states? Even Al Gore has given up beating this drum. He lost fair and square by the rules. I imagine if he would have accepted the loss from the very beginning he would still be a candidate in 2004. No one likes a whining loser. ------------------------------ From: Greg Wilson Subject: This Time for Sure: Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and TV Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 22:29:12 -0500 Michael D. Sullivan quoted a reader: >> Pat, this is getting silly. With all due respect to your fine skills >> as the TD moderator, and with sympathy for the health problems that >> you have suffered, it's pointless to debate this with you until you >> have the opportunity to get back up to speed on some of the basic >> facts surrounding the issues; facts that are commonly acknowledged by >> folks on both sides of the debate, but which you don't seem to be >> aware of. One of these facts is that Saddam is responsible for the >> deaths of more Muslims than any other person in modern history. > Most of them some time ago, I believe. After that, we had Gulf War I. And immediately after Gulf War I Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons against his own people, most notedly in the city of Basra where thousands of civilians were murdered, and the horrible cancers continue today and will for many more decades. > And then Bush I stopped and let Saddam go on ruling his country. > Since then there have not been massive slaughters, have there? And > recently? Yes, there have been. > I thought not. He's actually been lying pretty low. So > why now? Sure, the guy's evil. So are most dictators. Lots of them > are our "friends." The PRC has been responsible for a huge number of > innocent deaths over the years. Have we intervened? No, we've > rewarded their steps toward openness to US investment and trade. And China which as a society has opened significantly in the last decade, improving the watch of the world in that country and human rights have been vastly improved. Still much room for improvement of course, but China is not controlled by a tyrant who has signed a cease fire and disarmament agreement. > Nor did we intervene in Rwanda when massive evil was done. The US has > never taken on the role of avenging innocent deaths worldwide by > forcing regime change. While we should, unquestionably, put great > pressure on other nations that are "evil" to clean up their act and > protect human rights, there are good reasons for the US not to take on > the role of more-or-less-unilaterally acting as a world police > department with respect to what happens within a given country's > borders. And why didn't we intervene in Rwanda? President Bush wasn't the leader then. Unfortunately "putting pressure" on tyrants to improve their human rights and to encourage them to halt killing their own civilians has never worked and will never work. Tyrants, whether they are Adolf Hitler or Saddam Hussein only understand force. President Clinton did try to go back to Somalia to quash a dictator and provide food to starving citizens. But the proper support was never provided in 1993 and instead we lost American lives Mogadishu and nothing changed in the country. . >> People accuse Bush of being a cowboy and lacking in diplomatic skills. >> They ask what right does the US have to interfere with what's going on >> in another country. In fact, what we are witnessing is a re-writing >> of some of the "time-honored rules of diplomacy" which were put in >> place by the Europeans and evolved over hundreds of years. One of >> these rules is that it is nobody else's business what happens behind >> the "sovereign" borders of a country. This is what has let brutal >> dictators and tyrants flourish. > Simply put, we have no more right to interfere with what's going on > within the borders of another country militarily than Hitler did. > When one country sends its armed forces into another to intervene in > "internal affairs," without that country having attacked another, that > is a hostile act known as invasion, or war. It is contrary to not > just the time honored rules of diplomacy, but to stable international > relations and the interest of peace. The only time a nation should > militarily intervene in the internal affairs of another is when there > is an international consensus that this is necessary in the interest > of peace. That is the very reason the US advocated creation of the > League of Nations after WWI and the United Nations after WWII. So Iraqi citizens do not count, because they are Saddam's? Saddam only uses chemical weapons on his own people, so we shouldn't care? > The Bush II doctrine of preemptive war is contrary to the interests of > world peace and stability because it knows no limits -- it is > characterized by throwing off the constraint of needing consensus and > allowing unilateral action indistinguishable from an unprovoked act of > war. It is the war of the jungle -- whoever has the biggest armed > forces can do whatever it wants to a country without defenders. Under > this doctrine, China, for example, is free to invade South Korea, > Taiwan, or India simply because it says that those countries are > harboring evildoers of one sort or another from China's perspective. > India is free to attack Pakistan without becoming an outcast because > Pakistan has WMD and has mistreated Hindu minorities. >> In short, just because Bush can be ARROGANT and RUDE, does not >> necessarily mean he's WRONG. (Unless you subscribe to the liberal >> point of view where "image" and "style" and "PC" are everything.) > Bush sure is arrogant and rude. He's also a goddamn idiot who lets > the deluded warmongers Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz make war on a > country that had NOT taken hostile action against the US or its > allies, even though its leadership is unquestionably despicable and > evil. And he does this even though world opinion, including that of > many of our closest allies, is decidedly against doing so. His > "arrogance" and "rudeness" will have consequences that will haunt us > for many, many years. Arrogant? Hardly. Rude? Hardly. Your unabashed hatred of a person is showing through and it has obviously distorted you ability to think clearly and have a rational thought when you start spewing names such as "goddamn idiot." >> I'm sure you are aware of the saying "The only thing required for evil >> to triumph is for good men to do nothing." I think Bush realizes that >> brutality and repression is not just the private business of a >> "sovereign" nation. It is a *human* issue that should concern all of >> us. This goes much further than the Manifest Destiny of the 19th >> century where the main goal was to bring civilization to the "backward >> heathens". > The main goal of Manifest Destiny was not to bring civilization to the > backward heathens (presumably you mean the American Indians). It was > to wipe them out (or, failing that, herd them onto reservations) and > steal their land and resources and permit our population to expand > into the space cleared -- and, of course, create immense business and > graft opportunites (railroad land grants, in the short term). If you > are comparing the Bush II doctrine to Manifest Destiny, you are > probably right -- this goes well beyond it. And that's not a > compliment. Bush II doesn't give two s--ts about brutality and > repression. His buddy Ashcroft has shown that domestically, and > Bush's continued tolerance of innumerable brutal and repressive > regimes worldwide shows it internationally. What has Ashcroft done to show that Bush supports brutality and repression? Specific examples that were initiated by Ashcroft, accomplished by Ashcroft, and found illegal by the courts, please. > It really offends me to hear Bush II cast his role in moral terms. I > agree that "the only thing required for evil to triumph is for good men > to do nothing." (I believe that was Churchill.) That philosophy does > not amount to a mandate to invade every country one views as evil. > There are plenty of other ways to counter evil. Most of them involve > building international consensus. And when the international consensus fails the threat does not go away. I don't want to delegate US national security to Paris or Yaounde. France has typically not been right on such security manners and when they have profited by selling arms and nuclear material (why would one of the most oil rich countries in the world require nuclear power plants?) and then illegally purchasing embargoed oil while having billions of dollars with Saddam's regime their credibility is low. Interesting how wheever something goes wrong with Iraq, it involves Russia, France, or China. Today's missile launched at Kuwait was built in China. >> And it's not a question of conquering or colonizing these nations. >> Why do you think the first and biggest debate which preceeds each of > these actions is always "How are we going to get out? What's our exit >> strategy" It's because we are NOT interested in staying in, we are >> interested in making it possible for the people to have an opportunity >> for self-government. Then we leave, as we did in Germany and Japan, >> probably the two closest models of what our intention with Iraq is. >> Both of these countries went on to become thriving members of the >> world community. > And what is our exit strategy in Iraq? In Afghanistan? In the "War on > Terrorism"? As to the latter, I believe the Bush II answer is -- it > will end when there is no more (state-sponsored?) terrorism. Simply > put, there is no exit strategy. Say we off Saddam and his principal > cronies. Is that the end? Or do we stay in Iraq until there are no > evil, repressive dudes left and there are no al-Qaeda or other known > terrorist sympathizers left? If the population resents our presence and > acts accordingly does that mean that we stay until they have heeled > under? Sort of like the Israelis in their occupied territories? Great > exit strategy. >> TELECOM Digest Editor noted: >>> Freeing an oppressed people you say?? That's rich ... what about >>> all the people in South Africa and China and Cuba, and Guatemala and >>> other places who need a touch of Dubya's helping hand? > Then someone replied: >> Guess what? Maybe this is their wakeup call. The best we can hope >> for is that they will clean up their acts. The second best scenario >> is that their own population will be inspired to throw the rascals >> out. > But I thought you said the Bush II doctrine obliged us to kick out all > oppressive regimes. Why wait for things to get so bad that the locals > throw them out? We didn't wait for that in Iraq. (Oh, wait, those > other repressive regimes don't have lots of oil; the best they can > do is cigars and diamonds, so forget it....) >> Finally, since you and others seem so convinced that this is "ALL >> ABOUT OIL" (one of the most popular of the current liberal cliches >> along with "TAX CUTS FOR THE -- all together now -- RICH!") here's a >> challenge: Give us your best prediction as to what will happen with >> the oil situation in Iraq after this is over which will prove you were >> right. My prediction is that Iraq's oil will remain Iraq's oil for >> them to produce and sell as they please. If you've got a different >> prediction, let's have it. Quick, you don't have too much time ...! > Frankly, I don't think this is all about oil, although that is one > motivating factor. I agree that once we have implanted a puppet > regime that is sufficiently subservient, the oil will remain Iraq's to > do with as they please, and US contractors and wholesalers will be > pleased to assist the puppet regime. Imperialism has advanced a lot > since the 1800s; we no longer need to have ExxonMobil or its > equivalent OWN the wells. As long as the oil is sold into the world > market (and it will be), ExxonMobil will get all it wants. And > Halliburton will be happy to operate the wells as a contractor. And > Bechtel will build new wells for their "owner," Iraq. ExxonMobil can buy all the oil it wants today. So can any oil company. There is a world oil market and oil is an openly traded commodity. Who would you expect to get a contract to operate an oil field, Alcatel? >> As far as Sodomy's weapons of mass destruction go, the one thing that >> is certain is that the US will look for them and either find some or >> not. Either way, there's gonna be one helluva giant "I TOLD YOU SO" >> launched by one side or the other. > Oh, the US will find them, whether they are there or not. Just like the > Chicago Police will find drugs or weapons when they do a raid, whether > they are there beforehand or not. The US has tremendous credibility. > Just look at all the good tips they gave to the UN inspectors about > where to look. I'm sure that the international community will accept > our findings as completely unbiased. That is a nice conspiracy theory. I suppose the US fired the SCUD and Silkworm missiles at Kuwait too -- missiles that according to Honest Hussein and Hans 'Inspector Closseau' Blitz did not possess? > On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 20:42:25 -0500, Ed Ellers posted the following to > comp.dcom.telecom: >> PAT, the TELECOM Digest Editor, noted: >>> What makes you think Sodomy wasn't put in office by some standards which >>> were/are acceptable to the Iraqi people? >> The known facts, which are that he basically got where he is by the >> point of a gun. > And our strongman got where he is by the point of a 5-4 Supreme Court. > Bush II actually lost the popular vote -- the first resident of the > White House to have done so. He wasn't put in office by the American > people. I agree that Saddam Hussein wasn't put in office by the Iraqi > people; he was put there by supporting the overthrow of the > illegitimate King and then supplanting the dictator he helped into > office. Nobody has ever had any claim to be the legitimate leader > chosen by the Iraqi people, unlike in the US (but Bush ain't the one > chosen). This entire paragraph is a non-sequitur and your true bias is revealed. Of course the popular vote means nothing per the US Constitution when it comes to electing to the President. That has always been the case, and that is why both presidential campaigns focused only on certain states. The President was put in office by the electoral college, just as EVERY President has. And with so much reported election fraud in Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin, inter alia, it can never be said with certainty that Bush lost the honest popular vote. The President didn't get to office simply by a Supreme Court vote, he got to office by winning the majority of electoral seats, including Florida. Every count, recount, and re-recount showed that Bush won Florida. It was close, but the majority of votes were for Bush. All the Supreme Court do was find that Gore's attempt to change the rules after the fact (ex post facto), prevent the certification of votes exactly as specified by Florida statue, and hold selective recounts of various standards in only certain counties was not permissibile. But you cannot get past this, and you revealed your personal hatred for Bush in the process. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *For the last time, hopefully* this thread is now closed, abolished, finito, over with, done. Please do not force me to have to ask this same thing a month from now. Thank 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. 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 #368 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 30 03:30:08 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2U8U7K07407; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 03:30:08 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 03:30:08 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303300830.h2U8U7K07407@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 #369 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Mar 2003 03:30:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 369 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail (Gary Breuckman) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (Richard D G Cox) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (tonypo1@cox.net) Re: Update: $1 Charge to Call 800-555-Tell From Verizon Wireless (Madison) Re: U.S. Lifts FBI Criminal Database Checks (tonypo1@cox.net) Free Software Makes Telephone Users' Lives Easier in India (leelam) 900 Calls Not Billable? (Marli1213) Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and TV Networks (Karla Jacobson) "Popular Vote" (was Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane) (Danny Burstein) Finalizing a Thread (Jim Hopkins) 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: puma@serv.catbox.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 03:57:04 -0000 Organization: Puma's Lair - catbox.com In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > Worse yet, Network Address Translation (NAT), a technology widely > used for enterprise security, operates by translating the "from" and > "to" fields of Internet packets, thereby concealing the source or > destination of each packet, and hence violating these bills. Most > security "firewalls" use NAT, so if you use a firewall, you're in > violation. > If you have a home DSL router, or if you use the "Internet Connection > Sharing" feature of your favorite operating system product, you're in > violation because these connection sharing technologies use NAT. Most > operating system products (including every version of Windows > introduced in the last five years, and virtually all versions of > Linux) would also apparently be banned, because they support > connection sharing via NAT. NAT doesn't totally conceal your address, it replaces the individual system 'internal' addresses with the router's IP address. Surely when these bills say 'conceal' they mean to hide it totally, such that the source location cannot be found, or forging an address by providing a false identity that would mislead anyone trying to find the origin. Identifying the router's address should be sufficient in terms of determining where you are located. -- Gary Breuckman ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 20:56:17 GMT From: Richard D G Cox Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Reply-To: nospam@numbering.com Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited At 06:21 (UT) on Sat, 29 Mar 2003 in the anti-war Digest, Monty Solomon sneaked in a rare item about telecomms: > Suresh Ramasubramanian's job is to stop junk e-mail from ever getting > to your in box. But for every spammer he blocks, a dozen more rise up. The first part of that is very true. The second part is a good example of a journalist (Michelle Delio, not Monty!) missing the point by a mile. Suresh has probably done more single-handedly to make spam unprofitable, than any other individual on the net. And he does it for the most part quietly and firmly, without spending time arguing with -- or alienating -- other people who claim similar objectives. That's what makes Suresh successful; if there is ever any synergy between those who claim to be fighting spam, it is destroyed by all the petty bickering that goes on. My own experience is that reporting a spam to Suresh results in the account or mailbox used disappearing in a puff of smoke -- often in less than ten minutes. No, I don't know when he ever finds time to sleep! Blocking spam can only be done after it is sent ... some will always get through. Blocking the response mailbox, where there is one, will at a stroke extinguish any profit that the spammer (perhaps I should say, the "constructive sender" -- the person who wanted the spam to be sent) could hope to get. That makes it pretty good way to discourage a repeat attempt. But now let's take a look at the _second_ part of the original quote. A "dozen more rise up"? Not really. A very large proportion of spam is sent by a small number of spammers who nowadays mostly hide behind insecure computers known as "open proxies". As soon as one apparent source of spam is traced and blocked, the spammer simply moves to the next "open proxy" on his/her list. At first most open proxies were the result of carelessness - computers being left insecure, or misconfigured. What's recently come to light is that spammers now seem to be using viruses and trojans to break into machines that would otherwise have been secure. Back-door type trojans (such as NetBus, SubSeven) are being distributed both by means of warez downloads, and by self-spamming viruses: with the specific objective of compromising the victim's machine. Once compromised, the machine with the trojan sends a message back to "mission control" to say where it is installed -- and then the spammer logs in and installs what else he needs -- usually Firedaemon and Analog-X -- so that he will be able to send spam through that machine as a proxy. Unlike (most) open relays, compromised machines neither log the real originating address, nor put any tracking detail in the mail headers. But the networks (mostly) don't seem to care. Complaints of scanning fall on deaf ears ... if they reply at all, they will either claim that no law has been broken (probably untrue, but they'll say it!) or that they only accept complaints via a website -- which is a problem for any people who don't have a browser, or for those with access difficulties (can we say A.D.A here?). It simply hasn't yet sunk in that this type of activity is now just as much a part of spamming -- but a little further up the food chain -- and unacceptable on today's internet. The Hall of Shame includes T-Online, Skynet (in Belgium) RoadRunner (no surprises there ...) Cabovisao (in Portugal) SuperCable (Spain) and BellSouth. BellSouth deserve the greatest shame because they knowingly provide connectivity to send-safe.com, a company that sells software specifically designed to abuse open proxies, and also subscription access to lists of proxies which are downloadable from their site. So the message for those who want to do their bit fighting spam, is: Practice Safe Hex ... get a good firewall and learn how to use it. Read the logs and complain like **** to the providers responsible if your firewall reports evidence of this sort of scanning activity. Richard Cox ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 21:04:01 GMT In article , monty@roscom.com says: > Unfortunately, expert spammers can also switch IP addresses as quickly > as the blocks are applied. Ramasubramanian wasn't surprised to see > that each time he located the IP address the spammer was spewing from > and blocked it, the spammer quickly jumped to another IP address. > http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/03/27/spam_fighter/ Unfortunately the flood of SPAM will never stop until we outlaw it completely. The argument has always been that there's no cost component involved with sapmming 1,000,000 people other than the connection to your SPAM friendly ISP. But as the article shows, there is a definite monetary component that could be used to show actual damages because of SPAM. Tony ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: Update on $1 Charge to Call 800-555-Tell From Verizon Wireless Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 12:45:19 -0800 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , Steven J. Sobol wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This header arrived here without any > text included. I *assume* Steve was either asking for an update on > the topic from readers, or attempting to make an update. Please > re-submit the comment or inquiry. Thanks. PAT] My understanding from reading the thread in alt.cellular.verizon is that Verizon finally woke up and realized that surcharging $1.25 per call to 1-800-555-TELL is in direct violation of FCC regulations. Only certain market areas (Ohio and Michigan, more or less) of Verizon Wireless had the charge, but the claim is that all prior charges for 800-555-xxxx will be automatically credited back, at least back to 2002-08-12, in the April 2003 billing cycle. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: U.S. Lifts FBI Criminal Database Checks Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 21:12:15 GMT In article , monty@roscom.com says: > http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.65.html#subj4 > Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 18:15:30 +1100 (EST) > From: Peets > Subject: U.S. Lifts FBI Criminal Database Checks > The Justice Department has lifted a requirement that is supposed to > ensure the accuracy and timeliness of information about criminals and > crime victims before it is added to the National Crime Information > Center database, which includes data about terrorists, fugitives, > warrants, people missing, gang members, and stolen vehicles, guns, and > boats. NCIC is a mess because the FBI no longer maintains the data, instead they maintain a pointer to each state's individual criminal history system. That's what III (Interstate Identification Index) is. What they don't tell you is that III compliance in most states has not yet been reached. In other words, there is still a large amount of data that hasn't been verified or massaged to fit the formats that NCIC requires. One of the biggest causes of this problem is related to Y2K issues believe it or not. Years ago criminal ID systems were home brew in most states. They lived on things like Wang VS systems and the like. I left the RI AG's office recently and there were problems with failure to enter information in the old system that is absoultely required before a record can be III certified. I don't trust it as far as I can throw it. Tony ------------------------------ From: leelam Subject: Free Software Makes Telephone Users' Lives Easier in India Date: 30 Mar 2003 00:44:30 -0600 Organization: leelam Thanks to free software, one-third of a million telephone users living in Southern India will no longer find locating phone numbers such a complex process. Telephone directories often take a notoriously long time to be published in India, meaning phone subscribers are lost when trying to locate numbers they need. Linux increasingly is attracting attention in Corporate India, not only for its usually lower costs but also because of its high quality products. Last weekend, the latest edition of the Thiruvananthapuram telephone directory--from the regional capital of the south-western province of Kerala--was processed and typeset using a range of free software tools. These tools provided substantial savings in cost and time, while producing a neatly laid-out and elegant publication ahead of schedule. The two-volume directory, to be distributed to all subscribers of the Thiruvananthapuram secondary switching area as of March 25, contains 1,200 pages and 320,000 entries. Some 400,000 copies of the directory currently are being printed by the locally based St. Joseph's Press, using typesetting software and programs provided by River Valley Technologies (RVT), also based in the Kerala capital. RVT specialises in typesetting and publishing solutions using free and open-source software. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 05:49:14 +0100 From: Marli1213 Subject: 900 Calls Not Billable? Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net Hi, how do I call phone sex lines for free? I am so desperate and horny I need to have phone sex but my mom will be mad if she sees the bill. Can someone help? Thanks. Grant [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now, here is a fellow with a very practical question about telecom. Grant needs a fast, honest answer, with none of that nonsensical foolishness about middle-east politics and war for which this Digest has become (in)famous in recent times. Grant, the simple answer is there is no work-around for 900 numbers and their charges. It used to be (and still is to a limited extent) that 900 numbers were simply 'aliased' to regular seven digit numbers. That is to say, if you were trying to find a new friend to chat with on 900-xxx-xxxx you could call some areacode-xxx-xxxx and reach the same thing -- at regular toll rates **if you knew the translation number**, which -- if your new freind was smart, would never be given out, because bypassing the 900 version would cut your new friend out of his income for the call. That still is the case a little, where regular telephone lines are used to carry 900 traffic. It's a lot like 800 calls; my 800 number (888 actually) is just 'translated' into 620-331-xxxx and delivered that way. You dial it either way, I pay it you dial it 800 style, you pay if you dial it as a 'straight' number. 900 was the same way, dial it that way, you pay the outrageous overhead toll; dial it as a regular number (which you were NOT supposed to know about), and you got the essence of a free ride, less the usual toll charge. A working example is the talking clock: 900-210-TIME is the same as 202-653-1920, or as we used to say, "why should I have to pay for it", even though it is some measly amount of money -- like 50 cents or something -- versus a couple cents toll when dialed as 202 ... But a lot of that has gone by the wayside; much 900 traffic is now delivered to their owners on T-1 lines; that is, dedicated trunks with no specific number assigned, the way 800 calls *used to be delivered mostly*. Now days, if you tried to figure out the alias number to dial for a 900 number, you could read a bunch of Digest anti-war messages in the meantime. The short answer: it really cannot be conveniently done these days. Certainly not the terribly expensive 900 numbers. You gotta also be careful, Grant. Some of the more smart-aleck perverts on the net try to lure young guys like yourself into trouble (with their mothers) by flashing hot pictures on your browser at you and if you take the bait and click for it, they *automatically open your modem* (or disconnect it first, then re-open it) and dial a very expensive 900 number. You find out what happened a month later when the phone bill arrives. Be very careful about clicking on sex pictures you see on the screen. They'll even go on Yahoo Messenger with 'bots' and send links over and over hoping your urges will take over and you will click on one of those links with the same results (trouble with mother, and a phone bill that no one can ever pay for.) In summary, Grant, phone sex is a very sophisticated business these days, which is why the telephone company cooperates with Concerned Mothers by offering to block phone calls to 900 numbers, to make it a lot harder for guys to get in trouble when they get those urges. My personal suggestion is that you stick with AOL/Yahoo Messengers/Chat Rooms where you can chat with girls or guys or guys posing as girls for free. I hope this helps you a little.] ------------------------------ From: Karla Jacobson Subject: Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane and Bush and TV Networks Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 16:52:06 -0500 Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > I erred. I should have said "the first resident of the White House in > modern times to have done so." So what is your point? The Constitution of the United States need not be followed in the "modern times" because you don't like the particular candidate that won? > The UN is responsible for enforcing UN resolutions. The US is not. > The UN chose not to enforce via invasion. We violated the clear > consensus of the Security Council when we invaded. It's noteworthy > that Bush II said a few weeks back that he wanted the Security Council > to vote our resolution up or down, no matter what. When it appeared > that we not only would be vetoed by at least three members, but would > be voted down by a majority, he decided to invade. I don't call that > enforcement of UN resolutions. I call that unilateral hostile action. And what did you call the bombing of Baghdad under Clinton in 1998? What did you call the bombing of Belgrade under Clinton in 1999, including the civiliant targets? What do you now call the current unilateral French action in Côte d'Ivoire? When the UN relegates itself to the status of the League of Nations, it makes itself irrelevant. Ironically the three security council nations that were opposed to action are the same ones that have been providing airplanes, missiles, and nuclear material to Hussein's regime. If France had been able to veto our war on Japan, should we have halted it? It is clear that the only thing you are against is Bush. The bottom line is that Hussein signed a CEASE FIRE agreement in 1991. When the agreement is violated the cease fire is violated. Its terms included complete disarmament within 90 days. We gave him twelve (12) years! In that time he has violated every term of that agreement and every one of the UN's agreements and resolutions, yet you are advocating additional appeasement. In that time he has used chemical weapons on children, women, and men living in his country, yet you are advocating putting all of our heads in the sand. In that time he has fired at U.S. and British aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones which has been the ONLY protection for the Kurds and Shiias, yet you are pleading ignorance. In that time he has built weapons of mass destruction and missiles in excess of international agreements, yet you are advocating this to continue unchecked. Tolerating and appeasing brutality and tyrants has only brought misery and long term suffering throughout world history. The ONLY message that Hussein and his ilk can comprehend is force, and it is force that must be used. >> With regard to Sullivan's obligatory and gratuitous reference to >> Hitler (which should in and of itself end the thread instantly): he >> neglected to state which League of Nations resolutions (if any) the >> Nazi leader was enforcing. If we are going to make comparisons, let us >> make them legitimate, no? > (I was kind of hoping that the gratuitous reference to Hitler would end > the thread, in accordance with "Godwin's law," but I wasn't really > "comparing" Bush to Hitler, as you well know.) I didn't suggest that > Hitler was enforcing anything other than his own claims (e.g., the > Sudetenland, the Germans in Poland). Bush II is _claiming_ to enforce > UN resolutions, but (a) the UN resolutions pointedly don't authorize us > to enforce them, (b) the UN chose to enforce them through inspections > instead of invasion, and (c) there isn't any UN resolution regarding > regime change in Iraq. There was a resolution however that prevented Hitler from building up a military and creating the Luftwaffe. Instead of enforcing it in the 1930s, the world sat idle. "Peace" then ensured millions died and suffered in the next decade. We cannot ignore that terrible lesson of horror again. >> I would say that the arguments on both sides of this discussion have >> been myopic to say the least. The reality now is that we are there, >> and any retreat short of accomplishing our stated objective would be >> most detrimental to this country's future. > If accomplishing the stated objective (which one? WMD, regime change, > or the global eradication of terrorism?) involves a drawn-out war that > expands to other countries, wrecks national economies worldwide, and > results in the institution of US-hating fundamentalist Islamic regimes > throughout the middle east, I think that stopping short of that would > indeed be better for our country's future. Terrorism wrecks and has wrecked national economies worldwide, yet you showed no concern for that and the need to take action. There was no shortage of US-hating fundamentalism before. The US was not at war with Iraq nor terrorism when the 3,000+ people were murdered in NY,PA, and VA. Yet you are more upset with those that are willing to take action to protect humanity than those that brutalize and reign terror. I am proud of the President and I am proud of our finest men and women who serve the country. TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Ross McMicken: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, if you are trying to cause me > to have another heart attack, you are doing a damn good job! Their oil > will remain their oil but my prediction is Saddam or his predecessors > will place a 'war surcharge' on sales to the USA and USA sympathizers > and force us to buy it through some third party. Either they will > refuse to sell it to us at all or make it prohibitively expensive. Why, > it may even come to the point that Bush will declare war (again!) on > the Iraqi people and take the oil by force whether they like it or > not. Did you notice how the very first thing the troops did when they > arrived was deploy soldiers to guard the oil wells, of which there are > about two thousand in Bagdhad alone? Maybe Saddam will try to strike > a deal with the USA. "You need oil to survive, I need nuclear weapons > to survive'; let's help each other out." And Bush may decide to go > along with it. As I said earlier this week, this thread is supposed > to be closed. PAT] Generously assuming what you say could ever come true, it would have no effect. So Iraq would sell no oil to us. Big deal. We're not buying any oil from them now either. If they sold it from other countries, those countries would buy less from the countries we do buy from, causing those prices to fall for us anyway. Since oil is a world wide commodity, country A selling to country B still affects country C's price, whether they buy from country A or not. ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: "Popular Vote" (was Re: FINAL Words on Sodomy Insane) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 01:17:15 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC [ lots snipped, with just a few lines left for context ] >>> And our strongman got where he is by the point of a 5-4 Supreme Court. >>> Bush II actually lost the popular vote -- the first resident of the >>> White House to have done so. >> What reference are you using, and what numbers does it have for >> Benjamin Harrison (1888), Rutherford B. Hayes (1876), and John Quincy >> Adams (1824)? > I erred. I should have said "the first resident of the White House in > modern times to have done so." While there are certainly many, many, reasons to disagree with the way the election ran, can we finally put to bed this "popular vote" complaint? The way the Presidential election is set up, and the way the rules are, is that the Electoral Vote is the way to go. Everyone entering in at the beginning knows this. And the campaigning, by all sides, is done with this in mind. To complain, after the fact, that it was evil because it allowed for the tilting, as it were, is as inane as having the Giants complain that they wuz robbed of the World Series of US and Canadian baseball since, after all, in 2002 the results were: Giants: total runs: 44 Angels: total runs: 41 Of course, the number that COUNTS is the number of individual games that were won. And there, the score was: Giants: 3 Angels: 4 _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Jim Hopkins Subject: Finalizing a Thread Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 20:39:09 GMT Pat, You don't have to ask to end a thread. You're the moderator. Let's steer the group back to telecom - by unilateral action if necessary. Jim Hopkins [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are right. I have asked politely all this week to end the war thread, now it is official. I know it could have been shut off a week or so ago, but I honestly do not like to censor correspondents here, especially since it then appears the opinions, etc are being controlled or 'puppetted' by myself. I would rather get some heat when a thread runs to long than be criticized for cutting it off prematurely. Anyway, starting NOW, 3:30 AM on Sunday, March 30, DO NOT send me any more messages in the war thread. If you have one in transit, I am sorry, it is wasted. I do not intend to publish any more of them, I do not even want to read privately about them. I have been thinking about starting a blog on Yahoo or Google about it, but that is a very big question mark. Anyone who can offer more advice to Grant (in this issue) about his problems, feel free to write in however. I'll publish them soon. 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 #369 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 30 21:54:48 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2V2smm11872; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 21:54:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 21:54:48 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303310254.h2V2smm11872@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 #370 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Mar 2003 21:55:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 370 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Proposal for Extensions to ITA 2 (John Savard) SMDR and CDR Software For PBX Units (Boris Ionescu) Re: 900 Calls Not Billable? (John Higdon) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (John Higdon) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (Dave Phelps) Radio Shack DID Box (Steven Lichter) Re: Update on $1 Charge to Call 800-555-Tell From Verizon (Steven J. Sobol) Re: Wireless Mushrooms (Mike Hartley) Hardware ID Block of my Phone Number (Geoff) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail (Dave Phelps) Share Day and Fibber McGee's New Dial Phone (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, 30 Mar 2003 06:12:32 MST From: John Savard Subject: Proposal for Extensions to ITA 2 It may possibly be of interest to some of the readers of TELECOM Digest that I have placed on my web page at: http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto/mi6133.htm A description of a method of extending the 5-level teleprinter code derived from Murray code and standardized as International Telegraph Alphabet number 2 to a broad character repertoire. My intent was to provide a scheme that would allow both extensions to the figures case, having the scope of those provided by ASCII over AMTOR, and the use of a national script in the fashion of the various third-shift standards, but to adhere to the spirit of CCITT/ITU Recommendation S.2 (the means of adding lower case to ITA 2) more fully. The basic principle is to use ALT LTRS instead of ALT to shift to a national script, which national script then becomes the letters shift repertoire subsequently reached by using LTRS when in figures shift. In addition, ALT followed by a printing character acts as a single-character escape, allowing occasional characters from either an extended figures set or an extended letters set to be used in a way that conserves bandwidth. From that beginning, however, I have added numerous other features to my proposal, and it has undergone considerable revision and adjustment over the last several days since I first posted it to my web site. John Savard ------------------------------ From: boris@mailbox.ro (Boris Ionescu) Subject: SMDR and CDR Software For PBX Units Date: 30 Mar 2003 06:57:17 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, I discovered some times ago a new call accounting software. It supports virtualy any type of PBX unit, even network connection instead of serial connexion. When my clients wants such a software I install it because the producer gives very good discounts and good technical support. You can see at http://www.phonejournal.com , the application is named PbxTools PhoneJournal. I tried for a long time free solutions and now I gave up. I think that using free solutions you lost a lot of time instead of getting some money. With bad products you can loose customers as well! PS. Application can be fully translated to any language using the web browser. At this moment they have full translation for English and Romanian. Boris ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: 900 Calls Not Billable? Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 07:56:00 -0800 In article , Marli1213 wrote: > Hi, how do I call phone sex lines for free? I am so desperate and > horny I need to have phone sex but my mom will be mad if she sees the > bill. Can someone help? Thanks. I know a little bit about this. The answer is pretty much "no". Very low-rent 900 services have their numbers redirected to POTS lines which, if you knew their numbers, you could dial direct. Even some of those, however, use authenticating bursts from the carrier to screen out those trying to do what you want to do. Most 900 operators, including yours truly, use dedicated trunks from the carriers ... and in some cases we ARE the carriers. No self- respecting 900 service operator these days isn't also a CLEC. This means that there are no POTS lines associated with the 900 numbers. There are backdoors, but they are almost always auth code protected. Used to be that you could feed a line of bull to the telco and get the charges forgiven, but nowadays telcos don't fool around much. Try that tack now and you will find your phone permanently blocked from making any 900 calls. And remember, the 900 service company has your number and whatever line you gave to telco won't interest them much when they start collection proceedings. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 08:20:09 -0800 In article , tonypo1@cox.net wrote: > But as the article shows, there is a definite monetary component that > could be used to show actual damages because of SPAM. Two changes in the law could bring spam to its knees: The first would be to legally declare spam as "damage" in and of itself. Allow spammed individuals, ISP, companies, and anyone else who handles email to be able to sue spammers in court without having to prove specific damages. The second would be to make those who benefit from spam equally liable with the spammers themselves. It is very hard to find some spammers, but the company or individual whose product is featured in the spam has to come out of the shadows far enough to do business at some point. If a few high profile cases featuring high monetary awards were to be won in court, spammers ... and more importantly those who utilize spammers' efforts ... would be far more circumspect in their advertising methods. Dry up the demand, add some solid liability, and you would see spam fade away. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 11:25:34 -0600 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done tonypo1@cox.net wrote: > Unfortunately the flood of SPAM will never stop until we outlaw it > completely. I don't think this is true. Most spammers are motivated by one thing: Money. Making something illegal does not make it unprofitable -- thus spam will continue even if it's illegal. Changing mail protocols will not work because there's always an exploit, and the spammers will find it and use it. Spam will not die until it becomes unprofitable. There are two ways to render something unprofitable: Increase the cost, and decrease the return. How shall we make it more expensive to send spam? Since we have to play "fair", this would likely mean charging (somehow) for EVERY email sent. Of course, operators of legitimate mailing lists (TD, for example) would have to pay as well. Then there's the logistical boondoggle of tracking, collecting, and ultimately disbursing the fee. Who's going to collect it? Who gets the money? How much is diverted to administrative costs? Who audits the books? How shall we make it less lucrative to send spam? There are two ways I can think of ... The first weapon is education. We're going to have to train people not to buy products marketed through spam. Spam survives and grows based on what is already a miniscule response rate, so finding the minority who actually buy spammers' wares and getting them to stop is going to be nearly impossible. The second weapon is filtering. The current hero on this front is the "Bayesian" filter (see for details). If filtering is implemented at the ISP level spam never reaches the users: Thus, no purchasers. However, a false-positive at the ISP is an intolerable failure. When mail is filtered at the user level, messages improperly flagged as spam are not lost, just misfiled. Unfortunately I think spam is probably here to stay. The best we can hope for is to reduce it to a manageable level, and then manage it. 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: To make a profit at spam (which is their intention after all, no matter the rate of profit per sale or however miniscule the returns may be) they have to be able to *get the money for the sale.* Most businesses give a postage paid return envelope to use; the email equivilent is an 800 toll free number. We have discussed here many times how to go about trashing an 800 toll free number. No matter how little the spammer is charged for his 800 number (or how little the carrier has to write off when the spammer skips without paying) the 'power of the net' has been shown time and again when those 800 numbers are widely publicized. Spammers who give *any* way of contact (which they have to do to get their money) are vulnerable. Post office box, street address, email address, regular or toll free number, *all can be legally harassed out of business*, even if it does cost me an email account now and then (i.e. eecs.nwu.edu). We have not had an issue of the Business Directory here for a few years now. Let's compile one again. Take all spam, *edit it severely* leaving only a single line describing the 'product' or 'service' and the toll free number used to reach the 'company'. Send me that *one single line* in email entitled 'Directory Entry' and forward it. I'll further edit it so it will all fit in a special issue of the Digest and we will all have a good time! Please do not include any other correspondence in it; I do not want to have to edit out other messages, etc. A typical entry for the Business Directory might look like this: 'make 20 thousand dollars per week ....877-123-4567' or: 'penis enlargement, 3 inches or more ... 888-123-4567' Do any of you remember the previous issues of the Directory? We let the readers use their fingers to do the walking, as Bell System used to say in the yellow pages. Do any of you remember little Jeffy? He got a huge phone bill from Sprint on his toll free line and I guess is still paying on the second mortgage he had to take out on his house after the net worked on him. (See archives, from 1993, about the time this spam foolishness first started, when we all considered it so shocking.) What we really need is a revival of the old techniques. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 12:07:08 -0600 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , tonypo1@cox.net says: > Unfortunately the flood of SPAM will never stop until we outlaw it > completely. It won't stop then either. It will just move overseas, which it is already doing anyway. Most of the laws that attempt to stop spam are in violation of the first amendment anyway, because legislators don't know what they're writing laws about. > The argument has always been that there's no cost component involved > with sapmming 1,000,000 people other than the connection to your SPAM > friendly ISP. I've never heard that argument before. Everyone acknowledges that there is a cost to the sender, the receiver, and all ISPs in between. It is "low-cost" not "no-cost". > But as the article shows, there is a definite monetary component that > could be used to show actual damages because of SPAM. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dave, I am not sure if you were around here back in the early nineties when I started the idea of a 'business directory' for spammers or not. We did NOT harass spammers on the phone, we merely made inquiry about their 'services' and 'products' which is what they wanted. Little Jeffy and others discovered all about 'monetary components' involved with spam. Call it self-help, call it guerilla warfare, (or do you say 'gorilla') but it worked pretty well. You have to keep those guys busy answering phones, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 30 Mar 2003 18:27:58 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Radio Shack DID Box I have one of those CID boxes that allows you to program numbers for the services offered by the local telephone companies, but is one better since it will block any number. Last week I came home and found the light on my phone off hook. I checked all the phones in the house and the jacks. Upon removing the CID box the light went out, so it appears the box has a short. I replaced the cable still shorts the line, looked at the jack in the box for shorts, but nothing. I have not opened it yet. Any ideas? I have not seen these for a long time and don't want to lose it. 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. ------------------------------ From: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: Update on $1 Charge to Call 800-555-Tell From Verizon Wireless Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:18:10 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC From Linc Madison (nobody@example.com): > My understanding from reading the thread in alt.cellular.verizon is > that Verizon finally woke up and realized that surcharging $1.25 per > call to 1-800-555-TELL is in direct violation of FCC regulations. > Only certain market areas (Ohio and Michigan, more or less) of Verizon > Wireless had the charge, but the claim is that all prior charges for > 800-555-xxxx will be automatically credited back, at least back to > 2002-08-12, in the April 2003 billing cycle. That's what I was going to say. Check the thred in acv. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ From: Mike Hartley Subject: Re: Wireless Mushrooms Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 21:29:26 +0100 > <..>I have noticed that in the last month > three more access points have popped up in my neighborhood. > Of the five I can see, only one has WEP turned on and all are > broadcasting their SSIDs (making them visible to even a > novice). As I drive around in my car, I can easily connect > to four of these access points. I realise that replying to a xpost here probably won't get far, but I'm subscribed to risks at my work address. If cable modem suppliers are handing out wireless access points for free then the wireless internet landcape will change very quickly -- for good or worse. Having a dense network of open access points could go some way to providing contiguous coverage. If the cable company has their marketing act together they will implement the software necessary for them to provide some out of box security as well as setting up access for other customers. How hard (and RISKy) would it be for an installation wizzard/automatic web interface to guide a novice user through setup? Regards Mike www.hartleys.org.uk ------------------------------ From: Geoff Subject: Hardware ID Block of my Phone Number Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 17:38:11 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises I'm in the BellSouth region (southeast) and have a hardware block on my phone. The hardware block has always worked great no matter where I called. However, when I called my company's headquarters in Wisconson, my phone number showed up on their system. My company has offices in Connecticut and North Carolina. The hardware block works perfectly in the other offices. All three offices use MCI as their long distance carrier. Does anyone know why the phone will sometimes show up and has this happened to anyone else? -g [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It should not matter what carrier the company uses; YOUR carrier is handling your call. If you call an 800 number *or get forwarded to an 800 number* then your blocking will not work no matter which carrier you use. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 12:01:06 -0600 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , puma@serv.catbox.com says: > NAT doesn't totally conceal your address, it replaces the individual > system 'internal' addresses with the router's IP address. > Surely when these bills say 'conceal' they mean to hide it totally, > such that the source location cannot be found, or forging an address > by providing a false identity that would mislead anyone trying > to find the origin. > Identifying the router's address should be sufficient in terms of > determining where you are located. Your interpretation may be reasonable, but the law certainly doesn't say it, which means the court will interpret it as it sees fit -- and the court's opinion may not be the same as yours. Unfortunately, we wouldn't know until someone is charged. Regardless, the letter of the law plainly states that NAT devices are illegal, so why would the court decide otherwise? Besides, it's more feel-good legislation. It is unenforceable. For example, if I sent an "illegal packet" (one with an invalid source address), the state would have to prove that it came from me, but of course, it couldn't because it had an invalid source address. So how would that work? Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 11:13:08 -0700 Subject: Share Day and Fibber McGee's New Dial Phone Reply-To: joey@garynuman.info I recently received a bunch of new discs brimming with old time radio shows. Among them was a charming little 15-minute episode of Fibber McGee And Molly, entitled "McGee's New Dial Phone", in which, obviously, the McGee household finally gets their new dial telephone. He calls up his friend the doctor to brag, but can't reach him. But then that same friend calls HIM shortly afterward ... from his new *CAR* phone. Then he gets into an accident because he's not paying enough attention -- boy, isn't it interesting that the more things change, the more things stay the same? :-) (This was broadcast on February 8th 1954, btw) This file will be included on Telecom Digest Archives CD-ROM's from this point forward -- see Pat's regular "share day" announcements for more on that. If anybody would like it to be emailed to them (it's 3,511 kilobytes, which will expand by about 40% when emailed), drop a note to me and I'll get a copy off to you. / From the desk of Joey Lindstrom / / If Windows is User-Friendly, why do you need to read / a 678 pg. manual? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here we are at the end of the month and it is share day once again. Share Day is when I ask YOU readers to share the cost of producing/distributing this Digest with me once again. TELECOM Digest is 'shareware', not 'freeware'. If you make a donation and request it, you get back a copy of the Telecom Archives CD, which includes all the 20 plus years of back issues of this Digest, all the special reports, technical files, etc. Joey Lindstrom also includes a half-dozen or so old time radio shows, including this latest entry of Fibber McGee and Molly from NBC. It also has other 'telephone-related' radio shows such as Agnes Morehead's "Sorry Wrong Number" and several others. All on one CD along with the Telecom Archives. So send a donation today, in whatever amount you are comfortable with, and be sure to give a mailing address for the CD Rom if you want one. Send donations to 'editor@telecom-digest.org' via PayPal if you wish to use a credit card or PayPal account (you will find a PayPal button on the bottom of our web site http://telecom-digest.org) or if you prefer to mail a check or money order, that is okay also. Patrick Townson/TELECOM Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301-0050 Thanks very much! Please keep reading the Digest, and excuse my personal frailties as they occur from time to time as well. 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 #370 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 31 14:12:16 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h2VJCFI16197; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:12:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:12:16 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200303311912.h2VJCFI16197@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 #371 TELECOM Digest Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:11:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 371 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #376, March 31, 2003 (Angus TeleManagement) (Un)blocked Caller ID, was: Re: Hardware ID Block of Phone (Danny Burstein) International Long Distance Rates Info Needed (Ben Dover) Re: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked (Dave Garland) Radio Shack CLID Box (was Radio Shack DID Box) (Marcus Jervis) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (Mark Brader) Using my Headset to Talk on the Phone (Stephann) Service Provider Survey -- Earn Money for You Opinion! (Sage) Avaya Reporting (JM) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail (Barry Margolin) Share Day and Fibber McGee's New Dial Phone (Editor and Joey Lindstrom) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 11:52:14 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #376, March 31, 2003 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 376: March 31, 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: ** Cabinet Rejects AT&T Appeal ** Videotron Drops Entourage Outsource Plan ** Telus Sues Union ** Bell Wants to Continue Below-Cost Services ** AT&T Completes Reorganization Tomorrow ** Rogers to Offer Wireless Palm ** SR Telecom Buys Broadband Wireless Maker ** Wireless Fee Comments Now On-line ** Comment Sought on Quality Rebates ** Rogers Protests Telus Connection Arrangements ** Lucent Settles Suits for $568 Million ** Look Plans Rights Offering ** JDS Shifts Focus to Network's Edge ** UK Considers Tough Anti-Spam Law ** Security Flaw Affects Most Win2000 Systems ** Ottawa Supports Nunavik Telecom Upgrade ** Telesystem Sells Brazil Shares ** CA*net 4 Funding Workshop Planned ** Call Centre Managers Meet ** IP-PBXs at the Tipping Point ============================================================ CABINET REJECTS AT&T APPEAL: On March 26, Industry Minister Alan Rock announced that the Governor in Council has dismissed AT&T Canada's appeal of the CRTC's price caps decision. (See Telecom Update #347) ** Speaking to a Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association meeting, Rock said that "although many parties expressed concerns about the state of competition, few agreed with the specific solutions proposed by AT&T." http://www.ic.gc.ca/cmb/welcomeic.nsf/261ce500dfcd7259852564820068dc6d/85256a5d006b972085256cf5007c97ab!OpenDocument VIDEOTRON DROPS ENTOURAGE OUTSOURCE PLAN: As part of the settlement of a 10-month strike, Videotron has abandoned plans to outsource technical services and transfer 650 employees to Entourage Solutions (see Telecom Update #333). The employees have agreed to a longer work week and a three- year wage freeze. ** Entourage says it and Videotron are now negotiating terms for the return of the installation and repair operations Videotron sold to Entourage last May. TELUS SUES UNION: In a lawsuit filed in B.C. Supreme Court, Telus alleges that the Telecommunications Workers Union has conspired to damage the company's business. Citing articles in a TWU publication last year, Telus asks for general, special, and punitive damages. ** In a separate development, the TWU has urged the CRTC to reject Telus's application for a cable TV licence. The union says Telus management is reneging on a promise that work in Telus's new broadcasting operations would be done by TWU members. BELL WANTS TO CONTINUE BELOW-COST SERVICES: Bell Canada has filed more tariffs for "customer-specific arrangement" bundles offered through Bell Nexxia, as ordered by the CRTC (see Telecom Update #362). Four of the bundles fail the imputation test, but Bell says "it would be unfair and unjust to penalize the customer by interfering with the contract," so the below-cost deals should continue until the initial contract term ends. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2003/B20.htm#200303389 http://www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2003/B20.htm#200303470 http://www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2003/B20.htm#200303488 AT&T COMPLETES REORGANIZATION TOMORROW: AT&T Canada says it is on track to complete its reorganization and emerge from bankruptcy protection April 1. Bondholders and other creditors will receive $233 million in cash and all of the company's equity. No one creditor will receive more than 10% of the voting shares. ROGERS TO OFFER WIRELESS PALM: Rogers AT&T Wireless will begin selling a GSM/GPRS version of Palm's Tungsten W handheld next month. The device, which offers e-mail, cellphone, and Web access, will sell for $599 with a two-year service contract, or $824 with no contract. SR TELECOM BUYS BROADBAND WIRELESS MAKER: Montreal-based SR Telecom has agreed to buy Netro Corporation, a California company that makes broadband point-to-multipoint wireless gear. The deal is structured as a merger: over 80% of the US$120 million purchase price is Netro's cash, and Netro shareholders will receive 43% ownership of SR. WIRELESS FEE COMMENTS NOW ON-LINE: Industry Canada has posted 11 responses to its consultation paper on a new fee and licensing regime for cellular and PCS licensees (see Telecom Update #364). Reply comments are due April 4. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/sf08029e.html COMMENT SOUGHT ON QUALITY REBATES: In last year's price cap decision, the CRTC ruled that retail customers should be compensated for substandard service from incumbent telcos. Telecom Public Notice 2003-3 invites comments on how to implement this order, and how to ensure that the telcos' reports on quality of service and rate adjustments are consistent and accurate. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2003/pt2003-3.htm ROGERS PROTESTS TELUS CONNECTION ARRANGEMENTS: Rogers AT&T Wireless has filed a Part VII complaint with the CRTC against Telus's insistence that the LD traffic it sends to Rogers' network must use separate one-way trunks instead of the two- way trunks used for local traffic. Rogers says the arrangement, which is not required by other telcos, is costly and leads to customer complaints. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2003/8622/r11_200303603.htm LUCENT SETTLES SUITS FOR $568 MILLION: In one of the largest such settlements ever, Lucent Technologies will pay US$568 million in stock and cash to end class action suits alleging it violated securities laws. The company, which admitted no wrongdoing, says that spinoff Avaya will be responsible for a yet-undetermined portion of the payout. LOOK PLANS RIGHTS OFFERING: Look Communications says it expects to raise $20 million to $25 million through a rights offering to shareholders. A preliminary prospectus will be filed in April. JDS SHIFTS FOCUS TO NETWORK'S EDGE: JDS Uniphase has announced a range of new products that it says reflect greater emphasis on the "network edge," including enterprise and storage, metro core/regional, and access/aggregation applications. ** Separately, Calpers, the largest U.S. pension fund, has called JDS one of North America's worst-managed corporations, accusing it of "a lack of financial discipline ... during the late 1990's Internet boom." UK CONSIDERS TOUGH ANTI-SPAM LAW: The UK Department of Trade and Industry has requested public comment on a proposal to outlaw unsolicited commercial e-mail, giving magistrates the power to fine offenders, and recipients the right to sue them. SECURITY FLAW AFFECTS MOST WIN2000 SYSTEMS: First reports said a newly discovered security flaw in Windows 2000 affected only those running IIS Web server software. It now appears that all systems running Win2000 Advanced Server, Server, or Professional with Service Pack 2 or 3 are vulnerable and should be patched immediately. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/te chnet/security/bulletin/ms03-007.asp OTTAWA SUPPORTS NUNAVIK TELECOM UPGRADE: Canada Economic Development is contributing $1,843,539 to the Kativik Regional Authority to upgrade telecommunications facilities in the fourteen largely Inuit communities in Nunavik in northern Quebec. TELESYSTEM SELLS BRAZIL SHARES: Montreal's Telesystem International Wireless is selling its 49% stake in a Brazilian cellphone company for US$70 million. TIW will use part of the proceeds to reduce debt. CA*NET 4 FUNDING WORKSHOP PLANNED: CANARIE and BCNET will host a workshop in Vancouver on April 22 to define priorities for funding the Advanced Network Applications, Services, and Technologies program under CA*net 4. Attendance is by invitation only: for information, e-mail andrea.maru@bc.net CALL CENTRE MANAGERS MEET: Call Centre Canada, the country's largest event for customer contact centre professionals, runs April 14-16 at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre. The conference program was planned by Henry Dortmans of Angus Dortmans Associates and Phil Ritchie of P.W. Ritchie & Associates. http://canada.iccm.com/home.asp IP-PBXs AT THE TIPPING POINT: "For PBX buyers, the issue now is not whether the conversion will take place, but how to plan for and manage it." In the April issue of Telemanagement, mailed to subscribers on Friday, John Riddell examines how the IP PBX debate has shifted from "whether" to "how and when." ** Also in this issue: Lis Angus on the debate on foreign ownership of telecom companies; Gerry Blackwell on six providers that are deploying Wi-Fi hotspots across Canada; and Gary Bernstein on a practical trial of the all-in-one Blackberry. Telemanagement is available only by subscription. To receive Canada's #1 source for telecom analysis and guidance, call 800-263-4415 ext 500 or go to http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.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 2003 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: Danny Burstein Subject: (Un)blocked Caller ID, was Re: Hardware ID Block of my Phone Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 03:30:04 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Geoff writes: > I'm in the BellSouth region (southeast) and have a hardware block on > my phone. Your terminology is way, way, confusing. There's no such animal. My guess, and I hasten to repeat that's a guess, is you're talking about a box on your phone line that automatially prepends the code used for blocking (most -- see below) caller id. Or that you're badly mangling terms and have a fulltime CNID block courtesy of your telco. > The hardware block has always worked great no matter where > I called. However, when I called my company's headquarters in > Wisconson, my phone number showed up on their system. > Does anyone know why the phone will sometimes show up and has this happened > to anyone else? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It should not matter what carrier the > company uses; YOUR carrier is handling your call. If you call an 800 > number *or get forwarded to an 800 number* then your blocking will not > work no matter which carrier you use. PAT] As in all telco things, "that depends". As our esteemed moderator points out, if there's any hint of a 1-800 ("tollfree") component, then all bets are off. However, even in more or less regular phone service, sometimes the number you call from, either the CNID or ANI (which are usually, but not quite always, the same), *will* get sent across. Explanation: Whenever you make an outgoing call, your number is sent, along with the call itself, from your local telco central office through (if necessary) the long distance carrier, and eventually ending up at the central office servicing the final destination. It's *that* last central office that decides whether to forward the number to the actual answering telephone. If you've attached a "privacy" flag to your call, then the central office blocks your number from going across that last leg and replaces it with a "private" or "anonymous" or similar label. [a] That's the way it's supposed to work. HOWEVER, again, keep in mind that your number has made it all the way to that final central office. So ... we get to the interesting hiccup that occurs when that final number winds up at a Competitive Local Exchange Carrier. Or some other less traditional service. They, too, are supposed to recognize the privacy flag and NOT kick over the phone number, but I've personally witnessed quite a few cases where they don't do so. Meaning that your number is, indeed, sent over. I suspect, from what the original poster wrote, that his company uses hi capacity (T1 or PRI) circuits from MCI Local feeding their PBX and getting service that way. MCI, as the final terminating central office, gets the phone number. They're supposed to honor the privacy flag and aredoing so in the other areas. But the circuits feeding that one location are misprogrammed. [a] that's for normal customers. Certain locations can get a waiver from the FCC so that they'll always get CNID. The most common example, of course, is your 911 answering point. Similarly, in many areas of the country calls to the local fire department and EMS group may use regular 7 (or 10, alas) digit numbers answered in a fire hall, or clubhouse, or private homes with ringdowns. These groups can often petition for these waivers. And yes, the database for CNID or even ANI isn't as good as the (more expensive) ones specifically set up for 911, but it's far better than nothing. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: jonesge@yahoo.com (Ben Dover) Subject: International Long Distance Rates Info Needed Date: 30 Mar 2003 19:14:16 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Please assist me in finding a provider of LD rates from Continental USA to Mexico (Bands 1 2 3 ) and Canada. We do about $5000 / month in combined LD at one location and need to examine both switched and dedicated LD rates to Canada and Mexico. Will consider MO-MO term or 1 yr term only. Also, what is the going rate MO-MO or 1 YR Term for Intersate LD both switched and dedicated. Any info or links would be appreciated. Also, any info on LCR Least Call Routing providers. Thanks, Ben ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:46:17 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when Monty Solomon wrote: > Arab satellite TV network Al-Jazeera launched an English-language > website Monday. On Tuesday, its Web host says it was hit with a denial- > of-service attack, but an Al-Jazeera representative blames the problem > on unexpectedly high traffic. They seem to have another English site up: http://www.aljazeerah.us/ http://www.aljazeerah.info/ ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: Radio Shack CLID Box (was: Radio Shack DID Box) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 05:20:02 +0000 stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) wrote: > I have one of those CID boxes that allows you to program numbers for > the services offered by the local telephone companies, but is one > better since it will block any number. > Last week I came home and found the light on my phone off hook. I > checked all the phones in the house and the jacks. Upon removing the > CID box the light went out, so it appears the box has a short. I > replaced the cable still shorts the line, looked at the jack in the > box for shorts, but nothing. I have not opened it yet. Any ideas? I > have not seen these for a long time and don't want to lose it. Funny, I had this same problem yesterday with my Radio Shack 43-958. It happened while I was replacing the batteries. Turns out that model draws loop current from the line when the batteries are low or removed. Any chance it is a battery problem? By the way, I found the manuals archive on the Radio Shack web site quite useful, although it didn't mention this problem. The manual for this box is long lost, and I had forgotten that it could play pre-programmed voice messages to blocked or un-ID'd callers. Go to www.radioshack.com and click on Product Manuals in the bar across the top of the page. Quite an extensive collection. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, I had a very similar problem last week with a USB camera (Oregon Scientific). It does have a couple little tiny batteries in it, but I had been assuming it got its power off of the USB port. I accidentally dropped the camera on the floor and about that time it quit working and all I got on its local LED screen was gibberish. I assumed dropping it on the floor had done it in, somehow broke its little internal circuit board, etc, so I sat it aside. Exploring it a day or two later, I opened its trap door and saw the two little batteries, one of which was badly corroded. I took them out and got two new, fresh batteries and the cam started working again; there was nothing wrong with it. I had been assuming it was getting all its power off of the USB line; it did not occur to me that it had those two tiny batteries in it also. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 04:31:47 EST From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) John Higdon writes: > Two changes in the law could bring spam to its knees: > The first would be to legally declare spam as "damage" in and of > itself. ... The second would be to make those who benefit from > spam equally liable with the spammers themselves. And what if the spam comes from, oh, China? [Can you say "Subject:14 GROUPS OF CHINESE PRODUCTS"? :-)] Mark Brader, Toronto | "GUALITY IS FIRST" msb@vex.net | --slogan of "Dongda electron CO.,LTD" ------------------------------ From: Stephann@lineone.net (Stephann) Subject: Using my Headset to Talk on the Phone Date: 31 Mar 2003 02:55:50 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi there, I already have a headset plugged into the soundcard which is used for voice recognition. Can I use the same headset to answer calls and talk, using a regular telephone line and internal modem? Is there software that can do this? Or would I need to buy a headset that plugs into the internal modem itself? Thanks in advance, Stephann ------------------------------ From: andrewmeagher@hotmail.com (Sage) Subject: Service Provider Survey -- Earn Money For Your Opinion! Date: 31 Mar 2003 07:23:22 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have not yet decided if these folks are spammers or it they really, truely believe 'your opinion counts' as they claim. Let's see if anyone gets the ten dollars they promise to give respondents. PAT] Your Opinion Counts Because of your experience and knowledge, we would like to invite you to take an online survey regarding service management. And we'd like to pay you for sharing your opinions with us! Sage Research would like to offer a cash incentive of $10 to the first 100 qualifying respondents who submit a completed survey. Here's what you do: 1. Visit http://www.sageresearch.com/survey/3partysp.html and enter the password 2288. 2. Answer a few brief questions to ensure that your experiences match the requirements of the present study. 3. If you qualify, the survey will begin immediately. It will take approximately 10 minutes to complete. The information you provide will be used by our clients to develop new products and services to meet the needs of people like you. Any information you share with us is used in combination with that of other survey participants. Your name is never revealed to our clients or used for sales purposes. The first 100 participants to submit a completed survey on-line will receive a check for $10 (US) cash. The survey begins today and, in order to be considered for the cash incentive, all surveys must be completed by April 4, 2003, or before 100 completed surveys are submitted, whichever comes first. Incentives will be mailed by the end of April 2003. To review our privacy policy, visit http://www.sageresearch.com/PrivacyPolicy_a.htm. For questions regarding the survey, please contact me at (508) 655-5400 x201 or via email at ameagher@sageresearch.com. We look forward to hearing from you, and remember, YOUR OPINION COUNTS! Sincerely, Andrew Meagher Fielding Manager [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's see if Andrew Meagher is for real, or just collecting more spam names. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jeanmarccheong@yahoo.com (JM) Subject: Avaya Reporting Date: 31 Mar 2003 08:04:03 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, does anyone know if you can customize how reporting is done on the Avaya Definity? More specifically if I can customize how service levels are calculated. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail Organization: Genuity Managed Services, Woburn, MA Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:35:21 GMT In article , Dave Phelps wrote: > Regardless, the letter of the law plainly states that NAT devices are > illegal, so why would the court decide otherwise? Besides, it's more > feel-good legislation. It is unenforceable. > For example, if I sent an "illegal packet" (one with an invalid source > address), the state would have to prove that it came from me, but of > course, it couldn't because it had an invalid source address. So how > would that work? It's possible to trace back packets with forged IP addresses by monitoring the link layer. Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Genuity Managed Services, a Level(3) Company, 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: Editor and Joey Lindstrom Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 11:13:08 -0700 Subject: Share Day and Fibber McGee's New Dial Phone Reply-To: joey@garynuman.info It is Share Day once again at the Digest, which is where our usual anti-war messages, with an occassional telecom thing from Monty Solomon sneaking in, is interuppted with these nagware posts. I've been told I need to read/review/edit Monty's stuff more closely to prevent that from happening. (looking on, with straight face as I say this.) Today I am turning the forum over to Joey Lindstrom for a few words. I do not like the idea of this getting to be as obnoxious as our very own KRPS 88.9 FM from Pittsburgh, Kansas where the classical music is interuppted several times per day with constant (all last week and this week) fund raising pitches for public radio, but I have to survive also. Anyway, h-e-e-e-e-r's Joey: ------------------------------------------------- > I recently received a bunch of new discs brimming with old time radio > shows. Among them was a charming little 15-minute episode of Fibber > McGee And Molly, entitled "McGee's New Dial Phone", in which, > obviously, the McGee household finally gets their new dial telephone. > He calls up his friend the doctor to brag, but can't reach him. But > then that same friend calls HIM shortly afterward... from his new *CAR* > phone. Then he gets into an accident because he's not paying enough > attention - boy, isn't it interesting that the more things change, the > more things stay the same? :-) (This was broadcast on February 8th > 1954, btw) > This file will be included on Telecom Digest Archives CD-ROM's from > this point forward - see Pat's regular "share day" announcements for > more on that. If anybody would like it to be emailed to them (it's > 3,511 kilobytes, which will expand by about 40% when emailed), drop a > note to me and I'll get a copy off to you. > / From the desk of Joey Lindstrom > / > / If Windows is User-Friendly, why do you need to read > / a 678 pg. manual? -------------------------------------------------------- I have a copy of this from Joey, and I was not aware that Peoria, Illinois (where Fibber McGee and his wife Molly actually lived) was 'cut over' to dial from manual service in 1954, and in any event telco did not do cut overs quite in this manner. Typically a repair person visited your home and installed a dial mechanism on your (manual) phone anywhere from one to three months prior to the actual cutover. Most people had a 500 set in those days, with a removable face plate where the dial would be installed in due time. Even 302 phones had a face plate like that with room inside for the guts. The dial was installed, with a new number sticker for the front and the subscriber was handed a little cardboard card which stated, "DO NOT use the dial until (date). Until (date [usually at 2:00 AM on a Saturday morning]) continue to place calls by instructing the operator." Then promptly at 2:00 AM on the (usually) Saturday morning specified, the 'number please' lady went away and you started getting dial tone instead. Even the very old 'candlestick' style phones had a way to install a dial mechanism on them, but phones older than that had to be replaced, but you still got the 'number please' lady until 2:00 AM on the date specified. Nor did the telco hand out all new numbers. For most people with *private* lines, the 'new' number simply consisted of the new prefix and the same last four digits you had all along. Shorter (one, two or three digit numbers) had the requisite number of zeros prepended to the front of the old number to fill it out to seven digits. For example, if you lived here in Independence prior to 1962 and had the number '69', your new number became EDison 1-0069. '345' became Edison 1-0345, etc. Four digits stayed the same four digits with Edison 1 tacked on the front. People who previously had 'party line' service with an 'R' or an "M" or "J" at the end of their number received an Edison 1 with four digits, the last digit being the party line code. So it wasn't quite as Fibber McGee tells it in the adventure on the radio from that day in February, 1954, but its the usual cute story. Anyway to get a copy, *please* make a donation to the Digest today. You pick the amount which is appropriate. Remember please, the Digest is SHAREware, not FREEware. Essentially this Digest is brought to you by you. Be sure to include your name and mailing address if you want to have a copy of the archives sent to you on CD by return mail. You get the entire 20 plus years of the Digest and associated files on the CD, along with a half dozen or so 'telephone related' old time radio dramas, including Agnes Morehead in 'Sorry, Wrong Number'. You would make a credit card donation through PayPal, by going to the PayPal template at the very bottom of our web site: http://telecom-digest.org (or any PayPal template, making it payable to 'editor@telecom-digest.org' as a 'subscription' or 'donation'. If you prefer to use US Mail, send a check or money order to: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301-0050 As I said above, *you* decide the amount. The important thing is that *you* be part of the effort to share telecom news on Internet. Thanks! Patrick Townson, Editor/Publisher PS: And as I said recently, please excuse my own frailties. All of us have our own blind spots even though we don't always agree on what they are. 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 #371 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Apr 1 19:47:49 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h320lns22926; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 19:47:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 19:47:49 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304020047.h320lns22926@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 #372 TELECOM Digest Tue, 1 Apr 2003 19:48:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 372 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The Security Flag in the IPv4 Header (Monty Solomon) Big Brother Is Watching You Shop (Monty Solomon) PayPal Accused of Violating Patriot Act (Monty Solomon) Fears About DNA Testing Proposal (Monty Solomon) Cablevision Deploys Internet Photonics Solutions; Leading-Edge (M Solomon) The Internet and the Iraq War / How Online Americans Use (Monty Solomon) Ricochet Launches Customer Referral Program (Monty Solomon) Sonicblue Fails to Close ReplayTV Deal With D&M (Monty Solomon) Is Your Television Watching You? (Monty Solomon) SBC Drops Out of Bidding For Hughes -- CNBC (Monty Solomon) HDTV's Acceptance Picks Up Pace (Monty Solomon) Thrills and Frustration on Bay Area Screens (Monty Solomon) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail (John Higdon) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail (Robert Bonomi) Re: Hardware ID Block of my Phone Number (Spyros Bartsocas) 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, 1 Apr 2003 12:19:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Security Flag in the IPv4 Header http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.66.html#subj1 http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.66.html#subj2 Date: 1 April 2003 From: Peter Neumann Subject: The Security Flag in the IPv4 Header Steve Bellovin's RFC 3514 (released today) assigns a meaning to the IPv4 packet header's last currently unused bit, which can be thought of as a Security Flag. Benign packets have this bit set to 0; those that are used for an attack will have the bit set to 1. Correct functioning of security mechanisms depends critically on the bit being set properly. If faulty components do not set the bit to 1 when appropriate, firewalls will not be able to do their jobs properly. Similarly, if the bit is set to 1 when it shouldn't be, a denial of service condition may occur. Following is a summary of the assigned values in the RFC: 0x0 If the bit is set to 0, the packet has no evil intent. Hosts, network elements, etc., SHOULD assume that the packet is harmless, and SHOULD NOT take any defensive measures. (We note that this part of the spec is already implemented by many common desktop operating systems.) 0x1 If the bit is set to 1, the packet has evil intent. Secure systems SHOULD try to defend themselves against such packets. Insecure systems MAY chose to crash, be penetrated, etc. It is well worth your reading the full RFC, which is now available: ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3514.txt [See the IETF Web site for the full set of RFCs, for those of you not used to reading them. It is an extraordinary view of the history of the ARPAnet and Internet: http://ftp.rfc-editor.org PGN] Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 10:00:01 +1000 From: Drew Dean Subject: The Angelic Bit vs the Evil Bit Steve Bellovin's proposed RFC 3514 finds a very constructive use for the last unused bit in the IPv4 header. In his proposal, the unused bit is sometimes affectionately referred to as the "evil" bit, although that naming convention reflects a fundamentally *pessimistic* world view. We prefer an *optimistic* world view, and therefore propose that this last bit should be used for the "angelic" bit. Our proposed semantics for the angelic bit are as follows: 0x1 The angelic bit is set. All routers, firewalls, switches, and any other network devices MUST forward this packet to its indicated destination. This packet MUST NOT have any undesirable effect on any network device. Anyone who improperly sets the angelic bit on any packet SHALL be subject to divine retribution. Civil authorities MAY subject the perpetrator to any punishment provided for in applicable law. 0x0 The angelic bit is reset. All routers, firewalls, switches, and other network devices MAY filter this packet according to any policy they deem fit. This packet MAY have undesirable effects if forwarded. The sender of the packet SHALL NOT be subject to divine retribution in case of undesirable effects. Civil authorities MAY subject the perpetrator to punishment provided for in applicable law. NB: The angelic bit may have miraculous properties in face of network links severed by backhoes; however, this SHALL NOT relieve the router of its responsibilities. Yours for a more genteel Internet, Drew Dean ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 23:08:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Big Brother Is Watching You Shop WASHINGTON -- The U.S. government has discovered a powerful resource in its war against terrorism -- credit-card records, hotel bills, grocery lists and other records detailing the private lives of its citizens. Government investigators are turning to commercial databases to track down and isolate possible hijackers and suicide bombers before they strike, raising fear among privacy advocates that long-standing protections against government snooping may be eroded. The Transportation Security Administration is developing an airline passenger-screening program that would check private records such as credit reports to assess risk, prompting a fierce debate about the merits of such "pattern recognition" systems. Officials and many security experts say such data mining techniques are necessary to flush out a foe that does not wear a uniform but blends in with ordinary civilians to infiltrate and undermine American society. Civil-liberties advocates on the left and the right say the tactic could lead back to the bad old days when law-enforcement agencies like the FBI conducted routine, unfettered surveillance on law-abiding citizens like civil-rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. ... http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,58285,00.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So what else is old news? The Chicago Police Department has maintained a 'red squad' for forty years. And they do not hesitate to afford the victims of their spying all the 'street punishment' they can. I still find it hard to believe that I used to live in that town, and try to be a good citizen there for many, many years. This report from wired.com via Monty is NOT something new. Its the same old story. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 23:20:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: PayPal Accused of Violating Patriot Act PALO ALTO, Calif., March 31 (Reuters) - A federal prosecutor has alleged eBay Inc. (NASDAQ:EBAY) unit PayPal violated a 2001 anti-terror law aimed at fighting money laundering when it provided payment services to online gambling companies, the Web auctioneer said in its annual report filed on Monday. Silicon Valley-based eBay said it received a letter on Friday in which the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri accused PayPal of violating a provision of the USA Patriot Act. The provision prohibits the transmission of funds that are known to have been derived from a criminal offense, or are intended to be used to promote or support unlawful activity. ... http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33642249 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 22:39:39 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Fears About DNA Testing Proposal By Julia Scheeres A Justice Department proposal to create a database containing the DNA of suspected terrorists has raised fears that the measure would lead to so-called DNA dragnets. The concern is that police could round up people of Middle Eastern origin and other targeted groups to force them to contribute genetic samples to the database. The Terrorist Identification Database Act of 2003 is buried deep within the department's secretly drafted Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 -- known colloquially as Patriot Act II. It would empower the attorney general to collect DNA samples for the purpose of "detecting, investigating, prosecuting, preventing or responding to terrorist activities." The proposed database grants law enforcement agencies unprecedented access to private genetic information, allowing investigators to seize DNA samples from people merely suspected of participating in a broad number of activities that qualify as domestic terrorism, a new crime that was ushered in by the original Patriot Act. The American Civil Liberties Union and other government watchdogs have warned that the law against domestic terrorism could be used to suppress legitimate political protest, especially if that protest results in violence. They charge that if Patriot Act II becomes law, police could theoretically seize DNA samples from those same political activists under the pretext of the war on terrorism. ... http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,58270,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 11:59:54 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cablevision Deploys Internet Photonics Solutions In Leading-Edge MARLBOROUGH, Mass. and SHREWSBURY, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 31, 2003-- Next Generation Optical Ethernet Platforms Speed Cablevision's Delivery of VOD Services with Dramatic Cost, Capacity and Scale Advantages Internet Photonics Inc. today announced that Cablevision Systems Corporation (NYSE:CVC) is deploying Internet Photonics' Optical Ethernet and Wave Division Multiplexing (WDM) transport platforms as a key element of its leading-edge Video On Demand (VOD) network rollout. Cablevision has completed deployment in Eastern Long Island, in New Jersey, and in the New York-Connecticut region. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33635352 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 12:41:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Internet and the Iraq war / How Online Americans Use How online Americans have used the Internet to learn war news, understand events, and promote their views. http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=87 ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Ricochet Launches Customer Referral Program Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 12:44:12 -0500 DENVER, Colo. and SAN DIEGO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 1, 2003--What's better than unlimited high-speed wireless Internet access wherever you live, work and play? FREE high-speed wireless Internet access. That's the offer Ricochet Networks, Inc. is now extending to its customers. Since Ricochet(R) relaunched its high-speed, wire-free Internet service in San Diego and Denver last November, mobile laptop users and DSL/cable "access challenged" consumers are enjoying the speed and convenience of one of the world's fastest wireless data networks. It's no surprise that their enthusiasm for Ricochet is contagious. That's why Ricochet aims to capitalize on that enthusiasm by rewarding its customers with a free month of access for every new Ricochet customer they bring onto the service. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33664553 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 13:40:22 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sonicblue Fails to Close ReplayTV Deal With D&M NEW YORK, April 1 (Reuters) - Bankrupt consumer electronics company Sonicblue Inc. (NASDAQ:SBLUQ) on Tuesday said it failed to complete a proposed sale of its Rio portable audio and ReplayTV television recording systems to Japan's D&M Holdings Inc. (TOKYO:6735), and the assets will now be auctioned. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33664283 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 14:35:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Is Your Television Watching You? By Phillip Swann Could the federal government find out what you're watching on TV? Even if you're not the subject of a criminal investigation? If you're a satellite TV or TiVo owner, the answer is yes, according to legal experts and industry officials. Under the USA Patriot Act, passed a month after the 9/11 terrorist attack, the feds can force a noncable TV operator to disclose every show you have watched. The government just has to say that the request is related to a terrorism investigation, said Jay Stanley, a technology expert for the American Civil Liberties Union. Under Section 215 of the Act, you don't even have to be the target of the investigation. Plus, your TV provider is prohibited from informing you that the feds have requested your personal information. ... http://www.tvweek.com/technology/030303isyourtv.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well again, Monty seems to be filling us up with a lot of non-news. This has been the case for a long time in cities like Chicago, where the police whisper some of their venom and everyone else is expected to run and jump and stand at attention, and never cross or defy them (police). About two years ago, a satellite distributor in Chicago reported to the *Chicago Tribune* that he had been asked for customer records on a few people. The police of course denied it, but why would the satellite firm lie about it? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 14:41:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: SBC Drops Out of Bidding For Hughes -- CNBC NEW YORK, April 1 (Reuters) - Local telephone company SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) has decided against bidding for Hughes Electronics Corp.'s (NYSE:GMH) DirecTV unit, CNBC reported on Tuesday. CNBC, citing unnamed sources familiar with the matter, said SBC had opted not to pursue a final bid for the satellite television operator. SBC had entered the bidding fray for DirecTV in February. ... http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33668562 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 23:45:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: HDTV's Acceptance Picks Up Pace By ERIC A. TAUB LOS ANGELES, March 30 - It was an easy target and got a big laugh. At last week's Academy Awards ceremonies, the host, Steve Martin, noted that the awards show was being broadcast in high-definition television, or HDTV, for the first time. "So I'd like to say a big hello to the three guys watching at Circuit City," he said. Since its rollout in 1998, HDTV has tended for most people to be the video equivalent of a tree's falling in the forest with no one around to hear it. Digital sets have been costly and the availability of high-definition signals on cable has been skimpy. But, in fact, the technology - digital-quality television with a supersharp picture the shape of a movie screen - has started to catch on in measurable ways. Although HDTV still presents consumers with a confusing set of shopping issues and can be difficult to install, the sets and attendant equipment have come down in price from the ridiculous ($10,000 or more, initially) to the merely expensive (now less than $1,000 at the entry level). And so, sales are beginning to expand beyond the cult of early adopters, although the number of households with HDTV sets remains only a fraction of the nation's television audience. An estimated 4.9 million HDTV-capable sets have been sold in this country, but only about 640,000 have been purchased with a built-in tuner or add-on decoder box required for receiving an HDTV broadcast. HDTV programming, meanwhile, is steadily moving beyond special-event status and becoming an increasingly regular part of the lineup on the leading broadcast networks, transmitted as digital simulcast feeds by the local affiliates that have the necessary equipment. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/31/technology/31HDTV.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 23:47:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Thrills and Frustration on Bay Area Screens By EVAN RATLIFF SAN FRANCISCO, March 30 - A year ago, Bill Burnham was just about to give up on his early foray into high-definition television. After paying $2,400 for a 36-inch TV set that was high-definition ready, and $1,000 more for a satellite receiver with a built-in tuner capable of displaying supersharp images on his movie-shaped screen, he spent a day setting it all up in his home in Palo Alto. There was only one problem: nothing he wanted to watch was on. "I had two DirecTV channels that were HD," he recalled. "It was a bust." But then Mr. Burnham, a venture capitalist, discovered through an online Bay Area forum that many local HDTV devotees were watching over-the-air network programs beamed from San Francisco's prominent Sutro broadcast tower. So Mr. Burnham, 32, hired a technician to install a rooftop UHF antenna that would pick up digital signals. "He just plugged it into the back of my receiver," he said. "It was beautiful." Since then, Mr. Burnham has become a relatively contented member of the exclusive club of San Francisco-area HDTV aficionados. They are a loyal group of early adopters who have paid thousands of dollars for high-definition monitors and equipment for a better picture and high-quality sound. For the most part, they say, they feel their money has been well spent. But daily life as an HDTV devotee here is by turns thrilling and frustrating, envy-inducing and infuriating. It all depends on the effectiveness of one's antenna and what HDTV programming -- if any -- is on at the time. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/31/technology/31WATC.html ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 11:18:10 -0800 In article , Barry Margolin wrote: > In article , Dave Phelps > wrote: >> Regardless, the letter of the law plainly states that NAT devices are >> illegal, so why would the court decide otherwise? Besides, it's more >> feel-good legislation. It is unenforceable. >> For example, if I sent an "illegal packet" (one with an invalid source >> address), the state would have to prove that it came from me, but of >> course, it couldn't because it had an invalid source address. So how >> would that work? > It's possible to trace back packets with forged IP addresses by monitoring > the link layer. But then it wouldn't be illegal because it would be traceable and identifiable. In other words, this law appears to be nonsense. On the one hand, if the packet is untraceable and its source unidentifiable, then the law cannot be enforced. If it is traceable, then it isn't breaking the law. Sounds like the dummies under the dome have painted themselves into a legal corner. But what's new? John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail Organization: Not Much From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 15:10:05 GMT In article , Dave Phelps wrote: > In article , puma@serv.catbox.com > says: >> NAT doesn't totally conceal your address, it replaces the individual >> system 'internal' addresses with the router's IP address. >> Surely when these bills say 'conceal' they mean to hide it totally, >> such that the source location cannot be found, or forging an address >> by providing a false identity that would mislead anyone trying >> to find the origin. >> Identifying the router's address should be sufficient in terms of >> determining where you are located. > Your interpretation may be reasonable, but the law certainly doesn't > say it, which means the court will interpret it as it sees fit -- and > the court's opinion may not be the same as yours. Unfortunately, we > wouldn't know until someone is charged. > Regardless, the letter of the law plainly states that NAT devices are > illegal, so why would the court decide otherwise? Besides, it's more > feel-good legislation. It is unenforceable. > For example, if I sent an "illegal packet" (one with an invalid source > address), the state would have to prove that it came from me, but of > course, it couldn't because it had an invalid source address. So how > would that work? Consider a 'sniffer' running at your provider, -recording- traffic ... It _knows_ where the packet came from, because it's monitoring *your* line, specifically. Any outgoing packet 'source address' that doesn't belong to you, and you're busted. It's -not- rocket science, folks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Even without a 'sniffer' tattling on you, it isn't all that difficult, although that would help nail down the case. Many ISPs also have something like 'caller-ID' noting the time and origin of all their incoming traffic. Let's say there is a 'mystery packet' on the line at 2:47 AM some date. A quick review of the ISP's logs for 2:47 AM that date will show only a few users on line; so much easier to narrow the search for the originator down to those few users. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Spyros Bartsocas Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 22:21:40 +0300 Subject: Re: Hardware ID Block of my Phone Number This situation reminds of the following that took place a few years ago. I was roaming with my GSM phone in Cyprus. One day the phone rang and my parents' phone number appeared in the display. The interesting part is that my parents' phone number is unlisted and thus does not appear on caller-id. There was something else strange about the caller-id. Instead of appearing as an international number (of the form +3xxxxxxxxx or 003xxxxxxxxx), it appeared as 03xxxxxxxxx (a Cyprus national number). I have roamed in a number of networks, but I did not see this behavior again. Spyros [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: After we talked about this here yesterday I decided to try an experiment. I call forwarded my 620-331 number to my 888-number, which automatically camps on to my distinctive ring 620-331 number. I used my cell phone to deliberaty dial *67 and each of my two 620-331 numbers. In both cases, the cell phone *67 call was sent to the Privacy Manager for handling, prior to my inserting my 888 number in the line. The *67 call hit my main line 620-331 number, saw it was being forwarded, and did so. When the forwarded call went through 888 and back to my distinctive ringing line it rang through with my name and number plainly shown ... no attempt by privacy manager to intercept it or demand a number, etc. It would appear that anyone in the line who does not honor the privacy flag does not pass the privacy request further down the line either. The first place in the line that privacy is lost, it stays lost for the rest of the call. 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 #372 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Apr 1 23:25:35 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h324PYP24244; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 23:25:35 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 23:25:35 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304020425.h324PYP24244@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 #373 TELECOM Digest Tue, 1 Apr 2003 23:25:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 373 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (Clint Olsen) BBC News Item: "SHOCKING TACTICS DISCOURAGE CELL PHONE RUDENESS" (Old Bear) AirWay Phone System (Jim Sielaff) Re: Avaya Reporting (Paul A Lee) Re: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked (Phil Earnhardt) Re: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked (Henry) What the Bell ... (Brandon Turok) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail (Dave Phelps) Re: Radio Shack CLID Box (was: Radio Shack DID Box) (Steven Lichter) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (Hudson Leighton) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (John David Galt) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (John Higdon) Fiber Optics (JosheX) Classical Radio (Neal McLain) Re: Installing the New Dial Phone (Gail M. Hall) 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: Clint Olsen Subject: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 00:41:02 GMT I tried to forward some SPAM that I received to abuse@aol.com and noticed it was still sitting in the queue. Curious, I telneted to port 25 and got this nice present: 550-The IP address you are using to connect to AOL is either open to 550-the free relaying of e-mail, is serving as an open proxy, or is a 550-dynamic (residential) IP address. AOL cannot accept further e-mail 550-transactions from your server until either your server is closed to 550-free relaying/proxy, or your ISP removes your IP address from their 550-list of dynamic IP addresses. For additional information, 550-please visit http://postmaster.info.aol.com. 550 Goodbye As it turns out I am hosting my personal domain from my ISP and it _is_ considered dynamic. I am most certainly not a relay since I myself use ordb.org to filter incoming email. Has anyone else experienced difficulties with these turkeys? I think AOL contributes more to the spam problem than they solve. -Clint [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They certainly do. I got **273** pieces of spam in one day in my email box at AOL. I called their customer service and listened to a recorded spiel telling how AOL was blocking one billion pieces of spam daily. I asked the lady then how come 273 got through to this customer alone? She said what I should do was block off all incoming mail to my box except that which came from other AOL customers. I tried that and still got 25 spams the next day **sent by their customers**. I wound up totally cancelling my AOL account rather than continue dealing with the spam although the lady did offer me two months of free service if I would please stick around. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 18:40:28 -0500 From: The Old Bear Subject: BBC News Item: "SHOCKING TACTICS DISCOURAGE CELL PHONE RUDENESS" The increasing frequency of loud or indiscreet conversations carried on in public by oblivious cell phone users has prompted design firm Ideo to come up with prototypes for handsets that would encourage people to be a little more tactful. The designs are not intended for mass production, but rather to spark debate about the social impact of mobile phones. One design features a phone sandwiched between two metal plates that send electrical shocks of increasing intensity as the caller raises his or her voice. Another one, dubbed the catapult phone, allows users to aim their own handsets at someone in the vicinity and at the press of a button launch a sound that disrupts their conversation. "They are intended to stimulate discussion about whether these phones are any more ridiculous than what we put up with every day," says Chief Designer Graham Pullin. Meanwhile, for those who do wish to exercise politeness, there's a quiet phone that allows users to simply press a button to relay an automated "yes" or "no" answer to the person on the other end. source: BBC News (1 Apr 2003) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/2906135.stm ------------------------------ From: Jim Sielaff Subject: AirWay Phone System Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 11:20:36 -0500 Anyone familur with the Air Way wireless phone system? Is is any good? www.airwaysystem.com ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Avaya Reporting Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 14:48:34 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V22 #371, jeanmarccheong@yahoo.com (JM) wrote (in part): > Hi, does anyone know if you can customize how reporting is done on the > Avaya Definity? More specifically if I can customize how service > levels are calculated. Try sending your question to , and include specifics on the Definity and CMS software releases, as well as what client (CentreVu) software you have. I understand what you're asking, but I don't know the answer to your question, especially without knowing which release's features you have available. Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 21:58:44 -0700 On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:33:47 -0800, Linc Madison wrote: > I also saw signs that the hacker(s) hijacked the DNS for the > aljazeera.net domain. This was covered by a forbes.com story on 3/27. From http://www.forbes.com/business/newswire/2003/03/27/rtr922027.html "[...] Hackers have blitzed the site with meaningless data in an effort to squeeze out legitimate traffic and render the site inaccessible, a technique known as a 'denial of service' attack. That attack eased at around 3 a.m. London time on Thursday, Al Seddiqui said, but the domain name was hijacked shortly after. The Qatar-based network had tried to switch the address back but was enied access by domain-name seller Network Solutions Inc. , he said. 'We can't say it's their fault or our fault,' he said. A Network Solutions spokesman was not immediately available for comment." Perhaps the problem above was the same one that Scot Hacker noted on an O'Reilly website last month. From http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/2797 : "I've been taking every opportunity to move domain registrations off of Network Solutions and onto Dotster. Currently trying to transfer betips.net to a new owner and a new registrar simultaneously, but to do that, I need to retrieve a password. And to do that, Netsol's password-retrieval system needs to be up and running. For a week now, I've gotten nothing but a 'this service temporarily unavailable' message from them. Nor has their technical support team responded to my requests. Netsol is being trampled under its own weight and sloth by dozens of smaller, nimbler competitors. Now, it seems, they're resorting to desperation to keep people from migrating off their services." --phil ------------------------------ From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry) Subject: Re: English Al-Jazeera Website Hacked Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 13:55:08 +0300 Organization: Elisa Internet customer Dave Garland wrote: > It was a dark and stormy night when Monty Solomon > wrote: >> Arab satellite TV network Al-Jazeera launched an English-language >> website Monday. On Tuesday, its Web host says it was hit with a denial- >> of-service attack, but an Al-Jazeera representative blames the problem >> on unexpectedly high traffic. > They seem to have another English site up: > http://www.aljazeerah.us/ > http://www.aljazeerah.info/ A week ago, 25 March, this site was brought to my attention. I went there and found that they had a very clear disclaimer saying that they were NOT affiliated with the Qatari TV network. Now that notice seems to have disappeared -- but neither do they claim anywhere that they _are_ connected in any way. Note (a) the difference in spelling the name and (b) the fact that this 'aljazeerah' is based in Georgia, USA. Cheers, Henry ------------------------------ From: Brandon Turok Subject: What the Bell ... Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 05:39:47 -0800 Organization: Astound Broadband Terrifying things are happening at the phone company ... http://www.sbc-pacificbell.com/ ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 22:06:05 -0600 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , barry.margolin@level3.com says: > It's possible to trace back packets with forged IP addresses by monitoring > the link layer. Sure it is, if I'm under scrutiny and being monitored already when I send the packet with the forged source. And they have to be connected directly to my network segment. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 01 Apr 2003 03:02:47 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Radio Shack CLID Box (was: Radio Shack DID Box) marcusjervis wrote: > Funny, I had this same problem yesterday with my Radio Shack 43-958. > It happened while I was replacing the batteries. Turns out that model > draws loop current from the line when the batteries are low or > removed. Any chance it is a battery problem? That would make sence except the unit has a power supply and it is working. I replace the batteries when I get back home. 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. ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 21:30:07 -0600 Organization: MRRP In article , msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote: > John Higdon writes: >> Two changes in the law could bring spam to its knees: >> The first would be to legally declare spam as "damage" in and of >> itself. ... The second would be to make those who benefit from >> spam equally liable with the spammers themselves. > And what if the spam comes from, oh, China? > [Can you say "Subject:14 GROUPS OF CHINESE PRODUCTS"? :-)] > Mark Brader, Toronto | "GUALITY IS FIRST" > msb@vex.net | --slogan of "Dongda electron CO.,LTD" What I find intresting is that some of spam that does make it past my ISP's filtering, does not seem to be selling anything, and does not include anyway of contacting the sender. Makes you wonder. Of course the fact that I am using a antique version of Eudora on a antique Mac may have somthing to do with it. Hudson http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ From: John David Galt Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 20:34:22 -0800 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society John Higdon wrote: > The first would be to legally declare spam as "damage" in and of itself. > Allow spammed individuals, ISP, companies, and anyone else who handles > email to be able to sue spammers in court without having to prove > specific damages. Sounds nice in principle, but I cannot think of any way to define spam such that some legitimate messages would not also make their senders vulnerable to this type of suit. Do we want to make every business that sends out e-mail, first get a signed paper showing permission from each recipient? If so, legitimate web businesses become impractical (or at least are forced to slow to snail-mail speed for each new customer). > The second would be to make those who benefit from spam equally liable > with the spammers themselves. It is very hard to find some spammers, but > the company or individual whose product is featured in the spam has to > come out of the shadows far enough to do business at some point. The moment this is enacted, I predict a huge flood of spams "on behalf of" every business that has even a few enemies, all pointing to legitimate 800 numbers or web sites of the business, all sent without its knowledge. Political candidates are already sending out spam "from" their opponents. > If a few high profile cases featuring high monetary awards were to be > won in court, spammers ... and more importantly those who utilize > spammers' efforts ... would be far more circumspect in their advertising > methods. Dry up the demand, add some solid liability, and you would see > spam fade away. Along with legitimate advertising lists. (FWIW, I don't send any out, but I do receive several and want to keep getting them.) ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 11:47:42 -0800 In article , msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote: > John Higdon writes: >> Two changes in the law could bring spam to its knees: >> The first would be to legally declare spam as "damage" in and of >> itself. ... The second would be to make those who benefit from >> spam equally liable with the spammers themselves. > And what if the spam comes from, oh, China? I'm unaware of anyone doing direct business with US consumers from China. That means that they either have a presence in the US, or they are partnered or contracting with a US firm ... who could be targeted in a spam suit. Believe me, even though your house may be full of Chinese products, you can bet that American companies facilitated putting them there. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Joshman7@hotmail.com (JosheX) Subject: Fiber Optics Date: 31 Mar 2003 12:17:19 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Fiber Optics discussion and information board. Please help the effort to start this board if you have an interst in fiber optics or backbone technology. thank you :) Josh http://www.webula.net/dir/computers/internet/fiber_optics.php ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 22:49:21 -0600 From: Neal McLain Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com Organization: Ann's Garden Subject: Classical Radio PAT wrote: > I do not like the idea of this getting to be as obnoxious as > our very own KRPS 88.9 FM from Pittsburgh, Kansas where the > classical music is interuppted several times per day with > constant (all last week and this week) fund raising pitches > for public radio, but I have to survive also. Well, Pat, then try WQXR, New York, at . It's a commercial station, but they block most commercials on their internet feed, substituting snippets of music instead. No fund-raising (at least not so far), and minimal commercials! Unfortunately, WFMT Chicago is no longer available on the internet. Their site explains, "High Cost of Royalties and Uncertainty surrounding web streaming forces 98.7 WFMT to discontinue service October 14. Joining hundreds of other radio stations, the management of 98.7 WFMT, Chicago's classical fine arts station, has made the difficult decision to discontinue streaming the station's signal over the Internet. WFMT's signal streaming will cease on Monday, October 14 [2002]." Neal McLain nmclain@annsgarden.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I never did care for WFMT, either on air or on the net. They always have been a bunch of pissants in their programming and announcing. They were okay back in the 1950's when they first went on the air, but once WNIB went on the air in 1955 and switched to a totally classical format (except for overnight hours) in 1965 I started listening to them exclusively. What Sonia Florian (co-owner of WNIB with her husband Bill) started in 1955 for a five thousand dollar investment (1955 dollars) and spent another fifty to a hundred thousand dollars on over the years in maintainence costs was sold to Clear Channel in 2000 for $165 **million** dollars. For a year or two, WNIB had been ahead of WFMT in the 'ratings' for the limited classical music market. (WFMT was in 21st place, WNIB was in 20th place) in the Chicago market. Clear Channel did not want the advertisers for classical music; they were not interested in the mailing list of subscribers recieving the WNIB monthly program guide. All they wanted were those two frequencies, 96.9 and 97.1 which WNIB had squatted on for 45 years. The sale was in October, 2000 and the FCC approved the sale and the change of format in February, 2001. After that black day in October, 2000 when Sonia and Bill signed the papers, no one was ever able to reach them by mail or phone again (I tried, no luck). After 40 plus years of getting people to send in twenty dollars for a one year subscription to the program guide 'to help our station stay on the air with limited amounts of commercial advertising'... it was not even announced publicly until the day *after* the sale. Ironically, I heard the news of the sale on their competitor WFMT whose announcer told us at the noon news that day that 'our esteemed friends, Bill and Sonia Florian have sold their little radio station WNIB to Clear Channel for 165 **million** dollars, pending FCC approval. We asked Sonia to come over and talk to us on the radio about it; she had no comments to make.' On WNIB itself, there was never so much as a mention. It just vanished a couple days after FCC approval came through, when Clear Channel started playing their brand of music on endless loop cartridges. One of Sonia's employees told me she treated the help pretty well on closing day. WQXR is okay, and I listen to it now and then on the net, but on my Bose radio setup and amplified antenna I hear KRPS (89.9) in Pittsburg, Kansas pretty well. They have just about raised the $89 thousand dollars they need for this year's budget so their fund raising chatter has almost ended. They also have a couple of translator/repeater stations including 102.9 in Bartlesville, OK which is closer than Pittsburgh by fifty miles; the trouble is our local KIND at 102.7 runs them off the air locally. They also have a repeater in Iola, Kansas (91.9) but that is too far away, and a local repeater for American Family Association (KAAF) is on 91.9 here which also zaps them, so I tune the 'original'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Gail M. Hall Subject: Re: Installing the New Dial Phone Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 03:54:45 -0500 Reply-To: gmhall@apk.net On Sun, 30 Mar 2003 11:13:08 -0700, in comp.dcom.telecom message , you wrote: [Joey wrote] >> I recently received a bunch of new discs brimming with old time radio >> shows. Among them was a charming little 15-minute episode of Fibber >> McGee And Molly, entitled "McGee's New Dial Phone", in which, >> obviously, the McGee household finally gets their new dial telephone. >> He calls up his friend the doctor to brag, but can't reach him. But >> then that same friend calls HIM shortly afterward... from his new *CAR* >> phone. Then he gets into an accident because he's not paying enough >> attention - boy, isn't it interesting that the more things change, the >> more things stay the same? :-) (This was broadcast on February 8th >> 1954, btw) >> This file will be included on Telecom Digest Archives CD-ROM's from >> this point forward - see Pat's regular "share day" announcements for >> more on that. If anybody would like it to be emailed to them (it's >> 3,511 kilobytes, which will expand by about 40% when emailed), drop a >> note to me and I'll get a copy off to you. [snip] TELECOM Digest Editor then noted: > I have a copy of this from Joey, and I was not aware that Peoria, Illinois > (where Fibber McGee and his wife Molly actually lived) was 'cut over' > to dial from manual service in 1954, and in any event telco did not do > cut overs quite in this manner. Typically a repair person visited your > home and installed a dial mechanism on your (manual) phone anywhere > from one to three months prior to the actual cutover. Most people had > a 500 set in those days, with a removable face plate where the dial > would be installed in due time. Even 302 phones had a face plate like > that with room inside for the guts. The dial was installed, with a > new number sticker for the front and the subscriber was handed a > little cardboard card which stated, "DO NOT use the dial until (date). > Until (date [usually at 2:00 AM on a Saturday morning]) continue to > place calls by instructing the operator." Then promptly at 2:00 AM > on the (usually) Saturday morning specified, the 'number please' lady > went away and you started getting dial tone instead. Even the very > old 'candlestick' style phones had a way to install a dial mechanism > on them, but phones older than that had to be replaced, but you still > got the 'number please' lady until 2:00 AM on the date specified. I remember when the telephone man came and took our crank phone away and installed a knew "getting-ready-for-dial" phone. They said that they would be installing a dial system before long, so the phone had the "works" in it but the dial was covered up with a cover plate to match the rest of the phone. From then until they installed the dial system, the operator would come on when we picked up the phone. Some months later (might have been more than a year for all I can remember -- too much fog in the brain), the phone man came out again and said the change was made. He came and took off the cover plate and did whatever else he needed to the phone and from then on we dialed the numbers. Trouble is, we still were on a party line with several phones on a line. So you had to know if a number you were calling was on your line or not. If it was on your line, you dialed and then had to hang up quickly so the phone would ring. But if you were on the half of the line you couldn't hear the ring for, you just had to guess at when the ring was finished. Then you picked up the receiver again to see if the people answered. Something was similar before the dial system was installed and you had to give the number to the operator. You would have to hang up if you were calling someone on your line. Over the years they have improved those lines where my folks live, and all the phones are on private lines. People can use their modems without much problem, too. > Nor did the telco hand out all new numbers. For most people with > *private* lines, the 'new' number simply consisted of the new prefix > and the same last four digits you had all along. Shorter (one, two or > three digit numbers) had the requisite number of zeros prepended to > the front of the old number to fill it out to seven digits. I remember that was the case where I lived back then. We had had 4-digit phone numbers, and all they did was to add the exchange to make it a 7-digit number to be compatible with the upcoming national direct dialing plan. Speaking of direct dialing for l/d numbers, I was surprised when I first went to Lawrence, Kansas, in 1959 and found they had direct dialing enabled. I was really excited to see this was coming into reality instead of just a dream. But I was again surprised when I went to see friends in Topeka (the state capital), and found that Topeka did not have that enabled yet. I don't know when Topeka got direct dialing for l/d numbers enabled. Topeka was a larger city than Lawrence, so maybe it was easier for the phone company to install it in Lawrence? I wonder. Gail in Ohio USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think larger cities were converted first in most cases. New York City had dial service in the 1920's I think and Chicago started in 1938 but was both ways until after the War ended in 1946. NYC and Chicago both had those extremely noisy panel and stepping switch things that you could hear a block away on a hot summer night when telco had all the windows open. Since this is April 1, I will squeak in one last message for share day and I am *not fooling around*. Your money helps keep the Digest alive. You join me as 'partners' in sharing telecom news around the net and to people who want to know 'how phones work', etc. Send whatever donation you feel is appropriate using a credit card via PayPal; see the clicker on the bottom of our web page which is at http://telecom-digest.org or mail a check to me at: Patrick Townson / PO Box 50 / Independence, KS 67301-0050 Be sure to include your own mailing address if you want a copy of the CD mailed to you. 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 #373 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr 2 23:08:53 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3348rX29768; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 23:08:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 23:08:53 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304030408.h3348rX29768@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 #374 TELECOM Digest Wed, 2 Apr 2003 23:09:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 374 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson A Patent On Porn (Monty Solomon) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (John Higdon) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (temp7@thewolfden.org) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (John Meissen) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (Richard D G Cox) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (Will Herman) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (dlavoie) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail (David B. Horvath, CCP) Re: Hardware ID Block of my Phone Number (John McHarry) Re: Is Your Television Watching You? (temp7@thewolfden.org) Re: The Security Flag in the IPv4 Header (Michael D. Sullivan) Freeware: WiFi Hotspot Directory Updated for PDAs Tablets PCs (A Nicholas) Re: What the Bell ... ?! (Mark J Cuccia) 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, 2 Apr 2003 10:07:00 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A Patent On Porn Streaming Video A Patent On Porn Seth Lubove, 04.02.03, 9:00 AM ET NEW YORK - It must have seemed like easy pickings at the time. Acacia Research says it owns five U.S. and 17 international patents covering the transmission and receipt of digital audio and digital video content, otherwise known as streaming media. But before attempting to enforce its patents with big outfits such as Yahoo! (nasdaq: YHOO - news - people ) and The Walt Disney Co. (nyse: DIS - news - people ), Acacia instead chose to go after the smallish adult Internet sites that peddle videos of women (and men) doffing their clothes -- and much more. Beginning last year, the company sent a series of letters to 700 racy Web sites with offers to arrange royalty deals, typically consisting of 1% to 2% of gross revenue. Do the deal or we'll see you in court, warned Acacia. Eight firms agreed to Acacia's terms. But 40 didn't, and Acacia promptly slapped them with lawsuits. Rather than buckling, though, several of the porno sites joined together and stood their ground. Now Acacia is in the fight of its life and may even face a shareholder revolt as a result. ... http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/02/cz_sl_0402porn.html ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 22:29:36 -0800 In article , Clint Olsen wrote: > I tried to forward some SPAM that I received to abuse@aol.com and noticed > it was still sitting in the queue. Curious, I telneted to port 25 and got > this nice present: > 550-The IP address you are using to connect to AOL is either open to > 550-the free relaying of e-mail, is serving as an open proxy, or is a > 550-dynamic (residential) IP address. AOL cannot accept further e-mail > 550-transactions from your server until either your server is closed to > 550-free relaying/proxy, or your ISP removes your IP address from their > 550-list of dynamic IP addresses. For additional information, > 550-please visit http://postmaster.info.aol.com. > 550 Goodbye > As it turns out I am hosting my personal domain from my ISP and it _is_ > considered dynamic. I am most certainly not a relay since I myself use > ordb.org to filter incoming email. So why don't you get your ISP to delist your address from its declared dynamic address space? > Has anyone else experienced difficulties with these turkeys? I think > AOL contributes more to the spam problem than they solve. I do exactly what AOL does: I refuse email from addresses that are declared to be "dynamic" or "dial-up". You are banging on the wrong entity. You need to talk to your ISP, or get a better connection. I applaud AOL for doing exactly what they ought to be doing. I've probably been doing exactly that for several years more than they have! John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 09:12:26 -0600 From: temp7@thewolfden.org Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks > I tried to forward some SPAM that I received to abuse@aol.com and noticed > it was still sitting in the queue. Curious, I telneted to port 25 and got > this nice present: > 550-The IP address you are using to connect to AOL is either open to > 550-the free relaying of e-mail, is serving as an open proxy, or is a > 550-dynamic (residential) IP address. AOL cannot accept further e-mail > 550-transactions from your server until either your server is closed to > 550-free relaying/proxy, or your ISP removes your IP address from their > 550-list of dynamic IP addresses. For additional information, 550-please > visit http://postmaster.info.aol.com. 550 > Goodbye > As it turns out I am hosting my personal domain from my ISP and it _is_ > considered dynamic. I am most certainly not a relay since I myself use > ordb.org to filter incoming email. > Has anyone else experienced difficulties with these turkeys? I think AOL > contributes more to the spam problem than they solve. Ahh! Nice to see they're finally admitting it. A year or so ago, I noticed all the email from my home server was being successfully ACCEPTED by them and then never delivered. It just went into the email black hole, never to be seen again. I went so far as to actually get an AOL account, turned off all the filtering and tried to send myself email from my home machine. When it never appeared, I submitted a bug report. Customer service and I went back and forth for about 45 days and they just couldn't understand why none of the email wasn't getting through to my AOL account. (I had a pretty good idea, but try explaining this to level 1 support.) Level 2 tech support was little better. I eventually gave up with them, cancelled the AOL account (got to complain during the "goodbye" phone call) and converted to a static IP since my wife's business had a lot of customers from AOL. I can kinda see their point. If someone can start their own email server, then they don't need an open relay; they just create your own and go to town, and with dynamic IP blocks, there is no way to maintain an identity of a bad machine. Eventually, all the IP's would be blocked anyway; this way is just a bit quicker. -W ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@shell1.aracnet.com (John Meissen) Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: 2 Apr 2003 19:19:51 GMT Organization: Aracnet Internet Reply-To: jmeissen@aracnet.com In article , Clint Olsen wrote: >I tried to forward some SPAM that I received to abuse@aol.com and noticed >it was still sitting in the queue. Curious, I telneted to port 25 and got >this nice present: ... > As it turns out I am hosting my personal domain from my ISP and it _is_ > considered dynamic. I am most certainly not a relay since I myself use > ordb.org to filter incoming email. > Has anyone else experienced difficulties with these turkeys? I think > AOL contributes more to the spam problem than they solve. As someone who hosts his own domain at a static address, I can tell you that a significant amount of spam comes from throw-away dial-up accounts. Spammers will acquire accounts (AOL free trials were a major source) just long enough to dial in and spew their garbage. I reject a significant amount of crap every day orginating from dial-up or ppp pools at bellsouth, uswest, and dozens of others. The only way to block these sources is to reject SMTP connections from addresses that are part of these pools of dynamically assigned IP addresses. If you have a dynamic address it should be trivial for you to relay your outgoing mail through your ISP's mail server, unless you're sending such a large volume that they would consider it abusive. Some ISP's, such as Earthlink, actually force you to do that by blocking outgoing connections to port 25 from their dynamic IP pool, and I applaud them for that. john- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 21:40:59 +0100 From: Richard D G Cox Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Reply-To: nospam@numbering.com Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited At 00:41 GMT on Wed, 02 Apr 2003 , Clint Olsen wrote: > I tried to forward some SPAM that I received to abuse@aol.com and > noticed it was still sitting in the queue. Curious, I telneted to > port 25 and got this nice present: ... > As it turns out I am hosting my personal domain from my ISP and it > _is_ considered dynamic. I am most certainly not a relay since > I myself use ordb.org to filter incoming email. AOL are doing what many network administrators have been doing for some time now -- only accepting incoming mail from a server with a STATIC IP. The reason should be obvious -- nobody can successfully block spam from a single host on a dynamic IP, when two minutes later the IP may well have changed, and any block will hit an unintended victim. Spammers still utilise this loophole with throwaway accounts on dynamic dial-up IPs, sending directly to the target server -- producing what is known as "Direct-to-MX" spam. That's why users are meant to submit all mail from dynamic IP addresses -- preferably to the nominated smart-host for that IP range, or alternatively to a separate mailserver with whose owner they have reached an agreement for mail to be relayed -- and in the latter case they will need to use the SMTP AUTH protocol. > I think AOL contributes more to the spam problem than they solve. AOL does contribute extensively to the spam problem -- not least by accepting mail with forged sender details, and then sending a bounce message to the innocent victim whose email address was used without permission as the claimed sender, in respect of each AOL addressee that they find does not exist. But the situation you referred to is one example of AOL starting to get things RIGHT. At last! > [TELECOM Digest Editor Noted: I wound up totally cancelling my AOL > account rather than continue dealing with the spam Best move you could have made. Whatever took you so long ;-)) Richard Cox [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Richard, 'what took me so long' was that AOL has a really simple mail interface to use, I know a few local area users of it, and felt like keeping a simple thing available to use. Also, for a few years, several years ago, AOL distributed the Digest, and gave me a complimentary account to use for that limited purpose. When they discontinued the free account for me, they were up to version 7 in their software, it appeared to be getting easier and easier to use, and they kept saying version 8 would be along 'soon'. For 4.95 per month (the BYOA plan), I figured what the heck, but even that got to be a nuisance, paying five dollars per month for a mailbox chock full of spam every day and little else. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Will Herman Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 21:32:29 GMT I've got the same problem. I just started seeing it a couple of days ago. This is the case of using an axe instead instead of a pocket knife to solve the problem. I'm trying to find a workaround, but haven't gotten there yet. Clint Olsen wrote in message news:telecom22.373.1@telecom-digest.org: > I tried to forward some SPAM that I received to abuse@aol.com and noticed > it was still sitting in the queue. Curious, I telneted to port 25 and got > this nice present: > 550-The IP address you are using to connect to AOL is either open to > 550-the free relaying of e-mail, is serving as an open proxy, or is a > 550-dynamic (residential) IP address. AOL cannot accept further e-mail > 550-transactions from your server until either your server is closed to > 550-free relaying/proxy, or your ISP removes your IP address from their > 550-list of dynamic IP addresses. For additional information, > 550-please visit http://postmaster.info.aol.com. > 550 Goodbye > As it turns out I am hosting my personal domain from my ISP and it _is_ > considered dynamic. I am most certainly not a relay since I myself use > ordb.org to filter incoming email. > Has anyone else experienced difficulties with these turkeys? I think > AOL contributes more to the spam problem than they solve. > -Clint > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They certainly do. I got **273** pieces > of spam in one day in my email box at AOL. I called their customer > service and listened to a recorded spiel telling how AOL was blocking > one billion pieces of spam daily. I asked the lady then how come 273 > got through to this customer alone? She said what I should do was > block off all incoming mail to my box except that which came from > other AOL customers. I tried that and still got 25 spams the next day > **sent by their customers**. I wound up totally cancelling my AOL > account rather than continue dealing with the spam although the lady > did offer me two months of free service if I would please stick > around. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dlavoie@my-deja.com (dlavoie) Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: 2 Apr 2003 14:23:17 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Same issue here, started yesterday I believe. What a bunch of boneheads. I can see them blocking open relays, but all residential IP addresses? Oh well, I guess no email to AOL users, their loss. -Dave ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 18:40:11 EST From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail I don't know if using NAT/a firewall would be illegal under the new law, but how about using your computer-risk-illiterate neighbor's wifi? The packet certainly isn't coming from his house or his computers. Or a real world example: was working in a hotel room with some other computer dweebs; we used our wifi cards to set up a peer-to-peer network. I noticed an open AP that seemed to be in the apartment building across the street. It was wide open as I was able to traceroute back to my home ISP. In general, I would contend that neither example would not be "theft of service" if he left it openly available (just as if he left a water hose running on the sidewalk and I got a cool spash on a hot day). Of course, the open AP may violate the Internet providers TOS, but that's not *my* problem -- I don't have a contract with them. David B. Horvath, CCP Consultant, Author, International Lecturer, Adjunct Professor Board Member: ICCP Educational Foundation, ICCP Test Council, and Philadelphia Association of Systems Administrators ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Hardware ID Block of my Phone Number Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 19:37:29 -0500 Geoff wrote: > I'm in the BellSouth region (southeast) and have a hardware block on > my phone. The hardware block has always worked great no matter where > I called. However, when I called my company's headquarters in > Wisconson, my phone number showed up on their system. > My company has offices in Connecticut and North Carolina. The > hardware block works perfectly in the other offices. All three offices > use MCI as their long distance carrier. > Does anyone know why the phone will sometimes show up and has this > happened to anyone else? If they have an ISDN PRI incoming trunk group, the CLID information is still there, with the do not display bit set. Not all PBXs honor this. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 20:37:23 -0600 From: temp7@thewolfden.org Subject: Re: Is Your Television Watching You? At 06:47 PM 4/1/2003, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well again, Monty seems to be filling us up > with a lot of non-news. This has been the case for a long time in cities > like Chicago, where the police whisper some of their venom and everyone > else is expected to run and jump and stand at attention, and never cross > or defy them (police). About two years ago, a satellite distributor in > Chicago reported to the *Chicago Tribune* that he had been asked for > customer records on a few people. The police of course denied it, but why > would the satellite firm lie about it? PAT] Maybe for the same reason you re-reported it, i.e. extreme dislike of the Chicago police? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What's not to like about a loveable bunch like Chicago police? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: The Security Flag in the IPv4 Header Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 02:44:17 GMT On Tue, 1 Apr 2003 12:19:44 -0500, Monty Solomon posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: [snip Peter Neumann's message, The Security Flag in the IPv4 Header] > It is well worth your reading the full RFC, which is now available: > ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3514.txt From which one discovers the following gem: 6. IANA Considerations This document defines the behavior of security elements for the 0x0 and 0x1 values of this bit. Behavior for other values of the bit may be defined only by IETF consensus [RFC2434]. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: riverwlk@ntsource.com (A Nicholas) Subject: Freeware: WiFi Hotspot Directory Updated For PDAs, Tablets and PCs Date: 1 Apr 2003 19:31:04 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Improved Directory Helps Business People Find Wireless Internet Access For more information contact Tracy Wilson riverwalk@makewirelesswork.com Naperville, IL Riverwalk Software today announced version 2.0 of The WiFi HotSpot Directory, a free database of over 2700 public wireless internet access locations. Our first edition attracted thousands of downloads as WiFi users appreciate the ability to find local HotSpots when they are offline looking to go online. We fill a need, explained Tracy Wilson, director of marketing for Riverwalk Software. In this edition we have added over 500 new sites including several new service providers. Our coverage in Canada for example is greatly improved through cooperation with FatPort. "Our directory is rapidly becoming the preferred resource for business travelers and windshield warriors who are on the road frequently for their jobs," comments Wilson. The database is being provided at no charge to consumers and has been completed in cooperation with a number of leading HotSpot providers. Riverwalk is providing the directory in Microsoft Excel, Palm Address Book, Handmark's MobileDB and comma delimited ASCII formats. Version 2.0 now includes also comes in XML support and also supports the beta version of Microsoft Office 2003. "Our goal is to expand this Directory both in terms of the number of locations included in the directory as well as ways in which the data could be used with other programs. XML support increases our flexibility to work with newer applications," stated Ms. Wilson. The Wireless HotSpot Directory v2.0 is designed to be used by Laptop, Tablet PC and PDAs. "We've found overwhelming popularity of our product within Palm and Pocket PC users," said Ms. Wilson. Users have the ability to either receive the directory and updates monthly from Riverwalk Software directly at www.makewirelesswork.com/directory.htm HotSpot providers can have their sites added to the database by emailing wifi@busdevcenter.com. Freeware providers can add the directory to their site by contacting us at busdev@makewireless.com . Makewirelesswork.com is a website developed by Riverwalk Software to provide information and software to facilitate the use of wireless internet access at home and via WiFi Hotspots. Additional information regarding Riverwalk Software can be found at www.busdevcenter.com . ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 00:55:09 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: What the Bell ... ?! On Tuesday 1 April 2003 (April Fool's Day, BTW), Brandon Turok (news@loonquawl.com) wrote: > Terrifying things are happening at the phone company ... > http://www.sbc-pacificbell.com/ This URL 'translates' instead to: http://www.loonquawl.com/bell/ Note the domain, loonquawl.com is the same as Brandon's email address! The "Bell" URL/visual starts off with the current four R-BOC corporate logos, SBC (no 'bell' logo anymore), VeriZon (no 'bell' logo depicted here, although the local telco side of VeriZon, *BOTH* BA/NYNEX *AND* former *independent* GTE/Contel, does use the 1970's-era 'bell' logo), Qwest (no 'bell' logo), and BellSouth (still maintains the 'bell' logo of the 1970's for local telco and corporate stuff, except Cingular)... There is some text that flashes, and then the logo images move around, to be replaced by a LARGE 1970's-era 'Bell' logo, and the word (in original font) 'Bell' printed to the right of the logo. HOWEVER, on the main "logos" page -- what about Cincinnati Bell? Lucent/Bell Labs?, AT&T?, Telcordia/Bellcore? Neustar-NANPA?, ATIS?, NECA?, Bell Canada? *All* of the above entity names have "claim" in small to LARGE ways at being once part of the "Bell (Telephone) System"! SNET, Southern New England Telephone, was part of the Bell System as well, although like Cincinatti Bell and Bell Canada, SNET was not majority held by AT&T, even though it was part of the same patent and license and BSP standards as the other majority-held (or 100% held by AT&T) BOCs. But SNET has been held by SBC since the later 1990's, and SBC is already one of the four remaining R-BOCs as displayed on the first page of this parody webpage. I also took a look at other pages at loonquawl.com -- most parody type pages, some telco-related, but not all of them are ... And while I would personally like to see the "Bell System" reunited again, I tend to think that the posting of this Bell System type URL, http://www.sbc-pacificbell.com/ = http://www.loonquawl.com/bell/ is more of something intendend for 1-April, i.e., it's an April Fool's "joke"! :) Mark J. Cuccia New Orleans LA USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, it was an April Fool's Joke, and I thought a rather good one! Thanks, Brandon! 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 #374 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 3 00:52:40 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h335qdc01422; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 00:52:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 00:52:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304030552.h335qdc01422@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 #375 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Apr 2003 00:53:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 375 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Installing the New Dial Phone (Wes Leatherock) Re: Installing the New Dial Phone (Joseph) KSU Manuels and Wiring (John Dziurlaj) Re: Installing the New Dial Phone (Ed Ellers) Chicago: Communist East Berlin on Lake Michigan (Jack) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (John Higdon) Loop Start/Ground Start? (Alec Waters) Siemens Gigaset 8825 Question (Richard Sniderman) Re: Fiber Optics (No Spam) PlanetOmni.com Helps Military Keep In Touch With Loved Ones (Eworldwire) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (Dave Close) Byline Article: Integration and Telco (Kate Tang) Montreal Help Wanted: Senior Software Designers With SIP and GSM (Mario) Internet Business Avoid! (happyminded212@yahoo.com) Re: What the Bell ... (John David Galt) Last Laugh! - Re: Classic Radio (?) (Mark J Cuccia) 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: wesrock@aol.com (Wes Leatherock) Date: 02 Apr 2003 14:33:02 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Installing the New Dial Phone On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 03:54:45 -0500 Gail M. Hall gmhall@apk.net wrote: [ ... snip ... ] > Speaking of direct dialing for l/d numbers, I was surprised when I > first went to Lawrence, Kansas, in 1959 and found they had direct > dialing enabled. I was really excited to see this was coming into > reality instead of just a dream. But I was again surprised when I > went to see friends in Topeka (the state capital), and found that > Topeka did not have that enabled yet. I don't know when Topeka got > direct dialing for l/d numbers enabled. Topeka was a larger city than > Lawrence, so maybe it was easier for the phone company to install it > in Lawrence? I wonder. > Gail in Ohio USA The larger cities were often among the last to get direct dialing. As manual offices were converted to 5XB in smaller cities, direct dialing was sometimes (later usually) included, as part of the conversion. Among the first cities to get direct dialing were Enid, Oklahoma, Harlingen, Texas, and Waxahachie, Texas. Adding direct dialing to larger cities, perhaps usually at that time predominantly step-by-step, was a major project and usually done with Centralized Automatic Message Accounting (CAMA). By the time direct dialing came to Oklahoma City, for example, so much of Oklahoma already had direct dialing that customers in Oklahoma City were well familiar with it. The usual educational program was used, but customers were so well aware of how to use it that the two-year projection of the percentage of dialable traffic that customers dialed was reached in the first couple of weeks. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Installing the New Dial Phone Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 07:41:04 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 03:54:45 -0500, Gail M. Hall wrote: > Trouble is, we still were on a party line with several phones on a > line. So you had to know if a number you were calling was on your > line or not. If it was on your line, you dialed and then had to hang > up quickly so the phone would ring. But if you were on the half of > the line you couldn't hear the ring for, you just had to guess at when > the ring was finished. Then you picked up the receiver again to see > if the people answered. I know this was not the case in the Bell System, but I know that several independents had the same sort of arrangement that you'd dial a number and if it was on your line you'd hear a busy-back and then you'd hang up. Because they had harmonic ringers on the party lines you couldn't hear the phone ring so you'd replace the receiver and after a period you'd pick up the receiver and your party would be on the line. The other party who answered the line would hear a "tick-tick-tick-tick" which indicated to them that another party on their line was trying to call them. The tick-tick would of course go away when the original party came back on the line after they answered. Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group ------------------------------ From: Dziurlaj@hotmail.com (John Dziurlaj) Subject: KSU Manuels and Wiring Date: 2 Apr 2003 18:00:16 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hello, I recently acquired a AT&T Merlin System, and a Omega Phone II Phone System, from a local school. The AT&T system appears to be easier to setup then the Omega system, but I have no manuals for it, same with the Omega Phone. Is there a company who offers these sorts of resources for cheap. I didn't pay anything for these systems, so I don't really want to put much money into them. The Omegaphone also has two weird cables with a million wires coming out of them, which I have no idea how to wire. I think I am capable to wire these myself, I do have a background in comp networking, but have never dealt in depth with Telco systems. Is there any good reading and/or websites for newbies to this field? Any suggestions would be of great help. Thanks! John ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Installing the New Dial Phone Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 02:00:28 -0500 Gail M. Hall wrote: > I remember that was the case where I lived back then. We had had > 4-digit phone numbers, and all they did was to add the exchange to > make it a 7-digit number to be compatible with the upcoming national > direct dialing plan. That was often true in 4- and 5-digit areas, but areas with 6 digits (2L-4N) often got a very different NNX that was unrelated to the prefix they had had -- for example my grandparents here in Louisville had an ARlington number in the 6-digit days, but when 2L-5N came in during the mid-50s that changed to SPring 6 with the last four digits staying the same. > Speaking of direct dialing for l/d numbers, I was surprised when I first > went to Lawrence, Kansas, in 1959 and found they had direct dialing enabled. > I was really excited to see this was coming into reality instead of just a > dream. But I was again surprised when I went to see friends in Topeka (the > state capital), and found that Topeka did not have that enabled yet. I > don't know when Topeka got direct dialing for l/d numbers enabled. Topeka > was a larger city than Lawrence, so maybe it was easier for the phone > company to install it in Lawrence? I wonder." The switches could have been of different types. Which reminds me of a weird situation we used to have in Louisville; when we first got dial service (around 1930) in the downtown area this was provided with a step-by-step switch. As demand grew this was supplemented by a crossbar switch on a different floor of the same building. When Touch-Tone was introduced in the 1960s this was only available in those prefixes served by the crossbar switch, but when international direct dialing was introduced in the early 1970s it was only available in those prefixes served by the SxS switch! This split continued until a second ESS was installed, some time in the late 1970s, to replace the crossbar switch (the first ESS here replaced the SxS switch, in 1975). ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 00:14:10 -0500 From: Jack Subject: Chicago: Communist East Berlin on Lake Michigan > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So what else is old news? The Chicago > Police Department has maintained a 'red squad' for forty years. And > they do not hesitate to afford the victims of their spying all the > 'street punishment' they can. I still find it hard to believe that I > used to live in that town, and try to be a good citizen there for > many, many years. I'll bet you haven't heard the latest. Apparently "his highness", Mayor Daley, decided to pull his own version of the middle-of-the- night construction of the Berlin Wall, except in this case it was the middle of the night DEstruction of Meigs Field, with no advance notice to anyone (including the pilots that had planes parked there, that may now have no way to have them removed without having the aircraft partially disassembled and moved to another field). To give you an idea of Daley's utter disregard for the public, consider this comment as reported in the Chicago Sun-Times: Tom Komer was one of those stuck in Chicago. The North Carolina resident was in town for a cardiologists convention and couldn't fly his Cessna 206 back home Monday. Not only that, today's his birthday," said his wife, Ginny Komer. She had homemade chili and apple pie -- "some of his favorites" -- waiting at home Monday night, but had to polish them off herself. "What I'd like to say to your mayor isn't printable," she said. His take: "We're just pawns in the grand scheme of Chicago politics." The newspapers do a much better job of describing this than I could, so here's a few URL's: Chicago Sun-Times: http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-meigs01.html http://www.suntimes.com/output/commentary/cst-edt-edits01.html Chicago Tribune: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0304010326apr01,1,5224134.story?coll=chi%2Dnews%2Dhed http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-030401meigs,1,6720144.story?coll=chi%2Dnews%2Dhed http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0304010325apr01,1,4765381.story?coll=chi%2Dnews%2Dhed http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0304010023apr01,1,2078400.column?coll=chi%2Dnews%2Dhed http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0304010283apr01,1,6403784.story?coll=chi%2Dnews%2Dhed After reading this, there is no way in the world I would ever go into Chicago unless it was an absolute necessity, and then I'd get out as fast as I could. After all, his highness' next trick might be to start demolishing streets so that parked cars cannot be moved. In my opinion the mayor of Chicago is a crackpot and a vandal, but somehow I'll bet he manages to stay in power. (Yes, I did read where they thought that the stranded planes could use a taxiway to take off -- the problem is that nobody bothered to ask the FAA whether that would be permissible, and the FAA apparently isn't sure it would be safe). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, that was a shocking story, but one that is true. The FAA did agree on Tuesday to allow the remaining planes to leave *one at a time, under supervision* on the taxiway. The two or three planes which could not get out will have to be disassembled and moved piece by piece. Daley, Jr. (also known as Daley II) is as weird as his father was. His father, (Daley I) was mayor over twenty years, starting in 1955 to around 1975 or so, covering five terms in office. He died in his fifth term and the city constituion calls for the vice-mayor (same person as the city council seargent at arms) to assume the mayor's position. Trouble is, he was a (gasp!) black man, and that would never, never do back in 1975, so the city councilmen (who were mostly in an uproar over the loss of Daley and their own greed as they jockeyed for their new positions in life) went and found a judge somewhere who ruled that a democrat they approved of (and a white man at that) would assume the mayor's role. After that short term in office finishing out the late Daley I's term in office) the appointee mayor (Michael Bilandic) was rewarded with a judgeship of his own. Then Jane Byrne took over as mayor for four years, and then a black man (Harold Washington) took over as mayor. The city council tried desparately to keep Jane Byrne out of office, as well as Harold Washington. But the 'machine' (which Daley I always denied existing) was broken by this time and the democrats were unable to steal the election from either Byrne or Washington. Daley II was the Cook County Prosecutor all those years, and had his own machine going pretty well, but the democrats decided to get rid of Harold Washington (the first and only black mayor) and get (son of Daley I) in the job of mayor. They had a grudge against Harold W. who had tried to be a reformer but was largely ineffectual in that role. Harold had feebly tried to reform the police department (which had always resisted any change not ordered by the Supreme Court, etc). When the council could not get Harold to refuse to run for re- election, the story is 'somehow' he was poisoned. Literally, something was put in his coffee at the office. Harold did die in office, just as Daley I had died in office. The medical examiner always held out that Harold's death was 'inconclusive' so no one was ever held to account on it. But then, Daley II took the mayor's job and the city was back in 'safe hands' once again. One of Daley II's first jobs was to reward those people who had gotten him the mayorship, including his 'little' brother William who was rewarded by President Clinton by being given a cabinet post. The democrats always depend on Chicago to get them in office, so Clinton counted on Daley II and in turn helped him as needed. Daley II fought with the republican governor over the years about all sorts of things, including Meigs Field. Just as September 11, 2001 was a perfect opportunity for Bush II to begin acting out his real feelings toward the American people, so it was a great opportunity for Daley II to begin taking over everything in Chicago, under the guise of 'fighting terrorism', the same excuse Bush used. I do not know how I ever deluded myself into staying in Chicago for more than forty years, thinking it was all going to work out okay in the end. Yet so many people stay there and seem to thrive on battles for civil and human rights; never seem to grow tired of fighting with the politicians and the police. I guess they are just immune to it any longer, and don't care. I am *so glad* to be out of that sewer, that hell hole once and for all. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 22:23:20 -0800 In article , John David Galt wrote: > Sounds nice in principle, but I cannot think of any way to define spam > such that some legitimate messages would not also make their senders > vulnerable to this type of suit. Do we want to make every business > that sends out e-mail, first get a signed paper showing permission > from each recipient? If so, legitimate web businesses become > impractical (or at least are forced to slow to snail-mail speed for > each new customer). A customer either indicates that he wants email or he doesn't. If he doesn't explicitly indicate that he wants to receive email, then the company shouldn't send it. I see no problem with definitions there. > The moment this is enacted, I predict a huge flood of spams "on behalf of" > every business that has even a few enemies, all pointing to legitimate 800 > numbers or web sites of the business, all sent without its knowledge. An affirmative defense would be that the companies in question didn't actually send spam or have spam sent. > Political candidates are already sending out spam "from" their opponents. But they are found out, aren't they? Else, how would you know? > Along with legitimate advertising lists. (FWIW, I don't send any out, > but I do receive several and want to keep getting them.) Then you should have explicit permission for that company to send you email on file with them. I don't see what all the confusion is about. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 10:27:57 +0100 From: Alec Waters Subject: Loop Start/Ground Start? Organization: [posted via Easynet UK] Hi all, We have a Norstar Meridian key system here (a Modular 8/24, I think), which I'm hoping to connect to an FXO port on a Cisco router (I want to implement an off-premises extension via IP). Does anybody know: - If I should connect the FXO to an digital or analog extension (I'm guessing analog)? - What kind of start-dial supervision is in use (loop start/ground start/whatever)? - What kind of disconnect supervision is in use? The documentation I have for the system doesn't tell me any of this! Thanks a lot, alec ------------------------------ From: Richard Sniderman Subject: Siemens Gigaset 8825 Question Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 10:41:54 -0500 Organization: Bell Sympatico I have Bell Canada's Call Answer service. When a caller begins to leave a message, there is a SINGLE RING to alert that a message is being recorded. At that point it is possible to pick up the phone, screen the message as it is being left and if desired, flash to interrupt the recording and answer the call. On all of my non-Gigaset phones, the single ring is short. On my Gigaset phones, there are two issues. 1. The single ring occurs on only one of the cordless phones, and I can't figure out the algorithm that it's using to determine which phone to send the ring to. 2. When the single ring occurs, it is maddeningly long and everyone in my house finds it incredibly irritating. I talked to Bell today and there is no way to configure the service to not pass-on the ring. Does anyone have any insights on either issue. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: No Spam Subject: Re: Fiber Optics Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 13:44:47 -0500 Organization: ITS - NetNews JosheX wrote in message news:telecom22.373.13@telecom-digest.org: > Fiber Optics discussion and information board. Please help the effort > to start this board if you have an interst in fiber optics or backbone > technology. thank you :) > Josh > http://www.webula.net/dir/computers/internet/fiber_optics.php I always wonder when I see posts like the above ... (1) Going to strange URLs is a good way to catch a virus, or spyware, or whatever. (2) Why doesn't the poster point out how this "board" is different/better than existing discussion forums on the topic area? There certainly are more than a few out there already. Why do we need another one ? (3) Messages with poor grammar, misspellings, lack of capitalization, etc., hardly lend credibility when someone is trying to convince me to do something. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 14:17:01 -0500 From: Eworldwire Subject: PlanetOmni.com Helps Military Personnel Keep In Touch With Loved Ones PlanetOmni.com Helps Military Personnel Keep In Touch With Loved Ones Around The World $20 Rebate Available Through May 15 Sweetens The Deal CONCORD, Calif./EWORLDWIRE/April 2, 2003 --- Service men and women in Kuwait are doing it. "In analyzing our sales, we discovered that half our cell phone sales are to the military people stationed in Kuwait," stated Quantum Star President John Dulaney. "They've discovered that our offerings and service best meet their needs for communicating with family and friends back home." "We're proud to be a preferred cell phone company of our military," said Dulaney. "Since our phones are factory unlocked, they can be used worldwide with any GSM service." With a company history that dates back to 1994 and includes being one of the first 1500 websites to offer products online, Quantum Star continues its mission as an industry leader in customer relations. "Not only do we take the time to explain technical concepts in simple-to-understand terms so people feel comfortable with us before the sale," continued Dulaney. "Quantum Star staff are conversant in several languages, raising the comfort level even higher." Because businesses in every country buy blocks of time from major carriers and then print out cards for sale to the public, owners of the phones can purchase cards for the country or countries they call the most and receive substantially lower costs per call. "With the proper SIM card, or prepaid recharge telephone card, for the appropriate country, people everywhere can be assured of receiving the most cost-effective phone service." Incoming and emergency calls are free with all but the SwissCom card which offers the greatest flexibility of coverage -- over 115 countries. The SwissCom card charges a nominal fee for incoming calls. Product offerings of 110-220 Volt worldwide electronics -- audio/video products for use in any country -- video tape and DVD discs make it possible for these to be viewed on any TV, regardless of standard. Additional information about product offerings and rebates are available online at www.planetomni.com. Arrangements for interviews can be made by calling John DuLaney at 925.686.9945. CONTACT: Quantum Star, LLC 1480 Wharton Way Concord, CA 94521 John Dulaney President PHONE: 925.686.9945 FAX: 925.686.9968 EMAIL: johndulaney@quantumstar.com URL: http://www.planetomni.com  ------------------------------ From: Dave Close Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: 2 Apr 2003 18:55:46 -0800 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Clint Olsen : > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They certainly do. I got **273** pieces > of spam in one day in my email box at AOL. I called their customer > service and listened to a recorded spiel telling how AOL was blocking > one billion pieces of spam daily. I asked the lady then how come 273 > got through to this customer alone? She said what I should do was > block off all incoming mail to my box except that which came from > other AOL customers. ... So, perhaps the one billion figure comes, not from identified spam blocked, but from all mail from non-AOL addresses to customers who have agreed to block such mail. It may be that, for such customers, such mail has a high likelihood of being spam, but that is certainly not my definition of spam. It also would not indicate that AOL has any mechanism in place actually to identify spam, so that would be why our moderator still received such a large quantity. We should not accept AOL's statistics without understanding their definitions. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA "The cost of silicon chips has been dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359 steady at about $1bn per acre for dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu 40 years." --Gordon Moore ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 15:54:10 -0500 From: Kate Tang Subject: Byline Article: Integration and Telco Patrick, I have been reading TeleCom Digest with interest. I have an abstract for a contributed piece from Web services leader IONA Technologies that I think you might enjoy. The article would use case studies to demonstrate the ROI and operational efficiencies enjoyed by leading service providers who have applied rapid integration solutions to solve their most pressing business issues. It shows how a standards-based approach to SOA solutions favorably impacts the economics of IT and provides long-term benefits. I have included the abstract below. Please give it a look and let me know your thoughts. I would be happy to send along any additional information about IONA. Thanks for the time, Patrick. I am looking forward to hearing from you. Best, Kate Abstract: A Rapid, Incremental Approach to OSS/BSS integration Telecom Service Providers consolidate inventory systems, automate provisioning, unify billing systems and enable customer self-care with integration middleware. Systems integration solutions built for the telecom industry must bridge multiple application and middleware technologies - including qualities of service such as security and transactions - with minimal disruption to existing systems. Many telecom industries are not finding benefit from traditional enterprise integration solutions on the market. Proprietary technologies and large, all-encompassing integration projects have proven to be a very expensive way to integrate network operations and business systems. Service Providers need an approach to OSS/BSS systems integration that delivers fast results without re-implementing existing systems and infrastructure. Service-Oriented Architectures (SOAs) and standards-based technologies reduce risks associated with systems integration and show results quickly. This article uses case studies to demonstrate the ROI and operational efficiencies enjoyed by leading service providers who have applied rapid integration solutions to solve their most pressing business issues. It shows how a standards-based approach to SOA solutions favorably impacts the economics of IT and provides long-term benefits. Kate Tang Schwartz Communications, Inc. Prospect Place, 230 Third Avenue Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Phone - 781-684-0770 Fax - 781-684-6500 E-mail - ktang@schwartz-pr.com ------------------------------ From: mario@cpusoft.com (Mario) Subject: MONTREAL Help Wanted: Senior Software Designers SIP/GSM Map Protocols Date: 1 Apr 2003 17:36:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------- PLEASE FORWARD YOUR CREDENTIALS TO debra-lynn@cpusoft.com ---------------------------------------------------------- Smart start-up in Montreal (Quebec) Canada, with new venture capital ready to hire strong engineers and developers: Responsibilities: design and implement carrier-grade Home Location Register (HLR) type products for the Mobile GSM networks. This network element will interact, amongst others, with Visitor Location Registers (VLRs), Mobile Switching Centers (MSCs), Gateway-MSCs, and SIP based application servers. Technology (MUSTS): GSM MAP (MAP-C, MAP-D, MAP-H), SS7, C++, mobile/wireless networks topologies. Technology (ASSETS): Solaris, IP, VoIP, SIP, SIMPLE, TRIP, ENUM, GSM OAM&P, ISUP, SNMP Skills: initiative & creativity, personal drive & willingness to work hard, quality-oriented, system view/analysis, teaming ---------------------------------------------------------- PLEASE FORWARD YOUR CREDENTIALS TO debra-lynn@cpusoft.com ---------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ From: happyminded212@yahoo.com (happyminded212@yahoo.com) Subject: Internet Business Avoid! Date: 2 Apr 2003 02:38:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although 'happyminded' makes some serious allegations here which if true are bad news, the readers may be interested in first reading the spam-assassin report which came with this email and otherwise note the mail headers before jumping to conclusions. PAT] From news@google.com Wed Apr 2 05:39:00 2003 Received: from xuxa.iecc.com (xuxa.iecc.com [208.31.42.42]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) with SMTP id h32Acxw26225 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 05:39:00 -0500 (EST) Received: (qmail 28867 invoked by uid 166); 2 Apr 2003 05:38:59 -0500 Delivered-To: virtual-telecom-editor@telecom-digest.org Received: (qmail 28865 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2003 05:38:59 -0500 Received: from mailbox.ucsd.edu (HELO mailbox1.ucsd.edu) (132.239.1.53) by mail2.iecc.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2003 05:38:59 -0500 Received: from proxy.google.com (proxy.google.com [216.239.35.5]) by mailbox1.ucsd.edu (8.12.9/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h32AcuqZ087556 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 02:38:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from sjmm36.sj.google.com (sjmm36.prod.google.com [10.6.39.36]) by proxy.google.com (8.12.6/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h32AcujA003650 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 02:38:56 -0800 Received: (from news@localhost) by sjmm36.sj.google.com (8.12.6/8.12.3) id h32Acu5s029978 for comp-dcom-telecom@moderators.isc.org; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 02:38:56 -0800 To: comp-dcom-telecom@moderators.isc.org Path: not-for-mail From: happyminded212@yahoo.com (happyminded212@yahoo.com) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Internet business avoid! Date: 2 Apr 2003 02:38:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 30 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.105.192.10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1049279936 29977 127.0.0.1 (2 Apr 2003 10:38:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Apr 2003 10:38:56 GMT X-Spamscanner: mailbox1.ucsd.edu (v1.2 Mar 17 2003 15:04:36, 3.2/5.0 2.43) X-MailScanner: PASSED (v1.2.7 70979 h32AcuqZ087556 mailbox1.ucsd.edu) X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS,NOSPAM_INC, SPAM_PHRASE_00_01 version=2.41 X-Spam-Level: Status: RO ----- now what Happyminded has to say ------ Hello, Please, avoid any businesses with Mr.Thomas Swiss, the owner of Central Investments (a finacial & consulting company) in Chicago, he stolen the www.cinvest.org and www.investmentscentral.com websites, and in validation of copyright laws and didn't pay to Getty Images.com for the Images used on those web sites in the collages, as well as illegally using my whole design and logo, witch is my intellectual property and was stolen from original resources and deleted my name from the code and didn't pay for my designing work: www.cinvestments.narod.ru www.cinvestments.narod.ru/index1.html His contact emails: t.swiss@attbi.com centralinvestments@attbi.com tswiss@attbi.com other contact information: Telephone: (312) 942-9161 Facsimile: (312) 942-9162 Thomas Swiss 1054 W. Fry Street Chicago, IL 60622 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: After 40 some years living in Chicago, IL I do not recall ever hearing of a 'Fry Street'. If it exists (I do not know) it would be a couple blocks west of Halsted Street. If Mr. Swiss wishes to comment, I'd be pleased to print his response. Note that spamassassin tested for 'forged yahoo' and other things. Does that mean the yahoo email address is forged or not? Anyway, I found this message most interesting. Other comments? Mr. Swiss? PAT] ------------------------------ From: John David Galt Subject: Re: What the Bell ... Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 18:41:29 -0800 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Brandon Turok wrote: > Terrifying things are happening at the phone company ... > http://www.sbc-pacificbell.com/ You're right. A web page that refuses to display in Netscape 4 is seriously broken. They should get a clue from www.anybrowser.org. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 06:33:23 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Last Laugh! Re: Classic Radio (?) I click on this subject line, and I'm lost! (WQXR, WFMT ???) ... ... Because *I* thought this subject line had to do with Fibber McGee and Molly, Jack Benny, George Burns and Gracie Allen, Suspense, Johnny Dollar, CBS Radio Mystery Theater, Gunsmoke, Lights Out, The Lone Ranger, Our Miss Brooks, The Guiding Light, Ma Perkins, Don McNeill's Breakfast Club, Lowell Thomas and the News, Arthur Godfrey Time, Great Gildersleve, Amos 'n' Andy, and so forth ... and let's also not forget ... YOU'RE ON the MONITOR BEACON, all weekend long, on NBC Radio! mjc ------------------------------ 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 #375 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 3 16:56:01 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h33Lu1h05764; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 16:56:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 16:56:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304032156.h33Lu1h05764@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 #376 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Apr 2003 15:56:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 376 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 30th Anniversary of the Cell Phone (The Old Bear) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (dlavoie) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (John R. Levine) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (John Higdon) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (Stanley Cline) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (Scott Dorsey) PVR Boxes for Boston-area Comcast Digital Cable? (Scott Ehrlich) Re: Using my Headset to Talk on the Phone (Owain) Displaying Witheld Numbers in UK (Tim) Wi-fi, How to Keep Disk From Fragmenting With Left on Wi-fi (Tom Williams) Re: Loop Start/Ground Start? (Paul A Lee) Re: KSU Manuels [sic] and Wiring (Paul A Lee) Re: Internet Business Avoid! (David Esan) Re: Internet Business Avoid! (Name Withheld at Writer's Request) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail (temp7@thewolfden.org) Re: What the Bell ... ?! (Joey Lindstrom) Last Laugh! I Worked For Bell (Charles Cryderman) 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, 03 Apr 2003 12:51:36 -0500 From: The Old Bear Subject: 30th Anniversary of the Cell Phone As summarized in NewsScan Daily for April 3, 2003: 30TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CELL PHONE The cellular telephone was invented 30 years ago today by Martin Cooper, an employee of Motorola as "just part of the job." Here's his recollection of how it happened: "Bell Labs had invented this thing called cellular technology and told the government they would like to take over the entire personal communications business. They were telling the world they were the only one technically capable of executing it and the only ones with the money to do it. Their objective was to build car phones. But we thought the world was ready for portable phones. We had been working on portable communications for years -- antennas and things of that nature -- and had this dream of building a personal, portable cell phone. But when this situation came up with the Bell system, we felt we had to demonstrate this. So in November 1972, I conceived of this portable phone, and my team and I built it over several months." Since his days at Motorola, the 74-year-old Cooper has started "four or five" companies and says the only thing that would slow him down "is physical or mental impairment, and that hasn'tthat hasn't happened." source: San Francisco Chronicle (3 Apr 2003) http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/04/03/BU56141.DTL ------------------------------ From: dlavoie@my-deja.com (dlavoie) Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: 3 Apr 2003 07:46:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Except most major ISPs servers stink. I finally got sick of my messages getting lost for days or permanently, and just started using my own. I am now relaying aol.com outgoing mail through the ISP, but everything else still goes direct using DNS. jmeissen@shell1.aracnet.com (John Meissen) wrote in message news:: > If you have a dynamic address it should be trivial for you to relay > your outgoing mail through your ISP's mail server, unless you're > sending such a large volume that they would consider it abusive. > Some ISP's, such as Earthlink, actually force you to do that by > blocking outgoing connections to port 25 from their dynamic IP > pool, and I applaud them for that. > john- I'm now using an SMTP connector in Exchange to route aol.com outgoing mail only via my ISP's SMTP server. All other mail still goes direct via DNS. Working like a charm. Will Herman wrote in message news:: > I've got the same problem. I just started seeing it a couple of days > ago. This is the case of using an axe instead instead of a pocket > knife to solve the problem. I'm trying to find a workaround, but > haven't gotten there yet. Dave ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: 3 Apr 2003 12:12:04 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > So, perhaps the one billion figure comes, not from identified spam > blocked, but from all mail from non-AOL addresses to customers who > have agreed to block such mail. It's real spam. There's occasional misidentification, but the blasts of what is spam by anyone's definition are just unbelievable. With respect to blocking the dynamic IP addresses: use your ISP's mail server for outgoing mail. That's what it's for. AOL is far from the only network that doesn't accept dynamic IP mail, and I can assure you that there are 100,000 spams sent from dynamic addresses for every piece of real mail from a linux box whose owner is too cool to set it to smarthost through his ISP. I use a couple of the shared dynamic IP blocklists which blocked over 400 spams (they were spam, the IP ranges were unlikely to be sending any real mail) to the dozen users on my tiny network yesterday. But that's much less than the thousand spams blocked by abused open proxy lists, which is what you'll be seeing blocked next. Fortunately, open proxies are no more likely to send legitimate mail than dynamic IP addresses are. 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: John Higdon Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 20:27:26 -0800 In article , dlavoie@my-deja.com (dlavoie) wrote: > Same issue here, started yesterday I believe. What a bunch of > boneheads. I can see them blocking open relays, but all residential > IP addresses? Oh well, I guess no email to AOL users, their loss. And no email to me, and a whole lot of other people as well. It is becoming more and more common to block dynamic IPs, and for good reason. The vast majority of direct SMTP connections from such addresses is for the purpose of delivering spam. No, thanks. If you are going to operate servers, get suitable connectivity. I've been operating servers from my home for well over a decade, but I've never used throw-away addresses to do it. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 23:39:21 -0500 Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org On Wed, 02 Apr 2003 21:32:29 GMT, Will Herman wrote: > I've got the same problem. I just started seeing it a couple of days > ago. This is the case of using an axe instead instead of a pocket > knife to solve the problem. I'm trying to find a workaround, but The "workaround" is a permanent fix, and is quite simple: set your MTA to "smarthost" outgoing email through your ISP's SMTP server. This is *incredibly* easy to do in both sendmail and qmail, and I'm sure in other MTAs (postfix, exim, etc.) as well. For qmail (since that's what I use) ... In your qmail home directory, edit control/smtproutes and put in something like this: # smarthost through mail.earthlink.net :mail.earthlink.net 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: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: 3 Apr 2003 13:05:07 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , dlavoie wrote: > Same issue here, started yesterday I believe. What a bunch of > boneheads. I can see them blocking open relays, but all residential > IP addresses? Oh well, I guess no email to AOL users, their loss. Doesn't everybody block mail from dynamic IP addresses? We've been doing it here since dynamic IP first appeared. Too many possibilities for abuse. If this is a problem for you, route mail through your ISP's mail server. That's what it's for. If you don't trust the ISP's mail server and absolutely need to run your own with direct outside connectivity, you're going to have to get address space for it that has such connectivity. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: se@panix.com (Scott Ehrlich) Subject: PVR Boxes for Boston-Area Comcast Digital Cable? Date: 3 Apr 2003 07:16:16 -0500 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. I am considering an upgrade to digital cable in the Cambridge/Medford/Somerville Massachusetts area and am wondering what model boxes (I presume Motorola) are used? Are they deploying PVR-capable ones to record shows to the built-in hard drives? Also, if power goes out, how reliable are they? When I played with Digital cable on RCN a couple of years ago, power outages kept frying the boxes, so we opted to return to our simple cable-ready VCRs. HDTV is not important. Thanks for any insight. Scott ------------------------------ From: spuorgelgoog@gowanhill.com (Owain) Subject: Re: Using my Headset to Talk on the Phone Date: 3 Apr 2003 04:15:53 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Stephann wrote: > I already have a headset plugged into the soundcard which is used for > voice recognition. Can I use the same headset to answer calls and > talk, using a regular telephone line and internal modem? > Is there software that can do this? Or would I need to buy a headset > that plugs into the internal modem itself? Possibly. Your modem would need to be a "voice" modem - one that can capture and replay speech from/to the line as well as just data tones. If you can use it as a PC-based answering machine then it is a probably a voice modem, and you would just need appropriate software to route the audio from your sound card into the modem and to the phone line. Try checking shareware archives for voice modem software. Owain ------------------------------ From: tim@happylife.co.uk (Tim) Subject: Displaying Witheld Numbers in UK Date: 3 Apr 2003 04:50:01 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Does anybody know of how to build a device, or if there is one available, that can filter out the pulse at the begining of the data burst that tells BT Caller Display units not to display witheld numbers? I have seen this pulse using a Digital Storage Oscilloscope. We are bothered by nuisance calls and the only way to do it officially is to get the Police involved, I just want to find out who is doing this, without getting the perpitrators into trouble. ------------------------------ From: dejausenet@yahoo.com (tom williams) Subject: Wi-fi, How to Keep Disk From Fragmenting With Always on Wi-fi Date: 3 Apr 2003 09:33:35 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I have my laptop connected to a home wi-fi network which is 'always on' connected to cable modem. Find that my hd is active quite a lot, even while screen is in auto dark mode, when laptop is not actively being used. Usually have email and web browser open even while pc is in 'sleep mode'. Do I need to close my web browser to keep HD from spinning occassionally, while machine 'asleep'? Hate to have to turn machine off to prevent frequent fragmentation. TIA, tom ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Loop Start/Ground Start? Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 12:37:42 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V22 #375, Alec Waters wrote (in part): > We have a Norstar Meridian key system here (a Modular 8/24, I think), > which I'm hoping to connect to an FXO port on a Cisco router (I want to > implement an off-premises extension via IP). Does anybody know: Looks like: might be a good starting point. (Make sure you get the entire URL within "<>".) > - If I should connect the FXO to an digital or analog extension (I'm > guessing analog)? Analog. > - What kind of start-dial supervision is in use (loop start/ground > start/whatever)? The Cisco interface may be selectable for loop or ground start. If not, it's loop start. The Norstar station will be loop start. > - What kind of disconnect supervision is in use? If the Norstar even provides disconnect to its stations, it will probably be OSI (open switch interval), which removes battery from the loop for about 250 ms (ħ 50 ms). That should satisfy the FXO port. I've never checked whether a Norstar can provide OSI to a station. If it does, it will probably be called CPC (calling party control) in the Norstar documentation. I'm no Norstar or Cisco expert, but I hope this gets you started, at least. I've been there myself. Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: KSU Manuels [sic] and Wiring Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 12:44:10 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V22 #375, Dziurlaj@hotmail.com (John Dziurlaj) wrote (in part): > I recently acquired a AT&T Merlin System, and a Omega Phone II > Phone System, from a local school. The AT&T system appears to be > easier to setup then the Omega system, but I have no manuals for it, Depending on how old the Merlin is, you migh find the docs you need at: . (Make sure you get the entire URL between "<>".) Merlin systems are close to the bottom of the page. Avaya is the successor to the former business communications systems arm of AT&T. The top of their technical database listings is at: . You might find something comparable for the Omega III at . Have fun...! Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ From: david_esan@hotmail.com (David Esan) Subject: Re: Internet Business Avoid! Date: 3 Apr 2003 08:15:49 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: After 40 some years living in Chicago, > IL I do not recall ever hearing of a 'Fry Street'. If it exists (I do > not know) it would be a couple blocks west of Halsted Street. If Mr. > Swiss wishes to comment, I'd be pleased to print his response. Note > that spamassassin tested for 'forged yahoo' and other things. Does > that mean the yahoo email address is forged or not? Anyway, I found > this message most interesting. Other comments? Mr. Swiss? PAT] A quick check at Mapquest shows that Fry Street does exist in Chicago. It is west of the Kennedy Expressway, north of W Chicago Avenue. It seems to run from North Elston across North Sangamon and into W Chicago Avenue. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 23:53:38 -0800 From: Name Withheld at Reader's Request Subject: Re: Internet Business Avoid! [Not for publication] FYI: Mapquest beleives 1054 W Fry St exists, and it appears to be several blocks west of "Halstead" (He who is young and comes from suburbia where streets are circular and the names have no logic asks: How did you know that?) http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?country=US&addtohistory=&address=1054+W.+Fry+St.&city=Chicago&state=IL&zipcode=&homesubmit=Get+Map happyminded212@yahoo.com wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: After 40 some years living in Chicago, > IL I do not recall ever hearing of a 'Fry Street'. If it exists (I do > not know) it would be a couple blocks west of Halsted Street. If Mr. > Swiss wishes to comment, I'd be pleased to print his response. Note > that spamassassin tested for 'forged yahoo' and other things. Does > that mean the yahoo email address is forged or not? Anyway, I found > this message most interesting. Other comments? Mr. Swiss? PAT] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One thing the mayor and other city fathers in Chicago have not done (mostly) is tamper with the street names and numbering system. Yes, they have screwed with it a little, but by and large, the rationale and logic in street names goes back to 1871 or so, after the fire, and the present numbering system goes back to a re-numbering plan in 1910. Beginning at the intersection of State Street and Madison (which is the 'zero point' in all directions, the roadways are known as East (Streetname)(suffix [avenue, street, boulevard, place, road, etc]) or West (streetname, suffix), North or South (streetname, suffix). Other than the immediate and near-south area, east/west streets are numbered 'streets' and the numbering on said 'streets' begins at '00/01' on that block. 'Half-streets' also run east/west in the numbered street series and are known as 'places' and their numbering begins at 37/38 on that block. East and south sides of streets have odd numbers, north and west sides of streets have even numbers. For example, a building at 7440 NORTH Greenview STREET is located 74 blocks north of the State and Madison 'zero point' and is on the west side of the street with an even number. 1500-02 WEST Fargo STREET is fifteen blocks west of the State and Madison 'zero point' and on the north side of the street. Roadways keep the same name based on their position even if the roadway is interuppted from time to time. Once it begins again, it has the same name further along. Jarvis Street runs east and west and is at 74 blocks north (about 15 miles north of the zero point) and is commonly known as 'seventy four hundred north'. Fargo is the next street (actually a 'half street' north of Jarvis and comes in at seventy-four-forty north). If it were on the south side of town, Jarvis would be '74th Street' and Fargo would be '74th Place' (being a half-way count up Greenview Street'. Now with that in mind, the MAJOR north/south streets on the WEST side of town are Halstead (800 West), Ashland (1600 West), Western (2400 West [and many years ago the western city limits]), Kedzie (3200 West), Pulaski (4000 west), and I forget for sure west beyond that point, but Cicero (4800?) Oak Park (5600?) and Harlem (7200?) [all avenues, forget for now that there are also suburban towns by the same name as some of those avenues {but typically, the road thus named, the further west you go also runs through the suburban town by the same name}] The MAJOR east/west streets on the NORTH side of town are Grand (400 north), Chicago (800 north), Division (1200 North), North (1600 north [and many years ago the northern city limits]), Armitage (2000 North), Fullerton (2400 North), Diversey (2800 North), Belmont (3200 North), Addison (3600 North), Irving Park (4000 North), Wilson (4600 North), Lawrence (4800 North), Berwyn (5000 North), Bryn Mawr (5600 North), and I forget many of the others north of that point except I do remember Devon (6400 North), Morse (7200 North) and Howard (7600 North [and in most areas the northern city limits] {except along the lake where the city runs north to 7800 - Juneway Terrace} and further west {around Kedzie Avenue} where the northern city limits 'drops south' a few blocks to Devon Avenue]). Even if a roadway is interuppted for several blocks or several miles, it maintains the same basic name when it resumes. For example at 2300 west is NORTH Artesian Avenue [so named for at one time an artesian well near Fullerton Avenue] and although the street is interuppted several times in its north/south traversal through the city, I can assure you that on the 'south side' of town SOUTH Artesian Avenue is still at 2300 West, or a full city block east of Western Avenue, and a full city block west of Damen Avenue [named for a famous Catholic priest {Arnold Damen} in the founding of the city]). So if you can count from 1 to 76 (north [east/west] streets and 1 to 145 (south [east/west] streets and remember that the south [east/west] streets are numbered and the numbers grow increasingly larger the further south you go) then you mostly have it made. 'Irregular' streets (those that run at angles [northwest/southeast] or southeast/northwest or various other ways) are exceptions to the rules. Generally they take numbers (based on their starting points and their distance away from the 'zero point') and their general direction of travel. If they change in travel to a more redominant direction (such as Archer Avenue [southwest for many miles, then straight west for more miles they use both types of numbers.] Sheridan Road is the same way, mostly north/south in direction [with numbers NORTH of Madison] but a small east/west segment with numbers WEST of State Street.) Believe it or not, next to a building in the 3700 block of 'North Sheridan Road' is a building in the 800 block of 'West Sheridan Road'. because the north/south street curves and runs east/west for a few blocks. (General Sheridan was an Army hero long ago). But those exceptions are few and far between. To the case in point: Kennedy Expressway runs northwest. At around Chicago Avenue (800 north) it would be at about Halstead Street (800 West). Where 'Fry' comes in I do not know, but '1024 West Fry' would be !absolutely! two blocks and 24 spaces west of Halstead Street (main north/south street at 800 west) on the north side of the street. In my mind I would picture it around Halstead and Division (two major streets) on the near northwest side. You know who is *GOOD* -- really good -- at Chicago streets is our erstwhile correspondent, David whatshisname. The last name escapes me, but he is absolutely super at rattling off Chicago street names and numbers, as well as telephone boundary areas (area codes, exchange numbers, etc.) I haven't heard from him in years, but he used to be a regular correspondent here in the Digest. Many years ago, he also used to work for City of Chicago (or maybe County of Cook) either as an assessor for the tax people or the Surveyor's office. He knows so much trivia about Chicago streets it is incredible. I wish he would write for the Digest again occassionally. With my deseased brain I am gradually losing my memory on these things, and anyway, the buggers and politicians and police, etc who manage, manipulate, control and I daresay 'own' Chicago get me too nauseous to deal with it anymore. Imagine Daley II taking 'his' police out there to protect him while the crews mysteriously did away with the airport in the middle of the night. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 00:23:34 -0600 From: temp7@thewolfden.org Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail > In general, I would contend that neither example would not be "theft of > service" if he left it openly available (just as if he left a water hose > running on the sidewalk and I got a cool spash on a hot day). Of course, > the open AP may violate the Internet providers TOS, but that's not *my* > problem -- I don't have a contract with them. Interesting argument. Where does it end? -The host wasn't running, but there was a quick turn-on knob right at the end ... -The hose wasn't running, but he left an unlocked stopcock right there at the other end by the house ... -There was no hose, but the kitchen door was open and the sink was unlocked ... -Well, the door was locked, but it was just too simple to pick.... [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: At least the two final examples you give above involve specifically tresspassing on someone's private property. The other examples you give involve someone making a concious effort to take someone else's property. A more accurate example might be 'I was walking down the alley and saw some computer parts and I needed something like that. After watching for a few days and seeing that the parts were not just left there temporarily while the owner was making some adjustments or moving in or out, etc and that the parts were just sitting there abandoned, I decided to take them. Its a lot like years ago when people left 'loop around' lines on the phone unguarded; you just dialed one number, heard dial tone, and dialed against that dial tone to somewhere else. Were you committing theft? Years and years ago in Chicago, dialing any-exchange 9925 got a dial tone as a result from 9926. Phreaks used that as a 'cheap and inexpensive way' to make long distance calls until Illinois Bell decided to secure it with a password (in some cases) and disconnect the inbound line (in other cases). Illinois Bell security representatives tried to claim the phreaks had dephrauded the company, even though the real problem was that telco had bet their money on security through obscurity. A sucessful defense was mounted on the fact that the phreaks had not claimed to be someone they were not (no passwords or logging in required). The phreaks had asked permission from the 'operator' on the line to make a call (the dial tone presented did not do any kind of blocking of outgoing calls) so no theft had taken place. In other words, if I dialed a publicly accessible number and paid the stated charges for calling the number, then asked the 'operator' in charge of the line to make a call to somewhere for me and the 'operator' was too dumb to require me to identify myself or monitor where I was calling, is that my fault? When the same thing happened a few months later to one of Illinois Bell's largest customers (United Airlines had an incoming loop around which connected to an outbound trunk on the nationwide Unitel system providing unlimited, unmeasured phone service with WATS lines and tie-lines galore all over the USA) they did not bother to passcode it or monitor it either. Bell security reps almost went crazy on that one; but it was the same thing, security through obscurity. If the no-identification-required caller asked the 'operator' for '732' (SEA) and in turn got dial tone from Seattle International Airport and then the same no-identification-required caller dialed '186' against the Seattle Intl dialtone and reached yet a third dial tone which was identified through trial and error as Boeing Aircraft's unmonitored centrex with its own set of tie lines and WATS codes, exactly whose fault was that? If you don't want someone drinking your water, do not leave it running on a public thoroughfare, where it then becomes 'public' property. Or, conversely, demand much identification, passwords, etc from the passersby to protect your property, which happens to abutt the public right of way in case they see it and feel tempted to use it. In the above examples, no one ever broke into a Bell central office looking for codes, or looking for equipment to tamper with, etc. Nor did they ever go within twenty miles of Elk Grove, Illinois and United Airlines' property. By the way, I also contend I have a perfect right to carefully examine everything I find *on my property* and that includes invisible radio waves and transmissions which pass through my house on the way to your house, even if those transmissions are encrypted since I am not paying for them. If you don't want me looking at them, then keep them out of my house. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 09:05:30 -0700 Subject: Re: What the Bell ... ?! Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 23:08:53 -0500 (EST), Mark Of Cuccia wrote: > And while I would personally like to see the "Bell System" reunited again, > I tend to think that the posting of this Bell System type URL, > http://www.sbc-pacificbell.com/ = http://www.loonquawl.com/bell/ > is more of something intendend for 1-April, i.e., it's an April Fool's > "joke"! :) Yeah, I think most of us got that as soon as we saw it Mark. :-) And since we're dissecting the prank, I'll point out that (and I assume this was what was intended when the domain name was set up) the name "loonquawl" is a minor character in the Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy (book #1 for those of you reading along at home). First, "Lunkwill" and "Fook" were two programmers whose job was to program "Deep Thought", a supercomputer built for this purpose, to work out the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. 7.5 million years later, two other programmers named "Loonquawl" and "Phouchg" received Deep Thought's answer: 42. Deep Thought, of course, was the fictional supercomputer that inspired IBM to name its chess-playing computer "Deep Blue". Full Hitchhiker's text is here: http://k76.ryd.student.liu.se/~lindahl/other/guide/index.html The above-mentioned material can be found in the first book, chapters 25 through 28 (they're short, you can read 'em in a couple of minutes). -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: Charles Cryderman Subject: Last Laugh! Serving Time at Bell Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 10:09:40 -0500 Pat, I do not know where this came from and make no claims for myself on it but I knew you'd enjoy it as well as most of your readers. I SERVED MY TIME AT BELL When from, this earth I take my leave The Corporation will not grieve. The work I did will be absorbed, redistributed, or ignored. But by the time I will not care floating in celestial air. An angel greets me by the Gate, says I do not have to wait. St, Peter gives me a knowing smile, as I move beyond the rank and file: Beyond Mother Theresa and the Pope, past the man who created liquid soap. (Cleanliness being next to Godliness you know.) I stand in awe before the Gate, in dreadful anticipation I do wait, to hear the voice of God decree just what fate He has for me. I think of all the wrong I've done, the fear erases all the fun. And suddenly I fear the worst the never ending flames and thirst, And just when I abandon hope, And wished I'd invented liquid soap. His gentle voice allays my fears, Sooths my soul and dries my tears; Enter , friend. You've had your hell; I understand you worked for Bell. ------------------------------ 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 #376 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Apr 4 03:07:25 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3487PV09014; Fri, 4 Apr 2003 03:07:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 03:07:25 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304040807.h3487PV09014@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 #377 TELECOM Digest Fri, 4 Apr 2003 03:07:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 377 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Displaying Withheld Numbers in UK (Richard D G Cox) Re: Displaying Witheld Numbers in UK (John R. Levine) Return Of The Watch Phone (Eric Friedebach) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail (David B. Horvath, CCP) Sony's New TVs Join The Home Network (Monty Solomon) Charter Communications' 4Q Losses Widen (Monty Solomon) Rupert Murdoch Nears Global Satellite Goal (Monty Solomon) America Online Announces Marketing Relationship with BestBuy (M Solomon) Eye of the Storm (Monty Solomon) Search Privacy At Google and Other Search Engines (Monty Solomon) Music Industry Group Sues College File Swappers (Monty Solomon) How Not To Wrestle A Gator (Monty Solomon) PA Won't ID Sites Blocked for Child Porn (Monty Solomon) Re: Wi-fi, How to Keep Disk From Fragmenting With Always on Wi-fi (tonypo1) Internet Access On a Private Plane (Lew) Re: KSU Manuels and Wiring (Damon Brownd) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (Geoffrey Welsh) Fry Street in Chicago (BV124@aol.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: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 00:23:28 +0100 From: Richard D G Cox Subject: Re: Displaying Withheld Numbers in UK Reply-To: nospam@numbering.com Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited At 12:50 UT on 3 Apr 2003 tim@happylife.co.uk (Tim) asked: > Does anybody know of how to build a device, or if there is one > available, that can filter out the pulse at the begining of the data > burst that tells BT Caller Display units not to display withheld > numbers? I have seen this pulse using a Digital Storage Oscilloscope. You were two days late for a question like that. The Caller-Display information ("CLI" to some) never gets onto the customer line unless either the display-allow flag is set (i.e. when the caller does not withhold their number) or the called party has a display-override for their line (which is normally only available to emergency services, etc - but may soon be possible for ISPs and other service providers). The pulse you see is reporting the withheld condition, not enforcing it. Were it not so, there would be a plethora of rogue boxes on sale that would conveniently ignore that pulse and display the number. The only way _any_ Telco can be sure that the withheld condition is respected is by not sending the number in the first place. Of course there will always be clueless or rogue telcos that get their configuration wrong but they can expect to be on the receiving end of prompt followup, as sending that data out is a breach of European and UK Data Protection laws. > We are bothered by nuisance calls and the only way to do it officially > is to get the Police involved, I just want to find out who is doing > this, without getting the perpetrators into trouble. The alternative is to ask BT to block calls where the caller withholds their number. This service - known as Anonymous Call Rejection or ACR must, by law, now be available to everyone in the UK. BT will normally charge ?9.99 per quarter for the service -- but can waive the charge if you have complained about receiving nuisance calls. When that service was first introduced, a lot of business callers were unable to release their numbers at will, but most organisations have now had enough time to make the necessary modifications to their systems. Annoyingly, the ACR service is still not available on UK mobile phones despite the fact that the law does NOT exempt the mobile networks from having to provide it. If you have ACR on your wireline phone and set your mobile to divert busy or unanswered calls to your wireline number, then the ACR service on the wireline phone will kick in and tell the caller that they have to release their number in order to call you. Richard Cox ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Displaying Witheld Numbers in UK Date: 3 Apr 2003 19:20:00 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Does anybody know of how to build a device, or if there is one > available, that can filter out the pulse at the begining of the data > burst that tells BT Caller Display units not to display witheld > numbers? I have seen this pulse using a Digital Storage Oscilloscope. Unless the Euro standard for CLID is very, very different from the one here in North America, that initial pulse is a synchonization bit, not a masking bit. CLID blocking is done at the central office, and the CLID box just displays what it receives. 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: Eric Friedebach Subject: Return Of The Watch Phone Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 12:52:30 -0600 Organization: Purity Of Essence/Plant Operational Error Reply-To: Eric Friedebach Arik Hesseldahl, 04.03.03, Forbes.com NEW YORK - You'll have to forgive us if you're experiencing a bit of deja vu, as it seems we've been here before. It was a little more than two years ago in this space where we noted an announcement from South Korea's Samsung concerning the impending release of a mobile phone that had been shrunk down to the size of a wristwatch. We were among those in the media who just couldn't help ourselves with references to Dick Tracy and his "two-way wrist radio." Samsung's announcement coincided with the 2001 Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, at which Samsung declared its intention to introduce the watch phone within six months. It never happened. Now in 2003 Samsung is back with word of another iteration of the watch phone at yet another trade show. The announcement came at the CeBit show in Hanover, Germany, last month. http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/03/cx_ah_0403tentech.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 21:17:14 EST From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail On Thu, 03 Apr 2003 00:23:34 -0600, temp7@thewolfden.org, responded with my remarks thusly: > Interesting argument. Where does it end? > -The host wasn't running, but there was a quick turn-on knob right at the > end ... > -The hose wasn't running, but he left an unlocked stopcock right there at > the other end by the house ... > -There was no hose, but the kitchen door was open and the sink was > unlocked ... > -Well, the door was locked, but it was just too simple to pick ... Good points but they go way beyond my analogy. In your examples, they require that I turn something on (or open a door) that was closed off. Maybe a better analogy would be my listening to the music my neighbor was playing for his family BBQ. It comes over my fence and I don't have a choice in the volume or the station selected. But I can listen to and enjoy it if I wish. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: At least the two final examples you > give above involve specifically tresspassing on someone's private > property. The other examples you give involve someone making a > concious effort to take someone else's property. A more accurate > example might be 'I was walking down the alley and saw some computer > parts and I needed something like that. After watching for a few days > and seeing that the parts were not just left there temporarily while > the owner was making some adjustments or moving in or out, etc and > that the parts were just sitting there abandoned, I decided to take > them. Thank you for the kind words PAT. > When the same thing happened a few months later to one of Illinois > Bell's largest customers (United Airlines had an incoming loop around > which connected to an outbound trunk on the nationwide Unitel system > providing unlimited, unmeasured phone service with WATS lines and > tie-lines galore all over the USA) they did not bother to passcode it > or monitor it either. I remember those days -- back when SPC used a 5 digit access code and General Motors' WATS extender used 8 digit numbers selected based on a certain formula (something like every 13th code that added up to 27 would work). Of course, I completely forget how I know all that :-) And in the old days, you could use SPC to call 976 numbers in other cities (especially when there were very few cities that had them -- like NYC). 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: In the case of Sprint's old five-digit code numbers or the infamous GM WATS extender (I had forgotten about *that one* until you reminded me, [did every major city in the USA have a local number which terminated on that GM WATS extender?]) you still had to lie and cheat to use them, ergo, break the law, even though they were both simple-minded systems. You had to *claim* to be someone (and demonstrate that by entering a passcode) in order to use them. But Unitel and Illinois Bell's things were just wide open no questions asked. The thing with Sprint, like its predecessor MCI was that the call was picked up on a local switch in your community, then microwaved to the distant city where it was dropped off and then handed over to the local telco in that city. The call did not go through any sort of validity checking at your local switch (as telco does) to insure the switch got at least seven 'proper' digits. When the microwave tower set you down in New York for example, you were treated as a local customer of NY Telephone Company. Anything a NY Tel customer could dial, you could dial. All the microwave tower locally did was look at the first three digits. If it saw '212' it said that is New York and zipped you over there where *at that point* the remaining digits would be dialed out on a local line. If you dialed 212-976-whatever, then any customer in New York could dial that number, and of course, Sprint/MCI was the customer and got billed for the call accordingly. Likewise, if you were of a mind to do so, you could dial merely 212-411 and when the call was dropped off the net in New York it then processed a call to the local directory assistance. Or, 212-911 got you New York Police Emergency, etc. Smart people would even dial like this: 212-1-900-whatever. The call would drop in New York and proceed to make a 900 call from that New York phone, which is what got the bills. If you needed to know what the phone number was on the outgoing phone in New York, you would call 212-00-312-922-4400 and tell the operator who answered you wanted to make a person-to-person call to Mr. Smith at the Conrad Hilton Hotel in Chicago. "And operator, if he is not there yet, please leave word and a call back number". The dutiful operator would call Chicago and upon hearing that Mr. Smith was not there, leave word asking for Mr. Smith to call 'Operator 7 in New York and ask for 212-xxx-xxxx' which is all you wanted to know anyway. Thank you, operator. Most operators were so prissy, if you just came out and ask them what number you were calling from would refuse to tell you, saying 'if it is your phone then you know the number.' But the old 'operator 7' collect call routine would always produce the desired results. Maybe you needed to make a call and string three or four Sprint and MCI lines together for whatever reason. It helped to know all those numbers. That same routine also worked with Unitel, and it was good that guys had that outbound line number since one day the Unitel machine quit answering calls and on a hunch someone said 'try dialing into what was previously the outbound line'. Sure enough, all the simpletons at United Airlines had done was unplug the two lines of the WATS extender box and reverse them. They did that to try and throw phreaks off the track. So the former outbound line became the new inbound line and vice-versa. And General Motors had a full time clerk or two, whose *only* jobs, on an exclusive basis were attempting to track down phraud calls on that WATS extender; that is how bad the phraud rate had gotten on it. All that chicannery was in the days long before caller-ID of course, or ANI or any sort of computerized call tracing. *If* you had an emergency matter and needed a call 'traced' you had to tell your local operator who in turn called the plant foreman who in turn called a technician who in turn had to go in the frames and look and look and look only to find out the call was coming from another office and they had to call the foreman in that office and repeat the routine over again. Most phreaks knew that 'I am having this call traced' meant they could stay on the line doing whatever for another 15-20 minutes before it became really prudent that they clear out. Ask any old-timer, long ago fraud/harassing call investigator how they would get *almost all the way* through the frames trying to find the origin of a call only to hear that sickening CRASH! as the tandems collapsed, leaving them nowhere else to go in their search. Now days of course, two or three keys typed on a terminal tell the whole story. It has been said that telco had gotten so out of control by the 1960's with extremely high fraud, etc that they decided they had to re-invent the whole thing from scratch; thus came the brilliant ESS (electronic switching system) in use now. Or did you think they invented ESS only to offer a few new, glitzy features to the public like 'call waiting' and 'three-way calling'? Things like that were just the dessert on the new phone system which came into being during the 1970's-1980's. They had a lot more in store for you than just 'call-waiting' beeps. A lot more. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 21:38:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sony's New TVs Join The Home Network Arik Hesseldahl, 04.02.03, 10:00 AM ET NEW YORK - Japan usually gets some of the most interesting new consumer electronics products first. But one of the best things about watching what Japanese giant Sony launches in the country is that it often indicates what's next for Sony in the U.S. and elsewhere. In Japan this week, Sony (nyse: SNE - news - people ) is putting a stake in the ground surrounding home networks and television. With the release of a new line of Wega-branded liquid crystal display TV sets, it seems to be setting that strategy in motion. Sony's wireless Wega TV setsSony is cutting cords with these sets. They can receive a video signal via a wireless home network using a Sony-made wireless base station. Sony's favored wireless technology is known best by the arcane name of its technical standard, IEEE 802.11a. The standard differs from the better-known Wi-Fi technology (which had previously been known as IEEE 802.11b) in that it's faster--up to 54 megabits per second compared to a limit of about 11 MB per second for Wi-Fi--and operates in a higher frequency band. ... http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/02/cx_ah_0402tentech.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 21:39:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Charter Communications' 4Q Losses Widen ST. LOUIS (AP) -- Cable television company Charter Communications Inc. said Tuesday its fourth-quarter loss widened substantially to $1.87 billion amid a hefty impairment charge to adopt new accounting rules. Charter, whose chairman is billionaire and Microsoft Corp. co-founder Paul Allen, also said it trimmed its work force from about 18,600 full-time jobs at the end of 2002 to about 17,300 of March 31. Additional reductions expected. In the quarter ended Dec. 31, Charter's $1.87 billion loss equates to $6.36 a share on revenue of $1.19 billion, compared with last year's loss of $302 million, or $1.03 a share, on revenue of $1.05 billion. Analysts were expecting a loss of 63 cents a share, according to Thomson First Call. Charter booked an impairment charge of $4.64 billion for adoption of new accounting rules governing intangible assets and goodwill. As a result, operating losses from operations ballooned to $4.59 billion from $333 million in the year-earlier quarter. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33684092 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 21:55:41 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Rupert Murdoch Nears Global Satellite Goal SYDNEY, April 3 (Reuters) - Media mogul Rupert Murdoch is standing once again on the threshold of the crowning deal of his career, and this time it looks like he's the only bidder. The deal, giving him control of long-coveted U.S. satellite pay-TV network DirecTV and securing the last piece of his global satellite puzzle, could cost as much as $7 billion -- less than a third what Murdoch was thought to be prepared to pay for DirecTV two years ago. Rival bidders for the Hughes Electronics Corp (NYSE:GMH) unit have slowly melted away, leaving Murdoch the last man standing in the three-year tussle for the U.S. satellite broadcaster. Analysts are betting Murdoch's News Corp (AUS:NCP) will eventually win control of DirecTV, but hurdles still litter the path of the 72-year old mogul. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33696325 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 22:01:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: America Online Announces Key Marketing Relationship AOL and AOL for Broadband Services Promoted in Best Buy Retail Outlets Nationwide DULLES, Va.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 3, 2003-- BestBuy.com Products Featured In Several Key AOL Commerce Areas America Online, Inc., the world's leading interactive services company, today announced a new relationship with Best Buy, one of North America's leading specialty retailers of consumer electronics, personal computers, entertainment software and appliances, to provide in-store promotion of the AOL and AOL(R) for Broadband services in more than 500 Best Buy stores across the United States. In a separate agreement, Best Buy's wide selection of consumer products are now available in several key areas across the AOL service. Under a new agreement, the AOL and AOL(R) for Broadband services will be featured in Best Buy stores nationwide, allowing Best Buy to offer consumers everything they need for home connectivity, including access to AOL and the Internet at whatever speed they prefer. Special displays will provide information about AOL's selection of online services, and store employees will be trained to help consumers sign up for AOL. In addition, a separate agreement brings BestBuy.com's broad selection of consumer products to commerce areas across AOL, including a variety of Shop@AOL's most popular areas such as Computing, Electronics and Entertainment. The promotions will be relevant to the products they accompany, as part of AOL's "commerce in context" approach to online shopping, and consumers are able to make purchases directly from BestBuy.com simply and securely. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33697810 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 00:07:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Eye of the Storm Despite the whiplash of an imminent takeover battle, Roxanne Austin is turning DirecTV into a solid business. When Roxanne Austin was promoted to president of DirecTV in June of 2001, she asked her bosses for one key thing: Please leave her out of all merger talks. She didn't want to be distracted by news of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. and EchoStar fighting over her company. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=32622282 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 00:07:31 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Search Privacy At Google & Other Search Engines By Danny Sullivan, Editor The Search Engine Report, April 2, 2003 There's been some pretty scary statements made about Google and the privacy of search requests recently. You may have heard that Google was nominated for a "Big Brother" award. You may also have read that Google knows everything you ever searched for. Should you be frightened? It is time to boycott Google to protect yourself, as blogger Gavin Sheridan called for last month? Relax. Yes, there are privacy issues to be aware of when you do a search at Google. However, these issues are just as much as a concern for other search engines you visit, as well. More importantly, the fear that you personally could be tracked isn't realistic, for the vast majority of users, at least by Google itself. In this article, we'll take a closer look at just what exactly Google knows about you, when you come to do a search -- and see why you needn't be so worried, for the moment. http://searchenginewatch.com/sereport/03/04-privacy.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 00:11:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Music Industry Group Sues College File Swappers LOS ANGELES, April 3 (Reuters) - A music industry group on Thursday said it has filed lawsuits against the operators of private computer networks on three college campuses where it claims the networks are being used to illegally trade copies of digital music files. The Recording Industry Association of America said its member companies filed suit against two students at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and against one student each at Princeton University and Michigan Technological University. The RIAA has actively used the courts to pursue digital music pirates after a 9 percent dip in CD sales in 2002 that it blames for the most part on online file sharing. In a statement, the association compared the file-sharing systems, which are open only to students on the universities' internal networks, as miniature versions of Napster -- the software and network that led to the explosion of music file swapping. The four networks were offering nearly 2.5 million files, it said, including more than 1 million files on the largest network alone. ... http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33706267 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 22:06:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: How Not To Wrestle A Gator Michael Smith, 04.03.03, 10:30 AM ET NEW YORK - You may be irritated by pop-up Web ads on news sites but grudgingly accept that online publishers need the advertising revenue to pay for content you get for free. Now imagine how furious publishers get when ads served by a company that has nothing to do with them pop readers off their pages. So pervasive is the software that lets this happen -- between one in two and one in four PCs have it, according to Bill McKlosky, chief executive of Emerging Interest and long-time critic of the practice -- that some of the best-known news publishers on the Web turned anger into legal action. In their sights is Gator, the privately held, Redwood City, Calif.-based outfit that describes itself as "the largest online behavioral marketing firm and fourth-largest daily online media property in the U.S." The New York Times Co. (nyse: NYT - news - people ), The Washington Post Co. (nyse: WPO - news - people ), Dow Jones (nyse: DJ - news - people ) and several other leading publishers that brought the suit call Gator "a parasite ... that free rides on [their] hard work and investments." ... http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/03/cx_ms_0403gator.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 22:09:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: PA Won't ID Sites Blocked for Child Porn By TED BRIDIS Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- Pennsylvania's attorney general is citing laws against distributing child pornography in refusing to identify any of hundreds of Web sites his office has forced the nation's largest Internet providers to block under a unique state law. The legal stand by the attorney general, Republican Mike Fisher, stymies efforts by a prominent civil liberties group to challenge an unorthodox strategy in Pennsylvania to stem online child pornography. The Washington-based Center for Democracy and Technology had sought the list of sites to buttress its assertions that the Pennsylvania law blocks Web surfers visiting innocent sites located in the same electronic neighborhoods as those peddling illegal porn. Without the list of blocked sites, the group cannot find examples to support its claims. Fisher's office said disclosing the list of blocked Web sites would itself be disseminating such pornography, which is illegal. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33704697 ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: Wi-fi, How to Keep Disk From Fragmenting With Always on Wi-fi Organization: KiloDelta Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 23:56:15 GMT In article , dejausenet@yahoo.com says: > I have my laptop connected to a home wi-fi network which is 'always on' > connected to cable modem. > Find that my hd is active quite a lot, even while screen is in auto > dark mode, when laptop is not actively being used. > Usually have email and web browser open even while pc is in 'sleep > mode'. > Do I need to close my web browser to keep HD from spinning > occassionally, while machine 'asleep'? > Hate to have to turn machine off to prevent frequent fragmentation. It's going to fragment no matter what you do. It's a fact of life with PC based operating systems. But that disk activity you see is probably the indexing service running. You don't mention what o/s you're running but if it's Win 2000 or Win XP indexing service constantly scans contents of certain folders on the drive. Tony ------------------------------ From: llewis@cumberland.tec.nj.us (Lew) Subject: Internet Access On a Private Plane Date: 3 Apr 2003 18:17:32 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I don't have all the details: but my friend wants to know how far up he can get a signal for internet connection. He usually flies at 6000 feet -- mainly for weather updates -- he says he has Verizon for 100.00 a month that allows him to connect to any of his services. Can someone give me details on the posibilities of this and how this is done if it can be done. Thank you. ------------------------------ From: Damon Brownd Subject: Re: KSU Manuels and Wiring Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 20:57:34 -0600 Check out http://www.quick-manuals.com/. John Dziurlaj wrote in message news:telecom22.375.3@telecom-digest.org: > I recently acquired a AT&T Merlin System, and a Omega Phone II > Phone System, from a local school. The AT&T system appears to be > easier to setup then the Omega system, but I have no manuals for it, > same with the Omega Phone. Is there a company who offers these sorts > of resources for cheap. I didn't pay anything for these systems, so I > don't really want to put much money into them. The Omegaphone also has > two weird cables with a million wires coming out of them, which I have > no idea how to wire. I think I am capable to wire these myself, I do > have a background in comp networking, but have never dealt in depth > with Telco systems. Is there any good reading and/or websites for > newbies to this field? Any suggestions would be of great help. > Thanks! > John ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 14:44:46 -0500 Organization: Bell Sympatico John Higdon wrote: > I'm unaware of anyone doing direct business with US consumers from > China. That means that they either have a presence in the US, or they > are partnered or contracting with a US firm ... who could be targeted > in a spam suit. ... except that no one in China will be compelled by Western laws to reveal who their American partners are. Geoffrey Welsh 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! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But the Americans will be in plain site; don't worry about who the Chinese partners are; just start suing the pants off of the Americans. Don't worry, *they'll* get in touch with the Chinese people involved, when times get tough. PAT] ------------------------------ From: BV124@aol.com Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 22:44:38 EST Subject: Fry Street in Chicago Fry Street runs east-west between Ashland Ave (the west terminus) and Bishop Street (the east terminus.) It is one (1) block north of Chicago Ave. It also runs east-west from Elston ave (west terminus) to Lessing street (east terminus.) Again, one (1) block north of Chicago Ave. It also runs east-west from Willard street (west terminus) to Racine Ave.(east terminus.) Again, one (1) block north of Chicago Ave. TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Then '1024' would be in the strip of the street between Ashland (1600 west) and Bishop (around 900-1000 west). Whenever you look up a street name in Chicago, wherever it is located (such as 'one block north of' or 'one block east of') it will always be in the same 'one block north of' location throughout the city. I used to years ago live on Highland Street on the north side. It was a 'block south of Devon (major east/west street at 6400 north). Highland literally stopped and started every three or four blocks, interuppted by two cemeteries, a factory, etc. Then way, way out on the northwest side there it was again, a two block strip called 'Highland Street', once again right next to Devon Avenue. They are consistent in their street names, numbers and locations in Chicago if nothing else. So is Independence as well. North/south streets are numbered First through twenty-seventh, east/west streets are trees, i.e. Ash, Cedar, Elm, Poplar, Walnut, Willow, Magnolia, etc. The exception to that is Main Street downtown. The exception to the numbers north/south are Park Boulevard (Third Street) and Pennsylvania Street downtown (Seventh Street). When you get 'way out west' in town, in the streets numbered in the twenties, they interupt a lot around factories and the railroad tracks, etc but *always* resume in the same geographic area when they resume. One bit of weirdness however; the 'original town (of the late 1800's) went from First Street to Tenth Street. As the city expanded to the west, they just kept increasing the numbers to 11th, 12th, 16th, 18th, etc. But around 1910 as expansion occurred to the *east* end of town, they could not come up with Zeroeth Street or minus One Street, etc. So the four or five blocks east of First Street have names like Wald, Topeka, and Cement Street (because its southern terminus is at the Heartland Cement Plant). There is even a 'New Street' out there somewhere I think. That's a good way to study the expansion history of many small towns with numbered streets. Look at the place where First Street is, and while they can number to infinity in one direction, expansion the other way screws up the system. Coffeyville is like that. Their number streets run east and west, their trees run north and south. Both Independence and Coffeyville date from the middle 1800's. In Coffeyville, sure enough the street after First Street is called Second Street, etc. Going in the other direction, before First Street they have 'New Street' now itself about a half-century old. Check out the street names in the 'older parts' of your town, you'll see what parts of town were done second and third in history, etc. 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 #377 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Apr 4 21:18:38 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h352IbT13531; Fri, 4 Apr 2003 21:18:38 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 21:18:38 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304050218.h352IbT13531@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 #378 TELECOM Digest Fri, 4 Apr 2003 21:18:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 378 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Displaying Witheld Numbers in UK (Ken Wheatley) Re: Displaying Witheld Numbers in UK (Richard D G Cox) Re: Internet Access On a Private Plane (John R. Levine) Re: Internet Access On a Private Plane (Dale Farmer) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (Clint Olsen) Re: Internet Access On a Private Plane (Justin Time) Step-by-Step Demonstrator Box From 1895 (Ron Bean) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (John Higdon) Re: Rupert Murdoch Nears Global Satellite Goal (John Higdon) Re: KSU Manuels and Wiring (touch tone tommy) More News on Independence Area Phones, Postal Stuff (Carl Moore) Street Nomenclature (Joey Lindstrom) Last Laugh! Which Phone Company Has Most Expensive Toll Call? (Zhang Xixi) 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: Ken Wheatley Subject: Re: Displaying Witheld Numbers in UK Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 07:50:17 +0100 Organization: Unisys - Roseville, MN Tim wrote in message news:telecom22.376.9@telecom-digest.org: > Does anybody know of how to build a device, or if there is one > available, that can filter out the pulse at the begining of the data > burst that tells BT Caller Display units not to display witheld > numbers? I have seen this pulse using a Digital Storage Oscilloscope. Surely it's just the word 'withheld' in FSK? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 13:31:11 +0100 From: Richard D G Cox Subject: Re: Displaying Witheld Numbers in UK Reply-To: nospam@numbering.com Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited On 4 Apr 2003 at 00:20 UT johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote > Unless the Euro standard for CLID is very, very different from the > one here in North America, The UK standard certainly is. See http://www.sinet.bt.com/227v3p3.pdf > that initial pulse is a synchonization bit, not a masking bit. If it is seen for "withheld calls" but not other calls, it must either be the "withheld" flag, or some other symptom of that flag's state. > CLID blocking is done at the central office, and the CLID box just > displays what it receives. That part, however, is true for both systems! Richard Cox ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Internet Access On a Private Plane Date: 4 Apr 2003 11:05:59 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I don't have all the details: but my friend wants to know how far up > he can get a signal for internet connection. He usually flies at 6000 > feet -- It depends what kind of phone he has. A regular cell phone isn't supposed to be used in flight at all, although a lot of people use it near the ground. The higher you go, the more cell sites your phone can see, the worse it works, and the more it screws up the cell sites. I'd think that 6K feet would be way too high for regular cell use. For inflight use, Air Cell (www.aircell.com) offers modified cell phones that are legal for in-flight use as well as Iridium which works everywhere. If he wants weather, Air Cell provides that directly. It's not cheap, $50/mo and up after buying the equipment. 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: Dale Farmer Subject: Re: Internet Access On a Private Plane Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 11:49:18 -0500 Organization: Furry green fuzz in the back of the refrigerator Lew wrote: > I don't have all the details: but my friend wants to know how far up he > can get a signal for internet connection. He usually flies at 6000 > feet -- mainly for weather updates -- he says he has Verizon for 100.00 a > month that allows him to connect to any of his services. Can someone > give me details on the posibilities of this and how this is done if it > can be done. Using any radio device on an aircraft in flight bumps into lots of special FAA and FCC regulations. Violating these regulations carries with it large civil penalties and possibly jail time if you annoy the judge. In general you need to use radio systems that have been specifically modified for use on aircraft. For instance, were you to turn on your cell phone at that altitude over an area that is well provided with cell towers, the signal would go to many cell sites and cause problems with the system. --Dale ------------------------------ From: Clint Olsen Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 07:45:20 GMT In article , John Higdon wrote: > So why don't you get your ISP to delist your address from its declared > dynamic address space? I believe Comcast/AT&T don't want people running services like mail etc. without using their servers. > I do exactly what AOL does: I refuse email from addresses that are > declared to be "dynamic" or "dial-up". You are banging on the wrong > entity. You need to talk to your ISP, or get a better connection. Unfortunately, connection options are pretty limited in some towns. You can choose between the cable monopoly (Comcast) or your local DSL monopoly. You can get static IPs using DSL, but the service is even more abysmal than cable. Or are you suggesting I get a leased line (hundreds of $$/mo.) just so I can claim the luxury of a static IP? In article , Will Herman wrote: > I've got the same problem. I just started seeing it a couple of days > ago. This is the case of using an axe instead instead of a pocket knife > to solve the problem. I'm trying to find a workaround, but haven't > gotten there yet. My solution as others have mentioned is to relay your mail through your ISPs mail servers. This is fine as long as they do not have any draconian limits for mail transmission. Since this is a personal domain I've registered, I'm certainly not taxing the system whatsoever. My followup question to the group: How do you ascertain whether an IP address is dynamic or not? There's certainly not one pattern that's going to catch it all. I never heard definitively how this is done. I have managed to reject all email from hosts without a reverse lookup entry - this nails a lot of crap. I've had _one_ legitimate email reject by using this heuristic. But I would love to be able to tell these spammers sending mail directly to piss off :) Thanks, -Clint ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Internet Access On a Private Plane Date: 4 Apr 2003 13:52:33 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ llewis@cumberland.tec.nj.us (Lew) wrote in message news:: > I don't have all the details: but my friend wants to know how far up he > can get a signal for internet connection. He usually flies at 6000 > feet -- mainly for weather updates -- he says he has Verizon for 100.00 a > month that allows him to connect to any of his services. Can someone > give me details on the posibilities of this and how this is done if it > can be done. Doesn't the FAA have something to say about wireless devices operated in an aircraft? You can always tune a radio to the NOAA weather channels. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 17:41:58 -0600 From: Ron Bean Subject: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895 Pat-- Some years ago I mailed you a snapshot of a step-by-step demonstrator box that I'd seen in a museum (it had been built as a sales tool to demonstrate the "new" technology in 1895). I recently went back there and took some better pictures, which I have *temporarily* posted on my website at: . If someone would like to find a more permanent home for this page -- either on the Telecom Digest website or on someone's telecom history site -- feel free to grab it while it's there. Maybe your readers could fill in some details about some of the other items they have on display. For example, there's a cordboard that they claim was used from 1962 until 1980(!) as the interface between 50 office phones and 8 incoming trunk lines. Wouldn't they have had something a little more modern in 1962? I also took pictures of some old buttsets (with and without dials), an old PBX console, and a few other things that looked interesting. BTW I didn't ask anyone at the museum for permission to put this stuff on the web, I just sort of assumed they wouldn't mind :-). In any case, if you're ever driving across Nebraska on I-80, plan to spend half a day at Pioneer Village. Some of the displays look like random collections of old junk, but they also have some interesting bits of old technology here and there. ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 06:46:28 -0800 In article , Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > John Higdon wrote: >> I'm unaware of anyone doing direct business with US consumers from >> China. That means that they either have a presence in the US, or they >> are partnered or contracting with a US firm ... who could be targeted >> in a spam suit. > ... except that no one in China will be compelled by Western laws to reveal > who their American partners are. They don't have to. It is their American partners with whom you do business. That is why they have American partners: to do business with Americans. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But the Americans will be in plain > site; don't worry about who the Chinese partners are; just start suing > the pants off of the Americans. Don't worry, *they'll* get in touch > with the Chinese people involved, when times get tough. PAT] Exactly. No matter how clever spammers get, they still have to ultimately get your money. Most Americans are a bit queasy about sending money abroad, so whoever collects the "ransom" here in the US should be fair game for spam litigation. Incidently, anyone stupid enough to send money or give a credit card number to anyone about whom they know nothing at all (the typical spammer) deserves both the spam and to be taken to the cleaners. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Rupert Murdoch Nears Global Satellite Goal Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 07:56:08 -0800 In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > SYDNEY, April 3 (Reuters) - Media mogul Rupert Murdoch is standing > once again on the threshold of the crowning deal of his career, and > this time it looks like he's the only bidder. "Tomorrow Never Dies" should be required viewing. 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: John, would you mind reviewing "Tomorow Never Dies" for the readers here not familiar with it? Also, would you give some thought to putting it on MP-3 or 'Real' and putting it up on a web site for a short time for readers to view? Thanks! PAT] ------------------------------ From: touch tone tommy Subject: Re: KSU Manuels and Wiring Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 23:57:21 -0800 Organization: Acme Telephone Works On 2 Apr 2003 18:00:16 -0800, Dziurlaj@hotmail.com (John Dziurlaj) wrote: > Hello, > I recently acquired a AT&T Merlin System, and a Omega Phone II > Phone System, from a local school. The AT&T system appears to be > easier to setup then the Omega system, but I have no manuals for it, > same with the Omega Phone. Is there a company who offers these sorts > of resources for cheap. I didn't pay anything for these systems, so I > don't really want to put much money into them. The Omegaphone also has > two weird cables with a million wires coming out of them, which I have > no idea how to wire. I think I am capable to wire these myself, I do > have a background in comp networking, but have never dealt in depth > with Telco systems. Is there any good reading and/or websites for > newbies to this field? Any suggestions would be of great help. > Thanks! > John http://support.avaya.com Drill down through the "Communications Systems" link on the left bar to find Merlin, and then find your particular flavor. Tom Thiel - touch_tone_tommy@yahoo.com "Remember, it don't mean a thing if it ain't got that certain je ne sais quoi" - Peter Schickele (PDQ Bach) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 12:10:54 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: More Telephone and Postal Notes on Independence Some time ago, that prefix (by then in area code 620) was written up as being in use in (zipcodes furnished by me): Tyro 67364 Dearing 67340 Bolton nonpostal Liberty 67351 The PO's named above are in Montgomery County. Also, there is a Liberty prefix 485 (in old 316), so I take it 289 would appear on some rural route(s) in Liberty 67351. I should have added that I also see a Dearing prefix (948 in old 316 area). And somewhere I picked up a note about 620-847 being used at Caney. That apparently should be 879, not 847, so I am going to trash the reference to 620-847, which I failed to find in www.nanpa.com . I noticed that a Big K at 2801 West Main is closing. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, Independence K-Mart (right next door to Independence Wal-Mart in the mall area west of town) is closing in a few days. K-Mart corporate has had some problems of its own, and the closing of the local store was one of the casualties. It was not the fault of the Wal-Mart store, as many local Wal-Mart haters contend. A few of the K-Mart employees are going to go (or have started) to work for Wal-Mart. Furthermore, say the Wal-Mart haters, local Wal-Mart management are the ones spreading those 'damn lies' about Marvins (our local big grocery store, where Country Mart and prior to that, Safeway used to be located) going out of business also. Not true, say the Marvins people. Marvins has a very good selection of stock, and especially on Saturday mornings their store is very crowded with six cashier lines running, a 'customer service' counter with two or three employees on duty, a very active delicatessen area with three or four clerks, and a half-dozen high school age guys bagging stuff and carrying it out to the parking lot. But, in all fairness, we used to have *three* large groceries in town (Country Mart, Dillons and Food Town) before Walmart opened; they all closed up with Country Mart being the last to leave (they had occupied what was formerly Safeway and had been there for four years; no one expected them to go also). When Country Mart closed that left us with ZERO grocery stores in town except for Walmart for a few months. So even the Walmart haters had to go out there on West Main Street to Walmart for groceries, like it or not. Our 'crime rate' used to be zilch here in town, except for the usual DUI's, and rowdy teenagers in possession of tobacco and beer, or the makings of a meth lab. In the two years the Walmart SuperCenter has been on West Main Street, there is rarely a day in the police activity column of the Independence Reporter that we don't read of at least one (most days, a few days sometimes two) reports of shoplifters being arrested at Walmart, or kiting bad checks on purpose. And Carl, your listings for (what is called) 'rural Independence' is mostly correct. All are now 620 (was formerly 316, which is now Wichita area exclusively): 289 is Tyro/Dearing/Bolton, 879 is Caney, 251-252 is Coffeyville, 331 is Independence, and according to my SWB directory, 948 is Dearing and/or Liberty. 336 is Cherryvale and I forget what Neodesha is. Other than the city of Independence with our population of about 8500, and Coffeyville with 12,000, Cherrvale with 2000 and Neodesha with about 2000, the remainder of the 31,000 population in Montgomery County are spread among Dearing/Tyro (about six hundred people between them), Liberty/Bolton/Blake and other 'more rural' areas. Since Independence is the 'county seat' we get certain amenities here (local offices of state/federal government) not available in the other places in the area. Someone posted a message here a few months ago saying 'Independence must have quite a lot of shopping to support a Walmart Supercenter with only 8500 people.' Its not that, its the fact that everyone from miles around comes to the 'county seat' to do business, even neighboring counties such as Chatauqua (west) and Labette (east) which are smaller and 'more rural' than Montgomery. And the 'public servants' are *so friendly and helpful*. I called the Fire Chief today (Mr. Rail) to inquire about my smoke detector which has been 'beeping' sporadically for a day. In about 15 minutes he was over here at my house with one of his workers, to check and replace the unit. They supply free units to senior citizens. First thing he said when he came to the door was 'is your mother still living here?' I told him no, mother was living now down the street in the senior citizen residence called 'Penn Manor'. Then he volunteered to me that he was the 'brother in law of mothers friend, Joyce, and he saw mother at church every Sunday.' He tinkered with the smoke detector for awhile then went back to his office and got a new one for me. All over and done with from request being made on the phone to a new detector installed in a little over an hour. Try that in Chicago! His son is or was one of the help desk workers here at our local ISP on the night shift. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 11:22:14 -0700 Subject: Street Nomenclature Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Fri, 4 Apr 2003 03:07:25 EST, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > One bit of weirdness however; the 'original > town (of the late 1800's) went from First Street to Tenth Street. As > the city expanded to the west, they just kept increasing the numbers > to 11th, 12th, 16th, 18th, etc. But around 1910 as expansion occurred > to the *east* end of town, they could not come up with Zeroeth Street > or minus One Street, etc. So the four or five blocks east of First > Street have names like Wald, Topeka, and Cement Street (because its > southern terminus is at the Heartland Cement Plant). There is even a > 'New Street' out there somewhere I think. That's a good way to study > the expansion history of many small towns with numbered streets. Look > at the place where First Street is, and while they can number to > infinity in one direction, expansion the other way screws up the > system. Coffeyville is like that. Their number streets run east and > west, their trees run north and south. Both Independence and Coffeyville > date from the middle 1800's. In Coffeyville, sure enough the street > after First Street is called Second Street, etc. Going in the other > direction, before First Street they have 'New Street' now itself about > a half-century old. Check out the street names in the 'older parts' > of your town, you'll see what parts of town were done second and third > in history, etc. PAT] Calgary began back in the 1800's with named streets, but sometime this century they converted to a numbered street system. A central and arbitrary point was chosen, which is in the Bow River (running east-west) where the Centre Street Bridge crosses it (north-south), and that was designated the "centre" of town. From that point, as you move out in any cardinal direction, street numbers (running north-south) and avenue numbers (east-west) increase. The city is therefore divided into four quadrants, north-west, north-east, south-west, and south-east. If you drive north 7 blocks from "centre", you're at 7th Avenue and Centre Street N. If you then drive west on 7th Avenue for one block, you are at the corner of 7th Avenue and 1st Street NW. If you u-turn and head east, crossing Centre St and going another block, you're at 7th Avenue and 1st Street NE. The next intersection is 7th Avenue and 2nd Street NE. And so on. If you are looking for an address that is on Centre Street (or Macleod Trail in the southern part of town, which assumes the role of east-west dividing line), or Centre Avenue (which actually only exists for a few blocks in an industrial area), your quadrant designation depends on which side of the street you're on. If you live at 1601 Centre St north of downtown, then you're on the west side of the street and your address is 1601 Centre St NW. The person who lives across the street from you is at 1602 Centre St NE. Most of this applies only to the "central" part of town and not the newer districts added when the population of this town began to explode. And even then, some numbered streets and avenues have been renamed as named streets. For example, 2 St SE is "Macleod Trail SE". Centre Avenue (most of it) is "Memorial Drive" (NE and NW). Indeed, most of our heavy-use traffic corridors are named, such as Deerfoot Trail, Sarcee Trail, Glenmore Trail, Anderson Road, Marquis Of Lorne Trail, etc. Many of these names reflect our western heritage combined with our connection to Britain. Macleod Trail is named after one of Calgary's early settlers, who in turn gave Calgary its name: Cal Garry is a small fishing village in northern Scotland. Calgary is in the province of Alberta, named after Queen Victoria's daughter, who was in turn married to the afore-mentioned Marquis Of Lorne (and his title is pronounced "MAR-kwis", not "mar-KEE"). Native Indian names are used frequently on the major roads: Crowchild Trail, Peigan Trail, Stoney Trail, Deerfoot Trail, and so on. The newer districts all suffer from a misplaced desire to look like Los Angeles suburbs. Lots of winding roads, cul-de-sacs, etc. Those areas generally don't have numbered streets or avenues (except on a few main roads) but still adhere to the requirement of having "SW", or "NE" or whichever designation applied. A friend of mine, way way down south, lives in the community of Evergreen. All of the streets in the area will begin with "Ever" - a friend of mine lives at 160xx Everstone Road SW. This puts a high demand on street names, so generally speaking most of these suburb street names get used more than once. My friend lives on Everstone Road, but there is also an Everstone Crescent, and an Everstone Way, an Everstone Circle, and so on. When I used to drive cab, and someone from out of town hopped in and said "123 Abingdon", which works fine in most cities, I'd have to say "well, I need to know if that's Abindgon Way, or Abingdon Drive, or whatever". The city of Edmonton, 190 miles north of here, suffers from the problem you mentioned. They didn't start with "0" avenue and "0" street. Instead, they began their numbering with "100" avenue and "100" street (though 100 Avenue is actually Jasper Avenue). They probably figured that this system would last forever. Avenues north of downtown would be 101 Avenue, 102 Avenue, etc., while going south would find you at 99 Avenue, 98 Avenue, and so on. Well, now they've grown so large that they ran out of avenues on the south side of town. They have now adopted the "NE", "NW", etc. quadrant system that Calgary uses, with the side-effect that nearly the entire city is "NW", with a small amount in "SW". I can't see any "NE" or "SE" on Mapquest's system, though this is primarily because Edmonton bumps into Sherwood Park long before reaching "0 Street", and Sherwood Park has its own naming system (all names I believe). The city of Airdrie, just north of Calgary, has a similar problem. They began with all named streets but converted a few to numbers, and arbitrarily picked a spot "downtown" (Centre Avenue and Main Street) as the central spot from which to base a Calgary-style quadrant system (I believe Washington DC also uses something similar). The problem is, "downtown" is actually way up in the NW part of the overall land area of the town, meaning the vast majority of Airdrie addresses are "SE". Weird. ObTelecom: when dial service was set up here, all Calgary numbers began with "2" and all of the communities surrounding Calgary (and Edmonton), including Airdrie, got numbers beginning with "9". In Airdrie's case, that was "948". In the late 90's, my folks moved to Airdrie just after they ran out of 948 numbers. Alberta's 403 area code (prior to the 780 split) had also run out of NNX prefix codes, and they were now assigning NXX codes, so my folks got a shiny new 912-prefix number. I had a lady in my taxi once who was a dispatcher for the Calgary-area 911 service, and (as you might guess) she tells me that when they started that prefix, the number of "wrong number" calls to 911 went up, and haven't gone back down. It's awfully easy to "double-dial" that 1, especially if you've got a jittery "1" key on your phone, as I did for a while. I junked it after two accidental calls to 911, one of which resulted in a visit from the cops! Reminds me of that classic bit from the Simpsons, where everybody in town, including the cops, were glued to their TV sets waiting for the lottery numbers to be drawn. A phone in the police station rings. An obviously distracted Chief Wiggum answers the phone and says "Hello? ... No, you've got the wrong number. This is nine one... two" :-) -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The same situation is true of the streets here. Everything is nice and blocked out, one square block after another. If you remember that trees are east/west and numbers are north/south you can find *almost anything*. But in the far north part of town (the rich area, north of Taylor Road by the country club) they have lots of cutesy street names and streets that run in circles and curves, like 'Bowling Green' and 'Rajah'. Ditto in Coffeyville, which like Independence was started in the middle 1800's and was very nice and logically blocked out in squares, etc. But after the Second War, when the town enjoyed a very brief expansion period (about the time that 'New Street' was started) they had the same thing: a bunch of circle streets, etc. Look at a street map: it is *so obvious* what parts came first, which were added on later. In Coffeyville's case, they did not have north/south/east/west designations for streets until they had those new sections north of 'New Street' when to number the houses the rest of town would have had to be 'jump started' by a couple hundred numbers more. So they decided to invent 'north' as a designation for the streets in town which were continued onward through the new areas of town. Where I had been born at '210 Elm Street' in Coffeyville in 1942, the address now days is '210 South Elm Street'. My grandparent's house around the corner at '309 Third Street' in those days is now '309 West Third Street'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Zhang Xixi Subject: Last Laugh! Which Telephone Company Has The Most Expensive Toll Call? Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 12:55:39 UTC Organization: Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This belongs in our 'most peculiar message of the day' category. I do not know if this person is real or not? Can you decide? Is it a late April Fool's joke? PAT] ------------------------------ Hello!everyone Can anyone tell me that which telephone company has the most expensive toll call? I like toll call. Thanks! Zhang xixi Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe John Higdon can answer this. John told us here a year or two ago about a telco which had some outragously high rate for 'non-subscribers'. People who signed up with the 'ten-ten' company got reasonably good rates. People who used them through hackery or phreaking (then got caught!) got humongous bills for hundreds of dollars. What was that company, John? Maybe Mr. Zhang xixi could benefit from your counsel since he says "I like toll call." 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 #378 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Apr 6 15:24:48 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h36JOm823487; Sun, 6 Apr 2003 15:24:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 15:24:48 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304061924.h36JOm823487@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 #379 TELECOM Digest Sun, 6 Apr 2003 15:25:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 379 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Beam: "Web Filters at Libraries are Overdue" (Monty Solomon) Health System Warily Prepares for Privacy Rules (Monty Solomon) Sony DVR to Sport Broadband (Monty Solomon) Overture Signs Deal With Gator (Monty Solomon) Big Dig Changes Throw Internet Maps a Curve (Monty Solomon) Mexico's TV Azteca Says US Court Rules for It (Monty Solomon) Sony TV Would Grab Streams From the Net (Monty Solomon) U.S. Telecoms Off on Weak Outlook, Big Challenges (Monty Solomon) HP Introduces New Pavilion PCs for Digital Media Enthusiast (Monty Solomon) Landmark Theaters Plans Digital Cinema Rollout (Monty Solomon) SBC All Distance Connections (Monty Solomon) Comcast's Muscle Man (Monty Solomon) Airport Extreme Review (Monty Solomon) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (John Higdon) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (Gary Breuckman) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (Daniel W. Johnson) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (dlavoie) 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, 6 Apr 2003 01:17:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Beam: "Web Filters at Libraries are Overdue" By Alex Beam, Globe Columnist, 4/1/2003 I once wrote that 'librarians are indeed the unacknowledged legislators of the universe,' and I meant it. Their pay stinks, their working conditions are worse than at the post office, but they bring the world to us. Now librarians are caught up in a dramatic First Amendment imbroglio over the recently adopted Children's Internet Protection Act. The case, US v. American Library Association et al., has reached the Supreme Court, with the ALA and the American Civil Liberties Union aligned against the government. The government's position is: We provide $200 million annually to public libraries for computer-related programs. As a condition of this aid, we demand that you filter out Internet pornography, especially for juvenile users. The ALA and ACLU oppose the law on more or less classic First Amendment grounds, arguing that libraries' Internet terminals are ''public forums'' where the government may not restrict speech. They feel strongly that filters or ''blocking'' technologies end up weeding out legitimate sites -- e.g., the Flesh Public Library in Piqua, Ohio -- along with the illegal child pornography and the garden-variety smut clogging up the Internet. Well, we're all against censorship -- or are we? While the ACLU and the usual band of First Amendment zealots are demanding let-it-all-hang-out Internet access in libraries, some resistance has arisen from an unexpected constituency: librarians. In Minneapolis last week, 12 librarians sued their employer in federal court, charging that the library's three-year-old Internet sites displayed 'virtually every imaginable kind of human sexual conduct,' contributing to an 'intimidating, hostile and offensive workplace.' 'We were living in hell, and they were unwilling to acknowledge the problem,' plaintiff Wendy Adamson told the Minneapolis Star Tribune. In Toronto -- admittedly a city that won't be affected by the Supreme Court's decision -- a group of unruly teenagers chased a librarian out of her building when she shut off their Internet porn connection. A police officer told The Toronto Sun that teenagers consider the library better than an amusement arcade because the latter doesn't allow them free, unfettered access to all kinds of pornography. ... http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/091/living/Web_filters_at_libraries_are_overdue+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 01:21:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Health System Warily Prepares for Privacy Rules By ROBERT PEAR WASHINGTON, April 5 - When Dr. Stephen C. Albrecht of Olympia, Wash., called a hospital in Tacoma recently to inquire about one of his patients, an 18-year-old treated for an infectious disease, he had trouble getting information. Under a new policy at the Hebrew Home of Greater Washington, a 558-bed nursing home in Rockville, Md., callers can get information about patients only if they have a password or "verification code." And Dr. Matthew J. Messina, a dentist in Fairview Park, Ohio, near Cleveland, said he had changed the schedule posted each day in his treatment room, so patients would be identified only by their first names. New federal rules to protect the privacy of medical records take effect on April 14 and the changes have touched off a quiet revolution in the health care industry. Doctors, hospitals, drugstores and other health care providers must limit the disclosure of information about patients. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/06/national/06PRIV.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 01:26:37 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sony DVR to Sport Broadband By Matthew Broersma and Richard Shim Sony is continuing to make its network strategy a reality with three new digital video recorders that have broadband connectivity and can be programmed from a cell phone. Sony will release in Japan three new digital video recorders (DVRs), each with a broadband connection and Web browser, the company announced earlier this week. All are part of Sony's CoCoon line of DVRs, which are available in Japan and are expected to come to the United States once the consumer electronics giant can establish a DVR service. Toshiba and Panasonic have similar devices, which include a hard drive and DVD recorder, but Sony is the first to add a broadband connection to receive program guide information and to access Web pages. The NDR-XR1, set to launch on April 12 for about $1,200, is a combination DVR and DVD recorder, while the NAV-E900 and NAV-E600 are combination DVRs and DVD players with an AM/FM radio tuner. The NAV-E900 comes with a 600-watt amplifier and will cost around $950 and the NAV-E600 comes with a 500-watt amplifier and will cost about $700. The NAV devices are set for an April 26 launch in Japan. Sony representatives declined to comment on a U.S. launch. ... http://news.com.com/2100-1041-995549.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 01:30:07 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Overture Signs Deal With Gator By Stefanie Olsen Staff Writer, CNET News.com Overture Services has signed a three-year deal with Gator to display its sponsored search listings on pages that pop under those of rival and partner Web sites. As previously reported, the pay-for-performance search company has been testing a partnership with Gator's online advertising and information network (GAIN) for several months. In the last week, the company committed to a lengthy deal to distribute sponsored listings from its advertising network onto Gator's new paid search product, Search Scout. Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed. ... http://news.com.com/2100-1024-995616.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 01:00:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Big Dig Changes Throw Internet Maps a Curve By Mac Daniel, Globe Staff, 4/3/2003 Online map services could be updated easily, but when it comes to the Big Dig they are as obsolete as their paper cousins, with no mention of a new northbound tunnel on I-93 or bustling Leonard Zakim Bunker Hill Bridge. Five days after the tunnel opened, a quick survey shows that YahooMaps, Expedia, and on-line map king MapQuest are all giving bad directions. It's not surprising that the online services haven't caught up yet. But the company that supplies data to many of the services says its charts may stay in the past until the dust settles on the Big Dig -- more than a year from now. So northbound drivers, just hope the motorists in front of you are not among the millions who chart their route through Boston in cyberspace. With YahooMaps recording 15 million users (not hits) in January, and MapQuest receiving 19.9 million visitors in one month last year, the glitches have the potential to create a small army of lost souls making wrong turns and looking for bygone exits. Directions to the FleetCenter on Expedia.com were the most accurate, though they recommended exit 26B, which no longer exists. Actually, it never existed. MapQuest had drivers using the Causeway Street exit -- Exit 25 -- which has gone the way of Boston Garden. So too did YahooMaps. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/093/metro/Big_Dig_changes_throw_Internet_maps_a_curve+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 23:37:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mexico's TV Azteca Says US Court Rules For It By Fiona Ortiz MEXICO CITY, April 3 (Reuters) - Mexican television company TV Azteca (NYSE:TZA) said on Thursday that it won an early phase ruling in a legal battle over pay television broadcasting rights to its programming in the United States. U.S. satellite television firm EchoStar Communications Corp. (NASDAQ:DISH) filed suit last June in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, asking for a preliminary injunction to block Azteca programming from being retransmitted over cable and satellite. The court denied the injunction, Azteca America Chief Executive Officer Louis Echarte told Reuters. If the court had granted the injunction, Azteca's U.S. network Azteca America would have lost about half of its audience, Echarte said. EchoStar claimed that the fact that some affiliates of Azteca's U.S. network are carried on cable stations violates EchoStar's exclusive deal for the satellite television rights to programming from Azteca flagship Mexico network Channel 13. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33704309 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 23:58:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sony TV Would Grab Streams From the Net By Evan Hansen , Stefanie Olsen and Richard Shim Staff Writers, CNET News.com Sony is developing a plasma screen television set that's intended to tune in streaming video from home networks and the Internet as easily as regular TV programs, according to sources familiar with the plans. The project, code-named Altair, is one of the company's latest efforts to make digital content more accessible on its consumer-electronics devices, and it reinforces Sony's vision of the television as the centerpiece of its strategy for networked digital media. The new Sony TV will include a built-in Internet connection and tuners for receiving broadcasts from cable, satellite and over-the-air transmissions, according to sources. The TV is expected to include a Web browser but is not envisioned as a run at Web TV. The device will be manipulated by a remote control rather than a keyboard and will use the Internet primarily as an alternative way to deliver video to the TV screen. Sony has formed partnerships with several streaming-media companies, including chipmaker Equator, On2 Technologies, RealNetworks and Secure Media, to help deliver that video. ... http://news.com.com/2100-1031-995467.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 23:31:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Telecoms Off on Weak Outlook, Big Challenges PHILADELPHIA, April 3 (Reuters) - Shares of large U.S. telecommunications service providers weakened on Thursday as some Wall Street analysts scaled back growth expectations through 2004 and voiced concerns about pension liabilities and competitive pressures. Morgan Stanley on Thursday cut its view on the industry to "cautious," from "in line," while several other brokerage firms this week trimmed their earnings forecasts for 2003 and 2004 for the Baby Bells and long-distance telephone companies. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33703195 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 23:45:17 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: HP Introduces New Pavilion PCs for Digital Media Enthusiasts PALO ALTO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 3, 2003--HP (NYSE:HPQ) today announced a new series of notebook PCs with DVD+R/+RW drives and four HP Pavilion desktop PCs with rewritable CD or DVD drives, all of which are ideal for enjoying digital music and editing photos or videos. The HP Pavilion ze5300 series notebook PCs with rewritable DVD drives provide users the power, connectivity and convenience demanded by today's multimedia applications in a full-functioned device that doubles as a mobile entertainment center when connected to compatible DVD players. HP Pavilion desktops offer a full range of powerful, easy-to-use PCs packed with hardware and software tools to make digital entertainment capture and editing a snap. The new models include the first desktop PC with a DVD+RW drive priced under $900.(1) ... http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33697378 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 23:47:46 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Landmark Theaters Plans Digital Cinema Rollout LOS ANGELES, April 3 (Reuters) - Landmark Theatres, a specialist in showing independent movies, and Microsoft Corp.(NASDAQ:MSFT) on Thursday unveiled a plan to outfit 53 Landmark theaters nationwide with digital cinema systems. The plan, financial details of which were undisclosed, could boost the fledgling industry for new digital projection that promises a long-lasting, sharp picture for audiences and cheaper distribution for filmmakers and theaters. The computer communications hardware will be installed by Los Angeles-based Digital Cinema Solutions, and the systems will run on Microsoft's Windows Media 9 software. ... http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33706389 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 23:35:19 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: SBC All Distance Connections So Long, Calling Headaches: All Distances Created Equal; A 'Call is Now a Call' and it's 'All-You-Can-Eat' Calling - Apr 3, 2003 02:30 PM (BusinessWire) SAN ANTONIO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 3, 2003-- New SBC All Distance Connections Likely to Change Consumer Calling Habits with Unlimited Nationwide Local, In-State/State-to-State Long Distance, Calling Features at $48.95 - $52.95 a Month Say goodbye to geographic calling boundaries, time limits and special rates based on whom you call. And say hello to worry-free calling that treats all calls equally, eliminates clockwatching, and makes savings easy. SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE: SBC) today announced a new unlimited calling bundle called SBC All Distance Connections, which features an SBC local company residential access line with unlimited local calls, Caller ID, voice messaging, and more, as well as unlimited SBC Long Distance domestic voice calling - all for $48.95-$52.95 a month, depending on the state(a), and all on one monthly bill. The bundle, now available for residential customers, is the company's first such offer and among the lowest-priced, most robust unlimited calling solutions offered by any major carrier in the markets where it is available: California, Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, Missouri, and Arkansas. SBC All Distance Connections supports the company's overall corporate strategy of offering compelling, value-packed bundles of access lines and other services to gain new customers and offer more services to existing ones. Earlier this week, SBC Communications announced its early successes in adding more than 1.3 million long distance lines in just three months in California. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33704156 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: SBC also has a deal (at least here in Kansas) called 'Call Connections' where if you allow them to bill your *Cingular cell phone* on your regular phone bill, they give you several discounts on the total package (of land and cell phone services). They told me if I signed up for it, they would reduce my DSL bill each month from $49.95 to $29.95 'for at least 12 months' as part of the package. SBC owns Cingular Wireless, at least in this part of the country. Seems like a decent deal. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 00:33:42 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Comcast's Muscle Man Brett Pulley, 04.04.03, 9:00 AM ET NEW YORK - Brian L. Roberts, the head of Comcast, is by all appearances one of the cable industry's most polished and genteel executives. A second-generation company chief, a product of Philadelphia's elite Germantown Academy and a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania's prestigious Wharton School of Finance, Roberts seems a far cry from the bare-knuckle barons who built the cable industry by employing whatever tactics were necessary to win monopoly franchises from local governments. But now that Comcast (nasdaq: CMCSA - news - people ) is the largest U.S. cable operator, with 21.4 million subscribers and 30% of the cable market, Roberts could become the meanest, toughest, baddest man the industry has ever seen. Since the completion of Comcast's $51 billion acquisition of AT&T Broadband last November, Roberts has been under pressure with $30 billion in debt and the costly need to improve the poorly operated systems the company inherited from AT&T (nyse: T - news - people ). Because Comcast has more than doubled its customer base, Roberts is making it clear that he now expects to pay lower rates to the programmers who provide content for his systems. ... http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/04/cz_bp_0404comcast.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 12:49:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Airport Extreme Review Here's the review on the latest product -- the Apple Airport Extreme. Airport Extreme is based, of course, on the 802.11g standard -- which has compatibility with 802.11b devices. You can of course, look at the specs online, but there are a couple specific options available on the Airport that makes it quite different from other products - and that's what I'd like to review: 802.11g and Wireless Distribution System. ... http://www.newburyopen.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000011 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 18:33:09 -0800 In article , Clint Olsen wrote: > Unfortunately, connection options are pretty limited in some towns. You > can choose between the cable monopoly (Comcast) or your local DSL monopoly. > You can get static IPs using DSL, but the service is even more abysmal than > cable. Or are you suggesting I get a leased line (hundreds of $$/mo.) just > so I can claim the luxury of a static IP? I hate to sound callous, but you get what's available. Cable modem service is for "recreational use only". It is not meant to be used to host servers, period. Many, if not most, cable companies specifically forbid servers in their Terms of Service. I use DSL for a number of servers. It works just fine. If you find it lacking, get both. Sometimes you have to actually PAY for what you want to do. And you won't get much sympathy from me about a "leased line": for years and years, it was my ONLY option, since neither DSL nor cable modems were available. For most people in San Jose (the "capitol of Silicon Valley"), cable modems are not available at all. > My followup question to the group: How do you ascertain whether an IP > address is dynamic or not? There's certainly not one pattern that's > going to catch it all. I never heard definitively how this is done. Internet providers send lists of their dynamic IPs to the various blacklist operators. If you want to find out if your IP is "dynamic-blacklisted", call and ask your provider if they put it on the list. > I have managed to reject all email from hosts without a reverse lookup > entry - this nails a lot of crap. I've had _one_ legitimate email > reject by using this heuristic. But I would love to be able to tell > these spammers sending mail directly to piss off :) Rejecting connections from hosts that merely have no reverse DNS is not a good idea. If you handled any volume, you would reject quite a bit of legitimate stuff in all likelihood. A better practice is to reject hosts where the forward and reverse DNS don't agree. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: puma@serv.catbox.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 03:01:35 -0000 Organization: Puma's Lair - catbox.com In article , Clint Olsen wrote: > I tried to forward some SPAM that I received to abuse@aol.com and noticed > it was still sitting in the queue. Curious, I telneted to port 25 and got > this nice present: > 550-The IP address you are using to connect to AOL is either open to > 550-the free relaying of e-mail, is serving as an open proxy, or is a > 550-dynamic (residential) IP address. AOL cannot accept further e-mail I have servers on static addresses, and run a fair number of majordomo mailing lists that include AOL addresses. I've never had a problem, but they do, once a day or so, run some tests to make sure I'm not an open relay ... If you are using a Linux server with Sendmail as your agent, in the sendmail.cf file, look for the line that says: # "Smart" relay host (may be null) DS and change the second line to DSsmtp.myisp.com (using, of course, your ISP's smtp server name), and all of your outgoing mail will relay through your ISP's outgoing smtp server. -- Gary Breuckman ------------------------------ From: panoptes@iquest.net (Daniel W. Johnson) Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: 4 Apr 2003 22:49:37 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Clint Olsen wrote in message news:: > My followup question to the group: How do you ascertain whether an IP > address is dynamic or not? There's certainly not one pattern that's > going to catch it all. I never heard definitively how this is done. > I have managed to reject all email from hosts without a reverse lookup > entry - this nails a lot of crap. I've had _one_ legitimate email > reject by using this heuristic. But I would love to be able to tell > these spammers sending mail directly to piss off :) Usually, by looking it up in one of the relevant DNSBLs. dynablock.wirehub.net is described at http://basic.wirehub.nl/dynablocker.html dialups.relays.osirusoft.com is described at http://relays.osirusoft.com/ dialups.mail-abuse.org is described at http://www.mail-abuse.org/dul/ and costs money. (They also have some tips if your mail server is listed; those tips are mostly relevant to any such list.) There may be others. [My ISP's news server doesn't seem to regard comp.dcom.telecom as moderated, so Pat may get two copies: This one through Google, and my first one that appeared immediately at my ISP.] ------------------------------ From: dlavoie@my-deja.com (dlavoie) Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: 5 Apr 2003 15:59:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ First, to everyone that says just relay all your email, re-read the messages. If we wanted to use the ISPs servers, which lag, lose messages, go down constantly, and impose size limits, we would just use our attbi.com email addresses. I plan to just add any other ISPs that do this to my aol.com-only relay, but for the majority of outgoing email, I'm sticking with DNS direct. And the point about not using a dynamic address, they aren't blocking only dynamic addresses, they are blocking the entire residential ranges. Static, dynamic, doesn't matter. I agree with their open relay scans, but blocking the entire thing is silly. Give me a break, you want people to pay hundreds a month for a T1 so we can avoid using the cable/dsl ISP's lousy servers? Uh, nope. -Dave ------------------------------ 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 #379 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Apr 6 18:09:14 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h36M9Eu26183; Sun, 6 Apr 2003 18:09:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 18:09:14 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304062209.h36M9Eu26183@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 #380 TELECOM Digest Sun, 6 Apr 2003 18:09:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 380 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Automated Operator Services Voice/Touchtone Menus (Mark J Cuccia) Moving Between Access Points (Lyle Coder) Part 68 Device Wanted (Alan) Siemens Gigaset 2400 (Jim Sielaff) Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895 (Joseph) Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895 (Carl G Knoblock) Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895 (Dave Phelps) Praise for Cingular Rescinded (John Higdon) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (David Clayton) Re: The Security Flag in the IPv4 Header (Dave Phelps) Cellular to Modem? (*selah*) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail (Herb Stein) Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail (Dave Phelps) Re: Internet Access On a Private Plane (Laura Johnson) Re: Internet Business Avoid! (Dave Phelps) Help Running Phone Line Extensions (Mike P) A Laugh! Can You Guess Which Telecom Laid Him Off? (dilbertdogbert) Last Laugh! Put Everything on Auto Pilot (Supports) 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, 5 Apr 2003 19:23:43 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Automated Operator Services Voice/Touchtone Menus Every now and then, I've posted here in TELECOM Digest about various standard (and also NON-standardized) Voice/Touchtone menus for automated operator services used by the incubment LECs and AT&T within the North American Network. Most of the incumbent LECs in the US for their in-TRA-LATA TOPS (or OSPS in a few cases), and Bell Canada (and possibly Telus as well) for their TOPS in Canada, have a "menu" of various options that you can request (with touchtones), at the "bong" tone on 0+ NANP and 01+ IDDD calling. Even AT&T has some of these options within their OSPS on 0+/01+ dialing. Note that not all telcos are necessarily using all of these options and/or touchtone codes. But they all do begin with the digit '1', since at the 'bong' tone, keying a '0' will cut you through to a live operator (or another sub-menu layer), and keying something beginning 'N' (any possible digit '2' thru '9') is supposed to be the first digit of a calling-card (both line-number-based cards, and non-line-number RAO/Special/CIID-based cards). I do seem to think that the where used, the "assignment" of the codes are "standard" ... I have tried to compile the following list of '1X' codes that can be entered at the "bong" tone. If anyone can help fill in any of the gaps, or has any corrections or enhancements -- PLEASE do so! 11 for Collect billing 12 for Third Pary billing 13 for Person-to-Person 14 (I'm *guessing* this is to request "Time-and-Charges") 15 is used for 'sub-account billing' codes 16 to toggle over to Spanish menu prompts (used in California) 17 to toggle over to English menu prompts (if not already the default) 18 to toggle over to French menu prompts (used in Quebec) 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198 (reserved for future use) 199, 199, and 10 "appear" to be "undefined", possibly NOT assignable or useable at this time As for '0-' (zero-minus, including double-zero '00') ... Many incumbent LECs throughout the NANP, as well as AT&T in the US, have inplemented automated operator services when you simply dial '0' or '00'. Yes, you still have the option to "time-out" or touchtone an additional '0' AT THE MENU (on AT&T it is now a '9') to "cut-thru" to a live human operator. In addition to AT&T with its "double-0" (00) menu, I am aware of the following incumbent LECs in the NANP which have started up automated menus, when one dials "zero-minus" (0-): - BellSouth - Bell Canada - VeriZon (Bell Atlantic and NYNEX states) The individual menus are each unique as to what can be 'keyed' and in which sequence to touchtone-key the specific requests and codes. No two telcos have "identical" zero-minus menus. I am curious if any of the following local telcos in the NANP have yet introduced automated "zero-minus" menus on their TOPS (or OSPS) systems: - Qwest LEC (US West) - Cincinnati Bell - Telus (Canada: most of BC, all of AB, eastern Quebec) - Frontier and Rochester Telephone - Allnet (where they did their own operator services, such as Lincoln NE) - VeriZon in GTE/Contel areas where there may have been a GTE/Contel TOPS service, OUTSIDE of the Bell Atlantic/NYNEX states (i.e., outside of Virginia and Pennsylvania, although Erie PA had a GTE TOPS of its own, BEFORE any merger with BA to form NYNEX); i.e., places which may have had their *own* GTE TOPS operator services (separate from any nearby "Bell"), in Tampa FL, Palm Springs CA, San Angelo TX, Hawaii, Dothan AL (although the latter is being sold off to CenturyTel), etc ... - Sprint-LEC (United/Centel) -- in such places as Las Vegas NV, various places within VA or NC, Tallahassee FL, Ft.Myers FL, etc ... - SBC (including: former Southwestern Bell, former Pacific/Nevada Bell, former Ameritech, and also SNET in Connecticut). and possibly others ... So, I'm curious if any of these above telcos have instituted automated "zero-minus" menus, if one dials '0' from within their territory. NOTE: Not all cellular providers nor CLECs necessarily route to the incumbent LEC's TOPS/OSPS unit; And from payphones, especially those which are not telco owned (i.e. COCOTs), you may be 'diverted' to some 'other' operator provider if you simply dial '0' by itself. But even where you reach the real incumbent LEC's OSPS/TOPS system on simply dialing '0' when dialing from payphones (both telco and privately owned), wireless systems, CLECs, nearby independent LEC telco territory, etc... there might be some slight differences in the menu quotes and options when compared with the menu reached when dialing from incumbent (Bell) LEC landline non-coin phones and basic service areas. BellSouth has a specific 0- (zero-minus) menu when calling from payphones, and a specific quoted 0- menu when calling from non-coin lines in "independent" ratecenters which do use BellSouth for TOPS in-TRA-LATA operator services. And these 0- menus are DIFFERENT from the BellSouth 0- menu reached from BellSouth ratecenters from non-coin phones. So, if any of the LECs listed above (other than Bell Canada, BellSouth, and Bell Atlantic region of VeriZon) have automated menus when dialing 0- (zero minus), I'd be interested in knowing the actual "quotes" (including the 'order' of quoted options) of what options are available and what digit(s) are touchtone-keyed for those options ... and whether the 0- attempt was placed from a payphone, a cellular phone, or a regular residential/business line -- as well as if from "Bell" (or larger independent) territory vs. small independent territory, etc. Thanks! Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA ------------------------------ From: x_coder@hotmail.com (Lyle Coder) Subject: Moving Between Access Points Date: 5 Apr 2003 08:47:14 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, Suppose I have one LAN and two 802.11 access points hanging off of that LAN. Now lets say the two access points overlap slightly in coverage such that I can move between the two and always have connectivity. As I move between the two access points coverage, will my laptop keep losing socket states (sessions)? Second question: What is the two access points are on different LANs and hence as I move between the two access points I get different IP addresses? Third question: What products are good for scenarious like this... especially where I may not have contiguous coverage between the two access points (say that for a period of time as I move between floors of the building, I am out of range) Thanks, Lyle ------------------------------ From: Alan Subject: Part 68 Device Wanted Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 22:30:39 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com I am looking for a part 68 compliant device for my device that I may sell at some point. I have searched the newsgroups for this info but all I find is this same question and an answer like, "Yes it does have to be part 68 compliant, there should be something out there ..." But I need actual company names. I am looking for something like the cermetek device but less expensive. Would like something passive, and I am only interested in the audio. Not interested in dialing out. Thanks, Alan ------------------------------ From: Jim Sielaff Subject: Siemens Gigaset 2400 Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 07:43:39 -0500 I have the 2-line Siemens 2400 Gigaset system and have a problem with reception on the handsets -clicking, etc. I was wondering if on the 8800 series the reception is better. Also, can you use the speakerphone feature from the handsets? ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895 Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 06:45:24 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On Fri, 4 Apr 2003 17:41:58 -0600, Ron Bean wrote: > Maybe your readers could fill in some details about some of the other > items they have on display. For example, there's a cordboard that they > claim was used from 1962 until 1980(!) as the interface between 50 > office phones and 8 incoming trunk lines. Wouldn't they have had > something a little more modern in 1962? Not necessarily. Many businesses still used 701 PBXs until the late 70s with cord boards. I worked for a time at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Woods Hole, Mass. on Cape Cod and they had a two position (upgraded while I was there from one position) board (508 KImball 8-1400) and they for a time had a tie line into Boston as well as an outbound WATS line. When I left WH in '75 they were still using it. I imagine (though I couldn't say for sure) that they're now some sort of electronic PBX with DID. I remember the plant manager saying "we'll never have touch tone." Ha! Not two years later the Falmouth CO (548 aka KImball 8) which was a #5XB office was converted for use with touch tone. Of course it didn't matter to the 701 PBX a step-by-step machine that couldn't do DTMF. Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group ------------------------------ From: Carl G Knoblock Subject: Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895 Organization: Retired Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 00:04:50 GMT In article , Ron Bean wrote: > Maybe your readers could fill in some details about some of the other > items they have on display. For example, there's a cordboard that they > claim was used from 1962 until 1980(!) as the interface between 50 > office phones and 8 incoming trunk lines. Wouldn't they have had > something a little more modern in 1962? I started at Northwestern Bell in June of 1969 in Omaha, and the toll boards in use at that time looked much like the PBX board you show. TSPS came along a few years later. ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895 Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 01:11:34 -0600 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , rbean@shell.core.com says: > If someone would like to find a more permanent home for this page -- > either on the Telecom Digest website or on someone's telecom history > site -- feel free to grab it while it's there. I mirrored it on my website. www.tippenring.com/pioneervillage. Thanks for the pics. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Praise for Cingular Rescinded Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 09:37:19 -0700 About a month ago, I praised Cingular for its service from outside the US, notably the Kuwait region near Iraq. Before departure, my associate checked on rates and was very clear to the Cingular rep how the phone would be used. We were assured in no uncertain terms that the rate would be $0.99/minute. Turns out that is not the case. Calls back to the US are, in reality, $2.49/minute; calls to the mobile from the US are $3.99/minute. In checking around, I have found several other people who have been bitten by Cingular's apparently intentional deception. Therefore, I rescind my praise for Cingular and am about to pull all of my company's accounts with that provider. It is very difficult to do business with a company that cannot be candid with its customers. In the meantime, I am making arrangements for an Iridium phone to be delivered to my associate in Iraq. Not only is it much cheaper than Cingular, it works everywhere, not just in certain places. It also comes with many included features such as VM and SMS. If Cingular had been honest with us in the first place, we would have made these arrangements beforehand ... and saved quite a bit of money. But then, maybe that's the idea as far as Cingular is concerned. 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: Have you talked to Cingular and asked them about re-rating the calls at the 99 cent rate? Or have you tried that and had them lie about it? What sort of concerns me is that SBC is an owner of Cingular here in Kansas (at least) and starting two weeks ago, SBC started 'call connections' which is a plan where your Cingular Wireless bill gets billed on your SBC bill, and if you agree to that, you get a bunch of 'discounts' on your total bill, including a price change on DSL from $49.95 to $29.95 per month. That twenty dollar per month discount on DSL makes it a very tempting offer. I understand the cellular service will not change any, i.e. no charge on long distance calls, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 11:23:01 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au John David Galt contributed the following: > The moment this is enacted, I predict a huge flood of spams "on behalf of" > every business that has even a few enemies, all pointing to legitimate 800 > numbers or web sites of the business, all sent without its knowledge. Is that known as "Spamotage"??? :-) 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: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: The Security Flag in the IPv4 Header Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 00:01:13 -0600 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , monty@roscom.com says: > Date: 1 April 2003 > From: Peter Neumann > Subject: The Security Flag in the IPv4 Header > Steve Bellovin's RFC 3514 (released today) assigns a meaning to the > IPv4 packet header's last currently unused bit, which can be thought > of as a Security Flag. Benign packets have this bit set to 0; those > that are used for an attack will have the bit set to 1. That's hilarious. I like it. I think we should pass a law that states "If you are a bad guy, you have to wear a T-shirt that identifies that you're a bad guy." Like asking the bank robbers to wear T-shirts that says "I'm a bank robber." Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: *selah* Subject: Cellular to Modem? Date: 6 Apr 2003 18:37:27 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com I was told that cellular phones can't receive modem (digital) signals. Is this true and, if so, why? Are there any devices that would make this possible (other than using a satellite)? remove "noe" to reply [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are such things as cellular modems, so I would guess it is not true. The one cellular modem I have seen was like a little PCMCIA card, and it went on a slot on the side of a laptop. Instead of a plug for a modular cord on the end which ran off to a landline phone connection, there was a little (about three inches long) flexible rubber antenna on the side of the card like that seen on some cellular phones. To use it, you 'dialed' the number you were calling (using the protocol of the cell phone carrier you were using. I think Mike Sandman has one for his personal laptop, but I do not think he sells them. And they do not come cheap on monthly charges either. I think he said he gets flat rate service from some carrier, and it frequently gives him pains in his posterior trying to use it. His laptop gets locked up from the confusion at times, and it never runs faster than 9600 or maybe 14,400. Mike, if I am quoting you incorrectly here, I will ask you to correct me. I know that on my cell-socket device, I have used a laptop as the 'external phone' with a built in 56.6 modem. I have to force it to dial because it does not recognize the cell-socket 'dial tone' and I have never gotten more than 300 baud from it, when I get that much. Often times it will not negotiate at all. By the way, twenty years ago when I 'upgraded' from 110 baud to 300 baud I really thought it was wonderful. Not any more. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 21:25:24 -0600 wrote in message news:telecom22.376.15@telecom-digest.org: >> In general, I would contend that neither example would not be "theft of >> service" if he left it openly available (just as if he left a water hose >> running on the sidewalk and I got a cool spash on a hot day). Of course, >> the open AP may violate the Internet providers TOS, but that's not *my* >> problem -- I don't have a contract with them. > Interesting argument. Where does it end? > -The host wasn't running, but there was a quick turn-on knob right at the > end ... > -The hose wasn't running, but he left an unlocked stopcock right there at > the other end by the house ... > -There was no hose, but the kitchen door was open and the sink was > unlocked ... > -Well, the door was locked, but it was just too simple to pick.... > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: At least the two final examples you > give above involve specifically tresspassing on someone's private > property. The other examples you give involve someone making a > concious effort to take someone else's property. A more accurate > example might be 'I was walking down the alley and saw some computer > parts and I needed something like that. After watching for a few days > and seeing that the parts were not just left there temporarily while > the owner was making some adjustments or moving in or out, etc and > that the parts were just sitting there abandoned, I decided to take > them. > Its a lot like years ago when people left 'loop around' lines on the > phone unguarded; you just dialed one number, heard dial tone, and > dialed against that dial tone to somewhere else. Were you committing > theft? Years and years ago in Chicago, dialing any-exchange 9925 got > a dial tone as a result from 9926. Phreaks used that as a 'cheap and > inexpensive way' to make long distance calls until Illinois Bell > decided to secure it with a password (in some cases) and disconnect > the inbound line (in other cases). Illinois Bell security representatives > tried to claim the phreaks had dephrauded the company, even though the > real problem was that telco had bet their money on security through > obscurity. A sucessful defense was mounted on the fact that the > phreaks had not claimed to be someone they were not (no passwords or > logging in required). The phreaks had asked permission from the > 'operator' on the line to make a call (the dial tone presented did not > do any kind of blocking of outgoing calls) so no theft had taken > place. In other words, if I dialed a publicly accessible number and > paid the stated charges for calling the number, then asked the > 'operator' in charge of the line to make a call to somewhere for me > and the 'operator' was too dumb to require me to identify myself or > monitor where I was calling, is that my fault? > When the same thing happened a few months later to one of Illinois > Bell's largest customers (United Airlines had an incoming loop around > which connected to an outbound trunk on the nationwide Unitel system > providing unlimited, unmeasured phone service with WATS lines and > tie-lines galore all over the USA) they did not bother to passcode it > or monitor it either. Bell security reps almost went crazy on that > one; but it was the same thing, security through obscurity. If the > no-identification-required caller asked the 'operator' for '732' (SEA) > and in turn got dial tone from Seattle International Airport and then > the same no-identification-required caller dialed '186' against the > Seattle Intl dialtone and reached yet a third dial tone which was > identified through trial and error as Boeing Aircraft's unmonitored > centrex with its own set of tie lines and WATS codes, exactly whose > fault was that? > If you don't want someone drinking your water, do not leave it running > on a public thoroughfare, where it then becomes 'public' property. Or, > conversely, demand much identification, passwords, etc from the > passersby to protect your property, which happens to abutt the public > right of way in case they see it and feel tempted to use it. > In the above examples, no one ever broke into a Bell central office > looking for codes, or looking for equipment to tamper with, etc. Nor > did they ever go within twenty miles of Elk Grove, Illinois and United > Airlines' property. By the way, I also contend I have a perfect right > to carefully examine everything I find *on my property* and that > includes invisible radio waves and transmissions which pass through my > house on the way to your house, even if those transmissions are encrypted > since I am not paying for them. If you don't want me looking at them, > then keep them out of my house. PAT] I've been using your argument for close to 40 years! If I can receive it in my home office that's their problem. Encryption is too easy today if they're that concerned. They theory breaks down when you look at commercial broadcasts though. Does the claim at the end of a ball game about the "broadcast being the sole property of the XYZ league ..." actually hold any water. Can I tape it for personal use? Can I tape it, make a copy, and give it to my son? Can I tape it, make lots of copies, and sell them? You have to take proactive measure to protect intellectual property. A disclaimer at the end of the show is as meaningful to me as a software "license." I'd have more sympathy for some of them if they weren't so greedy. Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A lot of them are greedy, that's for sure. You know how Illinois Bell caught up with the phreaks who were using the 9925/9926 loop around in Chicago about 25 years ago? They had set that up originally for outside plant techs to use when they wanted to call the old repair service number of 611. In the old days, 611 went to the district which handled the line in particular. When an outside plant guy was working out of his district but wanted to check in with his *local* office, he could not dial '611'; that would get him a different office than his. 9925 was fixed so that 9926 would go off hook and *speed dial* '611' after a delay or two or three seconds. What the phreaks figured out was your fingers had to be quicker that your ear. After dialing 9925 and waiting for a couple of seconds for the outgoing dial tone on 9926 to commence, you had all of about another two or three seconds to 'cut' that dial tone with a digit of your own. If you dialed quickly enough, you'd have the number you wanted dialed before the speed dialer cut in feebly and punched out '611'. Once the number you wanted was dialed, the extra digits were ignored. If you just sat there thinking about it the dialer would cut in and punch out '611' and you could do nothing about it. If you were a little slow in your dialing, but at least got the first two or three digits dialed, then the dialer would cut in with its '611' and neither you nor the speed dialer on 9926 got anything but frustration. You had to *very quickly* get your seven or eleven digits out before the dialer woke up then you got your number instead of it getting its '611'. Anyway, it worked that way for years, security through obscurity, and since '611' was not a billable call, there was no paper work. But what the phreaks did not understand was Illinois Bell issued phone bills to *itself* also on all its internal lines. Once per month, the computer would issue a phone bill to Illinois Bell, 'thank you, it is a pleasure to serve you, please not not staple, punch or mutilate this card when you remit your payments'. Some department supervisor had to look over the bill, approve it and initial it, and send it through the 'system' as a charge on their monthly budget, etc. I think the intention was to keep service reps from making too many personal calls on their lunch hour using company phones, etc. Anyway, once those mystery long distance calls showed up on various-9926 lines around Chicago, it was a simple matter to call the recipients of the calls with the usual line in those days, "Mrs. X, on (date), you received a long distance call but our operator seems to have made a mistake and wrote down the wrong number of the calling party. Would you please tell us who you talked to, so we can get the billing straightened out?" Mrs. X would eagerly tell them about her conversation with her son ... 'such a good boy, and so smart about phones and computers' ... and the diligent investigator would wink at his co-worker and give a knowing smile; they had caught another one. Very shortly thereafter, a 'trap' would go on 9925 and as appropriate, a pen-register would go on the phreak's home phone. That was also the technique used by United Airlines and General Motors when they set about cleaning up the illicit traffic on their WATS extenders, i.e. "Mrs. X, would you tell us who called you on (date)" and then listen quietly as Mrs. X spilled her guts about her son, his friends, etc. Then as Big Customers of Telco Who Always Get Their Way, they'd be in touch with toll fraud investigators at the Telephone Company with all the lurid details to 'catch another one'. 25-30 years ago the phone company toll fraud investigators never ran out of work to do and most of the telcos took huge hits every year due to fraud. In the early 1970's, an executive of New York Telephone told a Congressional Investigating Committee that NYTel had written off eight million dollars the year before due to toll fraud. That was rather astounding to the audience of senators, etc. Is it any wonder Bell reached a decision to 're-invent the whole system' a few years before with ESS, calling cards, etc? They had to do something; they were getting eaten alive with fraud. Very few people would pay for a long distance call if they could get out of it through trickery. Then once ESS was in place, telco started selling the 'icing on the cake' features like 'call waiting' and 'three way calling' to the public to try and recoup some of their investment and losses. We have come so far in telephony in the past thirty/forty years. So far ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Use a Firewall, Go to Jail Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 23:46:35 -0600 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , bonomi@c-ns says: >> For example, if I sent an "illegal packet" (one with an invalid source >> address), the state would have to prove that it came from me, but of >> course, it couldn't because it had an invalid source address. So how >> would that work? > Consider a 'sniffer' running at your provider, -recording- traffic ... > It _knows_ where the packet came from, because it's monitoring *your* > line, specifically. Any outgoing packet 'source address' that doesn't > belong to you, and you're busted. That wouldn't be good enough. It's monitoring my line, which may serve dozens or hundreds of people. Who do you charge? > It's -not- rocket science, folks. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Even without a 'sniffer' tattling on > you, it isn't all that difficult, although that would help nail down > the case. Many ISPs also have something like 'caller-ID' noting the > time and origin of all their incoming traffic. Let's say there is a > 'mystery packet' on the line at 2:47 AM some date. A quick review of > the ISP's logs for 2:47 AM that date will show only a few users on > line; so much easier to narrow the search for the originator down to > those few users. PAT] Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: Laura Johnson Organization: Bonjour Subject: Re: Internet Access On a Private Plane Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 23:09:31 -0500 Justin Time wrote: > llewis@cumberland.tec.nj.us (Lew) wrote in message > news:: >> I don't have all the details: but my friend wants to know how far up he >> can get a signal for internet connection. He usually flies at 6000 >> feet -- mainly for weather updates -- he says he has Verizon for 100.00 a >> month that allows him to connect to any of his services. Can someone >> give me details on the posibilities of this and how this is done if it >> can be done. > Doesn't the FAA have something to say about wireless devices operated > in an aircraft? No. The FAA does not, provided that equipment does not interfere with navigational equipment while the aircraft is operated IFR. All of the radios onboard the plane of course qualify as wireless devices. On the other hand, the FCC certainly does have something to say about cellular phones in flight: Don't use them. However technically the prohibition is in the Part of FCC rules governing actual cellular phones, not the PCS type phones that are common today. > You can always tune a radio to the NOAA weather channels. Well, you could, although that wouldn't be of any great use to a pilot, even if you could tune in a station without interference from another station on the same frequency. NOAA weather broadcasts do not provide aviation weather products. A pilot is interested in details like: What is the visibility at my destination airport? How much of the sky is covered with clouds? How high are each of the cloud levels? What are the cloud tops? What is the wind speed, direction, and temperature at each altitude I will be flying at? Where can ice be expected? Where are the thunderstoms in relation to my flight path? How wide are the cells? What actual conditions are other pilots in the area reporting? Etc,.... Of course flight service could provide this information, but it isn't always practical to talk to them on one radio if another needs attention at the moment too. A screen that presents current aviation weather information in flight would be a great asset. ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Internet Business Avoid! Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 00:13:43 -0600 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , happyminded212 @yahoo.com says: > Please, avoid any businesses with Mr.Thomas Swiss, > the owner of Central Investments (a finacial & consulting company) in > Chicago, he stolen the www.cinvest.org and www.investmentscentral.com > websites, and in validation of copyright laws and didn't pay to Getty > Images.com for the Images used on those web sites in the collages, as > well as illegally using my whole design and logo, witch is my intellectual > property and was stolen from original resources and deleted my name from > the code and didn't pay for my designing work: You'd better protect what little intellectual property that you have. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Based on the original message, I have to wonder if he has any intellectual property left at all? PAT ------------------------------ From: mpotter@crosswinds.net (Mike P) Subject: Help Running Phone Line Extensions Date: 5 Apr 2003 19:46:48 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I recently moved and am trying to wire an extension into the jack. There is a box located in the open area with a junction box for the phone lines. so I bought some cat3 and ran it to the spot then hooked up the four wires (green red, black, yellow to the screw terminals to the box, then used a punch down to hook up the rj11 jack. No dial tone after much tinkering I still couldn't get it to work and only managed to make it worse. I figured it was the connection so I found a jack I don't need with a long cable. I unhooked it then ran it to the spot, then punched it down to the jack and still no dial tone. I hooked up the jack to the original jack and still nothing. What should I be checking for I did make sure the colors all match and I punched it down correctly (I ran cat5 for the network with punch downs problem free); could there be noise; could it be the previous owner's wiring job; I know of at least one jack upstairs that is dead, should I call in a pro to trace the wires and do it right, or is there a good site out there with all the info I would need to do it myself? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I know of a site which used to be good with questions like yours; it was around for more than twenty years then the proprietor got some kind of dreadful brain desease and many of his former petitioners claim he went totally crazy from his deseased brain and on anti-war tangents all the time. You can review his files at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and look for the telecom archives stuff, midst all the dubya-bashing stuff. (blink!) HOW many working lines do you have coming in to the premises? WHERE is the first place you can hear dial tone on the line in question? Start at the main IT, the 'head' where the lines come to your premises. Do you get dial tone there on the line in question? Let's start there and work forward. Does the line in question work anywhere in your premises at the present time? PAT] ------------------------------ From: DilbertDogbert@cs.com (dilbertdogbert) Subject: Laugh! Can You Guess Which Telecom Laid Him Off? Date: 4 Apr 2003 22:15:08 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ This guy didn't take being fired well. From the words and terms used I could make a good guess at what telecom it was. http://www.ssorg.com/jobloss/ ------------------------------ From: Supports Subject: Last Laugh! Put Every Thing on Auto Pilot Reply-To: kevin@emailacc.com Date: 04 Apr 2003 21:56:08 -0800 Hi, This is Kevin, I have tried to reach you several times with no Success.I have been playing phone tag for the last couple days. If you could call me at 1-888-314-1342 or 702-667-9462 and leave a good # that you can be reached at. Thank you for your patience. Sincerely, Kevin Please try not to reply. I get to much junk mail. Thanks. ` [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Kevin, as a very busy international student with my exams coming up, I only have a little bit of time to write you and tell you about these American magazines all the students are raving about. You can get them on subscription at heavily discounted rates since you are an important netizen. So if I cannot reply, because you get too much junk mail, then I'll ask one of my secretaries here to reply to your toll free number and ask about your questions you have been trying to ask about if it were not for the phone tag you have been playing for several days. I'll expect them to leave their 'good numbers' for you to call back however, but bear in mind most of them tend to have their offices next to the COCOT at the corner convenience store, or in the bathroom at the train station, etc. Let's see, would 888-314-1342 be the best number to use for you when they are at a pay-station, or behind a centrex or PBX? I guess 702-667-9462 would be okay to use when they are at a phone system like mine which requires you to preface all your dialing strings with *67. They'll probably tell me what you wanted to talk about when they get your message. As my erstwhile correspondent out of Box 789 in Staten Island, New York used to remind me on a daily basis, be sure and order all those magazine subscriptions. 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 #380 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr 7 13:23:16 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h37HNFx03545; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 13:23:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 13:23:16 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304071723.h37HNFx03545@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 #381 TELECOM Digest Mon, 7 Apr 2003 13:23:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 381 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #377, April 7, 2003 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (temp7@thewolfden.org) Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP (Danny Burstein) Re: Part 68 device (Chuk Gleason) Why we May Never Regain the Liberties That We've Lost (Monty Solomon) A Hotel's Privacy Invasion (Monty Solomon) Re: Displaying Witheld Numbers in UK (Phil McKerracher) Installing/Using Digital Cable Filters (aura7r@earthlink.net) Re: Last Laugh! Which Telephone Company Has Most Expensive Toll (joe@obil) 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, 07 Apr 2003 11:05:11 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #377, April 7, 2003 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 377: April 7, 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 Completes Restructuring ** Avaya Canada President Gone ** 360 Buys U.S. Fibre Network ** Nortel Reenters Wireless Data Market ** Newfoundland Cellphone Ban Takes Effect ** Sympatico Shuts Down Website Scam ** Wi-LAN Gets Federal Loan ** Avaya Extends IP-PBX to Branch Offices ** Avaya Adds Two Canadian Dealers ** Cogeco Cable Revenue, Profits Rise ** RIM Revenue Up 32% ** 724 Sales Decline ** Alcatel Loss Soars Under U.S. Rules ** Gaylen Duncan Leaves ITAC ** Dortmans Heads Call Centre Panel ** Wi-Fi Hotspots Come to Canada ============================================================ AT&T COMPLETES RESTRUCTURING: As expected, AT&T Canada completed its restructuring and emerged from bankruptcy protection on April 1. The company's voting shares now trade on the Toronto Stock Exchange and NASDAQ. ** We're now hearing speculation that Telus will buy AT&T Canada, or that AT&T Canada will merge with Microcell. Angus TeleManagement's view: Telus doesn't need the debt that such an acquisition would create, and AT&T doesn't need the low-margin consumer customers that a deal with Microcell would bring. Anything is possible, but these rumours seem implausible. AVAYA CANADA PRESIDENT GONE: Avaya Canada says its President, John Cameron, "recently left the company to pursue other opportunities." Michael Cibelli will head the company until a replacement is found. 360 BUYS U.S. FIBRE NETWORK: 360networks is buying 16,000 route miles of fibre, access points in 44 U.S. cities, and 65 wholesale customers, from Dynegy Inc, a U.S. energy company, for an undisclosed amount. NORTEL REENTERS WIRELESS DATA MARKET: Nortel Networks has announced a new portfolio of Wireless Local Area Network products for enterprises and carriers, including a switch, an access point, a voice client for pocket PCs, and a portable PC card. Availability: second quarter. NEWFOUNDLAND CELLPHONE BAN TAKES EFFECT: Newfoundland and Labrador's law banning the use of handheld cellphones while driving took effect April 1. (See Telecom Update #363) ** On February 12, New York City banned talking on or dialing a phone, or letting it ring, during movies, plays, and other public performances. Boston is considering a similar law. SYMPATICO SHUTS DOWN WEBSITE SCAM: Sympatico has shut down a website that was stealing personal data from customers. Victims received an e-mail from the "Sympatico Verification Dept." warning that their accounts would be cancelled unless they supplied new credit info. WI-LAN GETS FEDERAL LOAN: The federal government is making an $8.8 million loan to Calgary-based Wi-LAN for development of its wireless broadband technology. AVAYA EXTENDS IP-PBX TO BRANCH OFFICES: Avaya has added the MultiVOIP Gateway, developed by Multi-Tech Systems, to its Enterprise Connect Solutions portfolio. The product extends the features of Avaya's IP-PBX systems from large offices to branches with up to 10 people. North American availability is promised for June. AVAYA ADDS TWO CANADIAN DEALERS: Avaya has signed Symtech Canada and Quiet Touch, both of Toronto, as value added resellers for its data networking products. COGECO CABLE REVENUE, PROFITS RISE: Cogeco Cable reports revenue of $118.4 million for the three months ended February 28, 6.4% more than during the same quarter last year. Net income rose 21% to $1.2 million. Cogeco lost 4,322 basic cable subscribers during the quarter, a third the loss for this period a year ago. ** 25.9% of Cogeco cable customers also subscribe to high- speed Internet service, up from 20.7% a year ago. RIM REVENUE UP 32%: Research In Motion reports December- February revenue of US$87.5 million, up 18% from the previous quarter and 32% from the same period a year ago. The net loss of $12.6 million includes a $6.9 million provision for litigation costs. 724 SALES DECLINE: Toronto-based 724 Solutions, whose software provides mobile access to financial services, expects first quarter sales of US$3.5 million, down from $5.7 million in the previous quarter and $4.5 million a year ago. ALCATEL LOSS SOARS UNDER U.S. RULES: Alcatel has restated its 2002 financials under U.S. accounting rules. Result: its loss jumped to 11.5 billion euros (C$18.2 billion), compared to 4.7 billion euros (C$7.3 billion) under French rules. GAYLEN DUNCAN LEAVES ITAC: After seven years in office, Gaylen Duncan has resigned as President and CEO of the Information Technology Association of Canada. Adam Chowaniec, Chairman of Tundra Semiconductor and Vice-Chair of ITAC, will fill the organization's top post until a permanent replacement is named. DORTMANS HEADS CALL CENTRE PANEL: What's next in call centre equipment, services, and technology? At Call Centre Canada, Henry Dortmans of Angus Dortmans Associates will quiz a "power panel" of supplier executives on the current state and future of customer service and contact centres. ** Canada's largest call centre conference and exhibition will be held April 14-16 at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre. http://canada.iccm.com/home.asp WI-FI HOTSPOTS COME TO CANADA: When will broadband wireless Internet access be available in a public place near you? In the April issue of Telemanagement, Gerry Blackwell reveals the rollout plans of six Canadian Wi-Fi providers. ** Also in this issue: John Riddell on how the IP-PBX debate has shifted from "whether" to "how and when" ... Lis Angus on the debate on foreign ownership of telecom companies ... and Gary Bernstein on a practical trial of the all-in- one BlackBerry. Telemanagement is available only by subscription. To receive Canada's #1 source for telecom analysis and guidance, call 800-263-4415 ext 500 or go to http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.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 2003 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, 06 Apr 2003 17:55:17 -0500 From: temp7@thewolfden.org Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks John Higdon wrote: > In article , Clint Olsen > wrote: >> I have managed to reject all email from hosts without a reverse lookup >> entry - this nails a lot of crap. I've had _one_ legitimate email >> reject by using this heuristic. > Rejecting connections from hosts that merely have no reverse DNS is not a > good idea. If you handled any volume, you would reject quite a bit of > legitimate stuff in all likelihood. A better practice is to reject hosts > where the forward and reverse DNS don't agree. With virtual name hosting as common as it is, you may want to be careful about how you implement this reverse vs forward DNS matching algorithm. There are many legitimate sites on static IPs that map to the same IP and so reverse maps may not produce what you expect. ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 16:30:56 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In dlavoie@my-deja.com (dlavoie) writes: > First, to everyone that says just relay all your email, re-read the > messages. If we wanted to use the ISPs servers, which lag, lose > messages, go down constantly, and impose size limits, we would just > use our attbi.com email addresses. I plan to just add any other ISPs > that do this to my aol.com-only relay, but for the majority of > outgoing email, I'm sticking with DNS direct. > Give me a break, you want people to pay hundreds a month for a T1 so > we can avoid using the cable/dsl ISP's lousy servers? Uh, nope. I hate using the anti-spammer brush here, but let me remind you that you and your e-mail programs have NO unalienable right to access my mailserver, normy ISPs, nor my company's. Just like with US Postal Mail -- if I (or the other groups) deepsix any mail that arrives without a return address tha matches the postmark, that's not my problem. It's the sender's. If you suspect the ISP you're routing through is losing mail [a], then there are alternatives aplenty. Just as one example (and with the disclaimer that I work for one of them), you can get a remote account with an alternative respectable ISP [b] and route your authenticated e-mail through them. [a] by the by, don't be so certain it's your isp losing the mail. Many receiving systems, including AOL, have a very annoying habit of sending proper ack's to the sender but then dumping the messages into the bucket. [b] the one I work for, in fact, has quite a few customers who do exactly that. While I don't want to make this an annoying advert, if you want further info you can get the ISP name from my return address. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Chuk Gleason Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 19:13:36 -0400 Subject: Re: Part 68 device Alan - What you want is sometimes known as a "DAA" Data Access Arrangement. Try: http://circuitwerkes.com/ http://www.cermetek.com/ http://www.xecom.com/home.htm Chuk Gleason Cary, NC > Alan wrote: > I am looking for a part 68 compliant device for my device that I may > sell at some point. I have searched the newsgroups for this info but > all I find is this same question and an answer like, > "Yes it does have to be part 68 compliant, there should be something out > there ..." > But I need actual company names. > I am looking for something like the cermetek device but less > expensive. Would like something passive, and I am only interested in > the audio. Not interested in dialing out. > Thanks, > Alan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 22:57:51 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Why we May Never Regain the Liberties That We've Lost By Dan Gillmor Mercury News Technology Columnist NEW YORK - The lights of a magnificent, recovering city glittered from the 80th floor of the Empire State Building on Wednesday evening. The multiple ironies were not lost on the gathering of civil-liberties and public-interest activists. The Empire State Building is now the tallest structure in the city, still half-stunned from the attacks that brought down the two taller buildings 18 months ago. As a new war raged in Iraq, the people in the room were acutely aware of the only slightly older war that has consumed their daily lives like nothing before -- the way in which the war on terrorism has also turned into an assault on individual liberties. The activists were in New York for the annual Computers, Freedom and Privacy conference. They continued to take heart from small victories here and there, some of which were simply stopgap efforts to keep a bad law from becoming even worse. But the prevailing mood, even more so than a year ago in San Francisco, struck me as downright gloomy. http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/5571471.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 23:01:39 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A Hotel's Privacy Invasion * posted by Dan Gillmor 06:36 AM I will not be staying again at the Ramada New Yorker hotel, the site of the just-ended Computers, Freedom and Privacy conference, but my reason has nothing to do with quality or service (neither of which I'd rate all that high, but the price was commensurately modest). It's about something more fundamental -- a gross invasion of privacy. When I checked in earlier this week, arriving after midnight, the clerk demanded my driver's license and credit card. He said he had to photocopy and keep them while I was there. http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillmor/archives/000918.shtml ------------------------------ From: phil@mckerracher.org (Phil McKerracher) Subject: Re: Displaying Witheld Numbers in UK Date: 7 Apr 2003 02:13:07 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ tim@happylife.co.uk (Tim) wrote in message news:: > Does anybody know of how to build a device, or if there is one > available, that can filter out the pulse at the begining of the data > burst that tells BT Caller Display units not to display witheld > numbers? I have seen this pulse using a Digital Storage Oscilloscope. > We are bothered by nuisance calls and the only way to do it officially > is to get the Police involved, I just want to find out who is doing > this, without getting the perpitrators into trouble. The pulse you see on a scope is probably the "wetting" pulse, a burst of current that overcomes oxidation on cable joints that forms when the phone is unused for a while. Allegedly, witheld numbers can sometimes be seen by diverting all your calls to an alternative provider (e.g. of 0845 numbers) who doesn't implement the withheld flag properly. But it's a lot of trouble and success isn't guaranteed. Easier to get BT's nuisance calls department on the case, that's their job. Phil McKerracher www.mckerracher.org ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 23:28:11 -0500 From: aura7r@earthlink.net (aura7r@earthlink.net) Subject: Installing/Using Digital Cable Filter 1. What is a Digital Cable Filter? The digital filter stops the frequency signal that communicates with the digital cable box. 2. How do I connect it? The Digital Filter connects on the input side of the digital box where the incoming cable line is connected. 3. Is using the Digital Cable Filter Legal? Yes! The filter is to be used as a digital signal booster to enhance your digital cable. You must abide by your state, federal and local laws. It is against the law to receive channels without paying for them so you must call your cable company when you are going to watch a special order channel. Click here for more info or simply paste http://www.quicklink.bz/b/cable/index.php?176 into your browser ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Which Telephone Company Has The Most Expensive Toll Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 05:56:37 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications Perhaps it's from the CEO of Worldcom. Zhang Xixi wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This belongs in our 'most peculiar > message of the day' category. I do not know if this person is real or > not? Can you decide? Is it a late April Fool's joke? PAT] > ------------------------------ > Hello!everyone > Can anyone tell me that which telephone company has the most expensive > toll call? > I like toll call. > Thanks! > Zhang xixi > Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe John Higdon can answer this. John > told us here a year or two ago about a telco which had some outragously > high rate for 'non-subscribers'. People who signed up with the 'ten-ten' > company got reasonably good rates. People who used them through hackery > or phreaking (then got caught!) got humongous bills for hundreds of > dollars. What was that company, John? Maybe Mr. Zhang xixi could > benefit from your counsel since he says "I like toll call." PAT] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But his name isn't Mr. Zhang xixi is it? I thought his name was Bernie Something ... but I suppose he could use more toll traffic also. Maybe he could cut some deal with Mr. Zhang xixi so that MCI would have at least one satisfied customer and Mr. Zhang xixi would have a company he liked doing business with also. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 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 #381 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr 7 19:05:43 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h37N5h705896; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 19:05:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 19:05:43 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304072305.h37N5h705896@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 #382 TELECOM Digest Mon, 7 Apr 2003 19:06:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 382 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded (Steven J. Sobol) Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded (John Higdon) Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded (Ed Ellers) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (Barry Margolin) Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (John Higdon) Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done (Mark Atwood) Small Motel Telephone System (dnhunt) Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP (Mark Crispin) Re: Static IP (Joey Lindstrom) Looking For Cordless Phone With Battery Indicator (Gregory Lee) Saudi Arabian Telephone (t0rk--) Need Help Finding PBX Maintenance (Robert Campbell) Cablevision Drops DirecTV Bid Plan -- NYT (Monty Solomon) Update: Benetton Backs Away From 'Smart Tags' in Clothing (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: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 17:17:58 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to John Higdon no-spam@amadeus.kome.com: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Have you talked to Cingular and asked > them about re-rating the calls at the 99 cent rate? Or have you tried > that and had them lie about it? What sort of concerns me is that SBC > is an owner of Cingular here in Kansas (at least) and starting two > weeks ago, SBC started 'call connections' which is a plan where your > Cingular Wireless bill gets billed on your SBC bill, and if you agree > to that, you get a bunch of 'discounts' on your total bill, including > a price change on DSL from $49.95 to $29.95 per month. That twenty > dollar per month discount on DSL makes it a very tempting offer. I > understand the cellular service will not change any, i.e. no charge > on long distance calls, etc. PAT] That is the case here, too. SBC has been advertising that in Cleveland for a while. Cingular is the brand-name for the joint venture between BellSouth and SBC. Cingular includes the former Ameritech Cellular, PacBell/NevadaBell Mobile, Southwestern Bell Mobile, SNET's cellular properties if they had any, BellSouth Mobility, BellSouth DCS, and the former SBC CellularONE properties. CellularONE markets owned by Dobson Cellular and Western Wireless remain CellularONE, and SBC, the previous owner of the CellularONE brand and franchise, have sold them to Western Wireless. Some other independent C1 franchisees, if there are any, would have remained C1 also. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dobson Cellular operates here in Independence as Cellular One. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 12:32:35 -0700 In article , > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Have you talked to Cingular and asked > them about re-rating the calls at the 99 cent rate? Or have you tried > that and had them lie about it? What sort of concerns me is that SBC > is an owner of Cingular here in Kansas (at least) and starting two > weeks ago, SBC started 'call connections' which is a plan where your > Cingular Wireless bill gets billed on your SBC bill, and if you agree > to that, you get a bunch of 'discounts' on your total bill, including > a price change on DSL from $49.95 to $29.95 per month. That twenty > dollar per month discount on DSL makes it a very tempting offer. I > understand the cellular service will not change any, i.e. no charge > on long distance calls, etc. PAT] I have discussed this with a Cingular rep. She was quite insistent that the rates would have been explained properly, even though several other people have reported to me that they got exactly the same "bait and switch" tactic played on them. They were quoted $0.49 and $0.99 (depending on the country) for calls back to the US from their wireless phones. When they got the bill, it was $2.49/minute. In each case, they were told that the billing was correct and that they must have misunderstood what was being explained to them. Understand that my associate is quite versed in telephony and he carefully explained the intended use of the phone ... over and over ... inseveral different ways. The Cingular rep insisted that $0.99 would be the rate for calls from Bahrain and Kuwait. They will not re-rate the calls. I have been a customer of Cingular since the system went on the air as PacBell Mobile Services, about eight years ago. By the way, does Cingular offer "regular" cellular service there, operating on the "A" or "B" AMPS frequencies? The service for the San Francisco area is 1.9GHz GSM. 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: Let that be a lesson to you to *tape- record* phone calls with customer service reps as needed, especially the dingbat ones. Of course you have to notify anyone you are tape recording, and typically that will put them on their best behavior as well. Cingular offers 'regular' service here in Independence. I *think* they rent tower space from Dobson. They are the 'landline' carrier (B side?) while Dobson Cellular is the 'competitor' or A side, I think. It is kinda weird. Alltel, United States Cellular and AT&T all rent space on Dobson as well as Cingular and Cellular One. Cingular formerly had their customers on 620-870 which is a sort of 'state-wide' toll free exchange. One day Cingular Wireless said they were dropping that toll- free exchange, and to bring my phone in and get a 'local' number. They put all their local customers including me on 620-330, which is local here in Independence (although all the 'regular, wired, landline phones in town are on 620-331). But 330 and 331 are local to each other so it make no difference to me. 620-330 is sort of weird also. Other than Cingular Wireless customers and Alltel customers (on credit [the prepaid customers get 620-924 out of Liberty, Kansas]), the only other subscriber is the Montgomery County Sheriff, at 330-1000, and then only on incoming calls. When I have recieved calls from Sheriff personnel, the caller ID always says they are 620-331 like everyone else in town. The Coffeyville 'branch office' of the sheriff also is on 330-1000. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 16:46:39 -0400 PAT, the TELECOM Digest Editor, noted: > What sort of concerns me is that SBC is an owner of Cingular here in Kansas > (at least)... Cingular is a joint venture between SBC and BellSouth; the latter is also offering bundling discounts including Cingular service. ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Organization: Genuity Managed Services, Woburn, MA Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 18:10:10 GMT In article , wrote: > John Higdon wrote: >> In article , Clint Olsen >> wrote: >>> I have managed to reject all email from hosts without a reverse lookup >>> entry - this nails a lot of crap. I've had _one_ legitimate email >>> reject by using this heuristic. >> Rejecting connections from hosts that merely have no reverse DNS is not a >> good idea. If you handled any volume, you would reject quite a bit of >> legitimate stuff in all likelihood. A better practice is to reject hosts >> where the forward and reverse DNS don't agree. > With virtual name hosting as common as it is, you may want to be > careful about how you implement this reverse vs forward DNS matching > algorithm. There are many legitimate sites on static IPs that map to > the same IP and so reverse maps may not produce what you expect. Virtual hosting shouldn't cause a problem. There should just be *one* PTR record, and as long as it points to a name that resolves to the original address the check will succeed. I.e. you should have something like: mail.foo.com. IN A 1.2.3.4 mail.bar.com. IN A 1.2.3.4 virtualhost.hosting.net. IN A 1.2.3.4 4.3.2.1.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR virtualhost.hosting.net. When a connection comes in, the server performs a reverse lookup of its address and gets virtualhost.hosting.net, then it resolves that name to an address. The A records for mail.foo.com and mail.bar.com will never be noticed, so they shouldn't cause problems. Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Genuity Managed Services, a Level(3) Company, 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 Subject: Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 11:52:22 -0700 In article , dlavoie@my-deja.com (dlavoie) wrote: > First, to everyone that says just relay all your email, re-read the > messages. If we wanted to use the ISPs servers, which lag, lose > messages, go down constantly, and impose size limits, we would just > use our attbi.com email addresses. I plan to just add any other ISPs > that do this to my aol.com-only relay, but for the majority of > outgoing email, I'm sticking with DNS direct. That's up to you, but don't expect the rest of the net.world to accommodate your demands. You are going to find more and more destinations who will block you direct if you are on listed address space. > And the point about not using a dynamic address, they aren't blocking > only dynamic addresses, they are blocking the entire residential > ranges. Static, dynamic, doesn't matter. I agree with their open > relay scans, but blocking the entire thing is silly. No, it makes perfect sense. The amount of legitimate email that arrives at that site from "residential space" as you call it is down in the noise. On the other hand, much spam seems to arrive from those addresses. > Give me a break, you want people to pay hundreds a month for a T1 so > we can avoid using the cable/dsl ISP's lousy servers? Uh, nope. You need to shop a little harder. There are many providers who can offer you perfectly clean static address space over DSL. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 In article , temp7@thewolfden.org wrote: > John Higdon wrote: >> In article , Clint Olsen >> wrote: >>> I have managed to reject all email from hosts without a reverse lookup >>> entry - this nails a lot of crap. I've had _one_ legitimate email >>> reject by using this heuristic. >> Rejecting connections from hosts that merely have no reverse DNS is not a >> good idea. If you handled any volume, you would reject quite a bit of >> legitimate stuff in all likelihood. A better practice is to reject hosts >> where the forward and reverse DNS don't agree. > With virtual name hosting as common as it is, you may want to be > careful about how you implement this reverse vs forward DNS matching > algorithm. There are many legitimate sites on static IPs that map to > the same IP and so reverse maps may not produce what you expect. I'm not sure I understand what virtual name hosting on a web server has to do with SMTP. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Mark Atwood Subject: Re: A Spam Fighter's Work is Never Done Date: 07 Apr 2003 11:10:18 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com David Clayton writes: > John David Galt contributed the > following: >> The moment this is enacted, I predict a huge flood of spams "on behalf of" >> every business that has even a few enemies, all pointing to legitimate 800 >> numbers or web sites of the business, all sent without its knowledge. > Is that known as "Spamotage"??? :-) It's actually referred to in the field as a "Joe Job". Mark Atwood | Well done is better than well said. mra@pobox.com | http://www.pobox.com/~mra ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: dnhunt Subject: Small Motel Telephone System Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 14:12:47 -0400 Organization: Mid-South Consulting Engineers, Inc. I am looking for a small Motel telephone system that will do Voice Mail and other motel features. One system is for a motel with 10 rooms and one with 23 rooms. IP and traditional systems are also being considered. David N. Hunt, Executive Vice President - Business Development Mid-South Consulting Engineers, Inc. 3901 Rose Lake Drive, Charlotte, NC 28217 dnhunt@msceng.com, Tel: 704/357-0004, Fax: 704/357-0025 ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:39:32 -0700 Organization: Networks and Distributed Computing On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, Danny Burstein wrote: >> Give me a break, you want people to pay hundreds a month for a T1 so >> we can avoid using the cable/dsl ISP's lousy servers? Uh, nope. > I hate using the anti-spammer brush here, but let me remind you that > you and your e-mail programs have NO unalienable right to access my > mailserver, nor my ISPs, nor my company's. Right on! The one highlight of the anti-spam session at the last IETF was when some loudmouth started ranting on about how "everyone was ignoring the most important thing that needs to be done: guaranteed delivery" and how a "conspiracy" of RBL operators was causing him to lose business. It boggles the imagination that some individuals think that they have a right to have their mail received by anyone. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, in a perfect world, you do. Email should be like the post office in that respect; address a letter, and the mail carrier drops it at the address given. You should have reminded the loudmouth that if he was willing to pay 37 cents for each piece of email, and be part of some adminstrative committee to oversee the distribution of that 37 cents, he would get his 'guarenteed delivery.' Where the hassle comes in is that email is, uhhh.. free. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 12:50:00 -0600 Subject: Re: static IP Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Sun, 6 Apr 2003 15:24:48 -0400 (EDT), John Higdon wrote: > Rejecting connections from hosts that merely have no reverse DNS is not > a good idea. If you handled any volume, you would reject quite a bit of > legitimate stuff in all likelihood. A better practice is to reject hosts > where the forward and reverse DNS don't agree. I'm not sure I understand exactly what you mean here. Could you give us an example? -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: greglee@umich.edu (Gregory Lee) Subject: looking For Cordless Phone With Battery Indicator Date: 7 Apr 2003 13:24:38 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I am looking for a cordless phone that has a battery indicator on the LCD display, which tells me when the battery is running low, or better yet, exactly how many minutes left before the battery dies. Does anyone have any recommendations? ------------------------------ From: t0rk@hotmail.com (t0rk--) Subject: Saudi Arabian Telephone Date: 7 Apr 2003 14:05:30 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hello, What type of jacks are used in Saudi Arabia? Thanks, -C ------------------------------ From: Robert Campbell Subject: Need Help Finding PBX Maintenance Reply-To: rcampbell@nospam.allied.com Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 21:34:10 GMT I'm new to the (San Francisco) bay area, so I need advice regarding finding a company to either maintain my (Avaya) PBX equipment, or replace it. I'm currently dealing with Expanets (Exp@nets) and I'm not happy with them at all. So far, they have managed to screw up every single thing they've done for me, and overcharged me for the pleasure. They even tried to charge me $3000 for a refurbished TSU (Adtran TSU Ace) when I knew I could get a new one for about $500. I'm no expert when it comes to PBX equipment, I'm a computer guy. So, I'm asking if anyone here knows of a company they trust in this area. Thanks in advance, Robert ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 16:23:41 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cablevision Drops DirecTV Bid Plan -- NYT NEW YORK, April 7 (Reuters) - U.S. cable TV operator Cablevision Systems Corp. (NYSE:CVC) will not bid for Hughes Electronics (NYSE:GMH) and its satellite pay-TV network DirecTV, leaving Rupert Murdoch's News Corp (AUS:NCP) as the sole suitor, the New York Times reported on Monday. Citing people close to Cablevision, the newspaper said the company decided late on Friday to ditch its bid plans, a few days after SBC Communications (NYSE:SBC) also decided to drop out of the bidding for control of General Motors' (NYSE:GM) Hughes unit. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33734396 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 16:32:43 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Update: Benetton backs away from 'smart tags' in clothing line By LINDA ROSENCRANCE APRIL 04, 2003 Source: Computerworld Fashion retailer Benetton Group SpA said today that it has no immediate plans to attach radio frequency identification (RFID) "smart tags" to its Sisley line of clothing to help track shipping, inventory and sales in the company's 5,000 stores around the world. But it left the door open to doing so in the future after further study. Last month, Philips Electronics NV in Amsterdam issued a statement saying that the tags, which will use its I.Code semiconductor technology, will be integrated into clothing labels made by Lab ID in Bologna, Italy, and scanned by handheld devices made by Psion Teklogix Inc. in Mississauga, Ontario (see story). At the time, Terry Phipps, consulting CIO of Ponzano Veneto, Italy-based Benetton, told Computerworld that it was the first time the company planned to integrate the tracking technology into one of its product lines. ... http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/privacy/story/0,10801,80061,00.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 #382 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Apr 8 14:08:56 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h38I8uL11288; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 14:08:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 14:08:56 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304081808.h38I8uL11288@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 #383 TELECOM Digest Tue, 8 Apr 2003 14:09:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 383 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded (Steven J. Sobol) Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded (Jack Hamilton) Disney Preps Wireless Video Service (Monty Solomon) Benetton Takes Stock of Chip Plan (Monty Solomon) Fretting About the Future, Lost Liberty (Monty Solomon) TiVo Desktop (Monty Solomon) More Wireless Internet Access Set for Lower Manhattan Parks (Monty Solomon) Librarians Use Shredder to Show Opposition to New FBI Power (Monty Solomon) When Games Override Calls as Phone Feature (Monty Solomon) Consumers on the Web: Identification of Usage Patterns (Monty Solomon) Military Battling Junk E-Mail (Monty Solomon) The Comcast Shakedown (Monty Solomon) As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Monty Solomon) Are We Doomed Yet? (Monty Solomon) Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP (Mark Crispin) Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP (Robert Bonomi) Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP (Ed Ellers) 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: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 23:28:38 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC From Steven J Sobol (sjsobol@JustThe.net): > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dobson Cellular operates here in Independence > as Cellular One. PAT] Yes. Dobson CellularONE in the Youngstown, Ohio area also does. Dobson CellularONE out in Sandusky did too before they sold the Sandusky network to Verizon. Speaking of which, I'm getting ready for a big move to California and will be settling in Verizon landline territory and will be eligible for similar programs as I currently carry a Verizon Wireless cell phone. From John Higdon (no-spam@amadeus.kome.com): > By the way, does Cingular offer "regular" cellular service there, > operating on the "A" or "B" AMPS frequencies? The service for the San > Francisco area is 1.9GHz GSM. The former Pacific Bell areas are GSM, New York City is GSM riding on T-Mobile's GSM network (and T-Mobile uses PacBell's network in Cali), and the former BellSouth DCS areas are GSM. The rest is TDMA (what you and Pat are calling 'regular' service) that is being overlaid with GSM. [Quote from Pat:] > Cingular offers 'regular' service here in Independence. I *think* they > rent tower space from Dobson. They are the 'landline' carrier (B side?) > while Dobson Cellular is the 'competitor' or A side, I think. It is > kinda weird. Alltel, United States Cellular and AT&T all rent space > on Dobson Not really. Tower sharing is pretty common. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually what I was referring to as 'weird' was not that they are all on the same tower(s) together here in southeast rural Kansas; it was that we have so many functioning carriers here in town. All four of the *major* carriers in this area have sales/service offices here in town: (Dobson Cellular One, Cingular, and US Cellular all have offices/storefronts in the downtown area. Alltel has an agency dealer (Radio Shack) and a 'corporate' office (a kiosk at Walmart). Cell One, Cingular and Alltel all have local service with local phone numbers for customers. US Cellular gives their customers a 'wide area' number good in southeast Kansas (620-870 [like Cingular used to use]) and AT&T, while it used to have a storefront downtown (where Cingular is now) the customer cell numbers are all 316 (Wichita) or 918 (Tulsa, OK). PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jack Hamilton Subject: Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 19:19:18 -0700 Organization: Copyright (c) 2003 by Jack Hamilton. Reply-To: jfh@acm.org John Higdon wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let that be a lesson to you to *tape- > record* phone calls with customer service reps as needed, especially > the dingbat ones. Of course you have to notify anyone you are tape > recording, and typically that will put them on their best behavior as > well. Wouldn't their recording which says "calls may be recorded for quality purposes" cover that? "May" sounds like it's giving permission. Jack Hamilton jfh@acm.org If men are to wait for liberty until they become wise and good in slavery, they may indeed wait for ever. - Lord MacCaulay [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, 'may' does sound like permission is given, but *be certain to get that recorded statement on the start of your own recording so they cannot later claim they did not give permission. And 'quality purposes' sounds to me like you are trying to assure the customer service rep has been properly trained. You want to know one way to *absolutely assure* that a customer service rep gets very annoyed at you? When they first answer the call, you should ask, 'may I please speak to someone who has been trained to answer the phones and deal with customers?' Say it politely, and always thank them in advance for calling someone 'like that' to the phone. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 02:16:56 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Disney Preps Wireless Video Service By Stefanie Olsen and Evan Hansen Staff Writer, CNET News.com LAS VEGAS--Walt Disney plans to begin testing a new on-demand film service later this year, company Chief and Chairman Michael Eisner said Monday. Eisner said the service, called Movie Beam, will be a video-on-demand (VOD) storage product and service that uses leftover broadcast "bits" to download recent first-run theater film releases onto a TV set-top box. Customers will be able to store up to 100 feature films at a time through the service, which will include DVD and TiVo-like features. Eisner discussed the new service at a gathering of the National Association of Broadcasters, which honored the Disney franchise during a luncheon here. Disney has discussed a video-on-demand (VOD) service before, but now appears closer than ever to delivering on the promise. Past efforts that failed to bear fruit include a VOD service dubbed MovieBox, revealed in an earnings report in February 2001. In addition, Disney pulled out last year of a joint venture with 20th Century Fox to create an Internet VOD service. In his talk Monday, Eisner said Movie Beam is part of a string of technology initiatives that illustrate Disney's commitment, as opposed to fear, of the digital revolution. Others innovations include the transition of Disney-owned television network ABC to high-definition, or HD, television, including the broadcast of "Monday Night Football" in HD for the upcoming season. http://news.com.com/2100-1031-995846.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 02:21:35 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Benetton Takes Stock of Chip Plan By Winston Chai and Richard Shim Special to CNET News.com Clothing maker Benetton has clarified its plans regarding radio tags in response to reports that it is preparing to place millions of the devices in its products to help track inventory. A company spokesman on Monday said the company has to date purchased only 200 radio frequency identity (RFID) chips and is still studying whether or not it will use controversial technology to track its products. Spokesman Federico Sartor said there was a misunderstanding about Benetton's use of RFIDs, and though the company didn't think it was a major issue, concern in the financial markets regarding the cost of technology and its benefits caused the company to clarify its position. http://news.com.com/2100-1020-995744.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 02:27:57 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Fretting About the Future, Lost Liberty By Declan McCullagh April 7, 2003, 5:45 AM PT NEW YORK--About 250 activists gathered here last week to mourn lost Internet liberty and worry about what the future may hold. At the 13th annual Computers, Freedom and Privacy (CFP) conference, attendees fretted about shrinking privacy, growing online censorship, and their reduced ability to make "fair use" of music, video and software girded with anticopying technologies. Events included panels with titles such as "Terrorizing Rights" and enthusiastic condemnations of corporate miscreants. Anger and alarm characterized the mood. What many CFPers failed to recognize, however, is the tremendous difference between actions by governments and those undertaken by corporations. I've seen this view among other technologists as well, and it's based on a misconception that's commonplace. ... http://news.com.com/2010-1071-995691.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Many folks do not realize that things like the 'Bill of Rights' only addresses what the *government* may not do (unless you are like Bush, and use 'terrorism' as an administrative excuse), and do not discuss what *private individuals* may enter into contracts to do with each other. NO ONE is 'forced' to give their social security number (go somewhere else for service, etc) or to buy clothes from Bennetton. If you want to be a hermit, you can. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 02:31:43 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Desktop http://www.tivo.com/4.9.4.1.asp ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 09:56:17 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: More Wireless Internet Access Set for Lower Manhattan Parks By EDWARD WYATT A downtown business improvement district is planning to establish free high-speed wireless Internet access in six parks and public spaces in Lower Manhattan next month, significantly expanding the availability downtown of wireless connections to the Internet. Officials of the Alliance for Downtown New York, the business improvement district that encompasses most of Manhattan south of City Hall, said yesterday that the organization will set up wireless access points, which are known as Wi-Fi connections or "hot spots," in City Hall Park, the South Street Seaport area and Bowling Green. In addition, the wireless access points will be available in Vietnam Veterans Plaza on Water Street north of Broad Street; in Liberty Plaza, at Broadway and Liberty Street; and in Rector Park in Battery Park City. In those areas, plus at least one more for which the service is still being negotiated, anyone with a properly equipped laptop computer or personal digital assistant can enjoy free, high-speed access to the Internet through a system paid for by the Alliance. The networks will be similar to a wireless network set up in Bryant Park in midtown Manhattan that has grown in popularity since it was introduced last year. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/04/nyregion/04WIRE.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 09:59:36 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Librarians Use Shredder to Show Opposition to New F.B.I. Powers By DEAN E. MURPHY SANTA CRUZ, Calif., April 4 - The humming noise from a back room of the central library here today was the sound of Barbara Gail Snider, a librarian, at work. Her hands stuffed with wads of paper, Ms. Snider was feeding a small shredding machine mounted on a plastic wastebasket. First to be sliced by the electronic teeth were several pink sheets with handwritten requests to the reference desk. One asked for the origin of the expression "to cost an arm and a leg." Another sought the address of a collection agency. Next to go were the logs of people who had signed up to use the library's Internet computer stations. Bill L., Mike B., Rolando, Steve and Patrick were all shredded into white paper spaghetti. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/07/national/07LIBR.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:07:02 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: When Games Override Calls as Phone Feature By MATT RICHTEL SAN FRANCISCO, April 6 - Nokia, Sony Ericsson and their competitors are deploying technology to let callers kick, punch and beat one another up over their mobile handsets. And they are banking on consumers' willingness to pay plenty for the privilege. Advanced cellular telephones, already featuring things like personal organizers and digital cameras, have begun providing a platform for video games. The games, far from primitive Pong-like contests, display rich colors and increasingly elaborate action. And they are expected eventually to enable players to compete over wireless networks, as if sitting side by side in front of the television to play fighting, trivia and action games. The manufacturers are betting that the new capabilities will reverse a slowdown in phone sales. The features also appeal to the operators of mobile phone networks, which are counting on consumers to pay to download new games and eventually log more monthly minutes on the network to play them with other people. Significantly, though, as the phones develop more features, they are moving further away from their core purpose - being telephones. Industry analysts point out that games absorb battery life that might otherwise go to talk time. And cellphone makers, which in recent years have made the devices smaller and sleeker, are now finding that the need for larger screens that can accommodate game play is making it necessary for the phones to get bigger once again. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/07/technology/07GAME.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 22:20:38 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Consumers on the Web: Identification of Usage Patterns by Nina Koiso-Kanttila Abstract This article analyzes consumer behavior on the Web. The purpose is to research patterns that characterize consumer actions in this environment. The study employs Nielsen//NetRatings Internet panel data in Finland. The four-month data for 65 panelists suggest three interrelated Web usage patterns that are highlighted here. The text will outline how these conclusions were reached and present other observations. One pattern relates to the mosaic of the Web. Most consumers visit popular sites. However, many of their own favorite sites are more specialized. Approximately four in ten of the individuals' top three sites were coded in less frequently appearing categories, and did not appear among popular site measurement records. Web usage appears to have maintained individual preference and taste variety. The other pattern involves simultaneous presence of concentration and exploration. The familiar notion of 20-80 is employed, yet from the consumer point of view. The results point out that particularly in the case of high frequency users, a small number of sites accounts for a significant percentage of the pages viewed by an individual. At the same time, consumers can visit a large number of different sites. The data on popular Web sites are in line, showing how page view records display stronger concentration than audience measurement records. The third pattern concerns navigation patterns from site to site. Consumers appear to use various means of navigation in a rather balanced way: links from other sites, search queries, and bookmarks. However, the percentages of these various means vary by usage intensity and age. Contents Introduction Research material and transferability of findings The mosaic of the Web Web site usage: Concentration and exploration Navigation patterns: Opening a session Pages in one Web session Means of navigation from site to site Discussion http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_4/koiso/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 22:50:50 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Military Battling Junk E-Mail Military Battling Junk E-Mail Unsolicited ads pester troops checking for messages from home. Some advertisers use patriotism to lure the unsuspecting. By P.J. Huffstutter, Times Staff Writer When the 5,500 sailors aboard the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln in the Persian Gulf get their daily half-an-hour allotment of Internet time, they savor each precious second to connect with the world back home. Apparently, it's a world full of folks cooking with the ultimate pasta pot, making six-figure incomes selling junk on EBay and using anti-snoring spray to sleep quietly through the night. Such are the wares touted in millions of e-mail messages. The unsolicited advertisements -- contemptuously known as spam -- have been clogging corporate computer systems and home PC in-boxes for years, costing an estimated $8.9 billion annually, according to technology market research firm Ferris Research. And now the ads have followed U.S. troops to the Middle East. http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-war-spam5apr05,1,2647916.story ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 01:51:05 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Comcast Shakedown Flush with its purchase of AT&T Broadband, the biggest cable company on the block intends to make size matter. By Chishen Wei April 8, 2003 | Now that the Comcast-AT&T Broadband merger has wrapped up its final stage of system migration, Comcast cable subscribers are beginning to feel the weight of the FCC-approved 800-pound gorilla. The acquisition of AT&T Broadband last November gave Comcast control over 21 million cable homes (roughly one in five TV homes). The media-communications giant wasted little time flexing its newfound market muscle. On April 1, Comcast forced its cable Internet subscribers to adopt a new pricing scheme that toes the boundary of antitrust law. Current customers face a $15 (33 percent) monthly increase -- unless they subscribe to Comcast's cable TV service. Reaction to the move has been sharp, especially in California, where former AT&T Broadband cable subscribers have found themselves bombarded in recent weeks by a ubiquitous Comcast marketing campaign aimed at boosting Comcast's cable Internet subscriber numbers. Before the price hike was even official, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., sent a letter to Michael Powell, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, decrying what she called Comcast's "monopolistic practices." ... http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/04/08/comcast/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 02:03:37 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide TECH & INNOVATION Consumers need not break law to benefit By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff, 4/7/2003 With war and recession on everyone's mind, perhaps music would bring some cheer. So why aren't people buying? Recorded music sales are falling fast. Worldwide CD sales fell 10 percent last year, and the new chief of Sony Music says they could tumble another 15 percent in 2003. Major retailers like Best Buy Inc. are shutting down hundreds of record stores. Yet Americans are buying CDs by the billions: blank ones. They're creating their own music disks by downloading music from the Net and burning their favorite tunes on the blanks, using their PCs. It's usually illegal, but that's not stopping people. For millions of music lovers, "cheap and easy" trumps "right and wrong." People who'd never dream of filching the latest Coldplay disk from a store will cheerfully download its contents without paying a dime. According to the market research firm Ipsos-Reid, a quarter of the US population over age 12 has downloaded music from the Net -- and over two-thirds of them have never paid for their downloads. ... http://boston.com/business/news/2003/04/07/cd_burning.htm [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone (other than Old Fartes like myself, and they are dying off fast) remember when 'record stores' used to exist and they almost all had 'listening booths' where you could take a recording you were thinking about buying into a little private booth, sit down, use a pair of earphones and actually *listen* to some portion of the record before you bought it? When the trend in music went from 'LP' (long playing recordings) to tape cassettes that feature in stores still existed a little, but by the time we moved on to CDs it mostly had disappeared (the ability to listen, in the store to portions of the media before buying it). My God, a young kid who is a friend of mine came over the other day, saw my old collection old collection of 33 1/3 recordings in their cardboard jackets and asked me, 'how do you use these things?' That made me feel *so old*. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 01:39:34 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Are We Doomed Yet? The computer-networked, digital world poses enormous threats to humanity that no government, no matter how totalitarian, can stop. A fully open society is our best chance for survival. By Sheldon Pacotti Salon http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/03/31/knowledge/ ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 17:46:33 -0700 Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Mark Crispin: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, in a perfect world, you > do. Email should be like the post office in that respect; address a > letter, and the mail carrier drops it at the address given. You should > have reminded the loudmouth that if he was willing to pay 37 cents for > each piece of email, and be part of some adminstrative committee to > oversee the distribution of that 37 cents, he would get his 'guarenteed > delivery.' Postal mail does *not* offer guaranteed delivery. There are certain premium postal services which will offer proof of mailing, confirmation of delivery, proof of delivery and/or security of the item being mailed. However, none of these are effective if the recipient refuses it. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I should have said for 37 cents via the Post Office you are guarenteed (well, mostly) that the correspondence will be dropped in the appropriate receptacle at the premises of the recipient (or the place where the post office thinks he resides at. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Organization: Not Much From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 03:17:30 GMT In article , > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, in a perfect world, you > do. Email should be like the post office in that respect; address a > letter, and the mail carrier drops it at the address given. You should > have reminded the loudmouth that if he was willing to pay 37 cents for > each piece of email, and be part of some adminstrative committee to > oversee the distribution of that 37 cents, he would get his 'guarenteed > delivery.' Where the hassle comes in is that email is, uhhh.. free. PAT] Anybody that wants "guaranteed delivery" to _my_ networks, will _pay_me_ for that level of service. Anybody else gets email delivered *only* because I extend them that courtesy, as a gesture of "good will". Any network operator that cannot/will not police _their_own_ users to keep them from abusing _my_ (and other private network operators) private property will find that I *no*longer* extend 'good will' to anything originating from address-space assigned to that network operator, whether it is used directly by said operator, or delegated to customers of that operator. The internet works on the basis of "co-operation". If they won't cooperate by enforcing what the _rest_of_the_'net_considers to be the minimums of acceptable behavior', They should *NOT* be surprised that they (and thus, their customers) are *NOT*WELCOME* at a large number of networks. It *is* a sorry state of affairs. The blame for which rests *entirely* on those who choose not to *strictly* enforce 'good neighbor' policies. Too many providers "do not understand" the nature of the product that they are selling. That they have _nothing_ to sell, absent the 'good will' of the "rest of the 'net". ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 00:46:01 -0400 Mark Crispin wrote: > The one highlight of the anti-spam session at the last IETF was when some > loudmouth started ranting on about how "everyone was ignoring the most > important thing that needs to be done: guaranteed delivery" and how a > "conspiracy" of RBL operators was causing him to lose business. Well, if it appeared that a number of corporations were acting in concert in a way that damaged other businesses, there could be antitrust considerations. (Even if those corporations' concerted activity was in pursuit of a laudable goal. I remember that the Broadcast Television System Committee, which chose the Zenith-dbx multichannel TV sound system in the early 1980s, was racing the calendar; if the FCC had acted, before the BTSC had chosen a standard, to allow stations to use any system they wanted -- as happened with AM stereo -- the BTSC would have had to disband because choosing a single standard would cause a disadvantage to the other system proponents, and at least one had expressed a willingness to sue if that happened.) > It boggles the imagination that some individuals think that they have a > right to have their mail received by anyone. Seems to me that the greatest benefit of the Internet stems from being able to connect to hosts other than your own ISP. To the extent that a given ISP blocks email from certain other ISPs, it's reducing the value of both those other ISPs' email service *and its own*. And if that ISP is blocking incoming email from another ISP but allowing its customers to send email *to* customers of that other ISP, that strikes me as less than equitable. One solution might be for any ISP that chooses to block certain hosts to also block outgoing email to those hosts, and to post a list of the blocked hosts so its customers will be able to tell whether or not the restriction is acceptable to them. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 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 #383 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Apr 8 18:44:55 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h38MitQ14171; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 18:44:55 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 18:44:55 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304082244.h38MitQ14171@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 #384 TELECOM Digest Tue, 8 Apr 2003 18:45:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 384 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Saudi Arabian Telephone (Owain) Re: Saudi Arabian Telephone (Joseph) Locating Cell Phone Service (Doug Faunt) Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded (Kenneth P. Stox) Meet Me Conferencing (Benm) Re: Cablevision Drops DirecTV Bid Plan -- NYT (Steven J. Sobol) Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895 (Ron Bean) Re: Need Help Finding PBX Maintenance (Bruce Kille) Re: Cellular to Modem? (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Internet Access On a Private Plane (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Installing/Using Digital Cable Filter (Name Withheld-Readers Request) Re: Help Running Phone Line Extensions (3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com) Re: Moving Between Access Points (John R. Levine) Re: Last Laugh! Which Phone Company Has Most Expensive Toll (Justin Time) 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: spuorgelgoog@gowanhill.com (Owain) Subject: Re: Saudi Arabian Telephone Date: 8 Apr 2003 03:55:52 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ t0rk@hotmail.com (t0rk--) wrote > What type of jacks are used in Saudi Arabia? Any of US RJ-11, British[*], French, Jordan/Saudi, US (old) according to http://kropla.com/phones2.htm Owain [*] Site shows 'British' as the standard new type, but until the early 1980s Britain used a different type of plug entirely - type 420. I don't know what Saudi has. See: http://web.ukonline.co.uk/freshwater/shared/plug420.jpg for a pic) ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Saudi Arabian Telephone Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 09:01:55 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On 7 Apr 2003 14:05:30 -0700, t0rk@hotmail.com (t0rk--) wrote: > Hello, > What type of jacks are used in Saudi Arabia? According to http://www.kropla.com/phones2.htm they use either US RJ-11, British, French, Jordan/Saudi or US old style. Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group. ------------------------------ From: Doug Faunt Subject: Locating Cell Phone Service Date: 08 Apr 2003 13:02:52 -0400 Organization: at home, in Oakland, California Hi all, I've received this email from a Serbian friend, who apparently would like me to add some value to his mobile phone account. Can anyone give me a hint as to how to locate the approriate accounting department? I see that 305 is Florida, but haven't had any luck trying to dig further. > I have cell phone 305 766xxxx, and my money is finish 10.04, > Please pay 20 or 50 US $ I will use this phone in dayton in May 2000, > Company is T Mobile, I will give money to you in EA land, > best reagards and see you soon, > Hrane yt1ad 73, doug PS: I will write up my observations of communications on Pitcairn probably titled "Pitcairn goes wireless". [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My suggestion would be to call 'T Mobile' and ask them specifically where to send the money and how it will be applied so your friend can use his phone. Also, what other details are needed to assure the phone will work correctly. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Kenneth P. Stox Subject: Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 13:02:38 -0500 Organization: Imaqginary Landscape, LLC. Reply-To: stox@imagescape.com Steven J. Sobol wrote: > Cingular is the brand-name for the joint venture between BellSouth and > SBC. Cingular includes the former Ameritech Cellular, I can't comment on the others, but Cingular does NOT include the old Ameritech Cell network. That was sold off to Verizon, as SBC already had presence in the region through Cell One. ------------------------------ From: ben77m2000@yahoo.com (Benm) Subject: Meet Me Conferencing Date: 8 Apr 2003 05:30:28 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I am looking for a small (6-10 party), refurbished, conference bridge. Does anyone have anything to recommend or know where I can get one? These seem to be a rare item. Ben [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They certainly are rare! I have wanted one myself for awhile now. Southeast Kansas definitly needs a conference bridge for public use. If I had one, I would turn it on in a minute with six or ten (or however many) lines from Southwestern Bell, and advertise it heavily in the Daily Reporter. I'd probably run it for free at first, until I built up loyal users. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: Cablevision Drops DirecTV Bid Plan -- NYT Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 23:26:36 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC From Monty Solomon (monty@roscom.com): > NEW YORK, April 7 (Reuters) - U.S. cable TV operator Cablevision > Systems Corp. (NYSE:CVC) will not bid for Hughes Electronics > (NYSE:GMH) and its satellite pay-TV network DirecTV, leaving Rupert > Murdoch's News Corp (AUS:NCP) as the sole suitor, the New York Times > reported on Monday. Good. Cablevision doesn't know how to run a cable TV outfit, they hosed up the flat-rate PCS cellular carrier the launched in Cleveland (Northcoast PCS), the Dolan family* managed to somehow run the Cleveland Indians into the ground, and they'd probably screw up DirectTV too. *The Dolan who owns the Indians isn't involved in Cablevision. The Dolan who runs Cablevision is the Indians owner's brother. Close enough. :) Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 20:37:21 -0500 From: Ron Bean Subject: Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895 Joseph writes: > Many businesses still used 701 PBXs until the late 70s with cord boards. > ...Of course it didn't matter to the 701 PBX, a step-by-step machine > that couldn't do DTMF. OK, this is something that I know nothing about. Are you saying there were electromechanical PBXs? How big were they, and how much maintenance did they require? Are there any pictures on the web? Just for fun, I did a google search for "701 pbx", and it turned up this: "Our Area of Expertise: Analog telephone products and services employing electromechanical (relay-based) technology" It's still under construction, lots of information about key systems but none about the 701 yet. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, sure there were electromechanical PBXs. All during the 1950's they were very common with extremely large telco customers. The largest units for the largest customers (such as University of Chicago) were room-filling units. When I worked there (1958 to the early sixties) the 'phone room' occupied the entire sixth floor of the admin building, 5801 South Ellis Avenue. One area of the sixth floor were the 'switchboards' (they had two boards of eight (operator) positions each; a third board with two operator positions, and an area at one end with a long work table for the 'information' clerks, the teletype machine, the Western Union TWX machine, etc. The Chief Operator had a corner office back there with a window, etc. Across the hall were the mechanicals for the whole thing. Although all incoming/outgoing calls had to be dialed through the operators, users could dial each other directly, which is where the mechanicals across the hall came in. All users had rotary dial phones; they dialed each other with four digit numbers, but they dialed zero to reach an operator. Internal numbers started with 2 though 6, and 8. The single digit '7' got them the message center where they could request that someone be paged, or incoming calls could be held (and picked up by the called party dialing '72 something' as instructed by the paging clerk. Extensions beginning 2-3-4 were the 'quadrangles' or main campus area; extensions beginning 5-6 were the medical center, and extensions beginning 8 were the new place on campus called the 'Computation Center' a sort of mysterious place that few people knew anything much about except that they had 'computers' there, and that they recieved a truckload of cardboard 80 column punch cards every week or so. The switchboards were not the little modern looking consoles either; they were big wooden things about six feet high and three feet wide. The boards were 'multipled' where they overlapped each other every three operator positions. An operator mostly worked what was directly in front of her face, but roughly a third of the extensions were in the half-board to her left and a third were in the half-board to her right. The operator had to reach over in front of her neighbor on either side of her to get those users. But they did not have to 'ring' the extensions, all they had to do was 'test for busy' (touch the tip of the plug to the end of the jack), plug in and it would ring automatically by the equipment in the room across the hall. When you touched the tip of the cord to the jack, if the line was in use there was dead silence. If there was a slight 'tick' sound, it was free to be used. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: Bruce Kille From: Bruce Kille Subject: Re: Need Help Finding PBX Maintenance Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 22:10:01 -0400 I can't answer your question as I'm not in the SF area, but let me say as a former Expanets employee, RUN don't walk away from them as fast as you can! IMHO, Bruce Robert Campbell wrote in message news:telecom22.382.12@telecom-digest.org: > I'm new to the (San Francisco) bay area, so I need advice regarding > finding a company to either maintain my (Avaya) PBX equipment, or > replace it. > I'm currently dealing with Expanets (Exp@nets) and I'm not happy with > them at all. So far, they have managed to screw up every single thing > they've done for me, and overcharged me for the pleasure. > They even tried to charge me $3000 for a refurbished TSU (Adtran TSU > Ace) when I knew I could get a new one for about $500. > I'm no expert when it comes to PBX equipment, I'm a computer guy. > So, I'm asking if anyone here knows of a company they trust in this > area. > Thanks in advance, > Robert ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Cellular to Modem? Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 03:46:13 GMT On 6 Apr 2003 18:37:27 GMT, *selah* posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > I was told that cellular phones can't receive modem (digital) > signals. Is this true and, if so, why? Are there any devices that > would make this possible (other than using a satellite)? > remove "noe" to reply > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are such things as cellular > modems, so I would guess it is not true. Analog cellular phones will work with cellular modems. Digital phones may or may not. It depends on what digital technology your phone and provider use. Modems are not compatible with standard CDMA digital service. If you have a CDMA phone that is not analog-capable, you can't use a modem at all. If your CDMA phone is dual- or tri-mode (meaning that it can operate in analog mode), you should be able to use a modem designed for the phone as long as you operate in analog mode. (My phone has an option to "force" analog mode on for modem compatibility.) If your CDMA phone incorporates 1xRTT technology and your carrier supports it and you pay an extra fee for this (Verizon calls it "Express Network"; I can't remember Sprint's name for it), you can connect the computer to the phone with a special cable, with no modem required; you are assigned an IP address and get direct digital internet connectivity. I don't recall offhand whether TDMA phones are modem-compatible, but I would suspect not; if that's the case, you would have to force analog mode. I don't think modems will work with GSM phones, but GSM carriers may offer digital capability similar to the 1xRTT described above, if your phone is equipped -- the technology is called GPRS and the next version in its evolution is called EDGE. If the GSM phone is dual-mode and provides analog, you may be able to use a cellular modem with this. The reason you can't use a modem with most digital cellular systems is that the codecs (coder-decoders) used for conversion between voice and digital are optimized for voice, not modem signals. They cannot transmit the complex changes in tone and phase that are necessary for modem communications and would interpret a modem sound as being just a whiny, scratchy, beepy noise. Another alternative is CDPD -- a technology that can be implemented in analog or TDMA systems to provide direct digital internet connections. You have to use a separate PC-card transceiver for this; it is not included in the phone, and it doesn't use a standard cellular voice connection. > The one cellular modem I have > seen was like a little PCMCIA card, and it went on a slot on the side > of a laptop. Instead of a plug for a modular cord on the end which ran > off to a landline phone connection, there was a little (about three > inches long) flexible rubber antenna on the side of the card like that > seen on some cellular phones. To use it, you 'dialed' the number you > were calling (using the protocol of the cell phone carrier you were > using. I think Mike Sandman has one for his > personal laptop, but I do not think he sells them. And they do not > come cheap on monthly charges either. I think he said he gets flat > rate service from some carrier, and it frequently gives him pains in > his posterior trying to use it. His laptop gets locked up from the > confusion at times, and it never runs faster than 9600 or maybe > 14,400. Mike, if I am quoting you incorrectly here, I will ask you > to correct me. I know that on my cell-socket device, I have used a > laptop as the 'external phone' with a built in 56.6 modem. I have > to force it to dial because it does not recognize the cell-socket > 'dial tone' and I have never gotten more than 300 baud from it, when > I get that much. Often times it will not negotiate at all. By > the way, twenty years ago when I 'upgraded' from 110 baud to 300 > baud I really thought it was wonderful. Not any more. PAT] Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Internet Access On a Private Plane Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 03:57:34 GMT On Fri, 04 Apr 2003 23:09:31 -0500, Laura Johnson posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: >> Doesn't the FAA have something to say about wireless devices operated >> in an aircraft? > No. The FAA does not, provided that equipment does not interfere with > navigational equipment while the aircraft is operated IFR. All of the > radios onboard the plane of course qualify as wireless devices. On > the other hand, the FCC certainly does have something to say about > cellular phones in flight: Don't use them. However technically the > prohibition is in the Part of FCC rules governing actual cellular > phones, not the PCS type phones that are common today. I believe the FAA regs provide that electronic devices can't be used without the consent of the pilot or, in the case of commercial aircraft, the airline. You are talking about a pilot using the device, so you are correct that there is no FAA prohibition. You are also correct that the FCC's airborne cellphone prohibition is in Part 22, which is specific to 800 MHz cellular service; there is no corresponding rule in Part 24, which governs PCS. However, a cellphone cannot be used in a way that causes harmful interference, under FCC rules. It is far from clear whether a PCS phone operated while airborne will or will not cause harmful interference. It will most likely be within line of sight of hundreds or even thousands of cellsites, and its signal could likely be received at some sites at a sufficient strength to impair terrestrial service under some conditions. I am unaware of any tests for assessing such interference potential in the case of PCS. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 22:28:18 -0700 From: Name Withheld at User's Request Subject: Re: Installing/Using Digital Cable Filter [Pat - to minimize spam, please eliminate my email address if you publish this, thanks] Just incase anyone was interested in getting "something for nothing" with one of these 'digital cable filters' please note that the use that these are being marketed for is ILLEGAL in many jusisdictions, and can be considered 'theft of service'. The 'filter' will only work temporarially and only on programming that you order with your digital cable box's remote control. The filter will not get you premimum channels, and you will eventually have to pay for any programs/PPV you order, as digital cable boxes store purchases in a nonvolitale, nonerasable memory until such time as the purchase can be reported to the cable system's headend. In addition, the filter blocks all communications between the box and the cable television system. Occassionally the system operator will poll the boxes to check for trouble and to collect purchase information. Typically after a certain number of days/weeks without a response the cable company will treat this as a "nonresponder" and issue a command to shut the box down. The box will typically not be reenabled until either a service visit is scheduled, or the box is returned to the cable operator, and in either case, the previous purchases will be discovered and you will be billed for the services rendered. The filters work by blocking the retun path signal (5-42 MHz, "T channels") used to send information from premise equipment to the cable company. (This is the same frequency range commonly used by cable modems upstream bands, portable transmission equipment in schools, etc., etc.). This is a huge problem for the cable television industry, and the general public is being duped into beleiving that what they are doing is legal and that they will get away with it. (To add insult to injury, not only will the subscriber be backbilled, but they will have also wasted a signifigant amount of money on a little metal tube that does absoutely nothing). The manufacturers of these filters, which do have legitimate uses within the cable television industry, have issued statements reiterating that they do not approve of this use, and that the persons selling these devices have obtained them from 'grey market' sources. Lincoln (Speaking officially for no one) aura7r@earthlink.net wrote: > 1. What is a Digital Cable Filter? > The digital filter stops the frequency signal that communicates with > the digital cable box. > 2. How do I connect it? > The Digital Filter connects on the input side of the digital box where > the incoming cable line is connected. > 3. Is using the Digital Cable Filter Legal? > Yes! The filter is to be used as a digital signal booster to enhance > your digital cable. You must abide by your state, federal and local > laws. It is against the law to receive channels without paying for > them so you must call your cable company when you are going to watch a > special order channel. > Click here for more info or simply paste http://www.quicklink.bz/b/cable/i ------------------------------ From: 3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com Subject: Re: Help Running Phone Line Extensions Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 12:39:11 +0200 ~ To reply via e-mail, insert "Telecom Digest" in the subject line ~ On 5 Apr 2003 19:46:48 -0800, in comp.dcom.telecom Pat wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I know of a site which used to be good > with questions like yours; it was around for more than twenty years > then the proprietor got some kind of dreadful brain desease and many > of his former petitioners claim he went totally crazy from his deseased > brain and on anti-war tangents all the time. Pat, dare I say that the gentleman concerned may not be totally beyond redemption as he appears to have retained his sense of humour. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But dare I say you have no idea how helpless it leaves you feeling when you cannot do a lot of things you used to be able to do because of neurological damage. I mean, even non-labor intensive things like reading a book or working at the computer get me so tired and frustrated these days. People say, 'oh it is so nice that you recovered and are back (mostly) to normal.' What they fail to understand is how much brain-processing power is required to do the simplest tasks which used to come naturally. I cannot even get into long, fast-paced discussions anymore because my tongue trips over the words, so I just do not talk that much any more. I get so frustrated and nervous trying to cure 'relatively minor' (so I am told) computer networking problems. Forget about trying to write a working script for the archives anymore. :( Thank God I can still type, even though I wind up with a lot of mistakes there also. These are not good times for me, and from what the doctor claims, I will never get much better than I am now. Not in six months, not in six years, never. I never used to wear glasses, and would read several hundred pages or an entire book every day or two days. Now to read the Reporter or the Monitor each day I sit in my cushioned rocking chair, put on my big 'owl style' round glasses and hold the paper in front of my face. When I begin to lose concentration (often), I put the paper down and try it again later. I get tired so easily, and so often. For you long time readers here, that's the story of my life since that dreadful night on November 26, 1999, when at the bowling alley at Fort Riley Army Base in Junction City 'it' commenced to take over my life. I was doing a web page for them with a javascript game when 'it' happened. My friend called '911' and the base ambulance came and took me away, first to the municipal hospital in Junction City where the doctor examined my head, told me I had to be taken to the nearest hospital where a neurosurgeon was available, which was a hospital in Topeka. I do not think the base bowling alley ever got their web page finished, at least I never did it. The doctor even had a nurse ride along in the back of the ambulance with me on the 100 mile trip to Topeka, and she looked very frightened the entire trip. I told her I expected the neurosurgon in Topeka to pronounce me dead on arrival, and neither the nurse or the two guys driving the ambulance thought that was very funny. The traffic on I-70 was not that bad, being late at night, so we got to Topeka in about one hour, maybe in 45 minutes. At Stormont-Vail Medical Center in Topeka the staff at the emergency room came out and prodded and poked me there, then took me inside where the doctor on duty told me there would be an IMMEDIATE surgery on my brain. I asked him to let me call my mother here in Independence and tell her what was up. He said okay and I was on the phone talking to my mother when I got another splitting headache, and that was the last thing I remembered for about two months, when I came out of the coma. I remember *very briefly* coming out of the coma in the early morning hours of January 1, 2000 because I remember something I saw on the television which was always turned on in the room where they had put me. Some horror movie was on television, it apparently really scared me and I felt I should get out of bed and 'away' from whatever it was. I tried to get out of bed, but in my weakened condition fell on the floor. A few days later they moved me across the street to a facility called 'Kansas Rehabilitation Hospital' where I remained for another six weeks or so, mostly in a wheelchair and essentially totally out of touch with any reality. I guess they assumed I would probably be there for the rest of my life. And for those of you who wonder if cigarettes can hold you like a prisoner, please note: I started smoking when I was 13, because in my last year of middle school, I had a teacher who introduced me to reading good books. Arthur Erickson both was a vociferous reader and a vociferous cigarette smoker. I saw him do both, and since he was witty, intelligent and sophisticated, I wanted to be the same way. He bought me my first subscription to the Christian Science Monitor, and I've read it every day since, and been employed by it off and on. I've smoked daily since then, except I did not have a cigarette for *three months* during my coma and hospitalization. Then one day near the end of my 'intensive rehab' in the hospital setting, the nurse told me I could take my wheelchair and go for a ride down the sidewalk outside since it was a warm, pleasant day in February, 2000. I got outside and saw some guy standing out there with a cigarette, and I bummed one from him. After three months 'cold turkey' I was back on my filthy habit again. When people see me smoking and question why I 'do that' I tell them its because smoking makes me look glamorous and shows I am very sophisticated. PAT] ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Moving Between Access Points Date: 7 Apr 2003 19:03:07 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Now lets say the two access points overlap slightly in coverage such > that I can move between the two and always have connectivity. > As I move between the two access points coverage, will my laptop keep > losing socket states (sessions)? You shouldn't. The sockets are assigned to IP addresses, the IP address of your PC is assigned by your DHCP server and is attached to the hardware MAC address of the WiFi adapter. If your computer reregisters with the same DHCP server, the DHCP server will recognize the MAC address and it'll give you the same IP address, and the sockets shouldn't be affected. > Second question: What is the two access points are on different LANs > and hence as I move between the two access points I get different IP > addresses? If they are on the same IP network and have the same DHCP server, you win. If not, the IP address will change and you'll lose your sessions. > Third question: What products are good for scenarious like this... > especially where I may not have contiguous coverage between the two > access points (say that for a period of time as I move between floors > of the building, I am out of range) None, really. Windows XP does OK. 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: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Which Telephone Company Has The Most Expensive Toll Date: 8 Apr 2003 06:07:22 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ > Zhang Xixi wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This belongs in our 'most peculiar >> message of the day' category. I do not know if this person is real or >> not? Can you decide? Is it a late April Fool's joke? PAT] >> ------------------------------ >> Hello!everyone >> Can anyone tell me that which telephone company has the most expensive >> toll call? >> I like toll call. >> Thanks! >> Zhang xixi >> Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe John Higdon can answer this. John >> told us here a year or two ago about a telco which had some outragously >> high rate for 'non-subscribers'. People who signed up with the 'ten-ten' >> company got reasonably good rates. People who used them through hackery >> or phreaking (then got caught!) got humongous bills for hundreds of >> dollars. What was that company, John? Maybe Mr. Zhang xixi could >> benefit from your counsel since he says "I like toll call." PAT] (Someone wrote to say this fellow might be the chairman of MCI) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But his name isn't Mr. Zhang xixi is it? I > thought his name was Bernie Something ... but I suppose he could use > more toll traffic also. Maybe he could cut some deal with Mr. Zhang xixi > so that MCI would have at least one satisfied customer and Mr. Zhang xixi > would have a company he liked doing business with also. PAT] Come on Pat! The only reason for seeking the most expensive rates is so you know what to put on your expense report. If I could make 7 or 8 dollars per phone call, I would sure claim a lot more than I currently do! Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ 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 #384 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Apr 8 20:24:46 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h390Ojv15534; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 20:24:46 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 20:24:46 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304090024.h390Ojv15534@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 #385 TELECOM Digest Tue, 8 Apr 2003 20:25:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 385 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (John Higdon) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Hudson Leighton) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (temp6@thewolfden.org) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (tonypo1@cox.net) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (John R. Levine) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Joseph) Re: Help Running Phone Line Extensions (Herb Stein) The Wi-Fi Revolution (Monty Solomon) Internet Phone Calls Stymie FBI (Monty Solomon) Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? (Monty Solomon) Are They Still Blocking VOIP Ports in Panama? (Leonard Jenkins) Re: Looking For Cordless Phone With Battery Indicator (Eric Friedebach) Re: Static IP (John Higdon) Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (J Higdon) Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (S. Sobol) Meigs Field (Zed**3) 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 Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 11:42:31 -0700 In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > Yet Americans are buying CDs by the billions: blank ones. They're > creating their own music disks by downloading music from the Net and > burning their favorite tunes on the blanks, using their PCs. It's > usually illegal, but that's not stopping people. For millions of > music lovers, "cheap and easy" trumps "right and wrong." I used to buy CDs like they were going out of style. I have a library of literally thousands of CDs. I play them in my computer and make my own compilation CDs to play in my car and rip mp3s to play in my pocket player. Now that the record companies have instituted "copy protection", severely inconveniencing my ability to use these CDs that I buy in such volume, what choice is left to obtain music that I can hear in my car and away from home? > People who'd never dream of filching the latest Coldplay disk from a > store will cheerfully download its contents without paying a dime. Well, for one thing, if they filch the CD, they will discover that it is only playable in a limited number of players and cannot be used to supply music for other listening devices. In essence, the music listener gets a better product for free than he does when he pays the exhorbitant price for the CD. > According to the market research firm Ipsos-Reid, a quarter of the US > population over age 12 has downloaded music from the Net -- and over > two-thirds of them have never paid for their downloads. Perhaps if the record companies would offer something of value for the money they charge instead of trying to find ways to limit usefulness to consumers, they might sell more product. As for me, I no longer buy CDs at all. I have nothing that will play the new "copy protected" Cds. 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: About the only CDs I buy come from the Musical Heritage Society, and I do not think they have those restrictions on theirs, but I am not certain; I have never tested them. Do you (or any readers) know about MHS recordings? I also get the old time radio CDs, and those have no problems that I know about. I bought a CD from the BMG club in Indianapolis, IN recently, but the label on the CD was red and said 'RCA Victor' with the dog and the recording horn. It has been years since I saw one of those. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 13:47:16 -0500 Organization: MRRP In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > TECH & INNOVATION > Consumers need not break law to benefit > By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff, 4/7/2003 > With war and recession on everyone's mind, perhaps music would bring > some cheer. So why aren't people buying? > Recorded music sales are falling fast. Worldwide CD sales fell 10 > percent last year, and the new chief of Sony Music says they could > tumble another 15 percent in 2003. Major retailers like Best Buy Inc. > are shutting down hundreds of record stores. Part of it is that us "old farts" have finished buying replacements for all our old vinyl Beatles & Tommy Dorsey albums, and are not it the market to buy any more. -Hudson ***** There is only one hour of war news a day, the other 23 hours are just a repeat ***** http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 13:53:43 CDT Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide From: Reply-To: temp6@thewolfden.org As I generally feel your publication has integrity, I wouldn't expect you'd continue to publish media stories such as this, which make wild accusations without referencing proof, and make assumptions which only serve the industry reporting the data (ala the cigarette industry). "decreased CD sales" + "increased CDR sales" does not *only* equal "more copyright infringement" as these stories always want the reader to believe. Ignoring the fact that the record industry made sure they got a percentage of every CDR sold just to cover this, and the fact that owners have a right to transfer their favorite songs from multiple CDs onto one, CDRs have become a very common backup method. Beyond that is the mounting evidence from real artists that releasing copies of their music onto the internet for free causes an increase in their sales, including their older material, as more people discover and purchase their music. And then the obvious issue: when's the last time you heard new music among the current crap you wanted to own? Monty Solomon reported: > Subject: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide > TECH & INNOVATION Consumers need not break law to benefit > By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff, 4/7/2003 > With war and recession on everyone's mind, perhaps music would bring some > cheer. So why aren't people buying? > Recorded music sales are falling fast. Worldwide CD sales fell 10 percent > last year, and the new chief of Sony Music says they could tumble another > 15 percent in 2003. Major retailers like Best Buy Inc. are shutting down > hundreds of record stores. > Yet Americans are buying CDs by the billions: blank ones. They're creating > their own music disks by downloading music from the Net and burning their > favorite tunes on the blanks, using their PCs. It's usually illegal, but > that's not stopping people. For millions of music lovers, "cheap and easy" > trumps "right and wrong." > People who'd never dream of filching the latest Coldplay disk from a > store will cheerfully download its contents without paying a > dime. According to the market research firm Ipsos-Reid, a quarter of > the US population over age 12 has downloaded music from the Net -- and > over two-thirds of them have never paid for their downloads. > http://boston.com/business/news/2003/04/07/cd_burning.htm ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Organization: KiloDelta Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 20:46:28 GMT In article , monty@roscom.com says: > http://boston.com/business/news/2003/04/07/cd_burning.htm > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone (other than Old Fartes like > myself, and they are dying off fast) remember when 'record stores' > used to exist and they almost all had 'listening booths' where you > could take a recording you were thinking about buying into a little > private booth, sit down, use a pair of earphones and actually *listen* > to some portion of the record before you bought it? When the trend > in music went from 'LP' (long playing recordings) to tape cassettes > that feature in stores still existed a little, but by the time we > moved on to CDs it mostly had disappeared (the ability to listen, in > the store to portions of the media before buying it). My God, a young > kid who is a friend of mine came over the other day, saw my old > collection old collection of 33 1/3 recordings in their cardboard > jackets and asked me, 'how do you use these things?' That made me > feel *so old*. PAT] Actually in Borders bookstores they have listening stations for all the music they're currently hawking. It's not what it used to be, but it's as close as we're going to get right now. I still have my collection of 12" LP's and such, about 300 of them. Of course there's close to 400 CD's and 12GB of MP3's on my computer. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *What* do you play your 12" LPs on these days? It is impossible to purchase a 'record player' these days. Do they even make them any longer? PAT] ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: 8 Apr 2003 17:36:05 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone (other than Old Fartes like > myself, and they are dying off fast) remember when 'record stores' > used to exist and they almost all had 'listening booths' where you > could take a recording you were thinking about buying into a little > private booth, sit down, use a pair of earphones and actually *listen* > to some portion of the record before you bought it? They're back, sort of. The last time I was in a music store (probably the music department of Borders or B&N) they had listening stations where you could scan the barcode on just about any CD in the store and it'd play a few of the tracks on an adjacent set of headphones. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is also a lady here in Independence who deals with used books and records (now days mostly tapes and used CDs) who has a player she lets customers use in her store. But she assumes you are going to buy it after you listen. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 13:19:14 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 02:03:37 -0400, Monty Solomon wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone (other than Old Fartes like > myself, and they are dying off fast) remember when 'record stores' > used to exist and they almost all had 'listening booths' where you > could take a recording you were thinking about buying into a little > private booth, sit down, use a pair of earphones and actually *listen* > to some portion of the record before you bought it? ...] Well, many CD stores in Europe *do* let you listen to CDs before you buy them and you can listen to as many tracks as you like/have time for. Since there's no actual wear on the CD there's no problem with people listening. It all depends on your marketing. Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No wear? That was one complaint from the record stores years ago, that people would take records to listen to in the store, then drop the needle on it and scratch the records, etc. Then they did not want the record, or they would get in the bin and look for a new copy of it, leaving the scratched copy behind. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: Help Running Phone Line Extensions Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 15:09:57 -0500 Mike P wrote in message news:telecom22.380.16@telecom-digest.org: > I recently moved and am trying to wire an extension into the jack. > There is a box located in the open area with a junction box for the > phone lines. so I bought some cat3 and ran it to the spot then hooked > up the four wires (green red, black, yellow to the screw terminals to > the box, then used a punch down to hook up the rj11 jack. No dial > tone after much tinkering I still couldn't get it to work and only > managed to make it worse. If you are punching down on 66-type blocks, there is a good chance that you need a "bridge clip" to connect the left two to the right two. > I figured it was the connection so I found a jack I don't need with a > long cable. I unhooked it then ran it to the spot, then punched it > down to the jack and still no dial tone. I hooked up the jack to the > original jack and still nothing. > What should I be checking for I did make sure the colors all match and > I punched it down correctly (I ran cat5 for the network with punch > downs problem free); could there be noise; could it be the previous > owner's wiring job; I know of at least one jack upstairs that is dead, > should I call in a pro to trace the wires and do it right, or is there > a good site out there with all the info I would need to do it myself? Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 18:42:06 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Wi-Fi Revolution Issue 11.05 UNWIRED - A Wired Special Report - May 2003 The Wi-Fi Revolution The wireless Internet has arrived -- and now the sky's the limit. By Chris Anderson We stand at the brink of a transformation. It is a moment that echoes the birth of the Internet in the mid-'70s, when the radical pioneers of computer networking -- machines talking to each other! -- hijacked the telephone system with their first digital hellos. Or that jaw-dropper a decade later when the FCC official whose job it was to track the growth of communications networks suddenly realized that his neat tabulation of local and long-distance had been made moot by the unforeseen rise of local-area networks: an unregulated, unmonitored, uncontrollable phenomenon of the upstart PC industry that would soon shake the telecom world. Or the arrival of the Web browser, which blew millions of minds, making a mouseclick feel like teleportation. This time it is not wires but the air between them that is being transformed. Over the past three years, a wireless technology has arrived with the power to totally change the game. It's a way to give the Internet wing without licenses, permission, or even fees. In a world where we've been conditioned to wait for cell phone carriers to bring us the future, this anarchy of the airwaves is as liberating as the first PCs -- a street-level uprising with the power to change everything. The technology is Wi-Fi, and it's the first blast in a revolution, called open spectrum, that will drive the Internet to the next stage in its colonization of the globe. Like the Net itself, Wi-Fi was confined to technical circles for years before exploding into the mainstream, seemingly out of nowhere. Over the past two years, it's become one of the fastest-growing electronics technologies in history. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.05/unwired/wifirevolution.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 18:46:19 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Internet Phone Calls Stymie FBI NEW YORK -- Wiretapping takes on a whole new meaning now that phone calls are being made over the Internet, posing legal and technical hurdles for the FBI as it seeks to prevent the emerging services from becoming a safe haven for criminals and terrorists. The FBI wants regulators to affirm that such services fall under a 1994 law requiring phone companies to build in surveillance capabilities. It is also pushing the industry to create technical standards to make wiretapping easier and cheaper. But privacy advocates fear that because online eavesdropping technology is crude, tapping into the data stream for voice means qgetting more than what a court ordered -- including possibly e-mail and other digital communications. Service operators also question who should pay. ... http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,58350,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 18:52:34 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? http://www.politechbot.com/p-04623.html Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 00:17:12 -0400 From: Declan McCullagh Subject: FC: Can copy protected CDs hurt artists by limiting radio play? Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 11:48:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall To: Declan McCullagh Subject: unanticipated effects of copy protection... Message-ID: [I thought this was interesting ... Radio stations that are 100% digital can't play certain copy-protected CDs because the copy-protection doesn't allow them to rip the tracks on to their station's system. Copy-protection is therfore directly responsible for the lack of airtime in this market by the artists who choose to copy-protect their CDs! It's safe to say that this isn't the last of such effects ... -joe] Copy protected CDs: artists can be the losers http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/04/03/1048962867084.html <...> This radio station, which recently received its regular bag of freebies from EMI, finds that it is unable to play any of the CDs it received -- the copy protection on the discs gets in the way. <...> The station in question has no standalone CD players, just desktop PCs (all running Windows 2000) and a couple of old Denon CD Cart players. "The CD tries to install some files to allow the PC to play the CD but my boss won't authorise the installation of these files because he has no technical info on the software," wrote the gentleman who let us know about this. "And if we can't transfer the CD tracks to our digital playout system the CD ain't going to get any airplay at all!" <...> Joe PS: There's also a discussion about this on slashdot... http://www.shorl.com/fypofisistefri [yro.slashdot.org] Joseph Lorenzo Hall jhall@astro.berkeley.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH evening reception in New York City at 7 pm, April 1, 2003 at CFP: http://www.politechbot.com/events/cfp2003/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ From: brasilnut@hotmail.com (Leonard Jenkins) Subject: Are They Still Blocking VOIP Ports in Panama? Date: 8 Apr 2003 14:28:23 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Previously - approx November 2002 - the government of Panama, after being lobbied by Cable&Wireless (the TELCO) - started blocking 24 unique ports used for VOIP applications. I read an article that the government has descinded the order. But am not able to find any online references that the blocking has stopped. Please advise. Thanx in advance ! ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Re: Looking For Cordless Phone With Battery Indicator Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 17:40:21 -0500 Organization: Purity Of Essence/Plant Operational Error Reply-To: Eric Friedebach Gregory Lee wrote in message news:telecom22.382.10@telecom-digest.org: > I am looking for a cordless phone that has a battery indicator on > the LCD display, which tells me when the battery is running low, or > better yet, exactly how many minutes left before the battery dies. > Does anyone have any recommendations? Take a look at the Panasonic KX-TG2650N. It has a three bar level indicator on the LCD. This phone has more features than I would ever use, but I bought it for it's small size. You can find more info at: http://www.epinions.com/elec-Comm-Cordless_Phones-All-Panasonic_KX-TG2 650N Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Static IP Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 11:21:23 -0700 In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > On Sun, 6 Apr 2003 15:24:48 -0400 (EDT), John Higdon wrote: >> Rejecting connections from hosts that merely have no reverse DNS is not >> a good idea. If you handled any volume, you would reject quite a bit of >> legitimate stuff in all likelihood. A better practice is to reject hosts >> where the forward and reverse DNS don't agree. > I'm not sure I understand exactly what you mean here. Could you give > us an example? When a host connects here, a reverse lookup is performed at the same time a check is done for appearance on any of five RBLs. Even if the IP has no PTR record (associated canonical name), email will still be accepted provided the address is clean on the RBLs and all the other requirements (valid HELO syntax, valid recipient, routable sender) are met. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 11:31:38 -0700 In article : > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I should have said for 37 cents via the > Post Office you are guarenteed (well, mostly) that the correspondence > will be dropped in the appropriate receptacle at the premises of the > recipient (or the place where the post office thinks he resides at. PAT] That's a generous assumption. My weekly exercise consists of taking my neighbors' mail that has been erroneously dropped into my mailbox and delivering it to them. I can only assume that if I have making these delivery rounds that my mail has ended up in some of their boxes as well. About once every three or four months, I have to report to Amazon that I did not receive an order and a replacement is sent. Of all the delivery methods, the USPS is the only carrier that loses shipments. No shipment via UPS, Airborne, FedEx, or any other private carrier has ever failed to have been delivered to 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: I never have that problem, but it may because the postmaster here in Independence lives in the large house on the corner of my block. Prior to being postmaster, he was just a regular mail carrier here, and the only one I have ever known who delivered his own mail to his house each day (when he was a carrier on a route). I guess that encourages him to get it right! PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 20:23:44 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Mark Crispin (MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU): >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, in a perfect world, you >> do. Email should be like the post office in that respect; address a >> letter, and the mail carrier drops it at the address given. You should >> have reminded the loudmouth that if he was willing to pay 37 cents for >> each piece of email, and be part of some adminstrative committee to >> oversee the distribution of that 37 cents, he would get his 'guarenteed >> delivery.' > Postal mail does *not* offer guaranteed delivery. Indeed. In fact, with some of the carriers who have served my Northeast Ohio home out of the Mentor post office, *I* personally have been lucky to receive mail at all. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The only time I ever have trouble is on the day the substitute carrier is on the route. Then sometimes I get mail for my mother (who moved to Penn Manor a few blocks away about nine months ago). Last week when the substitute was on the route, I actually got a piece of mail for the postmaster. (It was in his personal name and personal address next door.) But it was not really the substitute's fault. Both he and I had gotten our monthly invoices sent from the cable company; the glue on the envelope flap (my bill) got stuck to the envelope below me (postmaster's at his home). I did not take it to him or otherwise mark it up. I held it aside until the regular guy was here the next day and let him take it back, or drop it in the box next door. No need to snitch on the substitute guy. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gc@radix.net (Zed**3) Subject: Meigs Field Date: 8 Apr 2003 22:33:18 GMT Organization: Spontaneous In article , Jack wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So what else is old news? The Chicago >> Police Department has maintained a 'red squad' for forty years. And >> they do not hesitate to afford the victims of their spying all the >> 'street punishment' they can. I still find it hard to believe that I >> used to live in that town, and try to be a good citizen there for >> many, many years. > I'll bet you haven't heard the latest. Apparently "his highness", > Mayor Daley, decided to pull his own version of the middle-of-the- > night construction of the Berlin Wall, except in this case it was the > middle of the night DEstruction of Meigs Field, with no advance notice > to anyone (including the pilots that had planes parked there, that may > now have no way to have them removed without having the aircraft > partially disassembled and moved to another field). To give you an > idea of Daley's utter disregard for the public, consider this comment > as reported in the Chicago Sun-Times: I am saddened to hear this. I have flown in to Meigs field a couple of times many years ago. I don't know of any other city that has an airport with such convenient access to downtown. This is not a big surprise, though. Some politicians have been trying to get rid of it for years, although I don't know why. Who, with money to give to politicians, would benefit? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, 'convenient access' to the public is not where things are at. Power for politicians, and getting things over on other politicians is where things are at. Daley did think that the 'war on terrorism' was a great excuse to take the action he did, and he used it to cover his tracks with the business community downtown who were ***very angry**** about his actions destroying Meigs Field. I guess his advisors just told him, 'claim you had to do it to protect the city against a terrorist attack'. Daley thought that sounded good, and so that became the line he used and is using. 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 #385 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Apr 8 23:23:43 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h393Nhe17137; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 23:23:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 23:23:43 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304090323.h393Nhe17137@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 #386 TELECOM Digest Tue, 8 Apr 2003 23:22:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 386 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson HeadsUp Headlines for the Period Ending April 8, 2003 (Judith Oppenheimer) Surveillance Nation (Monty Solomon) Court Strikes Down AT&T 'Slamming' Fine (Monty Solomon) Better Mac Living Through Bluetooth (Monty Solomon) Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded (Robert Bonomi) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (John Higdon) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Mike Van Pelt) Re: Meigs Field (Steven J. Sobol) Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP (Steven 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Judith Oppenheimer Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 6:26 PM Subject: HeadsUp Headlines for the Period Ending April 8, 2003 ICB HeadsUp Headlines for the period ending April 8, 2003 from http://ICBTollFreeNews.com - Covering the Political, Legal and Marketing Arenas of 800, ENUM and Dot Com. ______________________________________________ ________________________sponsor _______________ "Raise hundreds, even thousands of dollars every month . . . and save people money on their long distance service!" http://PhoneBillFundRaising.com generates recurring monthly donations to your School, Religious, Civic and Business organizations - an annuity that can raise more and more funds each month, year after year! Risk Free: no fee, contract, obligation or hidden costs. CLICK HERE: http://PhoneBillFundRaising.com ______________________________________________ ______________________________________________ ITU ADDRESSES ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH NON-GEO COUNTRY CODES IN ENUM This [draft] Supplement provides an overview of the various issues that need to be addressed when including the portion of the E.164 numbering plan corresponding to non-geographic country codes (in particular here, Global Freephone) within the Domain Name System. Its issues are identical to those facing the U.S. ENUM Forum as it proposes to include toll free numbers in the U.S. implementation of ENUM. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article_free.cfm?articleId=5856 WHO'S WHO AND WHAT'S WHAT IN THE NANP This is a good compilation in the form of an ENUM contribution to forward discussion of nongeographic numbers in U.S. ENUM. Contained herein are YR 2002 NANP country contacts, contact info from the ITU Global Directory as of 3/31/2003, and tallies of NPAs in service as of 2/24/2003. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article_free.cfm?articleId=5855 GENERAL SERVICES ADM RELEASES .GOV DOMAIN RULES The new rules are posted in the Federal Register. The GSA said it "reserves the right to charge for domain names in order to recover cost of operations." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article_free.cfm?articleId=5854 AT&T SUES OVER 'FAT-FINGER' DIALING AP reports that AT&T has filed a lawsuit contending that Sprint Corp. and two other rival telephone companies are stealing calls from AT&T toll-free operators through what is called a ``fat-finger dialing'' scheme. Ironically, AT&T still holds 1-800 CALL MCI which answers "AT&T". CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article_free.cfm?articleId=5853 ICANN POLICY COMMITTEE TO ADDRESS ENUM ENUM was mentioned at ICANN's press conference on March 27th, 2003, as one the issues to be addressed by ICANN's new "President's Standing Committee on Privacy," ie the ICANN Board's new privacy panel. (Did we blink and miss the APA?) CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article_free.cfm?articleId=5850 FCC'S 3RD ORDER AND 2ND NPRM ON SLAMMING AND RESP ORG CHANGES "It would not appear that an entity, when providing RespOrg service, is functioning as a ... carrier as contemplated by our carrier change rules." And that's very good news for the Toll Free Industry. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article_free.cfm?articleId=5852 ______________________________________________ ________________________sponsor _______________ 4.5˘ STANDALONE TOLL FREE SERVICE No/Low Monthly Fee, No Set-up Fee, No Contract Free Toll Free Numbers, Free Vanity Numbers 6 Second Billing, No Credit Card Needed! CLICK HERE: http://WhoSells800.com ______________________________________________ ______________________________________________ WIPO COULD WIPE OUT YOUR DOMAIN NAME The World Intellectual Property Organization wants to expand what is known as the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) to include country names and government organizations. If the proposal becomes policy, anyone who owns a domain name that includes a country name or acronym of a government organization could be forced to give up the domain name. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article_free.cfm?articleId=5851 .EU AWARDED TO BRUSSELS-BASED CONSORTIUM European Commission has awarded management of the new .eu top-level Internet domain to Brussels-based consortium EURid. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article_free.cfm?articleId=5849 DoC RE-AWARDS IANA TO ICANN DESPITE VERY VIABLE ALTERNATIVES BUT "If and when ICANN is broken up into its component functions a year or three from now, this moment will be seen as the turning point in undermining the argument that ICANN is essential, and that there's nothing or no one to replace it. (Questions about this decision may also figure in Congressional hearings, although no hearings are likely until after the present hostilities have passed....)" CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article_free.cfm?articleId=5848 COURT DISMISSES FALWELL DOMAIN NAME CASE Falwell had claimed Illinois resident Gary Cohn violated trademarks by using the Jerryfalwell.com and Jerryfallwell.com to parody the televangelist. Last June a UDRP panel also rejected Falwell's claim, saying the sites were "a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name." Falwell filed the complaint in federal district court a few weeks later. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article_free.cfm?articleId=5846 SO WHAT THE HELL WAS GOING ON, AND WHY? Internet battle lines were drawn at an extraordinary meeting in Geneva. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article_free.cfm?articleId=5845 ______________________________________________ ______________________________________________ EVERY 3.6 SECONDS SOMEONE DIES FROM HUNGER http://www.hungersite.com/ ______________________________________________ ______________________________________________ Subscribe and unsubscribe to this MailList at http://ICBTollFreeNews.com. Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. All rights reserved. ______________________________________________ ______________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 19:17:04 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Surveillance Nation Webcams, tracking devices, and interlinked databases are leading to the elimination of unmonitored public space. Are we prepared for the consequences of the intelligence-gathering network we're unintentionally building? By Dan Farmer and Charles C. Mann April 2003 Route 9 is an old two-lane highway that cuts across Massachusetts from Boston in the east to Pittsfield in the west. Near the small city of Northampton, the highway crosses the wide Connecticut River. The Calvin Coolidge Memorial Bridge, named after the president who once served as Northampton's mayor, is a major regional traffic link. When the state began a long-delayed and still-ongoing reconstruction of the bridge in the summer of 2001, traffic jams stretched for kilometers into the bucolic New England countryside. In a project aimed at alleviating drivers' frustration, the University of Massachusetts Transportation Center, located in nearby Amherst, installed eight shoe-size digital surveillance cameras along the roads leading to the bridge. Six are mounted on utility poles and the roofs of local businesses. Made by Axis Communications in Sweden, they are connected to dial-up modems and transmit images of the roadway before them to a Web page, which commuters can check for congestion before tackling the road. According to Dan Dulaski, the system's technical manager, running the entire webcam system-power, phone, and Internet fees-costs just $600 a month. The other two cameras in the Coolidge Bridge project are a little less routine. Built by Computer Recognition Systems in Wokingham, England, with high-quality lenses and fast shutter speeds (1/10,000 second), they are designed to photograph every car and truck that passes by. Located eight kilometers apart, at the ends of the zone of maximum traffic congestion, the two cameras send vehicle images to attached computers, which use special character-recognition software to decipher vehicle license plates. The license data go to a server at the company's U.S. office in Cambridge, MA, about 130 kilometers away. As each license plate passes the second camera, the server ascertains the time difference between the two readings. The average of the travel durations of all successfully matched vehicles defines the likely travel time for crossing the bridge at any given moment, and that information is posted on the traffic watch Web page. To local residents, the traffic data are helpful, even vital: police use the information to plan emergency routes. But as the computers calculate traffic flow, they are also making a record of all cars that cross the bridge-when they do so, their average speed, and (depending on lighting and weather conditions) how many people are in each car. ... http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/farmer0403.asp [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have a really neat new webcam program here which I enjoy a lot. webcamwatcher.com lets you download software which acts like a 'scanner radio' of web cams. They have a built in list of more than two *thousand* cams (which is ridiculous in my opinion) and you are free to add any more cams on your own that you find or know about. If you put it in 'automatic scan mode' then anytime anywhere, one of the two thousand cams takes a new picture, you get it displayed on your screen, for anywhere from five seconds down to one second or less, depending on the other cameras out there in the queue waiting to show off their pictures. Some of the cam shots are absolutely breathtaking, such as the continuously updating shots of the Russia/Finland border or the forest near the AlCan highway in British Columbia or the four cams showing views of Times Square in New York City all the time, or the other cam high atop an office building looking out a window at 545 Fifth Avenue. A couple thousand cams showing beautiful pics all the time. Even the webcam showing Mike Sandman's baby parakeets in their nest is interesting to watch and my own webcam showing weather conditions in Independence. (Those last two, I added on to the repertoire myself). And most people have absolutely *no idea* they are on cam. It amounts to a sort of 'candid camera' on real life. Its like everyone on the net has access to everyone else's web cam and can store and save all the images forever if desired. On webcam watcher you own the software and in addition to pictures from the Sheraton Fallsview Hotel at Niagara Falls, NY there are about a hundred or so 'adult' cams running all the time in people's homes, bedrooms, bathrooms, etc. They of course *know* the cams are there, and they glory in having their acts on public display. On the other hand, CameraWare lets you *license* the use of their 'viewer' software, but they -- camerware.com -- operate the 'central exchange' for viewing, etc. Anyone is free to pipe in pictures to them on a continual basis with no charge. Just get their software, install it and start sending pics all the time to the exchange. Where CameraWare makes their money is by charging for a license to *view* what others are doing through the exchange. And I guess it is profitable. On a typical night there are hundreds of 'menu items' in the directory of people who like being watched. Actually CameraWare is outrageous and quite funny at times. But with webcamwatcher.com there is a limited edition which is totally free. The 'deluxe' version which comes equipped with more than two thousand cams around the world costs around $39 I think. You add cams to it wherever you find them, and you own it all. Monty's article today quite accurately reflects where things are at. Always smile, because you never know when you will be on Candid Camera these days. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 19:27:59 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Court Strikes Down AT&T 'Slamming' Fine By DAVID HO Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal appeals court on Tuesday struck down a government fine against AT&T Corp., which had been accused of switching consumers' long-distance service without permission. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the Federal Communications Commission overstepped its authority when it fined AT&T $80,000 for two cases of "slamming," the illegal practice of switching telephone service providers without consent. In December 2000, the FCC fined AT&T $520,000 for 11 violations of federal slamming rules, the court said. The company paid the fine, but contested two incidents where consumers complained that they didn't know who had authorized a change of their phone service. The appeals court agreed with AT&T's position that the company had done enough to verify the identities of the long-distance subscribers before switching service. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33768373 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 19:31:04 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Better Mac Living Through Bluetooth Arik Hesseldahl, 04.08.03, 10:00 AM ET NEW YORK - If you've ever been curious about the wireless technology known as Bluetooth, now is about as good a time as ever to try it out. But the pertinent question surrounding Bluetooth has always been "What can I use it for?" For the last year or so, the stock answer has been wireless hands-free kits for mobile phones and, to a lesser degree, wireless hot-syncs between a PDA and a PC. Now a Swedish software developer named John Salling has come up with a truly innovative combination that pairs a Bluetooth-enabled mobile phone with an Apple (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ) Macintosh computer. Salling Software's Sony Ericsson ClickerThe program is called Sony Ericsson Clicker and it allows a particular mobile phone produced by the joint venture between Sony (nyse: SNE - news - people ) and Ericsson (nasdaq: ERICY - news - people ) to be used to control a Mac like a remote control. ... http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/08/cx_ah_0408tentech.html ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded Organization: Not Much From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 00:40:02 GMT In article , Jack Hamilton wrote: > John Higdon wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let that be a lesson to you to *tape- >> record* phone calls with customer service reps as needed, especially >> the dingbat ones. Of course you have to notify anyone you are tape >> recording, and typically that will put them on their best behavior as >> well. > Wouldn't their recording which says "calls may be recorded for quality > purposes" cover that? "May" sounds like it's giving permission. > Jack Hamilton > jfh@acm.org > If men are to wait for liberty until they become wise and good in slavery, > they may indeed wait for ever. > - Lord MacCaulay > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, 'may' does sound like permission > is given, but *be certain to get that recorded statement on the start > of your own recording so they cannot later claim they did not give > permission. Even if you take it as "we will (possibly) record this call", it is likely sufficient. To wit: If one party has 'served notice' of intent to (possibly) record the conversation, then _no_one_ on *that* side of the conversation has any "expectation of privacy". They _already_ know (or *should* know) that the call is subject to being recorded. > And 'quality purposes' sounds to me like you are trying > to assure the customer service rep has been properly trained. You want > to know one way to *absolutely assure* that a customer service rep > gets very annoyed at you? When they first answer the call, you should > ask, 'may I please speak to someone who has been trained to answer the > phones and deal with customers?' Say it politely, and always thank them > in advance for calling someone 'like that' to the phone. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:48:48 -0700 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *What* do you play your 12" LPs on > these days? It is impossible to purchase a 'record player' these days. > Do they even make them any longer? PAT] I am STILL transferring vinyl to CDs and the instrument serving that purpose is the last turntable I ever bought back in the late seventies or early eighties (I don't really remember): Technics SL-10 fitted with a Shure V-15 Type V. Unfortunately, this linear tracking unit does not play 78 rpm records. I unloaded my Technics SP-10 MKII (with an SME tone arm) years ago. It WOULD play seventy-eights! During a dubbing session, I feel like a museum curator. If the record companies think that the have me over a barrel, dictating copy-protection and all the other restrictions on music sales today, they have another thing coming. I suspect that goes for a lot of people. The technology is in the hands of the people. The record industry can go with the flow or it can be swept away as irrelevant. It matters not to me which. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide From: mvp@web1.calweb.com (Mike Van Pelt) Date: 09 Apr 2003 01:07:36 GMT Organization: CalWeb Internet Services, Inc. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *What* do you play your 12" LPs on > these days? It is impossible to purchase a 'record player' these days. > Do they even make them any longer? PAT] I just ran into one in Fry's Electronics last weekend. It was one of those silly "retro-looking radio" things with a CD drive on top. But in addition, the whole top would open, and inside, was an record player. I sure didn't expect to see that. The only meaningful memorial, the only one that will really count, will be when there are streets, tunnels, living and working quarters named after each of those astronauts--and those who will yet die in this effort--in permanently occupied stations on the moon, on Mars, in the asteroid belt, and beyond. -- Bruce F. Webster ------------------------------ From: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: Meigs Field Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 01:04:18 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC From Zed**3 (gc@radix.net): > I am saddened to hear this. I have flown in to Meigs field a couple > of times many years ago. I don't know of any other city that has > an airport with such convenient access to downtown. Cleveland, Ohio; Burke Lakefront Airport... which *is* downtown, as opposed to the big 'port, Hopkins International, about twenty minutes southwest. Owned and operated by the city, and used by private and small commercial flights. But only because the politicians here have other fish to fry. :) Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ From: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 01:06:54 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC From Steven J Sobol (sjsobol@JustThe.net): > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The only time I ever have trouble is on > the day the substitute carrier is on the route. In all fairness, I have not ever had trouble with any other Cleveland-area post office, and not all of the people who work at Mentor are idiots (just a select few). However, I am tired of complaining and getting ignored. Shall we talk about the Sprint PCS bill that arrived three weeks late, a week *after* the due date? Wasn't Sprint's fault, either. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ 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 #386 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr 9 23:06:45 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3A36jA22877; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 23:06:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 23:06:45 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304100306.h3A36jA22877@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 #387 TELECOM Digest Wed, 9 Apr 2003 23:07:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 387 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (tonypo1@cox.net) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Hudson Leighton) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (John Higdon) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Dave Garland) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Carl Navarro) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (jt) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Nathan Tenny) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Slave Sarah) Disconnects on Wi-Fi and Cell Phones (Monty Solomon) Silicon Valley Hikes Wireless Frontier (Monty Solomon) 'Step Back' for Wireless ID Tech? (Monty Solomon) FCC Inadvertantly Reveals Details Of HP's Next iPaq (Monty Solomon) Nokia 3650 Camera Phone for AT&T Wireless GSM/GPRS Network (Monty Solomon) TiVo Upgrade Shares PC Content (Monty Solomon) Gear Makers Team for Wireless Broadband (Monty Solomon) FCC's Powell Defends Media Ownership Index (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: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Organization: KiloDelta Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 02:31:56 GMT In article , tonypo1@cox.net says: > In article , monty@roscom.com > says: >> http://boston.com/business/news/2003/04/07/cd_burning.htm >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone (other than Old Fartes like >> myself, and they are dying off fast) remember when 'record stores' >> used to exist and they almost all had 'listening booths' where you >> could take a recording you were thinking about buying into a little >> private booth, sit down, use a pair of earphones and actually *listen* >> to some portion of the record before you bought it? When the trend >> in music went from 'LP' (long playing recordings) to tape cassettes >> that feature in stores still existed a little, but by the time we >> moved on to CDs it mostly had disappeared (the ability to listen, in >> the store to portions of the media before buying it). My God, a young >> kid who is a friend of mine came over the other day, saw my old >> collection old collection of 33 1/3 recordings in their cardboard >> jackets and asked me, 'how do you use these things?' That made me >> feel *so old*. PAT] > Actually in Borders bookstores they have listening stations for all > the music they're currently hawking. It's not what it used to be, but > it's as close as we're going to get right now. > I still have my collection of 12" LP's and such, about 300 of them. Of > course there's close to 400 CD's and 12GB of MP3's on my computer. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *What* do you play your 12" LPs on > these days? It is impossible to purchase a 'record player' these days. > Do they even make them any longer? PAT] I've got an old Technics SLP-92 that still works though I use it less and less. They're not called record players any longer, they're called turntables. I believe Technics or some such still makes the SLB series which are studio quality direct drive turntables but they're hideousely expensive. Tony ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 22:11:26 -0500 Organization: MRRP > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *What* do you play your 12" LPs on > these days? It is impossible to purchase a 'record player' these days. > Do they even make them any longer? PAT] Full Compass a professional audio equipment seller, http://www.fullcompass.com has turntables in their catalog, there are 10+ models rangeing from $300 to $700, the $270 needles is what blows my mind, although they do have some $45 needles. -Hudson ***** There is only one hour of war news a day, the other 23 hours are just a repeat ***** http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 20:34:13 -0700 In article , > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About the only CDs I buy come from the > Musical Heritage Society, and I do not think they have those restrictions > on theirs, but I am not certain; I have never tested them. Do you (or > any readers) know about MHS recordings? I also get the old time radio > CDs, and those have no problems that I know about. I bought a CD from > the BMG club in Indianapolis, IN recently, but the label on the CD was > red and said 'RCA Victor' with the dog and the recording horn. It has > been years since I saw one of those. PAT] Independently-produced CDs in all likelihood will not be copy-protected. This seems to be an obsession with the RIAA members. As such, I still buy CDs produced from independent record companies, such as MHS. So far, few CDs are actually copy-protected. But since the copyright industry has indicated an unwillingness to advertise a CD's crippled status on the case, I'm not taking any chances. Not buying any more RIAA CDs is the best insurance when it comes to avoiding copy-protected CDs. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 01:03:38 -0500 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when PAT wrote: > *What* do you play your 12" LPs on these days? It is impossible > to purchase a 'record player' these days. Do they even make them > any longer? Oh, they're still around, just not as many of them. There's even a cult of vinyl records, still being produced for some bands. Gemini and Numark make turntables for the DJ market, Denon, Audio-Technica, Technics, and Sony still make them for the audio market. Mass-market retailers don't carry many (although Best Buy apparently does, at least a Sony is available on their website), you need to seek them at specialist audio stores or from mail/'net dealers. Or at garage sales. Now, 78 might be a little harder. [Old Farte's Note: Do any of my brethren remember the contraption called a 'wire recorder'? Something like its later relative a 'tape recorder', the wire recorder had a take up spool on one side and on the other you put a spool of thin wire which went through the head, played the audio sounds recorded on it, then it all collected on the 'take up reel' on the other side. I have not seen one in so many years ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 02:37:07 -0400 Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America On Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:48:48 -0700, Old Farte noted in response to John Higdon by writing: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *What* do you play your 12" LPs on >> these days? It is impossible to purchase a 'record player' these days. >> Do they even make them any longer? PAT] > I am STILL transferring vinyl to CDs and the instrument serving that > purpose is the last turntable I ever bought back in the late seventies > or early eighties (I don't really remember): Technics SL-10 fitted with > a Shure V-15 Type V. Unfortunately, this linear tracking unit does not > play 78 rpm records. I unloaded my Technics SP-10 MKII (with an SME tone > arm) years ago. It WOULD play seventy-eights! I, likewise, own a Technics linear turntable :-). eBay has been instrumental in getting me an AM150 stereo mixer to replace my Rat Shack one, and TWO Califone portable turntables that play 78 RPM records. A couple of years ago, I presented a computer to my mother for her birthday with 4352 MP3's from 1910-1959. The second Califone is so that she can transfer her 78's to MP3's. One of my early childhood memories was to take a trip to Hudson-Ross on, maybe Wabash St. in Chicago to hear and buy records. A couple of our phonographs and my "portable" TV came from there. (That would be the 15" B&W in a metal case RCA model that came in either a red or blue case ... mine was red. When we moved to Ohio, it got exactly TWO channels, not the 5 it did in the city. The 6 year old boy was not happy. Carl Navarro [Old Farte's Note: Around 1952-53 (I do not remember for sure) I went to visit my uncle and aunt who lived in Coffeyville, Kansas. Coffeyville and Independence had ONE television station between them in those days, somewhere in the middle of the county. Channel 4 was mainly for weather information, and for hours on end, the camera would stay focused on a few dials with the temperature and barometer on display. Channel 4 is still around in Coffeyville, I understand, and is a LPTV thing now. There was no cable or satellite television in those days of course, nor FM radio. AM radio was around, with KIND in Independence and KGGF in Coffeyville on the air, but not much else in the daytime. At night in the summer of course, the radio was full of far away stations. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jt Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 08:39:53 -0400 Organization: WorldCom Canada Ltd. News Reader Service Old Farte noted in response to Monty Solomon by writing in message news:telecom22.383.13@telecom-digest.org: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone (other than Old Fartes like > myself, and they are dying off fast) remember when 'record stores' > used to exist and they almost all had 'listening booths' where you > could take a recording you were thinking about buying into a little > private booth, sit down, use a pair of earphones and actually *listen* > to some portion of the record before you bought it? When the trend > in music went from 'LP' (long playing recordings) to tape cassettes > that feature in stores still existed a little, but by the time we > moved on to CDs it mostly had disappeared (the ability to listen, in > the store to portions of the media before buying it). My God, a young > kid who is a friend of mine came over the other day, saw my old > collection old collection of 33 1/3 recordings in their cardboard > jackets and asked me, 'how do you use these things?' That made me > feel *so old*. PAT] Go visit the UK, Pat. They have those things (for CD's) in all the big music stores -- a bunch of poles or stands or some other form of station -- you get a sample CD and have a listen. But they way the girls dress over there might make you feel old - or young, who knows ... ------------------------------ From: n_t_e_nn_y_@q_ual_c_o_m_m_.c_o_m (Nathan Tenny) Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: 9 Apr 2003 09:56:28 -0700 Organization: QUALCOMM Incorporated Reply-To: ntenny+r@qualcomm.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *What* do you play your 12" LPs on > these days? It is impossible to purchase a 'record player' these days. > Do they even make them any longer? PAT] They sure do, but mostly as DJ items rather than home electronics. You've reminded me that one of these days I need to get around to buying one. These days they're called "turntables", and googling for 'em under that name will find sources aplenty. NT Nathan Tenny | Space is where your ass is. Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA | -William S. Burroughs | [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was a major audio components company north of Chicago (in Evanston, IL) for many, many years called 'Shure' and I think they made needles for record players. I wonder if they are still around? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Slave Sarah Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 19:31:47 -0400 Organization: Bell Sympatico Throw in that the Government of Canada charges a duty on every blank CD-R and CD-RW sold to compensate artists royalties, whether or not the disk is used for audio, MP3, or simply backing up your hard drive. rom the consumer's point of view, by paing the royalty, the music industry can't complain what I then stick onto my disk. Chris ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 00:33:04 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Disconnects on Wi-Fi and Cell Phones By Ben Charny Staff Writer, CNET News.com Martin Cooper doesn't get any special treatment from carriers just because he invented the now ubiquitous cell phone three decades ago. Even his Motorola V-60 from Verizon Wireless cuts off callers in midsentence, he said. So count Cooper among the tens of millions of wireless dialers wondering why carriers are pushing new features like text messaging, when what they ought to do is make sure that calls go through all the time. As he puts it: "We have not yet achieved the original dream" of being able to use a phone anywhere and call anyone, anywhere. Cooper -- now chairman and CEO of wireless technology company ArrayComm -- also believes that time is fleeting for cellular technology, which might have run its course. The industry needs to find a better way of ferrying calls over the air, he said. He spoke about these and other topics with CNET News.com on the 30th anniversary of the first-ever cell phone call. http://news.com.com/2008-1082-995667.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 00:35:13 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Silicon Valley Hikes Wireless Frontier By STEVE LOHR Eric Engstrom spent seven lucrative and exhilarating years at Microsoft -- working on big projects, making a name for himself, even testifying on the company's behalf in its federal antitrust trial. But in 2000, Mr. Engstrom walked away from Microsoft and the personal computer industry, which seemed to have settled into maturity. He founded his own company and set off to pursue innovation and riches elsewhere. "The opportunities are out on the edge, and the edge of software development has got to be the phone," said Mr. Engstrom, 38, the chief executive of Wildseed, a start-up in Kirkland, Wash. Mr. Engstrom personifies the migration of talent, excitement and investment in computing toward the wireless business as cellphones become more like computers and hand-held computers morph into phones. To veterans of past cycles in technology, the wireless world today has the look of the personal computer business in the late 1970's or the Internet in the early 1990's. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/07/technology/07CELL.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 00:38:00 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 'Step Back' for Wireless ID Tech? By Elisa Batista In a move that may have brought unwanted attention to a burgeoning industry, Italian clothing maker Benetton Group said it has not embedded any radio frequency identification tags in any of its clothing. The group was responding to recent press reports that the company planned to incorporate radio frequency identification tags -- wireless transmitters the size of a grain of sand -- into the labels of its clothes to track garments worldwide. While the company did not rule out using the or RFID tags at some point for inventory purposes, its statement late last week raised eyebrows in the industry. In the release, the company seemed to go out of its way to assure customers that the tags were not in any of its clothing, including the Sisley brand. http://www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,58385,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 13:50:26 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Inadvertantly Reveals Details Of HP's Next iPaq - Apr 9, 2003 10:00 AM (Forbes.com) - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33779417 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 13:54:17 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nokia 3650 Camera Phone for AT&T Wireless GSM/GPRS Network - Nokia 3650 Phone and AT&T Wireless' GSM/GPRS Network Brings the Power Of Imaging to Consumers - IRVING, Texas, April 9 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- AT&T Wireless (NYSE: AWE) and Nokia (NYSE: NOK) today announced the immediate availability of the Nokia 3650 imaging phone, which can now be purchased from the AT&T Wireless web site (www.attws.com). Taking advantage of AT&T Wireless' advanced GSM/GPRS network, the Nokia 3650 imaging phone allows customers to enjoy next generation services such as the capturing and sharing of images and video clips via multimedia messaging (MMS), over-the-air application downloads and the ability to access real-time streaming video and audio content. AT&T Wireless subscribers can also enjoy the wide range of exclusive mMode content delivered to the large color screen of the Nokia 3650 phone. With an integrated VGA-resolution camera, a large 176x208 pixel color display, and the ability to store over 1,000 standard VGA basic resolution photos with the in-box 16MB memory card, the Nokia 3650 phone offers users the latest and most powerful wireless features available. The Nokia 3650 phone also incorporates a unique video recorder application for capturing video clips and a RealOne Player for real-time streaming of audio and video content. MMS functionality allows users to send video clips, images, text and sound to another compatible MMS-enabled mMode phone or to an e-mail address. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33780001 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 00:20:14 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Upgrade Shares PC Content By John G. Spooner Staff Writer, CNET News.com TiVo wants to be the hub for spreading digital content throughout the home. The San Jose, Calif., company on Tuesday made available a new software upgrade that will allow its TiVo Series2 digital video recorders to tap content stored on a home PC. As previously reported, the Home Media Option software will let the TiVo boxes access and distribute content such as music files or digital photos stored on the hard drives of Apple Computer's Macs or on Windows PCs, streaming them to a television set or stereo via wired or wireless home networks. The $99 upgrade, available from TiVo's Web site, will also accommodate online scheduling, allowing Series2 owners to set their machines to record programs via the site, the company said. The Home Media Option highlights manufacturers' growing interest in the market for sharing content among devices in the home. Products such as the Microsoft Media Center PC, sold by companies such as Hewlett-Packard, position the PC at the center of the home network. Media Center PC software -- a special version of Microsoft's Windows XP operating system -- adds a second interface for accessing content such as music, photos and DVDs. Media PC owners can also watch TV and record programs to the PC's hard drive using digital video-recording features similar to TiVo's. Meanwhile, Intel and Microsoft have also begun efforts to jump-start the development of a host of new devices that connect to home networks and share multimedia files with PCs. Ultimately, some of these new devices will be able to show television pictures, the companies have said. But TiVo's Home Media Option bucks that strategy, positioning the TiVo box as the gatekeeper for digital content present on the home network. In this case, the PC becomes more of a data repository for files. TiVo's new software streams data, eliminating the need to reserve storage space on the device itself, which is otherwise dedicated to storing TV programs. http://news.com.com/2100-1041-995932.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 00:27:53 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Gear Makers Team For Wireless Broadband By Richard Shim and Ben Charny Staff Writer, CNET News.com April 8, 2003, 1:27 PM PT Gear makers have joined a nonprofit group looking to promote wireless access to high-speed broadband connections. Component and equipment makers including Intel, Nokia and Fujitsu Microelectronics America, announced Tuesday that they will be working with WiMAX to help promote and certify compatibility and interoperability of equipment for wirelessly accessing high-speed broadband connections. WiMAX promotes the 802.16a standard for wide-area broadband access, and the gear makers want to provide components to tap into those 802.16a networks. The 802.16a networks have a range of up to about 30 miles with data transfer speeds of up to 70mbps. A myriad of industries -- such as chipmakers -- will likely pick up on 802.16a technology. However, WiMAX's initial push is among high-speed networking companies that want to expand into areas such as rural districts or sparsely populated areas where it's not economically feasible to build DSL (digital subscriber line) or cable networks. The high costs of such construction have kept DSL and cable providers out of many rural areas, according to industry trade group DSL Forum. Building an 802.16a network is up to half as expensive as installing a T1 line for operators, said WiMAX President Margaret LaBrecque, who is also a spokeswoman for Intel's broadband wireless initiatives group. By using 802.16a gear to build a wireless network, operators would be able to make broadband access available to customers sooner, because it would not entail major construction. http://news.com.com/2100-1039-995994.html ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC's Powell Defends Media Ownership Index Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 23:04:08 -0400 By Jeremy Pelofsky LAS VEGAS, April 8 (Reuters) - Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell defended on Tuesday the idea of a formula to determine whether a media acquisition would harm the diversity of print or broadcasting voices in a market. Some of the five commission members questioned at a broadcasters' convention exactly how Powell's proposed diversity index would measure television, radio and newspaper ownership in a city or county. Powell, a Republican, has set a June 2 deadline to overhaul decades-old rules restricting ownership of the media industry and said he was leaning towards an index to ensure multiple television, radio and newspapers voices in a market. He favors an index rather than taking each case separately when companies want to acquire new properties. FCC Commissioner Kevin Martin, a fellow Republican who has bucked Powell before on a major telecommunications matter, on Monday told Reuters he preferred simple rules without complicated mathematical formulas to measure market voices. "It really isn't that complicated, the idea at least," Powell said at the National Association of Broadcasters annual convention. "I don't think that there should be a freak out about the possibility of both using data and mathematical methods." The rules at issue include a ban on common ownership of a newspaper and either a television or radio station in a geographical market as well as limits on a company owning multiple radio and television stations in a single market. Tribune Co. (NYSE:TRB), which owns newspapers and television stations, has pushed to scrap that restriction so it can go on a buying spree, but some newspaper owners and consumer groups have urged the FCC to keep the rules to preserve diversity. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33771711 ------------------------------ 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 #387 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 10 00:47:32 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3A4lV825054; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 00:47:32 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 00:47:32 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304100447.h3A4lV825054@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 #388 TELECOM Digest Thu, 10 Apr 2003 00:47:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 388 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Garrett Wollman) How to Switch to Different ISP Connection For Continous Connect? (D Singh) 0 or 1 to Start Number? (Randolph Finder) Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (Ron Bean) Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895 (Ron Bean) Re: Looking For Cordless Phone With Battery Indicator (Jim Rusling) Re: Saudi Arabian Telephone (t0rk--) Re: Static IP (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Meigs Field (joe@obilivan.net) Re: Meigs Field (Ed Ellers) Re: Meigs Field (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Meigs Field (Joey Lindstrom) Not Funny! Re: What the Bell ... (Linc Madison) 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: wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 03:40:18 UTC Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science In article , Olde Farte noted in response to Dave Garland : > [Old Farte's Note: Do any of my brethren remember the contraption called > a 'wire recorder'? Something like its later relative a 'tape recorder', > the wire recorder had a take up spool on one side and on the other you > put a spool of thin wire which went through the head, played the audio > sounds recorded on it, then it all collected on the 'take up reel' on > the other side. I have not seen one in so many years ... PAT] Actually, wire and tape recorders are roughly contemporaneous, at least in terms of consumer availability. I've researched this several times for my mailing-list; see and for a couple of takes on the subject. The latter article includes a link to a good source of wire recorder information. In article , Our Esteemed Moderator wrote: > north of Chicago (in Evanston, IL) for many, many years called 'Shure' > and I think they made needles for record players. I wonder if they are > still around? PAT] Oh, yes indeed. Shure Brothers (now just Shure Inc.) is one of the world's largest manufacturers of microphones for A/V, broadcast, and recording use. (The other biggie that I can easily name is Electro-Voice. You can get broadcasters and recording engineers to blather on for hours about which microphone is best for what.) I remember reading the data sheet for a particular Shure microphone which came with the warning that the company does not recommend mounting their microphones on the ceiling and would not provide support for that application. -- Garrett A. Wollman | [G]enes make enzymes, and enzymes control the rates of wollman@lcs.mit.edu | chemical processes. Genes do not make ``novelty- Opinions not those of| seeking'' or any other complex and overt behavior. MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002) ------------------------------ From: delip_singh@yahoo.com (Delip Singh) Subject: How to Switch to Different ISP Connection For Continous Connectivity? Date: 9 Apr 2003 19:40:12 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I have two ISP lines at my place. One is DSL line and another is wireless WAN. I have hosted a webserver on my wireless WAN public IP address. But the problem is that it losses connectivity sometimes and hence make my webserver unreachable. I want to switch to my DSL line automatically the moment my wireless WAN losses connectivity. This way I can provide 100% uptime for my webserver. I have different static public IP addresses from both ISPs. Both ISP lines are coming to my broadband router. Can anybody provide some help here? I don't mind even putting two NICs in my server machine (for having two IP addresses). Below is bluprint for my setup - Thanks. ____________ ____________ | | ____________ | | | ISP 1 |____________________| Router |__________________| ISP 2 | | Wireless | 209.237.xxx.xxx | | 63.64.zzz.zzz | DSL | ------------- ------------- ------------- | | | |209.237.xxx.yyy ------------- | | | Webserver | |mydomain.com| -------------- Currently DNS resolve mydomain.com to IP address provided by ISP1 and all traffic comev via ISP1. How can I make a provision that if link to ISP1 is broken, all the traffic can be directed to my webserver via ISP2? ------------------------------ From: naraht@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu (Randolph Finder) Subject: 0 or 1 to Start Number? Date: 9 Apr 2003 13:51:39 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ There are several area codes where the entire area code is now 10 digit dialing. I know DC (202) is and I'm pretty sure 212 in NYC is as well. Is there a *technical* reason why Washington DC can not have phone numbers that start with 0 or 1? If the phone number 123-4567 was assigned, there would be no confusion when dialing that number becuase it would have to be dialed 202-123-4567. There should be many area codes where this would provide a great deal of relief ... Randy Finder ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 21:27:05 -0500 From: Ron Bean Subject: Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > You should have reminded the loudmouth that if he was willing to pay > 37 cents for each piece of email, and be part of some adminstrative > committee to oversee the distribution of that 37 cents, he would get > his 'guarenteed delivery.' That reminds me ... Somewhere in science fiction, there's a character whose front door has a sign on it that says "If you want to talk to me, put a $10 bill in the slot. If I decide the conversation was worth my time, I'll refund your money." [1] That might work pretty well for email. Sender pays a "deposit", receiver decides if they get it back or not. You'd have a "whitelist" for mailing lists and people you correspond with regularly. Others you would decide on a case-by-case basis. I have no idea how such a scheme would actually be implemented. But I like the idea. [1] I thought it was Jubal Harshaw in "Stranger in a Strange Land", but I can't find the reference just now (in any case, it sounds like something Heinlein would come up with). If someone else doesn't remember this, I may be forced to read the whole book again ... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 21:28:03 -0500 From: Ron Bean Subject: Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, sure there were electromechanical > PBXs. All during the 1950's they were very common with extremely > large telco customers. OK, but how about smaller customers? You're talking about an entire college campus, I was talking about a company that only had 50 phones. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well the smaller they got, they usually went with a 'regular' cord board (where the operator or two handled all the calls in and out). Even substantially larger places used cord switchboards usually. For example, Sears Roebuck at their combination Chicago area regional office/department store downtown on State Street had a four-position cord board that literally rocked around the clock, with calls not only for all the merchandise departments in the store on the first five floors of the building, but they also had their customer service, credit, and collection offices on that board along with the executive offices. Another one I remember quite well was the Conrad Hilton (nee Stevens) Hotel downtown which had a humongous board but a separate room next to it for 'information' phone clerks, all of whom wore headsets with 25 foot cords on them so they could walk around the room looking in the various directories, etc, same as Illinois Bell had for their 'Information Operators'. But at the Hilton Hotel, the information clerks also had to maintain the 'tube exchange' as well. The 'tube exchange' was the place where pneumatic tubes all terminated. The operator there had to collect up the tubes with messages as they came in, walk over to the outbound tube for the message and send it on. Let's say you were a maid on the twelfth floor and you needed to send a message to the housekeeper in her office. You'd write the message out, slip it in a carrier and shove it into the pneumatic tube, where it would ride along on air pressure down to the basement where the tube exchange operator was on duty. The operator would hear a 'swoosh' sound as a trap door opened and the carrier fell out on a conveyor belt. The operator would step on a gear switch and the conveyor belt would move forward a few feet to him/her; the operator could look through the plastic window on the carrier and see to whom it was addressed. It was addressed to housekeeper, so the operator would take the carrier and stuff it in the pneumatic tube which went to the housekeeper in her office on whatever floor. A minute or two later, the process would go in reverse. The housekeeper had answered the maid, and out of one of the several hundred tubes in the exchange, you'd hear the 'swoosh' of air as a trap door came open and the response was received. The operator then took the carrier tube over the tube going up to the twelfth floor and shoved it on its way. Pneumatic tube message delivery was very common fifty or sixty years ago. All the major (multi-story) office buildings and department stores in downtown Chicago used 'tubes with air' and little plastic carriers as the way to deliver inter-department messages between floors. And they all had one or more persons exclusively manning the tube exchange as a full time occupation. I think electromechanical PBXs were so large and cumbersome that they were not used except for the largest customers. 'Smaller' multi-story office buildings relied on cord switchboards and tube exchanges. I do know that City of Chicago (back in the 1950's when it had a rather huge cordboard on RANdolph 6-8000 had an electromechanical PBX as did the Police Department, whose executive officers always gave out their phone numbers as WABash 2-7100 extension (whatever); PAX (whatever). PAX = Private Automatic Exchange, where PBX equalled Private Branch Exchange. It was a lot like having centrex service on a crossbar exchange. Big customers got their way (which is why the two largest customers of Illinois Bell, [City of Chicago and University of Chicago] had it when no one else could get it. You and your 'company with only 50 phones' didn't get squat. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jim Rusling Subject: Re: Looking For Cordless Phone With Battery Indicator Organization: Retired Reply-To: jrusling-0304@cox.net Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 02:56:51 GMT Eric Friedebach wrote: > Gregory Lee wrote in message > news:telecom22.382.10@telecom-digest.org: >> I am looking for a cordless phone that has a battery indicator on >> the LCD display, which tells me when the battery is running low, or >> better yet, exactly how many minutes left before the battery dies. >> Does anyone have any recommendations? > Take a look at the Panasonic KX-TG2650N. It has a three bar level > indicator on the LCD. This phone has more features than I would ever > use, but I bought it for it's small size. You can find more info at: > http://www.epinions.com/elec-Comm-Cordless_Phones-All-Panasonic_KX-TG2 > 650N > Eric Friedebach You should also take a look at the Vtech. It has a battery meter and on some models the base will charge an extra battery. If the power goes out it will run the base off the battery. Mine does have a noticeable hum while the base is on battery. Jim Rusling Partially Retired Mustang, OK http://www.rusling.org ------------------------------ From: t0rk@hotmail.com (t0rk--) Subject: Re: Saudi Arabian Telephone Date: 8 Apr 2003 22:51:56 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Joseph wrote in message news:: > On 7 Apr 2003 14:05:30 -0700, t0rk@hotmail.com (t0rk--) wrote: >> Hello, >> What type of jacks are used in Saudi Arabia? > According to http://www.kropla.com/phones2.htm they use either US > RJ-11, British, French, Jordan/Saudi or US old style. > Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group. What a mess - I wish they would standardize. Thanks for the reply. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 12:50:50 -0600 Subject: Re: Static IP Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 20:24:46 EDT, John Higdon wrote: > In article , Joey Lindstrom > wrote: >> On Sun, 6 Apr 2003 15:24:48 -0400 (EDT), John Higdon wrote: >>> Rejecting connections from hosts that merely have no reverse DNS is not >>> a good idea. If you handled any volume, you would reject quite a bit of >>> legitimate stuff in all likelihood. A better practice is to reject hosts >>> where the forward and reverse DNS don't agree. >> I'm not sure I understand exactly what you mean here. Could you give >> us an example? > When a host connects here, a reverse lookup is performed at the same > time a check is done for appearance on any of five RBLs. Even if the > IP has no PTR record (associated canonical name), email will still be > accepted provided the address is clean on the RBLs and all the other > requirements (valid HELO syntax, valid recipient, routable sender) are > met. I'm still unclear on the relationship between this and when a host's forward and reverse DNS don't agree. I think this is what somebody else (sorry, forgot your name) was driving at earlier. There are many mail servers, my own included, that handle mail for multiple domains, all from a single IP. I think the concern is that if the server handles mail for "domain1.com" and "domain2.com", and identifies itself when sending mail to you as "domain2.com" (sending a message from user@domain2.com to you), and you do a reverse on it and come up with "domain1.com", is that going to cause a problem? -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: Meigs Field Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 05:27:22 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, 'convenient access' to the public > is not where things are at. Power for politicians, and getting things > over on other politicians is where things are at. Daley did think that > the 'war on terrorism' was a great excuse to take the action he did, > and he used it to cover his tracks with the business community downtown > who were ***very angry**** about his actions destroying Meigs Field. > I guess his advisors just told him, 'claim you had to do it to protect > the city against a terrorist attack'. Daley thought that sounded good, > and so that became the line he used and is using. PAT] I guess the "honorable Mayor Son-of-Crook assumes all the Chicago business leaders are idiots. Hopefully, that will come back to bite his big fat rear. Anyone who has made it through Logic 101 knows that any terrorist threat from the air has far less to do with any particular airport than it does with aircraft in general, and, the larger the better. Thus, the King Mayor should logically shut down O'Hare and Midway before he shut down Meigs. I suspect many Chicago business folks have already figured this one for themselves. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sure he assumes everyone is an idiot. So do police in Chicago. The way all of the politicians/city workers there condescend to the public is incredible, and nauseating. PAT] Steven J. Sobol wrote: > Cleveland, Ohio; Burke Lakefront Airport ... which *is* downtown, as > opposed to the big 'port, Hopkins International, about twenty minutes > southwest. Owned and operated by the city, and used by private and > small commercial flights. > But only because the politicians here have other fish to fry. :) I think it goes beyond the focus of Cleveland politicos. There isn't an arrogant "descentant of the imperial palace" running Cleveland. Thus, the wishes of the business community of Cleveland are relevant and thus keep Burke Lakefront operating for the greater good of Cleveland. I doubt the movers and shakers in Cleveland will do anything nearly as arrogant and as stupid as the August Emperor of Chicago. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You mean you haven't heard that there is a terrible problem with 'terrorism' in this country (and I do not mean the police!) and we are at war with 'terrorists', along with our simultaneous wars on 'drugs' and 'crime'? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Meigs Field Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 10:36:43 -0400 Steven J. Sobol wrote: > Cleveland, Ohio; Burke Lakefront Airport ... which *is* downtown, as > opposed to the big 'port, Hopkins International, about twenty > minutes southwest. Owned and operated by the city, and used by > private and small commercial flights. In Louisville we have Bowman Field, which isn't downtown but reasonably close, and is used strictly for general aviation (up to and including the smaller business jets). Since it was the city's first airport, its designation is LOU, so the big airport has the almost unrecognizable designation of SDF -- derived from its original name, Standiford Field. (Its present name is -- now get this -- Louisville International Airport at Standiford Field. So help me.) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 09:59:29 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelectronics.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: Re: Meigs Field Zed**3 wrote: > I don't know of any other city that has an airport with such > convenient access to downtown. How about SAN in San Diego, CA? Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 12:54:41 -0600 Subject: Re: Meigs Field Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 20:24:46 -0400 (EDT), Zed**3 wrote: > I am saddened to hear this. I have flown in to Meigs field a couple > of times many years ago. I don't know of any other city that has > an airport with such convenient access to downtown. The city of Edmonton has two airports. The International Airport is way, way south of town, actually next to the town of Leduc. The Municipal Airport, however, is in the heart of downtown. Alas, only "local" short-range flights are permitted to use this airport (this includes small private craft). If you're coming in on a 747, you're going to the International. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That was the idea/intent of Merrill Meigs Airfield: To take the problems involved with small aircraft away both Ohare and Midway (formerly Municipal Airport), and let them have a place to take off and land by themselves, and in a way convenient to the downtown area, where most of their owners worked. But Mayor Daley knows best. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Not Funny! Re: What the Bell ... Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 17:33:34 -0700 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , [name omitted to protect the guilty] wrote: > Terrifying things are happening at the phone company ... > http://www.sbc-pacificbell.com/ So, what? I'm supposed to go to this web page and then guess what exactly you think is "terrifying"? Why should I bother? Articles like this are utterly useless and highly annoying! Don't post articles telling me "Hey, this web site is really { fantastic | interesting | terrifying | informative | funny | whatever }." Tell me what the web site is, and what about it is noteworthy, not just the URL. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California [Reverend Bob Dobbs of the Church of the Sub-Genius Notes: It was supposed to be an April Fool's joke, fool! And you know what I say about people who can't take a joke: F--- 'em! 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 #388 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 10 19:22:08 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3ANM7f29970; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:22:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:22:08 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304102322.h3ANM7f29970@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 #389 TELECOM Digest Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:22:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 389 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson EPIC Alert 10.07 (Monty Solomon) Murdoch Seals $6.6 Billion Deal For DirecTV Stake (Monty Solomon) High-End Universal Remotes Require High Maintenance (Monty Solomon) Review: "The Book of Wi-Fi" (Monty Solomon) Copyright Levy (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Static IP (John Higdon) Re: Static IP (John Meissen) How to Find Information About an Interface (DHCP Client) ? (big) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Ed Ellers) Re: TiVo Upgrade Shares PC Content (dold@TiVoXUpgra.usenet.us.com) Re: Looking For Cordless Phone w/ Battery Indicator (SELLCOM Tech support) NPA+0/1XX-xxxx, was 0 or 1 to Start Number (Mark J Cuccia) Re: 0 or 1 to Start Number? (John R. Levine) Re: 0 or 1 to Start Number? (Diamond Dave) 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, 10 Apr 2003 00:16:46 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EPIC Alert 10.07 ======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 10.07 April 9, 2003 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.07.html ======================================================================= Table of Contents ======================================================================= [1] National Coalition Urges Accuracy for FBI Database [2] Documents Show Errors in TSA's "No-Fly" Watchlist [3] ICANN Fails to Establish Adequate WHOIS Privacy Standards [4] EPIC Opposes Preemption of State Privacy Enforcement [5] News in Brief [6] EPIC Bill-Track: New Bills in Congress [7] EPIC Bookstore: "Your Body as Password" [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events ... http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.07.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 00:40:21 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Murdoch Seals $6.6 Billion Deal For DirecTV Stake NEW YORK, April 9 (Reuters) - News Corp. (AUS:NCP) (NYSE:NWS) said on Wednesday it struck a deal to take control of DirecTV for about $6.6 billion, giving media mogul Rupert Murdoch his long-sought foothold in the U.S. satellite television market. Under the terms of the deal, News Corp. said it would buy General Motors Corp.'s (NYSE:GM) 19.9 percent stake in Hughes Electronics Corp. (NYSE:GMH), the corporate parent of DirecTV. News Corp. said it would pay about $14 per Hughes share -- a 22 percent premium over Hughes' $11.48 closing price on Wednesday -- and offer to buy another 14 percent for the same price from the company's public shareholders. GM said it would receive about $3.1 billion in cash, and the remainder would be paid in News Corp. preferred American Depositary Receipts. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33787824 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 00:53:22 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: High-End Universal Remotes Require High Maintenance By WALTER S. MOSSBERG When universal remotes made their debut, people envisioned themselves picking up a single remote and controlling a multitude of devices with ease. But programming these remotes proved so tough that some people yearned for a coffee table covered with separate controllers. This week, we tested two costly, high-end universal remotes -- the Philips Pronto TSU3000 and Harmony Remote SST-768 from Intrigue Technologies -- to see if these recently designed products are easier to program. http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/solution-20030409.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 15:58:53 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Review: "The Book of Wi-Fi" The reading lounge: The Book of Wi-Fi by John Ross Level: Introductory Danny Kalev (dannyk@rocketmail.com) System analyst & software engineer April 8, 2003 * Book: The Book of Wi-Fi * Author: John Ross * Publisher: No Starch Press * ISBN: 1-886411-45-X * 260 pages * Price: $29.95 Setting up a Wi-Fi network with all the hardware and software configurations involved remains a confusing task. The Book of Wi-Fi, by John Ross, attempts to clear up some of this confusion and help new users get their networks up and running. http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/wi-lounge13.html ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:26:47 -0600 Subject: Copyright Levy Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Wed, 9 Apr 2003 23:06:45 EDT, Slave Sarah wrote: > Throw in that the Government of Canada charges a duty on every blank CD-R > and CD-RW sold to compensate artists royalties, whether or not the disk is > used for audio, MP3, or simply backing up your hard drive. > From the consumer's point of view, by paying the royalty, the music > industry can't complain what I then stick onto my disk. Not quite, for two reasons: 1) The levy (not royalty) that the Copyright Board collects is to be distributed *ONLY* to Canadian artists. Madonna and Eminem are SOL (Short On Luck). 2) To the best of my knowledge (and this info is a bit stale so it could have changed by now), the Copyright Board has yet to begin disbursing these funds. I just did a bit of research and I was slightly wrong in what I said about the Copyright Levy only being disbursed to Canadian artists. In fact, the Levy is to be split as follows: To eligible authors: 66% To eligible performers: 18.9% To eligible makers (ie: record companies): 15.1% Performers and makers only qualify for payment if they are Canadian. However, "authors" qualify regardless of nationality (and thus Madonna and Eminem can snag some loot out of this scam, providing they write their own tunes). -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Static IP Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 21:58:25 -0700 In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > I'm still unclear on the relationship between this and when a host's > forward and reverse DNS don't agree. I think this is what somebody > else (sorry, forgot your name) was driving at earlier. There are many > mail servers, my own included, that handle mail for multiple domains, > all from a single IP. I think the concern is that if the server > handles mail for "domain1.com" and "domain2.com", and identifies > itself when sending mail to you as "domain2.com" (sending a message > from user@domain2.com to you), and you do a reverse on it and come up > with "domain1.com", is that going to cause a problem? What a host claims in its HELO is not relevant in DNS lookups. It doesn't matter for how many domains a server handles email. It still has a cononical name for a DNS A record that maps to an identical name specified in its PTR record. A host can still have multiple names, each with an A record, but one of them will match up to the PTR record. If it does not, then the forward and reverse are said to disagree. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@shell1.aracnet.com (John Meissen) Subject: Re: Static IP Date: 10 Apr 2003 06:41:15 GMT Organization: Aracnet Internet Reply-To: jmeissen@aracnet.com In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 20:24:46 EDT, John Higdon wrote: >> In article , Joey Lindstrom >> wrote: >>> On Sun, 6 Apr 2003 15:24:48 -0400 (EDT), John Higdon wrote: >>>> A better practice is to reject hosts >>>> where the forward and reverse DNS don't agree. [.....] >>> I'm not sure I understand exactly what you mean here. Could you give >>> us an example? >> When a host connects here, a reverse lookup is performed at the same >> time a check is done for appearance on any of five RBLs. [.....] > I'm still unclear on the relationship between this and when a host's > forward and reverse DNS don't agree. I think this is what somebody > else (sorry, forgot your name) was driving at earlier. There are many > mail servers, my own included, that handle mail for multiple domains, > all from a single IP. I think the concern is that if the server > handles mail for "domain1.com" and "domain2.com", and identifies > itself when sending mail to you as "domain2.com" (sending a message > from user@domain2.com to you), and you do a reverse on it and come up > with "domain1.com", is that going to cause a problem? You're confusing sending mail with receiving mail. And actually, it's irrelevant. A system that provides mail services for multiple virtual domains should still identify itself by the correct name, verifiable by reverse DNS. The MTA doesn't change how it identifies itself based on the headers of the mail it's processing. john- ------------------------------ From: trankil75@hotmail.com (big) Subject: How to Find Information About an Interface (DHCP Client) ? Date: 10 Apr 2003 06:53:54 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, I ve got a Cisco 1605 (Version 12.2(16)) My eth1 interface is configured as a DHCP Client,and I want to know when the lease finished. With the command sh int 1,I dont see anything. Someone could help me please ? Thank you. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 17:51:35 -0400 PAT noted: > Around 1952-53 (I do not remember for sure) I went to visit my uncle > and aunt who lived in Coffeyville, Kansas. Coffeyville and > Independence had ONE television station between them in those days, > somewhere in the middle of the county. Channel 4 was mainly for > weather information, and for hours on end, the camera would stay > focused on a few dials with the temperature and barometer on > display. Channel 4 is still around in Coffeyville, I understand, and > is a LPTV thing now." The station may not have had an AT&T feed yet, meaning that it would be limited to what it produced itself or could get on film (from the networks or otherwise). As for channel 4 now being an LPTV, note that the FCC reworked the VHF TV allocations in 1952 -- the new allocations started to take effect in 1953, one station at a time -- so the station that was on 4 back then would now be on a different channel, while the newer channel 4 station would be unrelated. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, that makes sense. There is nothing on 4 in C-ville now; I am not sure if anything 'over the air' is on 4 there. There are one or two LPTV operations here in Independence I think, one being that dreadful Trinity Broadcasting thing which the owner is piping out; I think it is around 18 or 19 on the dial. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dold@TiVoXUpgra.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: TiVo Upgrade Shares PC Content Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 04:16:51 UTC Organization: a2i network Monty Solomon wrote: > But TiVo's Home Media Option bucks that strategy, positioning the TiVo > box as the gatekeeper for digital content present on the home > network. In this case, the PC becomes more of a data repository for > files. TiVo's new software streams data, eliminating the need to > reserve storage space on the device itself, which is otherwise > dedicated to storing TV programs. > http://news.com.com/2100-1041-995932.html Unfortunately, I don't think this option will be available to DirecTV "DTivo" owners, possibly due to the "perfect" digital copies available on DirecTV. Clarence A Dold - dold@email.rahul.net - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA. ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Looking For Cordless Phone With Battery Indicator Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:05:00 -0400 Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com greglee@umich.edu (Gregory Lee) posted on that vast internet thingie: > I am looking for a cordless phone that has a battery indicator on the > LCD display, which tells me when the battery is running low, or better > yet, exactly how many minutes left before the battery dies. > Does anyone have any recommendations? Most of our phones have a battery indicator but the Engenius phone is the only one I know of that actually allows you to put a call on hold, change the battery and then not lose the call. 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. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 00:31:02 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: NPA+0/1XX-xxxx, was 0 or 1 to Start Number Randolph Finder (naraht@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu) wrote: > There are several area codes where the entire area code is now > ten-digit dialing. I know DC (202) is and I'm pretty sure 212 > in NYC is as well. Well, first, DC (NPA 202) is *NOT* yet in mandatory ten-digit dialing for (local) calling within the 202 area code. Calls within 202 can still be dialed as just seven-digits, although ten-digits (and possibly 1+ten-digits), dialed as (1)+202-NXX-xxxx is *PERMITTED*. However, calls *from* 202 to any other area code must be dialed as (1)+ten-digits, and *toll* calls from 202 to other NANP area codes must be dialed as 1+ ten-digits. The entire state of Maryland is in "overlay" area codes, with associated mandatory (1)+ten-digit dialing (area codes 301/240/future-227, and 410/443/future-667), and the northern portion of Virginia in the Washington DC Metropolitan area, is in area code "overlay" with associated ten-digit local dialing (area codes 703/571). And calls to DC from the MD/VA suburbs, as well as between the MD/VA suburbs are now mandatory (1+) ten-digits. "Permissive/protected" seven-digit dialing of local calls within the Washington DC Metropolitan Area, between DC (202), MD (301), VA (703), ceased way back in 1990. New York City started with its first area code overlay in 1992. The new 917 area code overlaid the ENTIRE five-borough area (212 Manhattan and previouly Bronx; 718 Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island, and added Bronx). At the time, 917 was strictly for new wireless/mobile/ cellular/paging prefixes and customers. Later, 917 could be for ANY type of telephone service. In Summer 1999, Manhattan 212 was overlaid with the new 646 area code; In Fall 1999, the other four boroughs' 718 was overlaid with the new 347 area code. All along, (local) calling within the same area code was still permitted on a straight seven-digit basis, while (local and toll) calling to co-overlaid area codes and adjacent/different area codes in NYCity and to points outside, were on a 1+ten-digit basis. Calls to numbers within one's same NYCity area code were also permitted as 1+ten-digits. There was a waiver granted to NYCity and Chicago regarding requiring 1+ten-digits for same-NPA calls, even though there effectively were overlays, however the waivers have expired. NYCity began to phase in mandatory 1+ten-digit dialing for (local) calls within one's own/same area code, beginning Feb.2003 and continuing until March 2003. > Is there a *technical* reason why Washington DC can not have phone > numbers that start with 0 or 1? First, re Washington DC -- as mentioned above, they are NOT yet in a mandatory ten-digit dialing sitatuion, although the SUBURBS are. > If the phone number 123-4567 was assigned, there would be no > confusion when dialing that number becuase it would have to be dialed > 202-123-4567. This is a frequently asked question. Yes, there *IS* a MAJOR technical reason. There are already (and have been so, EMBEDDED, for DECADES, both special billing numbers of the form NXX-0/1XX-xxxx, including "special calling card" accounts and such. And also special operator and internal network routings and codes of the same format. While these are not 'real' customer telephones, they are in use for internal telephone company network/operator/etc routings as well as used for special billing account numbers. And there will *ALWAYS* be a need for a special "partition" of the theoretical numbering space using these code/numbering formats. > There should be many area codes where this would provide a great deal > of relief. Well, in the past two years, the "numbering" and "area code" crunch or explosion has more or less been brought "under control". And new area codes have come virtually to a SCREECHING HALT! Last year (2002), there were only eight new area codes to take effect. That is less than 1957, which had ten new area codes taking effect, 1957 was the year with the largest number of new NPA codes effective prior to 1995-forward, the timeframe of area code explosion. 1995 had 16 new codes, 1997 had 43 new codes, 2000 had about 13 new codes. And this calendar year (2003), there appears to be only THREE new area codes taking effect, all in the Republic of Texas. 430 overlaying 903 in northeastern TX, and the three-way split of 915 in western TX, which just went 'permissive' last Saturday, new codes being 432 for Midland/Odessa region, 325 for Abilene/Sweetwater region and VeriZon-GTE's San Angelo region; 915 retained by the El Paso metro area. Next year (2004), as it is viewed right now, there is only going to be ONE new area code to take effect, 684 for American Samoa in the Pacific. This isn't due to "growth" of new customers/lines/numbers, but rather where American Samoa's own unique country code +684 will eventually cease, those digits to be American Samoa's OWN AREA CODE 684 within the NANP (country code +1) 2005 is "scheduled" so far with only three new area codes, and all could potentially be postponed even later into the future: 226 to overlay 519 in southern Ontario (Canada) 385 to split from 801 Salt Lake City UT and vicinity 438 to overlay 514 in the Montreal PQ region (Canada) So, even if there were no previous routing/billing uses of 0XX/1XX c.o.codes within "POTS" area codes, there isn't any demand for those numbering ranges for "POTS" customer dialable numbers in just about any geographic "POTS" area code! The era of the explosion of new area codes has come to a halt, mainly because of the economy, but many are getting rid of their extra/second phone lines, since they now have DSL. And most importantly, the excessive use of new codes/numbers has decreased/ceased because of Thousands Blocks "pooling". Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: 0 or 1 to Start Number? Date: 10 Apr 2003 00:55:58 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > There are several area codes where the entire area code is now 10 > digit dialing. I know DC (202) is and I'm pretty sure 212 in NYC is > as well. Is there a *technical* reason why Washington DC can not > have phone numbers that start with 0 or 1? Telcos have long used fake numbers starting with 1 for leased lines and other non-dialable circuits. They'd have to move them out of the way first. Allowing XXX rather than NXX numbers would only be a 20% increase in available numbers but would be a huge hassle to implement. CO switches and PBXes all over the world "know" that the fourth digit of a valid phone number can't be 0 or 1, all of which would have to be reprogrammed. If you remember how much hassle it was to reprogram them all for NXX area codes and prefixes, it'd be about as much work for much less increase in numbering space. So if you want a number that starts with 0, move to France. 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: Diamond Dave Subject: Re: 0 or 1 to Start Number? Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 05:33:46 -0400 Organization: The BBS Corner / Diamond Mine On-Line It is still technically not possible to have a prefix start with a 0 or 1. This dates back to the time where telephone operators (primarily AT&T, but local ones as well) used 0xx and 1xx codes for routing telephone calls. These were used for direct access to certain features and/or systems. For example: if your local operator needed to contact a local operator in a distant city to perform "call interrupt" (breaking into a line for an emergency), the operator would dial NPA+0xx to reach that distant operator. (NPA = the area code, and a then unique 0xx code in that NPA for the city where the operator was). These days it doesn't work quite that way, as the operators aren't as "local" as they once were. However, the system is *STILL* in place. I have a list of these "operator codes" on my Telephone World website if you want to see what they are. I'm sure that others who read this group will chime in and give more DETAILED results (grin). Dave Perussel Webmaster - Telephone World http://www.dmine.com/phworld [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Could you please send in that list of operator codes here to the Digest? 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 #389 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 10 20:42:43 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3B0ggQ01906; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 20:42:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 20:42:43 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304110042.h3B0ggQ01906@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 #390 TELECOM Digest Thu, 10 Apr 2003 20:43:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 390 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Nokia 3650 Camera Phone for AT&T Wireless GSM/GPRS Network (Steven Sobol) Re: Nokia 3650 Camera Phone for AT&T Wireless GSM/GPRS Network (Joseph) Re: Meigs Field (tonypo1@cox.net) Re: Meigs Field (Chris Farrar) Re: Meigs Field (Steven J. Sobol) Re: How to Switch to Different ISP Connection For Continous Connect (Hlavenka) Re: How to Switch to Different ISP Connection For Continous Connect (Sobol) Re: How to Switch to Different ISP Connection For Continous Connect (Breuckma) Re: NPA+0/1XX-xxxx, was 0 or 1 to Start Number (Randy Finder) Re: Saudi Arabian Telephone (Joseph) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Arthur Shapiro) Wireless Carriers Propose New 'Number Portability' Plan (The Old Bear) Re: Stranger in a Badly-Written Land (Joey Lindstrom) Remembering Wire Recorders (Bob Peticolas) Motorola Revs Up Its Harley (Eric Friedebach) Re: Static IP (Daniel W. Johnson) Geriatric Gatherings - Was Re: Run Phone Line Extensions (3yeadqp02) 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: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: Nokia 3650 Camera Phone for AT&T Wireless GSM/GPRS Network Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 03:14:50 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC From Monty Solomon (monty@roscom.com): > - Nokia 3650 Phone and AT&T Wireless' GSM/GPRS Network Brings the Power Of > Imaging to Consumers - Big Freakin' Deal: T-Mobile has been advertising their GPRS-based multimedia messaging and camera phones for months here in Cleveland. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Nokia 3650 Camera Phone for AT&T Wireless GSM/GPRS Network Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 07:21:52 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On Wed, 9 Apr 2003 13:54:17 -0400, Monty Solomon wrote: >- Nokia 3650 Phone and AT&T Wireless' GSM/GPRS Network Brings the Power Of > Imaging to Consumers - > IRVING, Texas, April 9 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- AT&T Wireless (NYSE: > AWE) and Nokia (NYSE: NOK) today announced the immediate availability > of the Nokia 3650 imaging phone, which can now be purchased from the > AT&T Wireless web site (www.attws.com). Taking advantage of AT&T > Wireless' advanced GSM/GPRS network, And ATTWS is not alone. T-Mobile and cingular also offer this handset. Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: Meigs Field Organization: KiloDelta Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 04:55:33 GMT In article , joey@telussucks.info says: Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That was the idea/intent of Merrill Meigs > Airfield: To take the problems involved with small aircraft away both > Ohare and Midway (formerly Municipal Airport), and let them have a > place to take off and land by themselves, and in a way convenient to > the downtown area, where most of their owners worked. But Mayor Daley > knows best. PAT] Here in Rhode Island we have several airports, with the main being Greene Airport (PVD). Greene also supports private small aircraft flights as well as being the Air National Guard runways of choice. As such, security is beefed up by Nat'l Guard troops. You wouldn't believe the crap that airport goes through. They need to lengthen the main runway to 10K feet but residents are all up in arms about it. I say look, you bought knowing an airport was next door -- live with it. The other airports are: Block Island (KBID) North Central (KSFZ) Newport (KUUU) Quonset (KOQU) Westerly (KWST) You can visit http://www.pvdairport.com/ for more info. Quonset is capable of landing larger aircraft and is surrounded by an industrial park. It's a stone's throw from PVD and would be a logical choice to expand but no, we in RI don't have the vision to see that. Tony [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ohare in Chicago has the same problems with its neighbors in Bensenville and Elk Grove. People in those suburbs are always complaining about the noise overhead, etc. They really should have checked first. The airport has been there longer than any of them. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Chris Farrar Subject: Re: Meigs Field Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:03:34 -0400 Organization: Bell Sympatico Well, Toronto City Centre Airport (YTZ) on the Toronto Islands. There's one in located on the shore of Lake Erie in Cleveland as well that I can think of right off the bat. Chris > Zed**3 wrote: >> I don't know of any other city that has an airport with such >> convenient access to downtown. ------------------------------ From: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: Meigs Field Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:47:30 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC From joe@obilivan.net (joe@obilivan.net): >> Cleveland, Ohio; Burke Lakefront Airport ... which *is* downtown, as >> opposed to the big 'port, Hopkins International, about twenty minutes >> southwest. Owned and operated by the city, and used by private and >> small commercial flights. >> But only because the politicians here have other fish to fry. :) > I think it goes beyond the focus of Cleveland politicos. There isn't > an arrogant "descentant of the imperial palace" running Cleveland. No, we have never had a Richard Daley. We did, however, have the Honorable Michael R. White as mayor for several years. And HIS arrogance was (is!!) legendary. Now, one of my father's employees is a neighbor of Mike White, and she swears up and down how he's a fine, upstanding citizen. And in deference to White, he's done some good work over the years. But his administration ran more like a dictatorship. It *was* his way or the highway, period, end of discussion. And don't you dare get him upset, or you'll be on the receiving end of a tirade. (I've done some work for a few different public organizations here and have heard stories about him ...) > Thus, the wishes of the business community of Cleveland are relevant > and thus keep Burke Lakefront operating for the greater good of > Cleveland. > I doubt the movers and shakers in Cleveland will do anything nearly as > arrogant and as stupid as the August Emperor of Chicago. So do I, especially since we now have a mayor with more clue than White had. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Didn't Cleveland also have that real young kid as mayor for a few years? I wish I could remember his name. I think it was Dennis something. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:13:32 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelectronics.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: Re: How to Switch to Different ISP Connection For Continous Connectivity? Delip Singh wrote: > Currently DNS resolve mydomain.com to IP address provided by ISP1 and > all traffic comev via ISP1. How can I make a provision that if link to > ISP1 is broken, all the traffic can be directed to my webserver via > ISP2? The IP address to which a domain resolves is cached by DNS servers literally around the world. When the IP address for a webserver is changed, it can take several days before all the caches are updated. To provide the connectivity you're talking about will require the cooperation of someone upstream from your webserver; you have to have a stable IP with solid connectivity someplace. Probably the simplest solution is to use a "dynamic DNS" hosting service; they will resolve your domain to one of their servers, so your DNS remains constant, it's just not one of "your" IP addresses. A small application runs on your webserver, continually sending to the DynDNS company's machine; they forward traffic to whatever IP your webserver is currently broadcasting from. Just google (note lowercase use of a trademark :-) "dynamic DNS" and you'll get all the information you need. Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. ------------------------------ From: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: How to Switch to Different ISP Connection For Continous Connectivity? Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:41:27 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC >From Delip Singh (delip_singh@yahoo.com): > I have two ISP lines at my place. One is DSL line and another is > wireless WAN. I have hosted a webserver on my wireless WAN public IP > address. But the problem is that it losses connectivity sometimes and > hence make my webserver unreachable. If it's that important to always be reachable, why don't you just place the web server at a colo facility? Neither WiFi nor DSL typically have SLAs that provide for continuous uptime. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Re: How to Switch to Different ISP Connection For Continous Connectivity? Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:00:13 -0500 Organization: Puma's Lair - catbox.com In article , "Delip Singh" wrote: > I have two ISP lines at my place. One is DSL line and another is > wireless WAN. I have hosted a webserver on my wireless WAN public IP > address. But the problem is that it losses connectivity sometimes and > hence make my webserver unreachable. I want to switch to my DSL line > automatically the moment my wireless WAN losses connectivity. This way I > can provide 100% uptime for my webserver. I have different static public > IP addresses from both ISPs. Both ISP lines are coming to my broadband > router. Can anybody provide some help here? I don't mind even putting > two NICs in my server machine (for having two IP addresses). You can put two network cards in your server, but depending on what OS your server is running you probably can have only one default gateway, so you would need to issue some commands to change the active gateway to use the other line. Without changing the gateway, the second address can be used on that local subnet for other machines to talk to the server, but not to the outside world. Also, you need to change the DNS to point to the other address, and depending on how you have that set up, TTL's and such, there will be delays while the changes propagate. You can set up two addresses for one name in DNS, but the usual way that's handled is a request will get one address, and the next request the other, load balancing. That won't work too well if you want one OR the other, depending, so you probably will have to update the DNS with the new address when you change. Web servers using Apache may need to change the config file to show the proper IP address for each web site, if it changes. -- Gary Breuckman ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 10:14:06 EDT From: Randy Finder Subject: Re: NPA+0/1XX-xxxx, was 0 or 1 to Start Number I stand amazed ... I apologize for the incorrect infomration on 202, I honestly thought they'd had to go to 10 digit dialing, I live in suburban Maryland and even the phonebooks say that DC -> DC should dial 202 first. The fact that there are internal numbers for billing does not suprise me, however it would surprise me if these internal numbers represented 20% of the available numbers. Even to a layman like me it just seemed goofy when the number of area codes in a state quadrupled in ten years ... (for all I know there are states where it has been worse than Maryland) I consider the 684 to be a fluke, though I wish there had been some way to have the area codes which came out of old 809 to be obviously together for fraud reasons ... YiLFS Randy Leadership, Friendship and Service - Alpha Phi Omega ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Saudi Arabian Telephone Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 07:15:46 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On 8 Apr 2003 22:51:56 -0700, t0rk@hotmail.com (t0rk--) wrote: > Joseph wrote in message > news:: >> On 7 Apr 2003 14:05:30 -0700, t0rk@hotmail.com (t0rk--) wrote: >>> Hello, >>> What type of jacks are used in Saudi Arabia? >> According to http://www.kropla.com/phones2.htm they use either US >> RJ-11, British, French, Jordan/Saudi or US old style. >> Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group. > What a mess - I wish they would standardize. Thanks for the reply. The standard has become the USRJ11 specification. The older standards are still in use in many countries. It's still to a limited extent the same in the US. There are still a limited few places that use the old 4 pin plug here. In many or most places that use a combination of standards there's usually converter plugs you can buy. Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group. ------------------------------ From: art.shapiro@unisys.com (Arthur Shapiro) Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:04:18 GMT Organization: Unisys Corporation In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton): >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *What* do you play your 12" LPs on >> these days? It is impossible to purchase a 'record player' these days. >> Do they even make them any longer? PAT] Pat, we're straying from telecomm, of course, but you must be unaware of the audiophile-level turntable stuff available these days, as opposed to the consumer level (Denon/Sony/etc.) gear cited in other replies. You would probably be carried out on a stretcher if you were to see the 4 and 5 figure price tags for (separately) turntables, arms, and cartridges. Yep, even a phono cartridge -- the "needle" -- can run $2K - $7K for the best models. On the other hand, this level of equipment is astonishingly good from the listener's perspective. At audio shows, where the rooms might be so crowded so as to preclude even seeing what's being played, it is amazing that a record being played on good equipment will quiet and mesmerize an entire roomful of people. I stress that most people can't even see that it's a record, not a CD, being played. One doesn't get the same reaction to even a $10K or $20k CD player. This is the golden age of vinyl playback. Alas, the convenience of CDs outweighs the sonic disadvantages for the great majority of people. It's a tough problem, even for an audiophile such as myself. I tend to have a cat on my lap whenever I sit down, and the record reaches the end of side and goes click - click - click - click and the cat is purring away and doesn't want to be dislodged and ... it's a tough life. Art [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I was unaware of those 'options' in recorded music these days, and the price tag you quote is pretty awful, IMO. Like yourself, a certain cat follows me wherever I go around the house or in the yard, and when I sit down in my padded rocking chair in the main room, she is always right there on my lap also. She does not like to be dislodged either, especially all this past winter when I would have a fire in the fireplace each time I sat there to listen to the radio or read my books, papers, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 12:09:01 -0400 From: The Old Bear Subject: Wireless Carriers Propose New 'Number Portability' Plan As summarized in NewsScan Daily for April 10, 2003: WIRELESS CARRIERS PROPOSE NEW 'NUMBER PORTABILITY' PLAN For years, U.S. wireless operators have opposed efforts to force them to allow customers to keep their cell phone number when they switch to another carrier. But the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association is now pushing a new plan -- one that would comply with Federal Communications Commission rules on cell phone number portability, but would also require land-line carriers to allow customers to switch their traditional phone numbers to cell phones. The new proposal, if adopted, could accelerate the trend of people dropping their land-line service in favor of going completely wireless. Wireless operators have fought number portability over the years because they fear a dramatic increase in "churn," as they eliminate one inhibition to switching carriers. That could increase costs and likely would spark another round of price wars. "It's basically the nightmare before Christmas," says Roger Entner, an analyst with Yankee Group, who predicts that escalating churn following the Nov. 24 deadline set by the FCC could cost the industry $3 billion in the fourth quarter this year and the first quarter next year in increased commissions, phone subsidies and other sales-related expenditures. By including traditional phone providers in the number portability plan, wireless carriers hope to compensate for loss of cell phone customers with a new influx of former land-line subscribers. "The opportunity to take the wire-line phone and port it to wireless is an opportunity that the wireless industry wants to have happen," says Michael Altschul, general counsel to the CTIA. FCC chairman Michael Powell plans to rule on the CTIA proposal before the Nov. 24 deadline. source: Wall Street Journal (10 Apr 2003) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- NewsScan Daily is a lively summary of information technology news and is distributed FREE via email to its subscribers. To receive NewsScan, send email to NewsScan@NewsScan.com and in the subject line type "subscribe". For more information, see the NewsScan web pages at http://www.NewsScan.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:47:43 -0600 Subject: Re: Stranger in a Badly-Written Land Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 00:47:32 -0400 (EDT), Ron Bean wrote: > Somewhere in science fiction, there's a character whose front door has > a sign on it that says "If you want to talk to me, put a $10 bill in > the slot. If I decide the conversation was worth my time, I'll refund > your money." [1] > [1] I thought it was Jubal Harshaw in "Stranger in a Strange Land", > but I can't find the reference just now (in any case, it sounds like > something Heinlein would come up with). If someone else doesn't > remember this, I may be forced to read the whole book again ... Then I hope somebody comes forward, lest you have to reread that horrible, horrible book. I'm a huge Heinlein fan but I wouldn't use that book to prop up a table with one short leg. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 12:25:54 -0700 From: Bob Peticolas Subject: Remembering the Wire Recorder Machines > [Old Farte's Note: Do any of my brethren remember the contraption called > a 'wire recorder'? Something like its later relative a 'tape recorder', > the wire recorder had a take up spool on one side and on the other you > put a spool of thin wire which went through the head, played the audio > sounds recorded on it, then it all collected on the 'take up reel' on > the other side. I have not seen one in so many years ... PAT] Pat, Yes, I remember the wire recorders. The one my folks had was a "Webcor" brand. The head moved up and down as the wire ran by to build up an even wind on the spools as opposed to the "lump" that would build up if the wire just ran with the head stationary in one place. It had one of the "magic eye" tubes that had a green florescent "eye" that indicated record volume. When the two "wings" of the eye touched, the level was right, it they overlapped it was overload. Bob Peticolas Voice/fax (505) 526-2226 bobp@bobvette.com Peticolas Photography Las Cruces Community Theater Mesilla Valley Film Society - Fountain Theater ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Motorola Revs Up Its Harley Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 15:52:40 -0500 Organization: Purity Of Essence/Plant Operational Error Reply-To: "Eric Friedebach" Arik Hesseldahl, 04.10.03, Forbes.com NEW YORK - When last we looked in on Motorola's mobile-phone designs, the company had just completed the first phase of what we called a "hip transplant." That was when Motorola first unveiled its radical-looking swivel-topped v70 mobile phone, the one we dubbed "the coolest phone to own this summer" back in the spring of 2002. Yet for all of its interesting design attributes, it seems that the phone never picked up the buzz we expected. The only type of wireless phone anyone seems interested in these days are the ones with integrated digital cameras. As yet that's a feature Motorola hasn't added to its lineup, though it does offer a camera accessory with one phone, the T720i. Perhaps the thinking at Motorola is that camera phones are a fad. And in the long term they may be right. But from where we sit, the phone we seem to be seeing everywhere is a more conservative one from the Motorola lineup, the v60. It's a clamshell-shaped phone with a metallic outer shell that seems to be popping up as a prop on TV shows and commercials when the plot calls for a character to use a mobile phone. If the number of wireless service providers is any judge--at least five carriers offer a version of it -- then it's probably Motorola's most successful phone of the moment. So it's no surprise that Motorola is going to run with the success a little bit. Today it's announcing a special edition of the v60i that it will be selling through Harley-Davidson motorcycle shops. The phones are keyed to Harley-Davidson's 100th anniversary and are engraved with the company's logo. http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/10/cx_ah_0410tentech.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: panoptes@iquest.net (Daniel W. Johnson) Subject: Re: Static IP Date: 10 Apr 2003 14:05:25 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Joey Lindstrom wrote in message news:: > I'm still unclear on the relationship between this and when a host's > forward and reverse DNS don't agree. I think this is what somebody > else (sorry, forgot your name) was driving at earlier. There are many > mail servers, my own included, that handle mail for multiple domains, > all from a single IP. I think the concern is that if the server > handles mail for "domain1.com" and "domain2.com", and identifies > itself when sending mail to you as "domain2.com" (sending a message > from user@domain2.com to you), and you do a reverse on it and come up > with "domain1.com", is that going to cause a problem? That depends: Does a forward lookup on "domain1.com" (the result of the reverse lookup) yield the IP address in question? The only checking John described for domain2.com is whether there is a way to send mail addressed to it. ------------------------------ From: 3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com Subject: Geriatric Gatherings - Was: Re: Help Running Phone Line Extensions Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 23:52:32 +0200 ~ To reply via e-mail, insert "Telecom Digest" in the subject line ~ On Tue, 08 Apr 2003 12:39:11 +0200, in comp.dcom.telecom Pat wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But dare I say you have no idea how helpless > it leaves you feeling when you cannot do a lot of things you used to > be able to do because of neurological damage. Pat, at the risk of turning this NG into "Geriatric Ailments Anonymous" and/or attracting cries of "That's off topic" , I think it's safe to say that I actually have a very good idea how it feels. Although not from the same cause as your's, I have circulatory and nerve damage to my legs and feet, and the end result is that I am now more than somewhat limited in my movements -- On a good day, a walk of a few hundred yards leaves me with feet that feel as if I've run a marathon. On bad days, I need a walking stick to just move around the house. As a direct result of this damage, I have already lost one toe to gangrene, and could conceivably lose other bits in the future, or even the rest of the leg if I'm careless. So yes, I *do* understand only too well your frustrations, and sympathise with you -- however, I *also* understand that in both our cases, a little more self-care in earlier years could have gone a long way to reducing, or even avoiding, the damages experienced now. Cheers, Frank R [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Like yourself, on a couple of the warm spring days thus far this year during late March, I actually walked downtown without my cane. Walked, mind you, did not call for the cab to come pick me up. But I was *so tired* by the time I got back home, I was really dragging ... other days, I would not *dare* to go out of the house without my cane. Even if I were madly in love with the city of Chicago (I am not) it would be impossible for me to live there and survive there in my present condition. Basically I go almost nowhere, just sit in my house. I cannot imagine having to walk up or down the stairs in the subway stations or to the elevated train platforms. Often times the escalators are not running either, I am so happy to be living in a town I can *afford* (basically I just get my social security disability check each month; in a place like Chicago that would not even pay the rent). Here the rent on my HOUSE (I agree it was my mother's place is such that in Chicago I would have to live in a tiny, filthy, crime-ridden dungeon. I walk a few blocks to the stores downtown and the grocery market. To walk out to Walmart on West Main Street would be a bit much for me (or to the far north side of town by the country club in the rich area) but I have a big yard here, a nice back porch. The same six or seven block walk in Chicago would *possibly* take me to a liquor store with very high priced 'convenience' foods. For the $1.50 I pay for a cab which shows up in less than five minutes, I couldn't even step in a cab in Chicago. I like it here. And no one ever told me recovery would be short, quick and easy, or that it would someday arrive. I made all that up on my own while I was laying flat on my back at Kansas Rehab Hospital. :( But I have made much progress, just not as much as I would like, or as quickly as I would like. At least I do not have to use a wheel-chair or a walker to get around as I did in the first several months afterward. 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 #390 From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Apr 11 21:31:02 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3C1V2A08134; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 21:31:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 21:31:02 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304120131.h3C1V2A08134@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 #391 TELECOM Digest Fri, 11 Apr 2003 21:31:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 391 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Remembering the Wire Recorder Machines (Alan Fowler) Re: Remembering the Wire Recorder Machines (David) Re: Remembering the Wire Recorder Machines (joe@obilivan.net) Re: 0 or 1 to Start Number? (Chris Farrar) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (John Higdon) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (PaulCoxwell@aol.com) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (JDS) Help Wanted: Protocol Software, Product Verification Engineer (M Bhatia) Searchers May Google Your Patient Records (Monty Solomon) Steganography Revealed (Monty Solomon) Report Criticizes Google's Porn Filters (Monty Solomon) In Privacy Debate, Tech Has Two Faces (Monty Solomon) Re: SBC All Distance Connections (Dave Close) Re: Stranger in a Badly-Written Land (Ron Bean) Anti-War Slogan Coined, Repurposed and Googlewashed in 42 Days (M Solomon) Re: Fretting About the Future, Lost Liberty (keep-it-clean) 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: amfowler@melbpc.org.au (Alan Fowler) Subject: Re: Remembering the Wire Recorder Machines Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 09:13:28 GMT Organization: Whitethorn Software Bob Peticolas wrote: >> [Old Farte's Note: Do any of my brethren remember the contraption called >> a 'wire recorder'? Something like its later relative a 'tape recorder', >> the wire recorder had a take up spool on one side and on the other you >> put a spool of thin wire which went through the head, played the audio >> sounds recorded on it, then it all collected on the 'take up reel' on >> the other side. I have not seen one in so many years ... PAT] > Pat, > Yes, I remember the wire recorders. The one my folks had was a > "Webcor" brand. The head moved up and down as the wire ran by to > build up an even wind on the spools as opposed to the "lump" that > would build up if the wire just ran with the head stationary in one > place. It had one of the "magic eye" tubes that had a green > florescent "eye" that indicated record volume. When the two "wings" > of the eye touched, the level was right, it they overlapped it was > overload. > Bob Peticolas Voice/fax (505) 526-2226 > bobp@bobvette.com > Peticolas Photography > Las Cruces Community Theater > Mesilla Valley Film Society - Fountain Theater I remember them too. We had several at the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission and Radio Australia) in the early 1950s. They were used by the news staff to record interviews in the field. They also had a Magnetophon (?) an early German console tape recorder which used a 1/2 inch steel tape running between a pair of about 10 inch spools. Neither would have been regarded as "Hi-Fi" even back then. Alan (amfowler@melbpc.org.au) ------------------------------ From: David Subject: Re: Remembering the Wire Recorder Machines Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 13:33:49 GMT On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 12:25:54 -0700, Bob Peticolas wrote: >> [Old Farte's Note: Do any of my brethren remember the contraption called >> a 'wire recorder'? Something like its later relative a 'tape recorder', >> the wire recorder had a take up spool on one side and on the other you >> put a spool of thin wire which went through the head, played the audio >> sounds recorded on it, then it all collected on the 'take up reel' on >> the other side. I have not seen one in so many years ... PAT] > Pat, > Yes, I remember the wire recorders. The one my folks had was a "Webcor" > brand. The head moved up and down as the wire ran by to build up an even > wind on the spools as opposed to the "lump" that would build up if the wire > just ran with the head stationary in one place. It had one of the "magic > eye" tubes that had a green florescent "eye" that indicated record > volume. When the two "wings" of the eye touched, the level was right, it > they overlapped it was overload. > Bob Peticolas Voice/fax (505) 526-2226 > bobp@bobvette.com > Peticolas Photography > Las Cruces Community Theater > Mesilla Valley Film Society - Fountain Theater Well, I'm old enough to say that I owned one of these when I was in high school and used it for many years. When it finally was time to retire it, I transferred some of the audio to cassette tapes. I just recently transferred those tapes to my PC and now have digital recordings of my deceased family members. My kids and grandkids will just have to transfer the digital files to whatever media takes over from CDs if they want to preserve them for future generations. David ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: Remembering the Wire Recorder Machines Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 16:53:29 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications Bob Peticolas wrote: >> [Old Farte's Note: Do any of my brethren remember the contraption called >> a 'wire recorder'? Something like its later relative a 'tape recorder', >> the wire recorder had a take up spool on one side and on the other you >> put a spool of thin wire which went through the head, played the audio >> sounds recorded on it, then it all collected on the 'take up reel' on >> the other side. I have not seen one in so many years ... PAT] The first time I recorded then heard my own voice was on a wire recorder circa 1947, when I was around 11 years old. It was brand new, and belonged to a friend of my dad's. It was built like a tank and weighed almost as much. The quality was lousy, but it sounded better than the 78 records on the acoustical wind-up Victoria we had at our summer cabin, which was my then-frame-of-reference for audio recording quality. ------------------------------ From: Chris Farrar Subject: Re: 0 or 1 to Start Number? Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 20:39:52 -0400 Organization: Bell Sympatico Randolph Finder wrote: > There are several area codes where the entire area code is now 10 > digit dialing. I know DC (202) is and I'm pretty sure 212 in NYC is as > well. Is there a *technical* reason why Washington DC can not have > phone numbers that start with 0 or 1? If the phone number 123-4567 was > assigned, there would be no confusion when dialing that number becuase > it would have to be dialed 202-123-4567. There should be many area > codes where this would provide a great deal of relief ... > Randy Finder The problem comes as the phone companies are already issuing numbers starting with 1 to deal with certain problems. When I had my wallet stolen, Bell Canada replaced my calling card (old card was 416-23X-XXXX) with a new card bearing the number 476-176-XXXX. From then on, my bills showed calls from number 176-XXXX whenever I used my calling card. Chris ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:05:03 -0700 In article , > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I was unaware of those 'options' in > recorded music these days, and the price tag you quote is pretty awful, > IMO. Like yourself, a certain cat follows me wherever I go around the > house or in the yard, and when I sit down in my padded rocking chair > in the main room, she is always right there on my lap also. She does > not like to be dislodged either, especially all this past winter when > I would have a fire in the fireplace each time I sat there to listen > to the radio or read my books, papers, etc. PAT] That audiophile stuff was available long before CDs were introduced and the people making it flourished from the patronage of the audio crackpots. I've known people who actually plunked down five figures per component. I have a friend who hand constructs tube-type "audiophile" amplifiers. The audio crackpots buy them up like they are going out of style and pay outrageous amounts of money for them. The funny thing is that he laughs uproariously at the "suckers" who buy them. He has pointed out how electrically inferior they are to a modern amplifier comprised of contemporary high-speed solid-state components. But the customers maintain that nothing compares to that "warm, sweet sound" of a tube-type amplifier. So he keeps building them, and the suckers keep buying them...while he laughs all the way to the bank. I've come to the conclusion that "warm, sweet sound" consists of generous helpings of intermodulation distortion, thermal noise, poor phase linearity, and high frequency rolloff. The fact of the matter is that a vinyl record hasn't got any information on it that cannot be extracted by a respectable consumer-grade turntable and cartridge. Vinyl enthusiasts act as though some sort of magic processes were at work when the records were manufactured (working around Westrex cutting heads would quickly disabuse anyone of that notion), and only bizarre ultra-high-end components are capable of extracting that indescribable and immeasurable essence. Anyone who spends five figures on a turntable (or partcularly any part of one) has WAY too much money and a very over-inflated notion of the quality of his ear. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: PaulCoxwell@aol.com Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 05:01:36 EDT Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *What* do you play your 12" LPs on >> these days? It is impossible to purchase a 'record player' these days. >> Do they even make them any longer? PAT] There are indeed turntables still being made, both for professional (e.g. radio) use and for the real high-end "audiophiles," although the prices on the latter have gotten absolutely silly. I have a collection of about 3500 records, mostly 1940s-1960s, and I still add to it from time to time. As for equipment, I have several turntables around the house and workshop, mostly 1960s models made by Goldring and Garrard. The British-made Garrard units seem to still be quite popular in America too -- if you search on the name on eBay you'll most likely see several units up for auction. And yes, I still like to use vacuum-tube amplifiers too. Once again, there are some *very* expensive tube amps on the market these days, and even some well-respected older models now exchange hands for prices in the hundreds, but there is still a lot of quite affordable equipment to be found out there for those who like the older technology. Don't expect to be able to buy replacement stylii or cartridges in your local store downtown anymore, but they are still available from specialist places, where they will either carry stocks for popular types or in many cases will set a new stylus onto an existing assembly for you. I can't recall the URL, but I believe there's one such company somewhere in Indiana. By the way, a few years ago I thought I must be getting old before my time when someone had no idea what a "78" was (I still play them regularly!) Imagine how I felt recently when I came across a kid who had never seen a "45" either! Wasn't there somebody here recently who had a similar experience with a kid having no idea how to use a rotary-dial phone? ------------------------------ Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide From: JDS Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 16:33:36 GMT This invites a cosmically vast off-topic digression. I hope we can stop now. A diversity of opinions exist, and these opinions are expressed well (and not-so-well) on various rec.audio newsgroups. Let's keep this discussion off comp.dcom.telecom. ------------------------------ From: mbhatia@nextone.com (Medhavi Bhatia) Subject: Help Wanted: Protocol Software, Product Verification Engineers Date: 10 Apr 2003 21:17:19 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Job Title: Protocol Software Engineer Job Location: Germantown, MD Job Type: Full Time Contact: Please send in your resume in word format to: Medhavi Bhatia mbhatia@nextone.com Description: We are looking for candidates who are well versed in TCP/IP, IP routing, Unix system programming, BSD Socket programming and POSIX multi-threaded programming. Candidate must have solid development experience in C/C++, debugging and development tools on UNIX. Previous experience with Voice over IP call setup protocols and/or implementing Layer 5 protocols is also essential. Knowledge of shell programming, perl, Tk, Lex, Yacc is a plus. Must have at least 5 years experience and excellent communications skills. Responsibilities include design and development of VoIP software modules, coordination with product management, documentation and QA. Successful candidates will have history of working in close-knit teams as well as on self-directed tasks. You will have the opportunity to work with some of the finest in the telecom industry and learn about leading edge technologies. Job Title: Product Verification Engineer Job Location: Germantown, MD Job Type: Full Time Contact: Please send in your resume in word format to: Medhavi Bhatia mbhatia@nextone.com Minimum Qualifications: BS or equivalent in Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, or Telecommunications. 3 years prior experience in test / verification. Description: Ideal candidate must have 3 years experience in UNIX, Internet Protocols, TCP/IP, shell scripts, Perl and Tk. Prior experience in dealing with networking equipment, like Cisco Switches and Routers is essential. Candidate must display great attitude towards problem solving and telecom network design. Duties include writing verification requirements, executing test plans and assisting post development integration with engineering. You will have the opportunity to work with some of the finest in the telecom industry and learn about leading edge technologies. U.S Residents only. Job Title: Driver Software Engineer Job Location: Germantown, MD Job Type: Full Time Contact: Please send in your resume in word format to: Medhavi Bhatia mbhatia@nextone.com Description: We are looking for candidates who are well versed in TCP/IP, Unix system programming, designing and developing device drivers for Solaris and/or Linux. Candidate must have solid development experience in performance tuning and kernel threading environments. Must have at least 5 years experience and excellent communications skills. Responsibilities include design, development and debugging of third party drivers associated with VoIP software switching, coordination with product management, documentation and QA. Successful candidates will have history of working in close-knit teams as well as on self-directed tasks. You will have the opportunity to work with some of the finest in the telecom industry and learn about leading edge technologies. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 22:09:49 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Searchers May Google Your Patient Records Hackers discover that search engines can help gain unauthorized access to private patient information on Internet-based files. http://www.ama-assn.org/sci-pubs/amnews/pick_03/bisb0407.htm Google: Net Hacker Tool du Jour Why bother pounding at a website in search of obscure holes when you can simply waltz in through the front door? http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,57897,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 22:25:30 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Steganography Revealed by Kristy Westphal Over the past couple of years, steganography has been the source of a lot of discussion, particularly as it was suspected that terrorists connected with the September 11 attacks might have used it for covert communications. While no such connection has been proven, the concern points out the effectiveness of steganography as a means of obscuring data. Indeed, along with encryption, steganography is one of the fundamental ways by which data can be kept confidential. This article will offer a brief introductory discussion of steganography: what it is, how it can be used, and the true implications it can have on information security. http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1684 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 00:36:51 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Report Criticizes Google's Porn Filters By Declan McCullagh Staff Writer, CNET News.com April 10, 2003, 1:18 PM PT WASHINGTON--Children using Google's SafeSearch feature, designed to filter out links to Web sites with adult content, may be shielded from far more than their parents ever intended. A report released this week by the Harvard Law School's Berkman Center for Internet & Society says that SafeSearch excludes many innocuous Web pages from search-result listings, including ones created by the White House, IBM, the American Library Association and clothing company Liz Claiborne. The omissions occur because of the way Google designed the feature, which can be enabled or disabled through a preferences page. The feature uses a proprietary algorithm that automatically analyzes the pages and makes an educated guess, without intervention by Google employees. That technique reduces the cost of the SafeSearch service, but it can lead to odd results. It's perhaps unlikely that many humans would have classified a BBC News report on East Timor, Mattel's site about its Scrabble game -- the URL includes the word "adults" -- or the Nashville Public Library's teen health issues page as unsuitable for minors. Some articles from CNET News.com and CNET Software are also invisible to SafeSearch users. ... http://news.com.com/2100-1032-996417.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 01:46:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: In Privacy Debate, Tech Has Two Faces By Ian Fried Staff Writer, CNET News.com SAN JOSE, Calif.--Although modern technology created many of society's most pressing threats to privacy, a group of researchers is out to prove that it is also the greatest defender of civil liberties. For example, video surveillance could be made more palatable if it worked more like an episode of "Cops," with people's faces blurred out. Only if a crime occurred would the more detailed images be made available. Massive databases designed to root out terrorists, meanwhile, might feel less intrusive if the actual names associated with the information being gathered were kept in a separate file that required a warrant or other authorization to access. These were among the ideas that came up during a gathering of 150 academics and researchers this week at IBM's Almaden Research Center here to explore ways of protecting privacy amid an explosion in the amount of personal information that is being tracked electronically. The challenge? Data is being gathered from a growing variety of sources. It's not just Internet browsing that's being monitored. Grocery store shopping patterns are being tracked via "club cards," video surveillance has increased and embedded sensors could eventually track any product or person. http://news.com.com/2100-1029-996405.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 20:59:17 -0700 From: Dave Close Subject: Re: SBC All Distance Connections Date: 10 Apr 2003 20:57:59 -0700 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California Monty Solomon writes: > New SBC All Distance Connections Likely to Change Consumer Calling > Habits with Unlimited Nationwide Local, In-State/State-to-State > Long Distance, Calling Features at $48.95 - $52.95 a Month During discussion of the usefulness of 1+ toll-alerting dialing plans, I have predicted this idea here in this forum starting several years ago. Not to gloat, but would those who still insist on the need for 1+ dialing please comment on the effect of this plan. I wonder if SBC still enforces the 1+/non-1+ distinction in those markets where it was required. In other words, does a subscriber to this plan in Dallas still need to dial 1+NPA for his own NPA when the destination is beyond the standard service area, and does he still get an error when dialing a nearby number with 1+NPA? If so, why? Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA "The cost of silicon chips has been dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359 steady at about $1bn per acre for dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu 40 years." --Gordon Moore ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 21:03:30 -0500 From: Ron Bean Subject: Re: Stranger in a Badly-Written Land Joey Lindstrom writes: >> Somewhere in science fiction, there's a character whose front door has >> a sign on it that says "If you want to talk to me, put a $10 bill in >> the slot. If I decide the conversation was worth my time, I'll refund >> your money." [1] >> [1] I thought it was Jubal Harshaw in "Stranger in a Strange Land", > Then I hope somebody comes forward, lest you have to reread that > horrible, horrible book. I'm a huge Heinlein fan but I wouldn't use > that book to prop up a table with one short leg. Well, if it makes you feel any better, I'm pretty sure that's not the book I'm thinking of. A quick scan shows that people seem to come and go in flying cars that keep landing on his rose bushes; nobody ever comes in through the front door. And if you're a huge fan and didn't get the reference, then maybe it wasn't Heinlein after all (for some reason, I keep remembering the wrong authors for various books, which makes them very difficult to find again. I'll try r.a.sf.w, they've come though for me before). Maybe Jerry Pournelle? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 14:42:20 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Anti-War Slogan Coined, Repurposed and Googlewashed ... in 42 days By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco This year marks the 100th anniversary of George Orwell's birth, and the writer who best explained the power of language on politics would be amazed what can be done with the Internet. On February 17 a front page news analysis in the New York Times bylined by Patrick Tyler described the global anti-war protests as the emergence of "the second superpower". Tyler wrote: "...the huge anti-war demonstrations around the world this weekend are reminders that there may still be two superpowers on the planet: the United States and world public opinion." This potent phrase spread rapidly. http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/30087.html ------------------------------ From: keep-it-clean Subject: Re: Fretting About the Future, Lost Liberty Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 03:01:49 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Many folks do not realize that things > like the 'Bill of Rights' only addresses what the *government* may not > do (unless you are like Bush, and use 'terrorism' as an administrative > excuse) .... [....snip....] You know Pat, I've been sitting here quietly for some time reading the afterwords you tack on to various posts. Over and over again, you insist on making references to terrorism and our President in a snide way ... putting quotation marks around the word terrorism in this context to mock President Bush and his administration by implying that it's all something which doesn't really exist --- they made it all up to achieve their ends. Well, you certainly have a right to your opinion and to freely express it; I haven't seen anyone legislatively or administratively try to impair that. But I have to tell you that what I saw out the 5th floor window of our office building (from about 20 miles away from lower Manhattan NYC) around 10:15 AM on September 11th, 2001 was unfortunately real enough. I imagine the residents of the Washington DC and southwestern PA metro areas could make a similar observation. If you have a point to make, backed up by logic and facts (not innuendo and ad hominem remarks), then make it by all means. Otherwise, I wish you'd please save the whining and whimpering for some other audience. Thank you. [Whiner's Wimpering Note: I certainly agree those events happened on September 11, 2001. What I disagree with, however, are the number of persons (yourself included I assume) who refer to it as a 'terrorist act'. It was not 'terrorism', it was *mass murder*, no more, no less. To refer to it as 'terrorism' gives Bin Laden/Saddam Hussein and their ilk a lot more credit than they have coming. Mr. Bush says we now have a 'war on terrorism', to go along with, I assume, on the 'war on crime' and the 'war on drugs'. When are these 'wars' scheduled to end, if ever? I suggest, as I have in the past, that Bush and President Roosevelt II have at least one thing in common. They were both **itching** to get into a war. Roosevelt got his wish granted with Pearl Harbor, Bush got his wish granted on September 11, 2001. It was a horrible, tragic thing to be sure, but I can't help but think Bush played right into their hands with his declaration of 'terrorism'. Instead of having ONE Bin Laden to deal with, now he going to have hundreds of Bin Ladens. Well, I did say here the topic was closed out a couple weeks ago, and like yourself and many others here, I don't want it to continue either. Thanks for writing. 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 #391 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Apr 11 23:01:42 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3C31gG09356; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 23:01:42 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 23:01:42 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304120301.h3C31gG09356@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 #392 TELECOM Digest Fri, 11 Apr 2003 23:02:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 392 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Wireless GSM (SMS) Email Service - SMS Gateway Required (Dor Perl) Re: NPA+0/1XX-xxxx, was 0 or 1 to Start Number (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks (Johnson) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (JDS) Dial 1 Before Dialing All Numbers (John Schmerold) What is the Best IP PBS System (Gerbert) Re: Not Funny! Re: What the Bell ... (Linc Madison) Re: Meigs Field (Steven J. Sobol) Re: High-End Universal Remotes Require High Maintenance (Rob Levandowski) Re: Static IP (temp6@thewolfden.org) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (tippenring@deadspam.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: perelizer@yahoo.com (Dor Perl) Subject: Re: Wireless GSM (SMS) Email Service - SMS Gateway Required Date: 11 Apr 2003 06:48:34 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Try www.telemessage.com. We use their service and they are G-R-E-A-T ! They also have a site you can have all the capabilities you mentioned at: http://download.telemessage.com. You can even get 10 messages for free ! Enjoy. godofgarage@yahoo.com (ashutosh) wrote in message news:: > Hello, > I'm looking for a company which can provide us with the following > capabilities: > 1. SMS to Email Service > 2. Access to Email via SMS > 3. Intergration with Exchange and Lotus Notes > 4. SMS Gateway / SMS Server to send out Regular Alerts. > 5. Bulk SMS capabilities. > 6. Worldwide access. > Also I'm looking for a company which would provide me with the following > capabilities to help us with the web site we're building to serve ring > tones, Logos and Messaging for GSM mobile users worldwide: > 1. Interact with their SMS outbound gateway preferably via HTTP. > 2. Ability to send binary, Unicode and EMS messages. > 3. Ability to get Delivery Reports. > 4. Provide tools to create Image Messages, Operator Logos and Group > Logo's as a preference. > 5. Ability to schedule outgoing message bursts and their release > timings as an optional feature. > 6. Plans on or already has the ability to assist us with MMS > messaging. > 7. Ability to host a roaming GSM number to be able to send us via the > Internet messages which are sent to it as a preference. > 8. Ability to allow us to connect to their and other SMSC's via the > popular protocols, such as SMPP as an optional feature. > 9. Not a one man show. > 10. Cost per SMS relatively comparable to International market > standards. > 11. Is familiar with the different compatibility issues relating to > different brands of mobiles and the ability to send readable messages > and working ring tones and viewable images to them. > 12. The more automated and online tools they provide, the better. > Regards, > Ashutosh > CTO - SMS Gateway Inc. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 09:16:20 -0600 Subject: Re: NPA+0/1XX-xxxx, was 0 or 1 to Start Number Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:22:08 EDT, Markus Of Cuccia wrote: >> If the phone number 123-4567 was assigned, there would be no >> confusion when dialing that number becuase it would have to be dialed >> 202-123-4567. > This is a frequently asked question. > Yes, there *IS* a MAJOR technical reason. > There are already (and have been so, EMBEDDED, for DECADES, both special > billing numbers of the form NXX-0/1XX-xxxx, including "special calling > card" accounts and such. And also special operator and internal network > routings and codes of the same format. > While these are not 'real' customer telephones, they are in use for > internal telephone company network/operator/etc routings as well as used > for special billing account numbers. Here's an example. When I started working at this office last year, we had three business POTS lines provisioned by Telus, the ILEC. Later, we called up Sprint Canada and had them take over provisioning of local dialtone and long distance. We now get our bill from Sprint Canada, *BUT* we still get a monthly bill from Telus which covers our directory advertising. (Actually, we get a combined bill that also includes our fax line, which is still Telus because we have a DSL circuit on it and thus we can't change it to Sprint Canada). Anyway, on the combined bill, there are separate areas for: (403)250-2xxx (our fax number) (454)192-8xxx (our directory advertising) I have no idea what the "454" is for, but "192" is definitely an example of what you (and others) are talking about. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: panoptes@iquest.net (Daniel W. Johnson) Subject: Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks Date: 11 Apr 2003 08:26:48 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Ron Bean wrote in message news:: > [1] I thought it was Jubal Harshaw in "Stranger in a Strange Land", > but I can't find the reference just now (in any case, it sounds like > something Heinlein would come up with). If someone else doesn't > remember this, I may be forced to read the whole book again ... Sounds like "The Cat Who Walks Through Walls". ------------------------------ Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide From: JDS Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 16:33:36 GMT This invites a cosmically vast off-topic digression. I hope we can stop now. A diversity of opinions exist, and these opinions are expressed well (and not-so-well) on various rec.audio newsgroups. Let's keep this discussion off comp.dcom.telecom. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 15:17:21 -0500 From: John Schmerold Subject: Dial 1 Before Dialing All Numbers I just signed up for Vonage's service and am putting it in front of a BBS Telecom IPS 4x16 phone system. Only problem I see is the need to dial 1 before placing any call. Anybody know of a device that will do this automatically, or a program code I can give the IPS system that will put a 1 in front of any number dialed? ------------------------------ From: g.anbeek@royalhuisman.com (Gerbert) Subject: What is the Best IP PBS System Date: 11 Apr 2003 05:48:06 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi all, Our company is considering buying a Complete IP PABX system. with this they want to replace all analog phone communication. extra features they want to implement once the system is in place is high end video conferencing and building 3rd party TAPI applications. My question is what company makes the best system? Advice will be greatly appreciated. Kind regards, Gerbert ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: Not Funny! Re: What the Bell ... Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 02:15:26 -0700 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , Linc Madison wrote: > In article , > [name omitted to protect the guilty] wrote: >> Terrifying things are happening at the phone company ... >> http://www.sbc-pacificbell.com/ > So, what? I'm supposed to go to this web page and then guess what > exactly you think is "terrifying"? > Why should I bother? > Articles like this are utterly useless and highly annoying! > Don't post articles telling me "Hey, this web site > is really { fantastic | interesting | > terrifying | informative | funny | whatever }." Tell me what the web > site is, and what about it is noteworthy, not just the URL. > [Reverend Bob Dobbs of the Church of the Sub-Genius Notes: It was > supposed to be an April Fool's joke, fool! And you know what I say > about people who can't take a joke: F--- 'em! PAT] Well, in my defense, there are three points to be made: first, I didn't see the article until April 9th, so "April Fools" didn't register. Second, the web page when I did click on it was nothing but the regular SBC corporate web site main page, so the joke was lost. Indeed, it did really look like I was supposed to guess what about SBC was terrifying. (Their horrible treatment of their employees? The way they try to railroad their customers into signing up for unwanted extras? Their master plan to reconstitute The Bell System?) Third, I just got out of the hospital from a week of pancreatitis, and being NPO for four days will do that to you. Also, my point still remains for other postings and e-mails I receive. I get a lot of stuff that wants me to go to some URL with no explanation, and it's bloody annoying. Then again, when the evening news droids tell me that they're going to tell me something after the commercial break, my usual response is to change channels and look up the headline on the web. This business of "We'll tell you after the break whether it's going to rain or not" doesn't hook me in at all, it just makes me cranky. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am sort of cranky myself today. I always get numerous spams even in my personal email each day (to say nothing of how much comes through the telecom box) and I notice a new trend (at least to me today) are the numbers of spam which come through with totally irrelevant subject lines. You almost have to look at it, at least the first time around. For example, 'Your account will be deleted.' sent by 'Customer Service' or a message from ostensibly 'IRS' on the subject 'Your refund'. When you click on the first one it turns out that 'customer service' means customer service at a porn site or maybe a spam operation. Clicking on the second message reveals that IRS are the initials of a person who wants to tell you how much money you will be making each day on some MLM scheme. With most of those spam messages, as soon as you click to open the message you wind up validating your address for the spam sender. I get no laughs from the computer these days; they just are not fun any more, like they used to be. These days, my fun comes from watching 'TV Land' (which is channel 56 on our cable here) with their sense of humor. They re-run all the old shows. They'll play an episode of 'Happy Days' from the 1970's featuring actor Ronnie Howard as a teenage kid and as filler on it use a commercial from Andy Griffith featuring the same Ronnie Howard as a seven year old boy on that earlier series. Also, if you watch 'TV Land' very much (its similar to 'Nick at Night') you are also by now very familiar with their 'spam' (as a meat product) commercials which were made up especially as a laugh about our favorite topic: the lead-in differs on each commercial from the Hormel Meat Company, but it all boils down to the same thing each time. As an example: a woman is working at her computer, obviously tossing out lots of spam. Her son comes in the room and says, 'mom, I got hungry and made a sandwhich to eat. I made one for you also.' The lady opens the slice of bread, sees a chunk of meat in there, and thanks her son for giving me this spam to eat. Whenever she uses the word 'spam' you see her face up very close, and she repeats the word several times, each time getting more and more angry. Eventually she is turned back facing the computer once again, repeating the word 'Spam!' getting more and more angry as she reads and clicks. The commercial ends with a semi-trailer truck full of little metal cans of SPAM backing up to the computer and dumping thousands of the little cans out and totally burying her computer in the process. In another commercial, a woman has fixed dinner for the family and she is describing what it is; a sort of casserole made out of spam and sauce. The camera closes in on her face each time she pronounces the word 'spam'. The husband compliments her on her cooking but says, "I am still hungry" and the son says (as camera closes in on his mouth as he pronounces the word) "I want more spam, don't you?" Whereupon the mother says, "that is no problem, you can have all the spam you want". She claps her hands and the same semi-trailer truck crashes through the wall, knocking over the family computer wrecking it and dumping thousands of the little cans on the table the computer had been sitting on. I think it is very funny how TV Land juxtaposes computers, semi-trucks full of spam and the mouths of the actors as they express their anger (or glee, depending on the side of it your are on) about 'spam'. It is explicitly a meat product being served, and only an implication (always a computer in the background) of what an awful thing it is. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: Meigs Field Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 02:30:41 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC From Chris Farrar (cfarrar@sympatico.ca): > Well, Toronto City Centre Airport (YTZ) on the Toronto Islands. There's > one in located on the shore of Lake Erie in Cleveland as well that I can > think of right off the bat. City of Cleveland/Burke Lakefront Airport, mentioned by yours truly elsewhere in this thread. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ From: Rob Levandowski Subject: Re: High-End Universal Remotes Require High Maintenance Organization: MacWhiz Technologies Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 01:37:22 GMT In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > By WALTER S. MOSSBERG > When universal remotes made their debut, people envisioned themselves > picking up a single remote and controlling a multitude of devices with > ease. But programming these remotes proved so tough that some people > yearned for a coffee table covered with separate controllers. > This week, we tested two costly, high-end universal remotes -- the > Philips Pronto TSU3000 and Harmony Remote SST-768 from Intrigue > Technologies -- to see if these recently designed products are easier > to program. > http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/solution-20030409.html As a long-time owner of a Philips Pronto remote, albeit an older model, I found Mossberg's review to be a bit off-base. He chose to program the Pronto using the built-in system only. This method of programming was clearly designed in as a "backup" system. Anyone who is planning to drop this much money on a remote control is more likely to take full advantage of its features. What Mossberg didn't investigate is the Windows software that comes with the Pronto. It allows you to take control of the Pronto's touchscreen at the pixel level, create macros, chain events together, and so on. You can exactly customize the remote to your needs. If codes for a device you own aren't built into the Pronto, you can probably download them off the Internet instead of having to use the Pronto's learning function. Pronto's target market isn't someone who wants to clear up the clutter of two or three remotes. Any fool can figure out that a $400 remote won't be used by someone who only needs a $40 One-For-All. The target is people who have fairly serious home entertainment systems, with bunches of remotes, different brands of component, and complex interconnections. These people tend to be technically competent and won't shy away from using Windows to customize their remote control. For instance, my Pronto is programmed with a button marked "Watch TV." When I push that button, the following events occur: 1. The television is turned on. 2. The stereo receiver is turned on. 3. The television is set to the Video 2 input, where the TiVo is connected. 4. The stereo receiver is set to the Video 1 input, where the TiVo is connected. 5. The Pronto's display switches to the main TiVo control screen. Another button, "Watch DVD," sends a similar sequence. The "All Off" button sends power-down commands to everything in the system. Even more complex programming is possible, without much effort. That is, anyone that can successfully wire up a home theater without expert help should be able to understand the Pronto software. Pronto's real competition is the outrageously expensive automation systems from companies like Panja. I've seen systems that cost over $8,000 that didn't work as well as the Pronto, in part because the Pronto is easy to customize. Systems like the Panja really do require expert programmers, so a simple tweak like "I want this button over there" might involve hourly charges. With the Pronto, you load up the software, connect the remote, and make the change. I bought a Pronto, the earlier TSU2000 model, because it was the first universal remote I'd seen that actually did the job I needed. It replaces every button of every remote I have... and on top of that, it eliminates my need to push so many buttons just to go to bed. Rob Levandowski robl@macwhiz.com (Opinions expressed are solely my own and not a statement from my employer) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 00:42:40 -0500 From: temp6@thewolfden.org Subject: Re: Static IP John Higdon wrote on Wed, 09 Apr 2003 21:58:25 -0700: > In article , Joey Lindstrom > wrote: >> I'm still unclear on the relationship between this and when a host's >> forward and reverse DNS don't agree. I think this is what somebody >> else (sorry, forgot your name) was driving at earlier. There are many >> mail servers, my own included, that handle mail for multiple domains, >> all from a single IP. I think the concern is that if the server >> handles mail for "domain1.com" and "domain2.com", and identifies >> itself when sending mail to you as "domain2.com" (sending a message >> from user@domain2.com to you), and you do a reverse on it and come up >> with "domain1.com", is that going to cause a problem? > What a host claims in its HELO is not relevant in DNS lookups. In fact, the documentation for Exim (a common mail server) states several times: "The RFCs specifically state that mail should not be refused on the basis of the content of the HELO or EHLO commands." although I've never sought to verify this statement. > It doesn't matter for how many domains a server handles email. It still > has a cononical name for a DNS A record that maps to an identical name > specified in its PTR record. A host can still have multiple names, each > with an A record, but one of them will match up to the PTR record. If it > does not, then the forward and reverse are said to disagree. So what you're saying is that, given the incoming IP address of the server (ignoring the HELO hostname as required), do a reverse lookup on that IP, getting a name, then do a lookup on that name, getting an IP, and that IP better match the original. The other mail server names on the same IP will never been seen by the "testing process" and are only used to find the IP address when trying to deliver mail to them. jmeissen@shell1.aracnet.com said: > You're confusing sending mail with receiving mail. And actually, it's > irrelevant. A system that provides mail services for multiple virtual > domains should still identify itself by the correct name, verifiable by > reverse DNS. The MTA doesn't change how it identifies itself based on the > headers of the mail it's processing. I believe the question here is what is the "correct" name, and what does it mean to be "verifiable by reverse DNS". I believe the process above is the correct method. (I'm not sure your last statement is always true, but I believe it's irrelevent.) -W ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 20:40:52 -0500 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , submissive_sarah_98 @yahoo.com says: > Throw in that the Government of Canada charges a duty on every blank CD-R > and CD-RW sold to compensate artists royalties, whether or not the disk is > used for audio, MP3, or simply backing up your hard drive. Really? If that is the case, then the amount of royalties the artists have agreed to accept on blank CD sales would constitute a license agreement, since they are truly charging for the copyrighted media you might put on it. Therefore, you have paid the royalties to the artist, there is no middleman like RIAA members, so it sounds like you are entitled to burn whatever you like. You have paid your license fee for the copyrighted material. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 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 #392 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Apr 13 01:59:52 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3D5xpJ17349; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 01:59:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 01:59:52 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304130559.h3D5xpJ17349@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 #393 TELECOM Digest Sun, 13 Apr 2003 02:00:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 393 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson EchoStar Faces a Big Challenge (Monty Solomon) The Web by Modem, a Bit Faster (Monty Solomon) Internet via the Power Grid: New Interest in Obvious Idea (M Solomon) Live Traffic Reports By PDA (Monty Solomon) Prada RFID Tags (Monty Solomon) PluggedIn: Radio Tags May Track Shirts, Razors, Shoppers (Monty Solomon) Rivals See Room For Cooperation in TV on Demand (Monty Solomon) Apple Said to Discuss Music Deal, but Not Too Seriously (Monty Solomon) Deal Could Bring DirecTV's Interactive Services to US (Monty Solomon) Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP (Ron Bean) Re: Help Wanted: Protocol Software, Product Verification (Walt Howard) Re: Wire Recorders (Michael Muderick) I Need to Understand a Standard Business Phone System (Jim Leahy) RAO+0/1XX Cards, Other Special Billing Numbers (Mark J Cuccia) Re: Wireless GSM (SMS) Email Service - SMS Gateway Required (J Hopkins) Re: Anti-War Slogan Coined, Repurposed and Googlewashed in 42 days (AES) Re: Not Funny! Re: What the Bell ... (Richie Kennedy) Re: In Privacy Debate, Tech Has Two Faces (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: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:35:11 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EchoStar Faces a Big Challenge By SETH SCHIESEL While Rupert Murdoch and General Motors executives worked out the News Corporation's deal for control of DirecTV, Charles W. Ergen, the chairman of EchoStar, the nation's No. 2 satellite-television company, spent most of this week south of the border. Mr. Ergen was at an undisclosed Mexican location for a previously scheduled conference with senior EchoStar executives and sales agents, said two people close to the company. While the meetings were meant to be all business, Mr. Ergen may have been well advised to take a few minutes to relax in the sun. That is because it may be his last vacation for some time. Now that Mr. Murdoch has finally made the deal he has been anticipating for at least a decade - the deal that brings the News Corporation into the United States satellite television market - EchoStar will be hard put to continue to outperform DirecTV the way it has for the last 18 months. As the cable television industry finally begins to deliver on the promise of its long-lamented digital upgrades and as DirecTV, the nation's No. 1 satellite television carrier, finally appears to be falling into the hands of aggressive and capable media operators, EchoStar and its mercurial chairman appear to face their biggest challenges in years. Marc Lumpkin, an EchoStar spokesman, said yesterday afternoon that he did not know where Mr. Ergen was. Mr. Lumpkin said that the rest of EchoStar's senior executives were traveling and that neither he nor any other executive could discuss the DirecTV deal or EchoStar's future. Yet while EchoStar's future remains murky, its immediate past was fairly bright, even though regulators rejected EchoStar's own deal to acquire Hughes Electronics, the parent of DirecTV, from G.M. Ever since EchoStar announced that deal, in October 2001, EchoStar has maintained and even accelerated the pace of its business while DirecTV has appeared largely stagnant, adrift in a sea of uncertainty about its future. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/business/11BIRD.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:36:20 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Web by Modem, a Bit Faster By DAVID POGUE THESE young people today, with their loud music and cable modems! They're too young to remember the olden days, when it wasn't just your PC and your Windows version that became obsolete every other year; it was also your modem. Modems that ran at 9.6 kilobits per second gave way to 14.4K models, and then to 28.8 and 33.6. In all, Americans spent more than 15 years trying to keep up with the Hayses. And then it stopped. In 1997, so-called 56K modems appeared, and that was that; the industry hit a technological brick wall. Nowadays, if you feel the need for speed, you can pay $40 or $50 per month for a cable modem or D.S.L. hookup. But 70 percent of Americans either can't afford high-speed connections or can't get them because they live outside major cities. Legions of hotel-room laptop luggers are locked in the limbo of 56K, too. They still connect to the Internet the way they have since 1997: by dialing over ordinary phone lines at 56K or slower. If you're among those millions, here's some big news: the modem arms race isn't quite over. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/10/technology/circuits/10stat.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:37:38 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Internet via the Power Grid: New Interest in Obvious Idea By JOHN MARKOFF and MATT RICHTEL SAN FRANCISCO, April 9 - As cable, telephone and wireless companies compete to provide high-speed Internet access to homes, a new challenger is emerging based on a decidedly old technology. The idea is to send Internet data over ordinary electric power lines. Proponents argue that it can be a competitive alternative to digital cable, telephone digital subscriber line and wireless efforts to connect the "last mile" between homes and Internet service providers. Power-line networking has held out promise for several decades, in part because the electric grid is already in place, running to almost every residence in the nation, and also because it was thought that power companies would leap at the idea of a new revenue source - if the technology is proven. But the idea has elicited deep skepticism from technologists who argue that the electric power network is a remarkably difficult environment for transmitting digital information. Moreover the nation's electric power industry has for the most part remained complacent about the technology. Still, the technology is getting sudden attention in response to several trial efforts around the country and in other nations. Today, Michael K. Powell, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, gave the concept a further boost when he toured a demonstration site for the technology in Potomac, Md. The agency and its chairman have said they are backing the power-line approach in an effort to stir competition and offer greater consumer choice. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/10/technology/10POWE.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:39:45 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Live Traffic Reports By PDA Arik Hesseldahl NEW YORK - For some, the idea of a personal digital assistant that is also enabled to work with the Global Positioning System is of limited use. Knowing your location and where the next turn leads is only so useful if you don't know your way around. For that reason, the GPS unit in your car that is so helpful when you're on vacation or on a business trip can be less so when you're driving around your own home city. But what if a GPS-enabled device could not only keep track of your current location but also warn you of slow traffic conditions ahead -- and help you get around them? A Cleveland-based startup called Mapopolis has created a software program for handheld computers that does just that, and if you live in certain cities in the U.S. you can try it out for free before the end of April. http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/11/cx_ah_0411tentech.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 16:30:12 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Prada RFID tags Excerpt from http://www.out-law.com/php/page.php?page_id=benettonuturnonh1049810409 Benetton U-turn on hidden trackers in clothing? Since April 2002, RFID tags have been used by Prada in the designer clothing company's flagship Manhattan store. The tags, provided by Texas Instruments, are embedded in customer loyalty cards to personalise the shopping experience. In the dressing rooms, RFID readers identify all merchandise a customer brings inside and an interactive video touch screen displays information on the garment. From the touch screen, customers can access product specifications as well as alternative and complementary items and accessories. Excerpt from TI press release of April 2002 http://www.ti.com/tiris/docs/news/news_releases/2002/rel4-23-02.shtml Prada Personalizing Customer Experience at New York Epicenter Store Using Texas Instruments RFid Smart Labels RFID tags identify customers, merchandise and staff to enhance service and build loyalty DALLAS, TX (April 23, 2002) - Texas Instruments Radio Frequency Identification (RFid) Systems today announced that its RFid Tag-it smart label technology is being used at Prada's new Epicenter store in New York City. TI's RFid smart labels identify customers, merchandise, and link individual shoppers with information about their selections before and after they make a purchase. Texas Instruments RFid tags and readers are implemented at numerous touchpoints throughout the Prada Epicenter store to identify products, devices and staff. The technology creates a seamless shopping experience designed to enhance customer relationships. Prada sales personnel are equipped with a wireless RFID handheld reader that gives them up-to-date access to inventory and customer information stored in a centralized database. Sales personnel also use the device to read RFID-tagged products and identify staff wearing RFID 'clips.' The device also controls video screens throughout the store, which demonstrate products on the runway, show collection photographs and designer sketches, while providing more in-depth information about the color, cut, fabric and materials used to create Prada merchandise. In the dressing rooms, RFID readers identify all merchandise a customer brings inside and displays information on the garment on the interactive video touch screen display. From the touch screen, customers can access product specifications as well as alternative and complementary items and accessories. Using RFID technology linked to customer information stored in a database, Prada ensures a high-quality customer experience across multiple sales associates and subsequent Epicenter locations. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 16:33:12 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: PluggedIn: Radio Tags May Track Shirts, Razors and Shoppers By Andy Sullivan WASHINGTON, April 8 (Reuters) - Do you know what your underwear is saying about you? Tiny wireless transmitters promise to link tires, razors and other everyday items to the Internet, creating a world where money actually talks and the walls really do have ears. Marketing experts say the new technology, known as radio-frequency identification, or RFID, could revolutionize the retail industry as stores personalize service and manage inventory more efficiently. But civil-liberties advocates say the sensors could also enable an Orwellian world where sales clerks and law-enforcement officials, with the wave of a wand, could find out the contents of a purse. Or the fact that you purchased your name-brand briefs for $10 on sale at a specifically named department store. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33760097 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 03:43:05 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Rivals See Room For Cooperation in TV on Demand By Peter Henderson LOS ANGELES, April 11 (Reuters) - Watching TV could get really easy, if cable operators and the new industry led by TiVo Inc.(NASDAQ:TIVO) can bury the hatchet. The two businesses, which have emerged as technological rivals, both aim to let viewers watch what they want, when they want and have been competing to find their way into homes with services that are expected to explode in demand. And just as each is showing signs of success, setting the ground for a marketing war, some industry executives said this week that they see room for the two sides to work together. Cable television operators have been trying to replicate the video store experience by offering menus of movies and television programs that could be played at any time in any home with a touch of the cable remote. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33812352 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:26:17 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Apple Said to Discuss a Music Deal, but Not Too Seriously By GERALDINE FABRIKANT with LAURA M. HOLSON Apple, the iconoclastic computer maker, has discussed an investment in Universal Music, the world's largest recording company, people close to the discussions said yesterday. These people, however, also cautioned that a deal was unlikely to be concluded. Universal Music is among the American entertainment assets that its parent, Vivendi Universal of France, is considering selling as it tries to pare down a huge debt. Potential suitors were seen as coming from an investor or player in entertainment. But Apple's interest came out of the blue. The idea of an investment grew out of talks over a new online music store that Apple is planning to introduce. Apple, which has had great success with its iPod MP3 portable music device, is embarking on its own online music store, which could deliver music to consumers for a small price in an effort to thwart piracy. The online store could be introduced soon. After months of wrangling, all five major music companies finally agreed this week to allow Apple to license their music for a fee for the venture, according to a music executive. If the venture pans out, it could help stem piracy and benefit the music industry. The talks between Apple and Vivendi covered the concept of buying as much as a third of the music unit, according to people close to the discussions. But the talks appear to have been just exploratory discussions that did not go far. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/12/business/media/12MUSI.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:34:19 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Deal Could Bring DirecTV's Interactive Services to US Satellite unit changes expected at News Corp. By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 4/11/2003 Australian media baron Rupert Murdoch's $6.6 billion bid for the parent company of satellite television provider DirecTV could lead to a US rollout of some of the popular interactive TV systems offered by Murdoch's British satellite unit, analysts said yesterday. But few analysts think Murdoch's News Corp. would launch a price war to lure customers away from cable television and Echostar Communications Corp.'s Dish Network, even if it could reinvigorate declining subscriber growth at DirecTV. DirecTV's base of 11 million US subscribers offers an opportunity for News Corp.'s Fox television unit to launch new networks delivered to DirecTV customers. But US regulators that would have to approve the acquisition almost certainly would block a Murdoch-owned DirecTV from cutting special deals with Fox and favoring Fox over other news, sports, and entertainment networks, analysts said. Whatever changes News Corp. has in store for DirecTV might take several months to appear, said Michael Goodman, broadcast analyst with Yankee Group in Boston. News Corp. is seeking to buy a controlling 34 percent stake in Hughes Electronics Corp., which besides DirecTV also owns Hughes Network Systems, a business communications unit, and 81 percent of the PanAmSat commercial satellite unit. Murdoch ''is going to have his hands full for a while'' determining whether to keep the non-TV satellite units or spin them off, Goodman said. ''But when he finally does get those swallowed, I think he is going to come out of the door with both guns blazing.'' http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/101/business/Deal_could_bring_DirecTV_s_interactive_services_to_US+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 23:34:47 -0500 From: Ron Bean Subject: Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP Blocks panoptes@iquest.net (Daniel W. Johnson) writes: >> [1] I thought it was Jubal Harshaw in "Stranger in a Strange Land", >> but I can't find the reference just now (in any case, it sounds like >> something Heinlein would come up with). If someone else doesn't >> remember this, I may be forced to read the whole book again ... > Sounds like "The Cat Who Walks Through Walls". Several people over on r.a.sf.w have suggested that one, but I'm pretty sure I've never read it. I think Heinlein recycled the idea from some earlier book. And it's not SiaSL either, so it's still a mystery. ------------------------------ From: howard@rondo.ee.ualberta.ca (Walt Howard) Subject: Re: Help Wanted: Protocol Software, Product Verification Engineers Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 04:49:35 UTC Organization: A poorly-installed InterNetNews site In article , Medhavi Bhatia wrote: > Job Title: Protocol Software Engineer > Contact: > Please send in your resume in word format to: > Medhavi Bhatia Why is that someone who wants Unix experts, also wants resumes written by a Microsoft program? It's not as though less-proprietary formats like, say, PDF, are rare and difficult. Even for those who will switch to M$ software for writing their resume, rigging M$Word to output PDF is trivially easy. Ob telecom note: I am pleased to see that some company is trying to do VoIP in Unix, and has enough money to hire people. Walt Howard /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign InterNet: whoward@ieee.org \ / No HTML or M$Word in mail or news! BellNet: +1 780 492 7262 X ------------------------------ From: Michael Muderick Subject: Re: Wire Recorders Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 05:15:31 -0400 I still have two of those old Webster Chicago (Webcor) machines (probably one too many if anyone's interested.) They are heavy machines. The model 80-1 is probably one of the most popular. You can find them on ebay every now and then if you just want to see a picture. Michael Muderick ------------------------------ From: jimleahy@home.com (Jim Leahy) Subject: I Need to Understand a Standard Business Phone System Date: 12 Apr 2003 11:48:02 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I work for a medium sized corporation and need to learn the ins and outs of the phone system. We do e-mail, multi site connection, t1, prl, all different stuff. Is there a place that can put this in some sort of layman terms. I am an engineer so technical doesn't scare me -- actually it intrigues me, but I won't be plugging in any cables just purchasing a system and knowing how to maintain, upgrade, troubleshoot, ect. Any good web sites? Any good discussion groups? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not meaning to toot my horn too loudly, but right here in comp.dcom.telecom is a great place to start. If the guys here cannot answer your question, I do not know who can. You might also want to consult our web site, http://telecom-digest.org for twenty years worth of technical files and discussions. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 07:14:16 (CDT) From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: RAO+0/1XX Cards, Other Special Billing Numbers Chris Farrar wrote: > Bell Canada replaced my calling card (old card was 416-23X-XXXX) with > a new card bearing the number 476-176-XXXX. From then on, my bills > showed calls from number 176-XXXX whenever I used my calling card. and Joey Lindstrom wrote: > we called up Sprint Canada and had them take over provisioning of local > dialtone and long distance. We now get our bill from Sprint Canada, > *BUT* we still get a monthly bill from Telus which covers our directory > advertising. (Actually, we get a combined bill that also includes our > fax line, which is still Telus because we have a DSL circuit on it and > thus we can't change it to Sprint Canada). > Anyway, on the combined bill, there are separate areas for: > 403-250-xxxx (our fax number) > 454-192-xxxx (our directory advertising) > I have no idea what the "454" is for, but "192" is definitely an example > of what you (and others) are talking about. 476 is an RAO Code used by Bell Canada (one of many used by Bell Canada; all of Bell Canada's RAO Codes are of the 47X and 48X range) 454 is an RAO Code used by Telus (previously the AGT side; the old BCTel side of Telus uses RAO #493; Telus-Quebec has RAO #505). (Other large incumbent telcos in Canada, such as Northwestel, Sasktel, Manitoba Tel, NBTel, NewTel, Island Tel, NS Maritime Tel, etc. have their own RAO Codes). RAO = Revenue Accounting Office, used in billing, settlements, revenue divisions/separations/etc. within and between telcos in North America. The three-digit RAO Code is used for administrative purposes, including automating billing and accounts, such as SPECIAL accounts not directly related to a specific 'real' telephone number, such as special calling cards, and Joey's Telus Directory Adveritsement account. And to prevent confusion with any possible valid (ten-digit) line numbers which have AREA codes using the same numerics as special cards/accounts based on the RAO using those numerics, note that line-numbers do NOT have a fourth-digit of 0 or 1 (it is 2-thru-9), while such special-cards/account DO have a fourth digit of 0 or 1. This makes such special accounts unique and different from line-number accounts! RAO based Calling Cards start off with the three digits of the RAO Code (or 'adjusted' RAO Code), followed by a 0XX/1XX code, then the four-digit "account" number (like the line-number on a telephone number), and then the 'PIN'. RAO Codes "themselves" range from 0XX thru 5XX, but when one is keying a calling card number at the 'bong' tone on 0+/01+ or 1-800- access to an operator/card platform, a '0' at the 'bong' cuts one thru to the operator, and a '1' at the 'bong' tone indicates a special billing requet code of the form 1X or 19X. So, 'pure' RAO codes of 0XX are adjusted to be displayed as 6XX on RAO based calling cards, while 'pure' RAOs of 1XX are adjusted to be displayed as 7XX on RAO based calling cards. The numeric/code ranges 8XX-0XX, 8XX-1XX, 9XX-0XX and 9XX-1XX on standard telephone calling cards are assigned for use by Long Distance carrier issued special (non-line-number-based) calling cards and other special account numbers. These are called CIID cards (Card-Issuer-IDentifier code based calling cards), and are more-or-less similar to local telco issued RAO Cards (aka special calling cards). So ... LINE-number based cards (actually based on a real telephone number) are of the form: NXX-NXX-xxxx (plus the 'PIN' of the form NXXX) (where the first triplet NXX is the NPA/area code, the second triplet NXX is teh c.o.code, etc) while RAO/CIID based cards, based on special account numbers and RAO codes are of the form: NXX-0/1XX-xxxx (plus the 'PIN' of the form NXXX) (where the first triplet NXX is the RAO Code (or adjusted RAO Code of 6XX/7XX if the 'real' RAO is 0XX/1XX) OR the beginning of the CIID code (for LD Carrier issued special cards), and the second triplet is *NOT* NXX but rather 0/1XX. 'N' is any possible digit 2 thru 9 'X' is any possible decimal digit (ANY digit 0 thru 9) RAO Codes of the form 0XX (6XX), 1XX (7XX), 2XX, and 3XX are used exclusively by telcos within the continental USA, while 4XX and 5XX RAO codes are used by both US-based telcos and telcos *oustide* of the continental USA. BTW, these days, CLECs and Cellular/etc. companies can have RAOs, and 'pure' RAO codes can now be ALPHA-numeric (but any RAO with a leading alpha followed by two numerics cannot have calling cards based on that code). Here are some of the assignments of RAO Codes in Canada and other places OUTSIDE of the 48 US States/DC: 451 NB Tel 452 Maritime Tel (NS) 453 NorthwesTel (YT, NWT, Nunavut, northern BC) 454 Telus (Alberta only) 455 Island Tel (PEI) 456 Manitoba Tel 457 SaskTel 458 Newfoundland Tel 459 (no longer used, once used by Terra Nova Tel in NF) 461 Hawaii (VeriZon-GTE Hawaiian Tel Co) 470 thru 479, 481, 484, 486 Bell Canada (various parts of ON and PQ) 490 Puerto Rico Telephone (VeriZon) 491 (no longer used, once used in Puerto Rico along with 490) 492 Alascom 493 Telus (BC Only, formerly GTE's BC Tel) 498 (used by US for billing back to foreign telcos overseas) 500 Bahamas 501 Telmex (Mexico) 502 Jamaica 503 Cayman Islands 504 U.S.Virgin Islands 505 Telus-Quebec (eastern PQ, formerly GTE-QuebecTel) 506 Barbados 507 (misc. Caribbean islands - see details below) 508 Trinidad/Tobago 515 Bermuda 516 Dominican Republic 519 (today used by AT&T CLEC; years ago used by AT&T for High Seas) 520 (today used by AT&T CLEC; years ago used by AT&T for Overseas) 521 (no longer listed; once used by AT&T for Dataphone Srvc billing) 523 Telnor (Northwestern Mexican border area) 931 (no longer listed; once used by Canada for billing back overseas) (and there are hundreds of other RAO/CIID code assignments not listed here -- I have only attempted to list those which have been used for locations or billing situations outside of the continental US). NOTE, 507 for "misc. Caribbean islands" includes: Anguilla, Antigua/Barbuda, British Virgin Is, Dominica, Grenada/Carriacou, Montserrat, St.Kitts/Nevis, St.Lucia, St.Vincent, Turks/Caicos Again, note that the codes listed above are when used as RAO (Revenue Accounting Office) codes, and NOT when used as dialed AREA (NPA) Codes. And when used to issue calling card numbers BASED ON the RAO Code, the second 'triplet' of digits of the card number (forth/fifth/sixth digits) are 0XX or 1XX, *NOT* NXX, so as not to conflict with NPA/Line Number based calling cards, where the first triplet is the NPA (Area Code) and the next triplet is the c.o.code of the form NXX. Both formats have to "peacefully co-exist", and each is unique and distinct. And since there is use of 0 or 1 in the fourth position digit, for such billing purposes (as well as internal network/operator/test routing and switching purposes, not really discussed in this post), you can't simply allow customer-dialalbe "POTS" c.o.codes of 0XX/1XX even in overlay / mandatory ten-digit dialing situations. And EVEN IF they were to "clear out" all such long-embedded special billing and internal network switching/routing uses of 0XX/1XX codes in the "central office code" portion of a ten-digit number, there are just WAY too many switches, payphone chips, dialers, PBXes, etc. out there which are HARD-CODED to restrict any customer dialing use of such 0XX/1XX codes when calling "POTS" numbers. (When one keys an RAO/CIID card number for billing, they are keying it to a telco TOPS or AT&T OSPS Calling card platform which specifically allows such customer keyed use of these codes, and ONLY in those cases). Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu ------------------------------ From: Jim Hopkins Subject: Re: Wireless GSM (SMS) Email Service - SMS Gateway Required Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 14:47:33 GMT Could this be....SPAM?? Posing as an innocuous question and answer? I think so. Jim Hopkins Dor Perl wrote in message news:telecom22.392.1@telecom-digest.org... > Try www.telemessage.com. > We use their service and they are G-R-E-A-T ! > They also have a site you can have all the capabilities you mentioned > at: http://download.telemessage.com. > You can even get 10 messages for free ! > Enjoy. > godofgarage@yahoo.com (ashutosh) wrote in message > news:: > > Hello, >> I'm looking for a company which can provide us with the following >> capabilities: >> 1. SMS to Email Service >> 2. Access to Email via SMS >> 3. Intergration with Exchange and Lotus Notes >> 4. SMS Gateway / SMS Server to send out Regular Alerts. >> 5. Bulk SMS capabilities. >> 6. Worldwide access. < --- Lots of message snipped --> >> Regards, >> Ashutosh >> CTO - SMS Gateway Inc. ------------------------------ From: AES/newspost Subject: Re: Anti-War Slogan Coined, Repurposed and Googlewashed Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 09:23:13 -0700 In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > Tyler wrote: "...the huge anti-war demonstrations around the world > this weekend are reminders that there may still be two superpowers on > the planet: the United States and world public opinion." And one of these has some chance of being adequately informed, rationally guided, and possibly effective in achieving beneficial results; the other doesn't. Take your pick. (Note: I said "some chance . . . ".) "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: Richie Kennedy Subject: Re: Not Funny! Re: What the Bell ... Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 17:24:03 -0000 Organization: route56/cp, Pat replied to Linc Madison in news:telecom22.392.7@telecom-digest.org: > Also, if you watch 'TV Land' very much (its similar to 'Nick at > Night') OT, BUT... TV Land was sort of a "spinoff" from Nick at Nite, after Viacom extended Nickeloden kids programming, and basically had a large library of show that they couldn't run just in the prime-time and overnight hours. > you are also by now very familiar with their 'spam' (as a meat > product) commercials which were made up especially as a laugh about > our favorite topic: the lead-in differs on each commercial from the > Hormel Meat Company, but it all boils down to the same thing each > time. As an example: a woman is working at her computer, obviously > tossing out lots of spam. Her son comes in the room and says, 'mom, I > got hungry and made a sandwhich to eat. I made one for you also.' The > lady opens the slice of bread, sees a chunk of meat in there, and > thanks her son for giving me this spam to eat. Whenever she uses the > word 'spam' you see her face up very close, and she repeats the word > several times, each time getting more and more angry. Eventually she > is turned back facing the computer once again, repeating the word > 'Spam!' getting more and more angry as she reads and clicks. The > commercial ends with a semi-trailer truck full of little metal cans of > SPAM backing up to the computer and dumping thousands of the little > cans out and totally burying her computer in the process. Interesting ... BTW, does anyone else have any experience with the Junk Mail controls in Mozilla 1.3? I've used them a little bit, and thus far have been fairly effective ... some stuff gets through, but I don't think I've gotten a "false positive" in a while. Richie Kennedy route56@route56.com · www.route56.com "If you're lost, you can look - and you will find me" ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: In Privacy Debate, Tech Has Two Faces Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 10:40:02 -0700 In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > For example, video surveillance could be made more palatable if it > worked more like an episode of "Cops," with people's faces blurred > out. Only if a crime occurred would the more detailed images be made > available. Now THAT would be remarkable technology. That the system could determine where faces are in the frame and blur them reliably is one thing, but having the system determine that the activity in the frame "is a crime" would be truly remarkable! That being the case, I can see the ultimate obsolescence of trial courts. Just run the appropriate video clips through the Crime-o-Rater, and it would determine what if any crimes were committed and who to lock up. I love ideas that come out of "think tanks". 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 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 #393 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Apr 13 19:25:19 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3DNPJ621882; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 19:25:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 19:25:19 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304132325.h3DNPJ621882@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 #394 TELECOM Digest Sun, 13 Apr 2003 19:25:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 394 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cellular to Modem? (Mike Sandman) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (David Clayton) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (David O'Heare) Lagact DOS App in Win2000 Doesn't Dial Correctly (Rollo) Unlike Napster, Kazaa Can Run and it CAN Hide (John Smith) Re: Internet via the Power Grid: New Interest in Obvious Idea (joe) Re: In Privacy Debate, Tech Has Two Faces (Paul Wallich) Re: SBC All Distance Connections (Wes Leatherock) Re: How do I Reject Callers Based on a Timeframe (Mike Sandman) Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play (Clayton) Heinlein Quote, was Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists (3yeadqp02) Re: Meigs Field (Mike Sandman) 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: Mike Subject: Re: Cellular to Modem? Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 15:14:36 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: mikes595@hotmail.com I used a Verizon CDPD modem for a couple of years, but recently canceled it. It was 14.4 max at $50 a month unlimited, which was better than nothing around the Chicago area, but I recently was turned on to a faster service that came on-line last fall. Sprint PCS has upgraded their system to 3G in all areas they work in (most major cities and along many major highways only). The theoretical max data rate is over 100K. A friend showed me his Sanyo 4900 phone, which he says gets remarkable reception compared to all other Sprint phones (I agree). I purchased a Sprint Sanyo 4900 phone with the USB data cable, installed the drivers on my laptop which make it look like a regular modem (follow the directions carefully!), and use Sprint's #777 to dial the internet with a regular Dialup Networking session (just like a land line modem). You don't need an ISP -- Sprint acts like the ISP to connect you to the Internet. My friend suggested buying it at Circuit City which has a no questions asked return policy, and a service contract where they'll just replace a broken phone when you walk in with it. I did, but I don't know what they'll do when they don't carry the 4900 any more? Before I activated the phone, I took it home and to the office, and drove around with it to make sure I had good coverage. You can dial 611 from an unactivated Sprint phone, and listen to their idiotic IVR for quite a while before a human answers (if ever). Someone told me that Sprint charges you to talk to a human, but I don't know that for sure. I get around 40K or so most of the time, sometimes faster and sometimes slower, but always a lot faster than the 14.4K CDPD modem which worked in most of the Chicago area, but hardly anywhere else in the country. Like the CDPD modem, I have to disconnect and reconnect from time to time when it stops working (I sometimes use it for hours at a time). One solution to keeping the connection alive is to ping some server every 1 to 8 seconds. In Win 98SE I click on Start, RUN, type COMMAND in the box, and then type at the DOS prompt: ping -t www.yahoo.com I leave the DOS box open while I want to stay connected, and it seems to work OK. I also had to order the Sanyo 4900 Desktop (drop-in) Charger, which allows me to power/charge the phone while I use the USB cable to the laptop. There's only one connector on the phone, so you can't charge it while on the Internet without the desktop charger. For some reason, Sprint doesn't carry any of this stuff, I had to order it from Sanyo's web site. I've heard reports that other models of Sprint phones (like the Samsung A500) will connect at faster speeds, but won't work in the fringe areas of what is otherwise a fringe service anyway. The Sanyo 4900 is pretty amazing as far as having signal goes, but I don't like it as a phone (there's no sidetone), and access to the Internet through the built-in browser/tiny screen is unbelievably slow and cumbersome. It does have a barely usable speakerphone (the speaker is on the back of the phone) -- much worse than Motorola's on Nextel phones. When I canceled the Verizon CDPD, they told me that their 3G service was up and working, but that I'd only get 14.4 in areas where they don't have 3G towers (a lot of places). I might have gone for it, but they didn't have an unlimited service. It was X cents a megabyte, and I was pretty scared that I could end up with a huge charge for checking the weather etc. I don't know how much a megabyte is? I currently use the Sprint phone as a backup to my Nextel phone for voice, and only use a few minutes for voice a month. Internet minutes seem to be billed against regular voice minutes (I have 2000 anytime for $85, and unlimited nights and weekends). Sprint also has a PCMCIA card that they offer unlimited service on, for $100 a month. I use my Nextel phone as a backup for data, dialing into my regular ISP at around 9600 baud. Pretty slow -- but better than nothing (sometimes). Of all the cell phones I've tried, the Nextel seems to have the least mechanical sound (most of the time). The Sprint phone, and my AT&T phones are bad along those lines. I do get cut-off on the Nextel phone all the time -- it's horrible. Customer service at Sprint is absolutely the worst. Nextel is a close second, being worse than useless. AT&T seems better than the other two, but I don't call them much. I recently mentioned in my Mart column that Nextel has a "corporate" customer service number that's a little bit better - 360-662-5960. Almost all Nextel customer service reps are contractors, probably the same highly trained people taking orders for the Miracle Mop. There's no getting around the nitwits at Sprint. As soon as someone else offers timed or unlimited 3G in a reasonable area, I'm going to switch. I use this connectivity on a regular basis, since I try to stay out of the office as much as possible. When I'm there, I end up doing everybody else's work, and can't get what I need to do myself done (which makes for some long nights). Plus, everybody at our office seems to be happy when I'm not there, including (especially?) Donna. I have a mobile office that lets me work from just about anywhere. I can take orders, and access anything on our network. It's where I write articles for The-Mart, write books, write catalog pages, design new gizmos, and write new training videos. I couldn't do this stuff remotely if I couldn't research stuff on the Internet. To keep connected by voice, we have Centrex on the lines in our office. If someone has a question that they can't answer in the office, they transfer the caller off-premise to my cell phone - but with a twist. I use a service called LinxFind (Sheryl Stone at 888-830-1761) to allow me to transfer the calls back to the office. The office transfers the caller to an 800 number at Linx, which sends the call to my cell phone. If I want to transfer back to the office so they can place an order, I dial ###0, and the call goes back to our main number. I can also transfer the caller anywhere else by dialing ### and following the Linx voice prompts. One reason I'm still using Nextel, even though I get cut-off all the time, is that when the call drops the caller is told that the call was disconnected, they can dial * to reconnect. My phone rings again, and we can pick up the conversation where we left off. Pretty amazing. I can make outgoing calls through Linx as well to get the same cut-off benefit, but it seems like a hassle to call the 800 number first, so I don't. To put all this in perspective, the quality of service on all cell phones is much worse than regular service in third world countries - but we seem to put up with it. It will never get better since there's a finite amount of bandwidth for an almost unlimited quantity of humans, and a finite amount of money divided between a bunch of wireless companies. What would it be like if there were still only two carriers per market? How about just one phone company? If someone really needs to use a cell phone for a modem, like with a credit card machine or fax, you need access to analog service. A guy named Zachary seems to have a solution for certain Motorola phones on certain carriers. It's some kind of POTS adapter that he's adapted (I haven't tested it). His number is 972-484-3107. I'm told that analog service is very expensive if you try to subscribe to it, which might not be bad for credit card transactions or faxes. Carriers seem to be turning off some analog towers in some areas - so you might not be able to get a signal. Some phones won't let you force them into analog mode, either. Mike Sandman On 6 Apr 2003 18:37:27 GMT, *selah* wrote: > I was told that cellular phones can't receive modem (digital) > signals. Is this true and, if so, why? Are there any devices that > would make this possible (other than using a satellite)? > remove "noe" to reply > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are such things as cellular > modems, so I would guess it is not true. The one cellular modem I have > seen was like a little PCMCIA card, and it went on a slot on the side > of a laptop. Instead of a plug for a modular cord on the end which ran > off to a landline phone connection, there was a little (about three > inches long) flexible rubber antenna on the side of the card like that > seen on some cellular phones. To use it, you 'dialed' the number you > were calling (using the protocol of the cell phone carrier you were > using. I think Mike Sandman has one for his > personal laptop, but I do not think he sells them. And they do not > come cheap on monthly charges either. I think he said he gets flat > rate service from some carrier, and it frequently gives him pains in > his posterior trying to use it. His laptop gets locked up from the > confusion at times, and it never runs faster than 9600 or maybe > 14,400. Mike, if I am quoting you incorrectly here, I will ask you > to correct me. I know that on my cell-socket device, I have used a > laptop as the 'external phone' with a built in 56.6 modem. I have > to force it to dial because it does not recognize the cell-socket > 'dial tone' and I have never gotten more than 300 baud from it, when > I get that much. Often times it will not negotiate at all. By > the way, twenty years ago when I 'upgraded' from 110 baud to 300 > baud I really thought it was wonderful. Not any more. PAT] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mike Sandman is an old friend who we don't hear from often enough here in the Digest. He also has a very good catalog online of telephone-related stuff which I wish you would review from time to time: http://sandman.com and while you are there have a look at his parakeets on the camera page. He theoretically is only a seller to companies, but occassionally he helps out readers here by selling odds-n-ends needed for private phone systems, etc. Do give him a look over and see how he can possibly help you with a variety of miscellaneous telephone parts, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 19:14:55 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au John Higdon contributed the following: ...... > The fact of the matter is that a vinyl record hasn't got any > information on it that cannot be extracted by a respectable > consumer-grade turntable and cartridge. Vinyl enthusiasts act as > though some sort of magic processes were at work when the records were > manufactured (working around Westrex cutting heads would quickly > disabuse anyone of that notion), and only bizarre ultra-high-end > components are capable of extracting that indescribable and > immeasurable essence. > Anyone who spends five figures on a turntable (or partcularly any part > of one) has WAY too much money and a very over-inflated notion of the > quality of his ear. I once knew someone who had a steel post (filled with concrete) installed through the floor of his living room so his turntable could have a solid base totally isolated from any vibrations from the room's floor etc. This person also used hand wound moving coil cartridges, really one of the "golden ears" brigade! As this was a while ago, I wonder how he would have coped with the modern day prospect of mobile phone signals breaking into his carefully constructed hi fi setup? 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. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I happen to like good music and good audio quality. But there are limits to it. Years ago I had a tube-style radio from a well known German company which had a turn- table as part of it. Now I have a Bose radio/CD combination which does okay. I do not have many tape cassettes any longer, but those I have I play on a little unit which plugs into the 'aux' connection on the Bose. It all sounds pretty well. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David O'Heare Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 09:52:16 -0400 PAT sez: > There was a major audio components company > north of Chicago (in Evanston, IL) for many, many years called 'Shure' > and I think they made needles for record players. I wonder if they are > still around? PAT] Yes, they're still around, and still making cartridges and styluses (what used to be called needles), though they make far fewer types than they used to. Much of their business is in microphones and audio gear aimed at the pro and semi-pro performer and recording market. I have two Shure cartridges for my turntable, depending on what's being played. The turntable is an old Lenco, continuously variable in speed from about 12 RPM to something over 80 RPM. I did buy a 10" record a few years back, recorded by Los Lobos around the time of the "La Bamba" movie, that was 45RPm on one side, and 78RPM on the other! Dave O'Heare oheare (at) magma (dot) ca [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Purely as a novelty I once had a 33 1/3 record which played 'backwards' (from the inside at the core to the outer edges. Do you recall the very old 'original' 33 1/3 recordings which were very heavy? They came in an old-fashioned cardboard sleeve from 'Columbia Long Playing Records', mostly made back in 1948-50. I had a few of those records, of Charles Ives' piano music, the 'Concord Sonata' as I recall. I am told Columbia lost bundles of money on that recording, and many of their very early classical releases. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rollo Subject: Lagact DOS App in Win2000 Doesn't Dial Correctly Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 13:36:52 -0700 Organization: NetHere Inc. HELP, Pleeze. I've been researching this the last three days! I have a legacy DOS application which auto-dials the modem on demand from w/i Win2000 Pro (from a winbox using a shortcut to make App settings). I have the App dial to COM5 (and modem set to COM5) since the original COM2 isn't avail for direct hardware use in Win2000 (can't access device error) Most of the time it dials, but drops digits in the dialed phone number, sometimes nothing happens, and only a couple of times it actually dials correctly! The DOS app can't be upgraded (please don't ask) and reverting back to an earlier OS isn't feasible. I've come across recommendations of: * installing SP2 + hotfixes (someone said it cured the dropped phone digits); * confirm RTS & DTR and the UARTS are enabled; * try Hayes modem commands ATX1, S32=98 (to turn off X2 and V.90), and X3 (blind dial); * run the DOS app in Protected mode using its shortcut property, enable hardware compatibility; ** I haven't dug into TAPI, RAS ... I've have tried a couple different modems (PCTel & Netodragon {a motorola copycat?} chips using their w2k drivers, with a no-go. I think they are winmodems, non have DOS drivers. I point the app dialer to win2000's com5, and again, I usually do get some dialing output. I'm sure someone else has needed this fix, and I appreciate any help what-so-ever. My EYES and brain hurt from trying to figure this thing out! Thanks in advance. Lady*Griff1258(no *)@netscape.net ------------------------------ From: John Smith Subject: Unlike Napster, Kazaa Can Run and it CAN Hide Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 14:55:38 -0400 Boston Globe 4/13/03 "Kazaa Media Desktop, the new king of Napster-like Internet file-sharing programs, is proving as hard to ignore as it is to destroy. "...everything about Kazaa -- from its technological setup to its strange worldwide organizational maze -- seems designed to thwart the methods by which Napster was felled in July 2001. And that spells trouble for a music industry that only recently began licensing catalogs for use in a variety of legitimate, fee-based music download and streaming services, such as Rhapsody, eMusic.com and MusicNet on AOL. .... "But the distributed nature of the Kazaa setup has forced the recording industry group to adopt new tactics in its fight. Unlike Napster, FastTrack designates user computers as ''supernodes'' that catalog available files for trading. Every time a home computer logs in to share songs, it has the potential to become a supernode. And all traffic between supernodes is encrypted, preventing recording industry attorneys from discovering exactly how the Kazaa network is being controlled. " http://tinyurl.com/9fxp [Boston Globe] ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: Internet via the Power Grid: New Interest in Obvious Idea Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 04:37:50 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications I hope it works better than my Radio Shack "wireless" telephone jack, which uses the inside electrical wiring. Snap, pop, and crackle. Monty Solomon wrote: > By JOHN MARKOFF and MATT RICHTEL > SAN FRANCISCO, April 9 - As cable, telephone and wireless companies > compete to provide high-speed Internet access to homes, a new > challenger is emerging based on a decidedly old technology. > The idea is to send Internet data over ordinary electric power lines. > Proponents argue that it can be a competitive alternative to digital > cable, telephone digital subscriber line and wireless efforts to > connect the "last mile" between homes and Internet service providers. > Power-line networking has held out promise for several decades, in > part because the electric grid is already in place, running to almost > every residence in the nation, and also because it was thought that > power companies would leap at the idea of a new revenue source - if > the technology is proven. > But the idea has elicited deep skepticism from technologists who argue > that the electric power network is a remarkably difficult environment > for transmitting digital information. Moreover the nation's electric > power industry has for the most part remained complacent about the > technology. > Still, the technology is getting sudden attention in response to > several trial efforts around the country and in other nations. Today, > Michael K. Powell, the chairman of the Federal Communications > Commission, gave the concept a further boost when he toured a > demonstration site for the technology in Potomac, Md. > The agency and its chairman have said they are backing the power-line > approach in an effort to stir competition and offer greater consumer > choice. > http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/10/technology/10POWE.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For many, many years, the Chicago Transit Authority operated its internal telephone system using the 440 DC volts on the 'third-rail' which also operated the subway trains. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Paul Wallich Subject: Re: In Privacy Debate, Tech Has Two Faces Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 09:54:57 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In article , John Higdon wrote: > In article , Monty Solomon > wrote: >> For example, video surveillance could be made more palatable if it >> worked more like an episode of "Cops," with people's faces blurred >> out. Only if a crime occurred would the more detailed images be made >> available. > Now THAT would be remarkable technology. That the system could > determine where faces are in the frame and blur them reliably is one > thing, but having the system determine that the activity in the frame > "is a crime" would be truly remarkable! > That being the case, I can see the ultimate obsolescence of trial > courts. Just run the appropriate video clips through the > Crime-o-Rater, and it would determine what if any crimes were > committed and who to lock up. > I love ideas that come out of "think tanks". Blame the reporter's editor, not the think tank. The versions of this I've seen conference papers for talk about storing the video in some encrypted/distributed/magical form so that legal authorization of some kind is needed to get hold of the full-quality data. So "only if a crime is reported to the police and a judge signs a warrant would better-than-32x32 images be made available." Of course, you have to be an idiot to believe that those legal safeguards would mean anything at all once a system was operational ... paul ------------------------------ From: wesrock@aol.com (Wes Leatherock) Date: 13 Apr 2003 14:08:29 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: SBC All Distance Connections On 10 Apr 2003 20:57:59 -0700 Dave Close dave@compata.com> wrote: > I wonder if SBC still enforces the 1+/non-1+ distinction in those > markets where it was required. In other words, does a subscriber to > this plan in Dallas still need to dial 1+NPA for his own NPA when the > destination is beyond the standard service area, and does he still get > an error when dialing a nearby number with 1+NPA? If so, why? SBC in Oklahoma for a number of years has had a optional service (soon to be discontinued) allowing customers unlimited calling throughout their LATA for a flat monthly charge. For customers with this plan, such calls are dialed as 10D. Customers with or without this plan who dial such calls 1+10D are charged the regular intraLATA toll charge. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: Mike Subject: Re: How do I Reject Callers Based on a Timeframe Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 11:13:22 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: mikes595@hotmail.com We have a new modular gizmo called the Automatic Ringer Cut-off Switch. Just put it in-series with a phone(s). Instead of turning off the phone line altogether, it only prevents incomng calls - you can make outgoing calls just fine (handy for 911, or forgetting to switch the phone back off after making a call). It comes with a switch where you can shut the ringer(s) off manually, but it also has a power cube, which lets you plug the device into an Intermatic timer or X10 device. When there's no power at the cube, the ringer is on. When there's power, the ringer is off (it has a swich to reverse the operation for power on/off). It also has a trace visible on the back that when cut with an Exacto knife will shut the phone off altogether based on the power. $36.95, plus shipping. Our Manual Ringer Cut-off Switch is $28.95, and does the same things based on a pushbutton switch. Either one can be put in front of one phone, or put in front of all the phones (at the demarc). Installation is up to you or your phone man. We made it mainly for people with home offices (we've gotten lots of requests for this). If someone decides to send someone in the US a fax during the day from Europe, and decides to dial the company's main number, the person in the US ends up getting a call every five minutes during the middle of the night. With the Manual version, you can hit the button -- and not hear the phone ringing until you turn it on in the morning (and go back to sleep!) Even if you have an answering machine, you still hear the ringing every five minutes until the machine answers the fax call. Not fun. We've used a prototype of this gizmo on our fax line on our last phone system, which didn't allow programming of ringing on individual lines for our external ringer. I simply stuck it in front of the line on our KSU, and we were still able to make calls from the fax line if needed, but not hear the ringing for incoming faxes. We've sold some to night workers or people who take frequent naps during the day. As long as you don't put it in front o fyour answering machine, it will still take a message while you're sleeping. It's a neat toy. Mike Sandman - 630-980-7710 On 13 Mar 2003 07:16:00 -0800, curt@journyx.com (curt finch) wrote: > My teenage stepdaughter has her friends calling at 3 am! > Other than kill someone, is there a way to make our phones > shutdown at 10pm and restart at 6am without running around the > house and unplugging them all? >Is there some service I can buy like call waiting or whatever? ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 19:14:57 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au Monty Solomon contributed the following: > [I thought this was interesting ... Radio stations that are 100% > digital can't play certain copy-protected CDs because the > copy-protection doesn't allow them to rip the tracks on to their > station's system. Copy-protection is therfore directly responsible for > the lack of airtime in this market by the artists who choose to > copy-protect their CDs! It's safe to say that this isn't the last of > such effects ... -joe] Don't all the "copy protection" methods only stop pure digital copying? One would imagine that taking the analog feed from a CD player and recording that would solve the problem, (even burning that onto another CD)?, or is analog copying now too "old school" for the 21st century? 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: 3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com Subject: Heinlein Quote, was Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 13:22:46 +0200 ~ To reply by e-mail, insert "Telecom Digest" in the subject line ~ On Fri, 11 Apr 2003 23:34:47 -0500, in comp.dcom.telecom wrote: > Several people over on r.a.sf.w have suggested that one, but I'm > pretty sure I've never read it. I think Heinlein recycled the > idea from some earlier book. > And it's not SiaSL either, so it's still a mystery. I'd suggest that you try 'alt.fan.heinlein' ... if it *is* a Heinlein book, those guys should be able to point you at it ... Cheers, Frank R ------------------------------ From: Mike Subject: Re: Meigs Field Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 12:25:38 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: mikes595@hotmail.com I don't own a plane, I'm not a pilot, and have never flown through Meigs -- but I do think if it as part of Chicago. I remember seeing it along with the Prudential Building, Field Museum, Aquarium etc. when I went downtown as a kid -- and was pretty impressed. I'm still amazed by big hunks of metal with humans inside getting off the ground. I feel that same way about Daley's family home, which was really the place where modern Chicago was shaped (and paid for?). Although Daley's mother passed away recently, I think the home should be preserved. I wonder how Daley will feel when the land is sold, and the house is torn down to put up a more modern house -- or maybe a garden? I did join the AOPA for $39 to aid in their fight against Daley. You can see thier article along with pictures of the destroyed runway at: http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2003/03-1-157x.html I made one of the photos my Windows background, but had to take it off when I felt my blood pressure go up every time I looked at my computer. I personally don't drive into Chicago from the suburbs any more due to traffic and parking problems (and blood pressure), but we do have a pilot working at our company. I was thinking it would be convenient to fly from the airport a mile down the road to Meigs, and then take a cab into the loop. I guess I don't have to think about that any more. When I asked Donna to order a uniform for the pilot (who has other responsibilities at our company), she got pretty upset. Maybe she worked out the deal with Daley? Oh well. With the current recession we couldn't afford the gas, parking, or taxi at Meigs anyway. Mike Sandman On 8 Apr 2003 22:33:18 GMT, gc@radix.net (Zed**3) wrote: > In article , Jack > wrote: >> I'll bet you haven't heard the latest. Apparently "his highness", >> Mayor Daley, decided to pull his own version of the middle-of-the- >> night construction of the Berlin Wall, except in this case it was the >> middle of the night DEstruction of Meigs Field, with no advance notice >> to anyone (including the pilots that had planes parked there, that may >> now have no way to have them removed without having the aircraft >> partially disassembled and moved to another field). To give you an >> idea of Daley's utter disregard for the public, consider this comment >> as reported in the Chicago Sun-Times: > I am saddened to hear this. I have flown in to Meigs field a couple > of times many years ago. I don't know of any other city that has > an airport with such convenient access to downtown. > This is not a big surprise, though. Some politicians have been > trying to get rid of it for years, although I don't know why. > Who, with money to give to politicians, would benefit? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, 'convenient access' to the public > is not where things are at. Power for politicians, and getting things > over on other politicians is where things are at. Daley did think that > the 'war on terrorism' was a great excuse to take the action he did, > and he used it to cover his tracks with the business community downtown > who were ***very angry**** about his actions destroying Meigs Field. > I guess his advisors just told him, 'claim you had to do it to protect > the city against a terrorist attack'. Daley thought that sounded good, > and so that became the line he used and is using. 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 #394 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr 14 18:58:08 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3EMw8D27835; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 18:58:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 18:58:08 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304142258.h3EMw8D27835@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 #395 TELECOM Digest Mon, 14 Apr 2003 18:58:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 395 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #378, April 14, 2003 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Meigs Field (joe@obilivan.net) Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide (Joey Lindstrom) Re: I Need to Understand a Standard Business Phone System (Justin Time) Re: Legacy DOS App in Win2000 Doesn't Dial Correctly (David Clayton) India's Telephone Man ... Affordable Solutions (FN) Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists Limiting Radio Play? (J Higdon) Re: Cellular to Modem? (Steven J. Sobol) TCAP with Multiple Users (Sharanu) Re: Stranger in a Badly-Written Land (Please invert everything) Forensic Strategy Data Recovery Newsletter: Iss 1 (Forensic Strategy) 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, 14 Apr 2003 12:05:57 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #378, April 14, 2003 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 378: April 14, 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: ** CRTC Gets Tough on Telco Violations ** Aliant Actions Ruled Anti-Competitive ** Telus Wins Spectrum Cap Exemption ** Bell West Claims 10% of Business Market ** MCI Reborn ** Call-Net Wants CDNA Clarifications ** BCE to Reveal Plans for CGI ** Forum Boosts New Wireless Standard ** Telus Merges Wireless Billing Systems ** Condo Boards Can Choose TV Providers ** Look CEO Moves On ** Pushing Back the Digital Frontier ** Telco Execs Doing Okay ** Shaw Loss Cut 75% ** Canada Tops E-Government Survey ** ICANN Seeks Board Candidates ** Platinum Buys Real Time Technologies ** Zarlink Writes Off Mitel Stake ** Foreign Ownership Report Due ============================================================ CRTC GETS TOUGH ON TELCO VIOLATIONS: The CRTC says it will no longer rely solely on competitor complaints to identify anti-competitive behaviour by incumbent phone companies. Citing repeated cases in which the telcos have violated the Telecommunications Act, Telecom Public Notice 2003-4 announces that the Commission will appoint inspectors with broad powers to verify compliance with the Act and with Commission rulings. ** The telcos could be subject to fines of $100,000 and up for offering regulated services at off-tariff rates. ** From now on, telcos must include a clause in all business contracts saying clearly that the rates and conditions for included non-forborne services are subject to CRTC approval. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2003/pt2003-4.htm ALIANT ACTIONS RULED ANTI-COMPETITIVE : In a related decision, the CRTC says Aliant violated its tariffs by charging Memorial University below-tariff rates for Centrex, and by switching other Centrex customers to lower contract rates without applying tariffed termination charges. ** Telecom Decision 2003-23 says Aliant's actions "are non- compliant and anti-competitive and undermine fair and sustainable competition." http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2003/dt2003-23.htm TELUS WINS SPECTRUM CAP EXEMPTION: Industry Canada has agreed to modify its wireless spectrum cap rules to allow Telus Mobility to acquire more capacity for its Mike service. Under the new rules, only 10 megahertz of Mike's Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio spectrum will count towards the maximum of 55 MHz a single company can hold in any location. ** The other wireless carriers strongly opposed the change, saying Mike competes directly with regular PCS services, which are fully subject to the 55 MHz limit. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/sf07009e.html BELL WEST CLAIMS 10% OF BUSINESS MARKET: Bell West says it has won 10% of the business wireline market in B.C. and Alberta, where it offers service in 14 cities. Fifty percent of the company's revenue comes from data products and services. MCI REBORN: In an effort to distance itself from scandal and bankruptcy, WorldCom Inc. has changed its name to MCI, the long distance company it bought in 1998. The company's headquarters will move from Mississippi to Virginia, and its wholesale division will now operate as UUNet. ** WorldCom has submitted a reorganization plan that would reduce its debt from over US$40 billion to about $5 billion. It could emerge from bankruptcy protection by September. CALL-NET WANTS CDNA CLARIFICATIONS: Call-Net has told the CRTC that Telus, Aliant, and SaskTel are refusing to apply CDNA rates to many eligible circuits. It asks the Commission to clarify the rules, and to add interest charges to the payments it is owed by the incumbents retroactive to June 1, 2002. (see Telecom Update #364) BCE TO REVEAL PLANS FOR CGI: Tomorrow, BCE Inc is expected to announce what it will do with its 30% stake in computer services company CGI Group. In December 2001, BCE said CGI was a "non-core" holding that it would sell over the next two or three years. FORUM BOOSTS NEW WIRELESS STANDARD: Intel, Proxim, Wi-LAN, and a half-dozen other companies have formed the WiMAX Forum to support a new wireless broadband standard that may be deployed commercially in 2004. The 802.16 standard will link 802.11 networks at up to 70 Mbps over distances up to 50 km. http://www.wimaxforum.org TELUS MERGES WIRELESS BILLING SYSTEMS: Telus Mobility has completed implementation of a single Amdocs billing system to replace the separate systems formerly used by Telus, QuebecTel, and Clearnet. CONDO BOARDS CAN CHOOSE TV PROVIDERS: In 1997, the CRTC ruled that in Multiple Unit Dwellings (MUD), the end-user must be able to choose which TV distribution service to use. Last week the Commission ruled that in a condominium MUD the Board of Directors or Strata Council represents the end-users and so can make that decision. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2003/pb2003-18.htm LOOK CEO MOVES ON: Look Communications' President and CEO Paul Lamontagne will leave the company on May 14. Board Chair Michael Cytrynbaum will be Interim CEO. PUSHING BACK THE DIGITAL FRONTIER: Some recent announcements of network expansion to unserved and underserved areas: ** NorthernTel says it will use fixed wireless service to extend single-line phone service to 70-100 households in the Kenogamissi Lake area near Timmins. The expansion will also allow NorthernTel Mobility to improve digital cellular coverage along 37 km of Highway 144. ** The government of Alberta has purchased 3,000 km of installed fibre from Telus for use in SuperNet's Extended Area. The new fibre will bring Internet connections to 98 smaller communities in the province. ** Working together, Storm Internet Services and Telesat have made high-speed Internet service available in North Stormont, a rural community southeast of Ottawa. TELCO EXECS DOING OKAY: Despite the sad state of telecom revenues and profits, proxy statements filed last week show that top executives at Canada's two largest telcos did just fine in 2002: ** Telus CEO Darren Entwhistle's total compensation, including shares that vest over the next three years, was $3.29 million. That's more than 60% higher than in 2001. ** Telus Mobility CEO George Cope's annual pay was $1.24 million, up from $1.18 million. ** BCE CEO Michael Sabia's total compensation was $1.62 million, up from $1.48 million. ** Former BCE CEO Jean Monty received $2.32 million for the four months he worked for the company in 2002. SHAW LOSS CUT 75%: For the three months ended February 28, Shaw Communications reports a sharp reduction in red ink. The company lost $19.8 million, compared to $78 million in the same period last year. ** Shaw says it will follow ExpressVu's lead and raise its satellite TV fees by $3/month. CANADA TOPS E-GOVERNMENT SURVEY: A report published by Accenture again names Canada as the world leader in implementing "e-Government." Canada is the only country where the national government has reached the top of the authors' four-layer "e-Government maturity" model. Singapore and the United States are in second and third place. http://www.accenture.com/xd/xd.asp?it=enweb&xd=industries\government\gove_capa_egov.xml ICANN SEEKS BOARD CANDIDATES: The Nominating Committee of ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) is requesting recommendations and expressions of interest for possible members of its Board of Directors and two other bodies. Deadline: May 5. http://www.icann.org/committees/nom-comm/formal-call-05apr03.htm PLATINUM BUYS REAL TIME TECHNOLOGIES: Platinum Communications, a Calgary-based high-speed Internet Service Provider, has agreed to buy Real Time Technologies, a Red Deer ISP, for one million Platinum shares. ZARLINK WRITES OFF MITEL STAKE: Zarlink Semiconductor, spun off from Mitel in 2000, has written its $11.5 million investment in Mitel Networks down to zero, because it will not be able to realize the value of the investment in the foreseeable future. FOREIGN OWNERSHIP REPORT DUE: The Parliamentary Committee reviewing foreign ownership in telecom is expected to issue its report in a few weeks. In the April issue of Telemanagement, Lis Angus details the key arguments and evidence the committee heard, and clarifies the complex issues the MPs have before them. ** Also in the current issue: Gerry Blackwell reveals the rollout plans of six Canadian Wi-Fi providers ... John Riddell on how the IP-PBX debate has shifted from "whether" to "how and when" ... and Gary Bernstein on a practical trial of the all-in-one BlackBerry. Telemanagement is available only by subscription. To receive Canada's #1 source for telecom analysis and guidance, call 800-263-4415 ext 500 or go to http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.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 2003 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: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: Meigs Field Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 08:08:27 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, 'convenient access' to the public >> is not where things are at. Power for politicians, and getting things >> over on other politicians is where things are at. Daley did think that >> the 'war on terrorism' was a great excuse to take the action he did, >> and he used it to cover his tracks with the business community downtown >> who were ***very angry**** about his actions destroying Meigs Field. >> I guess his advisors just told him, 'claim you had to do it to protect >> the city against a terrorist attack'. Daley thought that sounded good, >> and so that became the line he used and is using. PAT] If his Royal Highness, the Almighty Mayor, wants to effectively deal with airborne terrorists, he needs to shut down O'Hare and Midway, sterilize all airspace for 30 miles around downtown, and put in place anti-aircraft radar and gun emplacements. Just to give you one clue (and I am an expert in the area of flight procedures and transport jet aircraft performance) when O'Hare is "landing west" there is a gaint intrail "Daisy Chain" of jets lined up, east-to-west, over Lake Michigan. This line up for O'Hare's Runway 27 Left passes less then 6 miles north of downtown Chicago. If a pilot-qualified terriorist wanted to hit downtown, he could turn out of the "Daisy Chain" just prior to that closest point. His altitude assignment would typically be 5,000 feet, some 4,000 feet, plus, higher than downtown. By retracting any landing flaps, descending, and applying full power, the aircraft would reach downtown before anyone could even react to its departure from the assigned flight path. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 09:37:25 -0600 Subject: Re: As Many Join Burning Boom, CD Sales Slide Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Fri, 11 Apr 2003 23:01:42 EDT, Dave Phelps wrote: >> Throw in that the Government of Canada charges a duty on every >> blank CD-R and CD-RW sold to compensate artists royalties, whether >> or not the disk is used for audio, MP3, or simply backing up your >> hard drive. > Really? If that is the case, then the amount of royalties the artists > have agreed to accept on blank CD sales would constitute a license > agreement, since they are truly charging for the copyrighted media you > might put on it. Therefore, you have paid the royalties to the artist, > there is no middleman like RIAA members, so it sounds like you are > entitled to burn whatever you like. You have paid your license fee for > the copyrighted material. You are correct, sir, although I'd hardly characterize this as a situation where artists "agreed" to anything at all (unless they've signed up for royalty disbursements). The Canadian government simply said "ok, here's the way it's going to be" and that was that - which is the way of things in Canada. But yes, you're essentially correct, within limits. Legal - I buy the latest Gary Numan live double-CD ("Scarred", in stores now!) and make a backup of each disc for use in my CD changer. Legal - I also rip the songs and encode them to MP3, then burn those MP3's onto blank CD-R's, for use on my PC, my upstairs DVD unit (which plays MP3's), and my car stereo (also plays MP3-CD's) Legal - I borrow my friend's copy of the latest Madonna CD, duplicate it, return the original to my friend AND KEEP THE DUPLICATE FOR MYSELF. Illegal - I make duplicates (full-copies or MP3's) of the afore-mentioned Gary Numan CD-set for my friend. Legal - I loan that Gary Numan CD-set to my friend. He makes his own duplicates, then returns the original to me. For more on this, there's a nice FAQ at: http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml To zero in on just this part (making copies), see: http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml#copy_for_friends -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: I Need to Understand a Standard Business Phone System Date: 14 Apr 2003 07:00:46 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ jimleahy@home.com (Jim Leahy) wrote in message news:: > I work for a medium sized corporation and need to learn the ins and > outs of the phone system. We do e-mail, multi site connection, t1, > prl, all different stuff. Is there a place that can put this in some > sort of layman terms. I am an engineer so technical doesn't scare me > -- actually it intrigues me, but I won't be plugging in any cables > just purchasing a system and knowing how to maintain, upgrade, > troubleshoot, ect. > Any good web sites? > Any good discussion groups? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not meaning to toot my horn too loudly, > but right here in comp.dcom.telecom is a great place to start. If > the guys here cannot answer your question, I do not know who can. You > might also want to consult our web site, http://telecom-digest.org for > twenty years worth of technical files and discussions. PAT] One other way to get information quickly is the discussion group for your particular switch. Try a Google or Yahoo search on the manufacturer looking for newsgroups. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Legacy DOS App in Win2000 Doesn't Dial Correctly Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 18:59:48 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au rollo contributed the following: > HELP, Pleeze. > I've been researching this the last three days! I have a legacy DOS > application which auto-dials the modem on demand from w/i Win2000 Pro > (from a winbox using a shortcut to make App settings). I have the App > dial to COM5 (and modem set to COM5) since the original COM2 isn't > avail for direct hardware use in Win2000 (can't access device error) ....... I had a DOS app try and use the "standard" Win 2K COM port with the same error, (it was also accessing a modem), if I remember correctly you can get around it by disabling the COM port in Control Panel, (or wherever that setting is, Hardware-Devices?, I can't exactly remember). The DOS app should now have full access to it as Win 2K will now leave it alone. This may fix your misdialling problem as using COM5 may be a bit unreliable with shared interrupts etc. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 16:21:53 IST From: Frederick Noronha Subject: India's Telephone Man ... Affordable Solutions Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net INDIA'S TELEPHONE MAN, BRIDGING THE 'DIGITAL DIVIDE' WITH AFFORDABLE SOLUTIONS WHEN ASHOK Jhunjhunwala speaks of a telephone, there's fire in his eyes and commitment in his voice. Over the years, this one man has not just built a stream of idealistic young engineers out of IIT Madras, but has significantly contributed to making telephones more affordable to the world. Over the past few weeks, one of the firms he helped incubate, Midas Communication, picked up a $12 million (around Rs 60 crore) order from Egypt. India's business press was quick to hail this as the country's biggest export order in the telecom sector, and seemed surprised that it came from the seven-year-old R&D company focussing on rural telephony. Another business publication called the IIT-Madras professors -- Jhunjhunwala, Bhaskar Ramamoorthy and Timothy Gonsalves -- the "angels from academia who had "incubated some of the hottest startups in telecom and networking, now valued over Rs 400 crore. In Egypt, Midas is to install 200,000 telephone lines based on the corDect wireless in local loop (WLL) technology that it has developed in partnership with the Tenet group, spearheaded by Jhunjhunwala. corDect WLL is just one of the fruits of Jhunjhunwala's dream to provide affordable telephone lines to the rural poor. His vision is a mix of technological excellence, lower costs to make communications affordable even to the poor, and a fierce pride that believes Indian has the brains to come out top in technology. Such being the goals, is it an accident that this man is producing world-class technology? FREDERICK NORONHA interviews him: Q: What is the response to your technology abroad? We have started deploying corDECT in 15 countries. The initial response is very good. It takes a year or two to enter the telecom market in any country. Q: What inspires you to strive towards this goal? I am doing what IITs were meant to do -- make India technologically strong. As far as I am concerened, this is the only justification for the society to spend the money that they do on IITs. Q: After all these years, is there light at the end of the tunnel? Very much. We have orders worth Rs 1000 Crore ($ 200 million) in India. Q: What do you think telecom is so important for the common man? Internet is power. It enables people. It is changing the way we live ... those without Internet will have a tremendous disadvantage as we go on. People with confidence and enabled people can make all the difference. We would like to see that all villages get reasonable speed Internet connection at the earliest. Q: The question you must have heard a thousand times -- does it make business sense providing access to the poor? Yes, it does. Just that the business has to be done in a different way. In 1987, we (i.e. India) opened STD PCOs in India. We aggregated demand of middle and lower middle classes of urban people and provided them shared telephony. Today there are 950,000 STD PCOs contributing to approximately 25% of total telecom revenue in the country and serming 300 million people who do not otherwise use telephones. The whole thing makes great business sense. We just have to do a similar thing in rural areas. Q: Besides Midas, what are the other start-ups you'll have generated out of IIT Madras? Banyan Networks, NMSWorks, Chennai Kavigal, n-Logue Communications, and others. Q: To someone who doesn't know your work, how would you introduce its significance? India needs products at a cost three-times lower than that prevalent in the West. The simple reason is that affordability in India is much lower. A product can reach large number of people in India only if the cost reduces. We are doing this in telecom sector. Working on new disruptive technologies, new business models and new applications. Q: What are the visions you have ahead of you? To connect 650,000 villages of India (with Internet) and use that to aim to double rural GDP of India. To get to 200 million telephone and Internet connections in India at the earliest. To make India a design house of technologies. Q: Over the years, which are the goals you feel you've achieved? Telcom in India today is booming -- with prices coming down and service improving. We have contributed towards this. And showed that successful product companies can be built in India and that IITs can contribute towards it. Q: Is the Indian government supportive enough? What more would you like to see them doing wrt to technologies like yours? Yes, supportive. But on and off. Our policies are still not aimed towards making India strong. This is unlike most other countries, especially developed countries. Q: What do you see as the three best strongpoints and three worst shortcomings of technology innovators in India. Venture Finance in India is very weak. We do not have recent experience of making successful global product. We often go for short term goals and objectives. Our organisational capabilities are not as strong as our technology skills. Strengths are that we have everything to gain and nothing to lose in trying. We have the talent -- an endless stream, but it need to be harnessed. We have a large untapped potential internal market. The key is to harness the potential. Frederick Noronha : http://www.fredericknoronha.net: When we speak of free Freelance Journalist : http://www.bytesforall.org : software we refer to Ph 0091.832.2409490 : Cell 0 9822 122436 : freedom, not price. ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 16:38:11 -0700 In article , David Clayton wrote: > Don't all the "copy protection" methods only stop pure digital copying? > One would imagine that taking the analog feed from a CD player and > recording that would solve the problem, (even burning that onto another > CD)?, or is analog copying now too "old school" for the 21st century? Radio stations are not going to futz with that. Making realtime analog-to-digital recordings, with the attendant setting of levels, trimming of the recording, not to mention the quality hit, is not something the radio stations are going to do simply to indulge RIAA paranoia. Analog copying is not too "old school", but it is too labor-intensive for stations these days. Trust me: if a CD cannot be ripped into the automation, it just gets tossed. 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 Subject: Re: Cellular to Modem? Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 00:39:41 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC From Mike (mikes595@hotmail.com): > I used a Verizon CDPD modem for a couple of years, but recently > canceled it. It was 14.4 max at $50 a month unlimited, which was > better than nothing around the Chicago area, but I recently was turned > on to a faster service that came on-line last fall. > Sprint PCS has upgraded their system to 3G in all areas they work in > (most major cities and along many major highways only). The > theoretical max data rate is over 100K. Verizon has a similar service now, Express Network (Sprint's is called PCS Vision). AT&T and T-Mobile, I believe, have similar services. > My friend suggested buying it at Circuit City which has a no questions > asked return policy, and a service contract where they'll just replace > a broken phone when you walk in with it. I did, but I don't know what > they'll do when they don't carry the 4900 any more? They'd probably do what the carriers do and give you a refurb'd phone. You normally don't get a new phone as a warranty or insurance replacement. > When I canceled the Verizon CDPD, they told me that their 3G service > was up and working, but that I'd only get 14.4 in areas where they > don't have 3G towers (a lot of places). I might have gone for it, but > they didn't have an unlimited service. Verizon CDMA Data is no extra charge -- I used it this weekend. Verizon's CDMA data service is called Quick2NET and can use Verizon as the ISP or you can dial into your own ISP account. It does use airtime minutes. There is no per-KB surcharge though. With Express Network, however, if you use the traditional 14.4 service, there may be additional charges. I don't use Express Network. (Yet.) > If someone really needs to use a cell phone for a modem, like with a > credit card machine or fax, you need access to analog service. Absolutely wrong. With a CDMA carrier you should be able to plug a serial or USB cable into your computer and use the phone directly as a modem. That's what I do with my Verizon Kyocera 3035e. > I'm told that analog service is very expensive if you try to subscribe > to it, which might not be bad for credit card transactions or faxes. CDMA data would be cheaper. And 14.4 is all you need for credit cards or faxes. Sprint used to have crappy customer service, but being both a Sprint and a Verizon customer, I've seen Sprint's CS improve dramatically. Their new CEO has announced a committment to improving CS and has apparently been doing a good job of it in the past few months. If you need data, get a CDMA phone and use Verizon Quick2Net, which should be available in any Verizon digital area. If you need faster speeds than Q2N, you may want to look into options with Express Network if you're not happy with Sprint. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ From: sharanu_swami@rediffmail.com (Sharanu) Subject: TCAP With Multiple Users Date: 13 Apr 2003 22:56:13 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, Can anyone please explain me how TCAP interacts with multiple users ? Regards. ------------------------------ From: 6212hgk@newsguy.com (Please invert everything left of the @ to reply) Subject: Re: Stranger in a Badly-Written Land Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 21:47:46 GMT On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 21:03:30 -0500, Ron Bean wrote: > Well, if it makes you feel any better, I'm pretty sure that's not the > book I'm thinking of. A quick scan shows that people seem to come and > go in flying cars that keep landing on his rose bushes; nobody ever > comes in through the front door. How about THE CAT WHO WALKS THROUGH WALLS? It was RAH after all. > And if you're a huge fan and didn't get the reference, then maybe it > wasn't Heinlein after all (for some reason, I keep remembering the > wrong authors for various books, which makes them very difficult to > find again. I'll try r.a.sf.w, they've come though for me > before). Maybe Jerry Pournelle? Nobody but a fool goes into a federal counterrorism operation without duct tape - Richard Preston, THE COBRA EVENT. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 16:55:05 -0400 From: Forensic Strategy Newsletter Subject: Forensic Strategy Data Recovery Newsletter: Vol 1 Issue 1 *********************************************************************** Forensic Strategy Data Recovery Newsletter Vol. 1, Issue 1 *********************************************************************** --------- EDITOR'S NOTE ----------------------------------------------- The intent of this newsletter is to educate and inform attorneys about basic computer forensics for cases that involve personal computers or computer evidence. Utilizing the services of a computer forensics specialist can eliminate problems that often occur when forensics is of significant importance to a case: timing, the handling of the data and the possibility of evidence being destroyed. -------- IN THIS ISSUE: ----------------------------------------------- 1. COMMENTARY - Computer Forensics 101: What is Computer Forensics? 2. SPONSOR - Varidev Technology Solutions 3. UPCOMING NEWSLETTER ISSUES - Items you can look forward to in future issues! 4. CONTACT US - For more information on Forensic Strategy Services. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ==== COMMENTARY ==== * COMPUTER FORENSICS 101: What is Computer Forensics? By: Scott Moulton, Computer Forensic Specialist mailto:scott@forensicfirm.com Forensics, as it relates to computers and data, is the collection and preservation of data to investigate or establish facts for any type of legal purpose. For each case, computer forensics can contain many different types of material and can be gathered from dozens of sources. Information can be limited to what exists on a hard drive and may even include data from the Internet, tapes, CDs, disks or printouts made by a specific computer. Computer forensics is an emerging specialty that has no defined criteria. This makes it difficult to find a person with the knowledge, experience and skills needed to be an expert in this area. Colleges are beginning to recognize this as a growing field and are adding degrees and certification programs to their curriculum. With the speed at which the computer industry changes, it is often a struggle for the legal profession to keep up with all of the new laws established to convict criminals who use technology as a weapon. It is equally challenging to locate a knowledgeable computer specialist that has the interest, expertise and skills in fields other than computer science. Consequently, a computer forensic specialist who has skills in other disciplines such as accounting and/or law, will deliver better results meaning more useful and credible evidence for you. Methodologies are a set of processes that can be applied to any situation. While the tools or items used to lay the groundwork for the discovery phase may vary, the methodology remains the same. Some of these methods are still being developed in the area of computer forensics. Changes are frequent because of new laws that require the way processes are completed. Other changes are due to an ever-evolving technology and the ability to completely remove two or three processes with new software or hardware. Qualified computer forensic specialists will spend considerable time staying in front of the new technology curve. It takes an extreme amount of work to keep up with the changes in the computing industry, as well as, issues involving the law. This is the type of expertise you should seek for assistance with cases requiring computer forensics. Most lawyers have little knowledge about computers and will need guidance as a case develops. They will continually need to discuss the case with a computer forensic specialist and review new material even when it seems unnecessary. When dealing with computers and data, the process of understanding what is achievable and what isn't requires an advanced understanding of technology generally not found outside the professional computer security community. Not only must the computer forensic specialist assist the attorney with what can be done but they must also stand as a credible witness under the pressure and scrutiny of cross examination. During the discovery phase of a case, being a forensic computer specialist can be compared to being a Private Investigator, only the subject matter is mainly dealing with computers and electronic data. Discovery often involves several passes at the data. As new facts are revealed about the case, the old data will need to be reviewed to see what has been discovered and how it is applicable to the case. In some cases, knowing what happened is more important than the actual data itself. Example #1: In a divorce case, a court order was given to the husband with instructions not to delete or destroy any data. The computer was to be picked up by a forensic investigator and reviewed for evidence per the court order. The husband promptly went home and deleted everything on the computer he thought would be incriminating. After examining the computer, it was proven that he purposely deleted data after the court order. Since he violated the court order, this case could have easily escalated into more than just a divorce case for the husband. When the opposing attorney confronted the husband with this fact, the husband quickly decided to settle out of court and agreed to his soon to be ex-wife's demands. Example #2: The majority of work is often discovering how to look at the information and display it so that it makes sense to laymen. This also includes educating the attorney about the technical details so they can decide how to approach the case. It is of no value if the information is so complex that it can not be explained clearly. In a recent case, a CD was stolen from a company. During the discovery period of the case, the defendant was ordered to make an EXACT copy of the original CD and deliver it to the plaintiff the same day. It was noted that one of the files had been changed on the CD. On the CD there were several files that amounted to 500 megabytes. This brand of CD was only able to hold 650 megabytes. The specific file in question was a 200 megabyte file. The defendants claim was that the CD was a CDRW (ReWritable CD) and that the file changed while viewing the CD. In this instance the changed file could not overwrite the existing file, but would be appended to the CD. As there was only 150 megabytes left, there was not enough space to append a 200 megabyte file. The defendant would have needed another 50 megabytes in order to make a change to the file on the same CD. Therefore, this was not an exact copy of the same CD that was taken. Only a computer specialist with experience with a ReWritable CD would have realized this was not possible. The opposing attorney initially accepted the explanation; however, the computer specialist on the team revealed that evidence had been tampered with. More examples and experiences will be discussed in future issues. If you are interested and would like to continue to receive our newsletter, please see our website to sign up for a FREE subscription at: http://www.forensicstrategy.com/contacts.asp -------- Sponsored by Varidev Technology Solutions -------------------- Varidev Technology Solutions can develop solutions to help your business operate more efficiently. Varidev is your complete business technology resource for front-end and back-end database development using Microsoft .NET Technology. Varidev has made operations much more efficient for companies like Six Flags and Georgia Pacific, and they can do it for you. Check out amazing demos at http://www.varidev.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. ==== UPCOMING NEWSLETTER ISSUES ==== * What items are usually found in data recovered * Equipment used for Forensic Storage of Data * Details of Forensic Data Gathering 4. ==== CONTACT US ==== * TECHNICAL QUESTIONS: mailto:info@forensicstrategy.com * COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS NEWSLETTER: To suggest a topic for a future issue or to send a comment to the editor email: mailto:comments@forensicstrategy.com * WEBSITE: http://www.forensicstrategy.com * MAILING ADDRESS/PHONE/FAX: Forensic Strategy Services, LLC. 601B Industrial Court Woodstock, Georgia 30189 ph: 770.926.5588 fax: 770.926.7089 * WOULD YOUR COMPANY LIKE TO SPONSOR A FORENSIC STRATEGY DATA RECOVERY NEWSLETTER? Send us an email at mailto:sponsor@forensicstrategy.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------- To receive the latest information about forensic computer technology and news SUBSCRIBE to our FREE email newsletter: http://www.forensicstrategy.com/contacts.asp Thank you for reading The Forensic Strategy Data Recovery Newsletter. __________________________________________________________ Forensic Strategy Services, LLC. 2003 ------------------------------ 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 #395 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr 16 15:01:39 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3GJ1cJ07945; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 15:01:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 15:01:39 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304161901.h3GJ1cJ07945@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 #396 TELECOM Digest Wed, 16 Apr 2003 15:01:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 396 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson EFFector 16.9: EFF Files Comments Against Government (Monty Solomon) In Searching the Web, Google Finds Riches (Monty Solomon) Unlike Napster, Kazaa can Run and it CAN Hide (Monty Solomon) One Third of [AU] Motorists Break Phone Laws (Monty Solomon) Automated Denial-of-Service Attack Using US Post Office (Monty Solomon) Nokia Launches Service to Support Smooth MMS Messaging (Monty Solomon) @stake Provides Security Services and Application Assessment (M Solomon) Liberty Could Benefit From the DirecTV Deal (Monty Solomon) Murdoch's First Step: Make Sports Fans Pay (Monty Solomon) Apple Sells Over 150,000 AirPort Extreme Products (Monty Solomon) Avaya ASAI (Lawrence J. Rizzo) Re: TCAP With Multiple Users (Don't email me) Cell Phone Companies Seek to Block Rule Letting Consumers Keep (Joseph) Re: Cellular to Modem? (Mike) Re: Meigs Field (Clark Wilhelm Griswold, Jr.) Voicemail to Emails - Computerized Phone Answering Machines (Tony Toews) Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio (D. Clayton) Re: Postamble and Variable Length Packets (Swami) Greenies (Jim Hopkins) Ain't Spammers Funny? (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, 13 Apr 2003 22:44:20 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 16.9: EFF Files Comments Against Government EFFector Vol. 16, No. 9 April 13, 2003 ren@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 248th Issue of EFFector: * EFF Files Comments Against Government Attempt to Ignore E-Activism * California Supreme Court Hears Email Pamphleteer Case * 2003 Pioneer Awards Thanks, Pictures * EFF at RSA Conference 2003! * Thanks to Van Dayke Software * Deep Links (8): USA Patriot Act Could Be Extended * 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! http://www.eff.org/effector/HTML/effect16.09.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:05:34 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: In Searching the Web, Google Finds Riches By JOHN MARKOFF and G. PASCAL ZACHARY MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. IN the last few years, Google has risen as a force on the Internet by offering its smarter, faster searches as a free public service. Now the band of technoinsurgents who run the company are striking a blow against the business strategies of giant Web portals like America Online, Yahoo and Microsoft's MSN by rewriting the rules of Internet advertising. Emerging as a powerful new marketing medium, Google has found a route to profitability that stands apart in a Silicon Valley that is still crippled by the dot-com crash. Its rivals are responding by trying to out-Google Google for leadership in a technology -- searching for information -- that they once dismissed as an easily bought commodity. But Yahoo, Microsoft and others are discovering that it will not be easy to unseat Google, which has mastered an enormous private computer network that stores a snapshot of much of the Web and allows searchers to find digital needles in haystacks of data. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/13/technology/13GOOG.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:58:34 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Unlike Napster, Kazaa can Run and it CAN Hide By Doug Bedell, the Dallas Morning News, 4/13/2003 Kazaa Media Desktop, the new king of Napster-like Internet file-sharing programs, is proving as hard to ignore as it is to destroy. With 60 million users worldwide, 22 million of them in the United States, advertisers are dumping millions into Kazaa.com coffers. Meanwhile, the Recording Industry Association of America is shelling out similar amounts to decipher Kazaa's labyrinthine corporate structure and stop unauthorized trading in copyrighted music, games, software, and movies. Stopping Napster was a no-brainer by comparison. Napster used a central server to index files being shared. A judge ordered the server shut down until Napster could screen out unauthorized copyrighted files, and Napster died. But everything about Kazaa -- from its technological setup to its strange worldwide organizational maze -- seems designed to thwart the methods by which Napster was felled in July 2001. And that spells trouble for a music industry that only recently began licensing catalogs for use in a variety of legitimate, fee-based music download and streaming services, such as Rhapsody, eMusic.com and MusicNet on AOL. ... http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/103/business/Unlike_Napster_Kazaa_can_run_and_it_CAN_hide+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 01:03:01 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: One Third of [AU] Motorists Break Phone Laws Almost one third of Australian motorists continue to use handheld mobile telephones while driving despite the dangers, according to a new report. The national survey released by telecommunications giant Telstra, also shows almost 90 per cent of people know the practice is illegal. The research revealed that of the 750 people surveyed, 26 per cent of Victorian drivers used mobile phone handsets to make calls while driving and 32 per cent received calls while driving. One in 10 Australian drivers surveyed said it would be really hard to get through their day without using a mobile phone while driving, while one in six admitted using SMS or text messages while behind the wheel. Telstra consumer and marketing group managing director Ted Pretty said nearly 90 per cent of drivers knew it was illegal to use a handset. http://news.ninemsn.com.au/Sci_Tech/story_28666.asp ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 03:33:40 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Automated Denial-of-Service Attack Using the U.S. Post Office In December 2002, the notorious "spam king" Alan Ralsky gave an interview. Aside from his usual comments that antagonized spam-hating e-mail users, he mentioned his new home in West Bloomfield, Michigan. The interview was posted on Slashdot, and some enterprising reader found his address in some database. Egging each other on, the Slashdot readership subscribed him to thousands of catalogs, mailing lists, information requests, etc. The results were devastating: within weeks he was getting hundreds of pounds of junk mail per day and was unable to find his real mail amongst the deluge. Ironic, definitely. But more interesting is the related paper by security researchers Simon Byers, Avi Rubin and Dave Kormann, who have demonstrated how to automate this attack. http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0304.html#1 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 08:38:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nokia Launches Service to Support Smooth MMS Messaging Nokia Launches Service to Support Smooth MMS Messaging between Different Operators - Apr 14, 2003 05:25 AM (BusinessWire) HELSINKI, Finland--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 14, 2003-- New service shows how Nokia supports mobile operators in ensuring seamless interworking of MMS across network borders Nokia today launched its Nokia MMSC Interconnection Service to help ensure smooth interworking between the MMS systems of different operators. By enabling MMS interoperability, this service supports the mass-market adoption and success of multimedia messaging services. MMSC Interconnection Service provides important benefits for operators, helping them speed up their time to revenue, improve their cost-effectiveness and ensure the quality of their MMS services. With this new service, Nokia is helping operators address the key technical issues in implementing MMS services. Along with routing and security, these cover network hierarchy and number portability. Nokia MMSC Interconnection Service comprises two main components. The Interconnection Workshop enables operators to identify their needs when implementing MMSC interconnections and helps them choose the most feasible evolution path, taking into account the business situation and environment. Interconnection Implementation Support comprises project planning, analysis, documentation, implementation and testing, which is completed in a joint project between Nokia and the operator. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33825874 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 09:08:46 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: @stake Provides Security Services and Application Assessment @stake Provides Security Services and Application Assessment for TiVo Home Media Option 14 Apr 2003, 09:04am ET CAMBRIDGE, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 14, 2003--@stake, Inc., the world's largest independent digital security consulting firm, today announced that TiVo Inc., the creator of television services for digital video recorders (DVR) selected @stake to provide security services, and conduct an applications security assessment of the TiVo Home Media Option(TM). The premium feature package allows Series2 subscribers to stream digital music, photos and schedule recordings via the Web. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?symbols=&story=33828225 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 10:05:44 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Liberty Could Benefit From the DirecTV Deal By GERALDINE FABRIKANT In early March, Liberty Media's chief operating officer, Gary S. Howard, told investors at a conference that Liberty was considering a bid for DirecTV. The news surprised media industry executives. Liberty, which is controlled by John C. Malone, also owned 18 percent of the News Corporation. Rupert Murdoch, the chief of News Corporation, was angered by the news, according to a veteran media executive who knows both men (although a News Corporation spokesman disagreed with that interpretation). Mr. Murdoch has long wanted to acquire DirecTV and a rival bid from his largest shareholder was hardly helpful. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/14/business/media/14MALO.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 10:07:12 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Murdoch's First Step: Make Sports Fans Pay By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK To understand why Rupert Murdoch is buying control of the satellite broadcaster DirecTV, ask fans of the Orlando Magic or the Minnesota Timberwolves. Mr. Murdoch's Fox cable networks have the local television rights to both basketball teams. When Time Warner Cable refused to pay the fees that Fox demanded to carry the channels this year, the company kept the games off cable for 10 weeks of the season. "I'm a very big Magic fan," Shah Jamali, a local lawyer, said in an interview with The Orlando Sentinel. "I was pretty much ready to switch to a satellite TV service to get my games back." That would not bother Mr. Murdoch, chairman of Fox's parent, the News Corporation, once he adds DirecTV to his Fox sports channels, which means he can drive an even harder bargain. Likewise, when the Walt Disney Company negotiates fees to carry its popular ESPN sports channels on DirecTV, Mr. Murdoch might not object as much to doing without it for a while. Fans could turn to his Fox sports channels instead. Sports is just one example of the potential power in Mr. Murdoch's acquisition of DirecTV. News Corporation also controls Fox News, FX and Fox Movies, among others. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/14/business/media/14CABL.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:04:15 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Apple Sells Over 150,000 AirPort Extreme Products CUPERTINO, Calif., April 15 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Apple(R) (Nasdaq: AAPL) today announced that more than 150,000 AirPort(R) Extreme wireless networking products have been sold this past quarter, representing nearly half of all 802.11 products the company shipped during the quarter. AirPort Extreme is the next generation of Wi-Fi wireless networking technology based on the new ultra-fast 802.11g standard. Compatible with millions of 802.11b-based Wi-Fi products, 802.11g offers data rates almost five times faster and is quickly gaining widespread acceptance as the next generation standard for wireless networking.* - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33840905 ------------------------------ From: ljrconsult@adelphia.net (Lawrence J. Rizzo) Subject: Avaya ASAI Date: 16 Apr 2003 06:18:34 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I need to get some information regarding software required to integrate my G3r V11 running ASAI and MAPD, to our Unix based host. We have been totally frustrated by Avaya. They have had us purchase an SDK (software developers kit) and stand alone server for it. Then we find out that this will only allow us to simulate a connection to a PBX and not develop a deployable application. We found a piece called Avaya Active Enterprise, which will allow us to develop using Active X controls to monitor multiple VDN's for ANI information. Problem is it appears we need to buy Avaya CT (formerly CenterVu CT). I am hopeful that someone has been down this road and can alleviate some of my suffering and offer us an answer as to whther this is indeed the right two items to allow us to do this. Any help would be greatly appreciated. ------------------------------ From: nomailp@netscape.net (Don't email me) Subject: Re: TCAP With Multiple Users Date: 16 Apr 2003 07:11:50 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ sharanu_swami@rediffmail.com (Sharanu) wrote in message news:: > Hi, > Can anyone please explain me how TCAP interacts with multiple users ? > Regards. TCAP = Transaction Capability Application Part. This is used by CCS7 to send application messages between nodes. An example of this would be network ring again. Whereby you dial a number that is busy. You then enter a code (usually *xx) and when the line comes free your phone rings. What is happening behind the sceens is: 1) a TCAP message is sent to the far end switch to watch the line 2) when the line comes free the far end switch sends a message back to your switch saying "line now free" 3) your switch then rings your line 4) you go off hook and the call is made to the destination number. This is only one example of TCAP. Other uses are 800, 0800 etc. which are part of IN (inteligent networking) and mobile phones which update user location etc. You can also design your own applications for custom features. I hope this answers your question. questions@telcosupport.net http://www.telcosupport.net ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Cell Phone Companies Seek to Block Rule That Lets Consumers Keep Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 04:44:41 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com Despite static, dropped calls and dead zones, Jeff Danielson sticks with his cell phone service, not out of loyalty but because he can't stand the thought of asking clients to call a new phone number. "I've been unhappy with the service, but I've given up doing anything about it because I really don't want to lose the number," said Danielson, 27, a Washington technology consultant. "I'm afraid I would lose clients that way." Federal regulators are sympathetic with Danielson's plight and have ordered cell phone companies to let people take their numbers with them when they switch to a competitor. The wireless providers asked a federal appeals court Tuesday to block the regulation, arguing that keeping the same phone number is a convenience, not a necessity. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/04/15/national1756EDT0770.DTL or http://tinyurl.com/9ndd Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group ------------------------------ From: Mike Subject: Re: Cellular to Modem? Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 07:19:34 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: mikes595@hotmail.com >> If someone really needs to use a cell phone for a modem, like with a >> credit card machine or fax, you need access to analog service. > Absolutely wrong. With a CDMA carrier you should be able to plug a > serial or USB cable into your computer and use the phone directly as a > modem. That's what I do with my Verizon Kyocera 3035e. >> I'm told that analog service is very expensive if you try to subscribe >> to it, which might not be bad for credit card transactions or faxes. > CDMA data would be cheaper. And 14.4 is all you need for credit cards > or faxes. Thanks for the info. The problem with faxes or credit card machines is that they don't have a serial port. All they have is an RJ-11 to stick in the wall. Even if a POTS adapter is available for a cell phone (that gives you an RJ-11 for a POTS phone), if the call is made through digital towers the data will be clobbered (even slow data like a credit card machine). On the other hand, if the call is made through an analog tower the data will go through. There are fewer analog towers every month. If you had a fax or credit card machine that connected through a phone's USB or serial port, it would work fine on digital. Even the 9600 or 14.4 on most cell phone data networks is plenty fast for faxes or credit card transactions. Mike Sandman On Mon, 14 Apr 2003 00:39:41 -0000, Steven J. Sobol wrote: > From Mike (mikes595@hotmail.com): >> I used a Verizon CDPD modem for a couple of years, but recently >> canceled it. It was 14.4 max at $50 a month unlimited, which was >> better than nothing around the Chicago area, but I recently was turned >> on to a faster service that came on-line last fall. >> Sprint PCS has upgraded their system to 3G in all areas they work in >> (most major cities and along many major highways only). The >> theoretical max data rate is over 100K. > Verizon has a similar service now, Express Network (Sprint's is called > PCS Vision). AT&T and T-Mobile, I believe, have similar services. >> My friend suggested buying it at Circuit City which has a no questions >> asked return policy, and a service contract where they'll just replace >> a broken phone when you walk in with it. I did, but I don't know what >> they'll do when they don't carry the 4900 any more? > They'd probably do what the carriers do and give you a refurb'd phone. > You normally don't get a new phone as a warranty or insurance > replacement. >> When I canceled the Verizon CDPD, they told me that their 3G service >> was up and working, but that I'd only get 14.4 in areas where they >> don't have 3G towers (a lot of places). I might have gone for it, but >> they didn't have an unlimited service. > Verizon CDMA Data is no extra charge -- I used it this weekend. > Verizon's CDMA data service is called Quick2NET and can use Verizon as > the ISP or you can dial into your own ISP account. It does use airtime > minutes. There is no per-KB surcharge though. > With Express Network, however, if you use the traditional 14.4 > service, there may be additional charges. I don't use Express Network. > (Yet.) >> If someone really needs to use a cell phone for a modem, like with a >> credit card machine or fax, you need access to analog service. > Absolutely wrong. With a CDMA carrier you should be able to plug a > serial or USB cable into your computer and use the phone directly as a > modem. That's what I do with my Verizon Kyocera 3035e. >> I'm told that analog service is very expensive if you try to subscribe >> to it, which might not be bad for credit card transactions or faxes. > CDMA data would be cheaper. And 14.4 is all you need for credit cards > or faxes. > Sprint used to have crappy customer service, but being both a Sprint > and a Verizon customer, I've seen Sprint's CS improve dramatically. > Their new CEO has announced a committment to improving CS and has > apparently been doing a good job of it in the past few months. > If you need data, get a CDMA phone and use Verizon Quick2Net, which > should be available in any Verizon digital area. If you need faster > speeds than Q2N, you may want to look into options with Express > Network if you're not happy with Sprint. > Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), > OH/888.480.4NET > "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to > say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of > what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - > G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ From: Clark Wilhelm Griswold, Jr. <73115.1041@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Meigs Field Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 17:24:32 -0600 joe@obilivan.net wrote: > If his Royal Highness, the Almighty Mayor, wants to effectively deal > with airborne terrorists, he needs to shut down O'Hare and Midway, > sterilize all airspace for 30 miles around downtown, and put in place > anti-aircraft radar and gun emplacements. According to an aviation newsletter I get, HRH has now publically admitted that the security flag was a red herring and that the whole purpose was to grab the land for his much desired park. There appears to be a number of people in Washington quite pissed about this, as HRH has made verbal promises on other several projects that are now being questioned. Western access to O'Hare airport is one in particular. While I doubt that Meigs will be reopened, the old saying that "Payback is a B****" comes to mind. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So, to the persons who have written me and taken umbrage over my mocking commentaries about politicians in general and my use of quotation marks around the word 'terrorist' from time to time, I now feel vindicated. I've said it before: the events of September 11, 2001 have been and are going to be milked to the hilt by politicians, police and civil serpents in our country. When are they going to understand (or do they understand, and hope we the citizens do NOT understand) that the events of 9-11 were not 'terrorism' they were *mass murder*, no more, no less. To refer to them as terrorism gives Bin Laden, Sodomy and their friends a lot of credit they do not deserve. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony Toews Subject: Voicemail to Emails - Computerized Telephone Answering Machines Organization: Me, organized? Not a chance. Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 04:36:39 GMT Folks, I'd like the ability to have a computer answer my two telephone lines, record the voice mail and email me the resulting .wav files. (My telco, Telus in Alberta, for unexplainable reasons, is cancelling this service.) Does anyone have any suggestions on this? I've found the following which appears to do what I want. IVM Phone Answering and Call Attendant Software http://www.nch.com.au/ivm/index.html The following also does similar but not quite. Advanced Call Center: Answering Machine Software http://www.voicecallcentral.com/advancedcallcenter.htm but not multiple lines. Call Attendant Pro http://www.nch.com.au/ivm/index.html but only works on Win95/98. Yuck. Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can read the entire thread of messages. Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 17:19:40 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au John Higdon contributed the following: > In article , David Clayton > wrote: >> Don't all the "copy protection" methods only stop pure digital copying? >> One would imagine that taking the analog feed from a CD player and >> recording that would solve the problem, (even burning that onto another >> CD)?, or is analog copying now too "old school" for the 21st century? > Radio stations are not going to futz with that. Making realtime > analog-to-digital recordings, with the attendant setting of levels, > trimming of the recording, not to mention the quality hit, is not > something the radio stations are going to do simply to indulge RIAA > paranoia. I would say that the analog level from a CD is the same as the digital output, and the "quality hit" is far less than the radio station currently has in its transmission, (digital radio will be another matter). > Analog copying is not too "old school", but it is too labor-intensive > for stations these days. Trust me: if a CD cannot be ripped into the > automation, it just gets tossed. I can quite understand that the convenience is the issue, but if it takes 4 minutes to analog record a track onto hard disk that may be played 500+ times it isn't really a big impost. My real point is that the various "copy protection" schemes are in reality only "copy inconvenience" schemes to those of us who still know how to plug a couple of RCA leads around. 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: swami18@lycos.com (Swami) Subject: Re: Postamble and Variable Length Packets Date: 16 Apr 2003 04:53:36 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Thank you for your response. I think that I should clarify things a bit more: In our case, a "packet" at the physical layer is really a "stream of data". So each such stream could actually contain several packets at the higher (data link) layer. The main problem that we are facing is that the higher layer is not sure how many such "packets" will be multiplexed in the current stream (imagine a shared medium where each node gets a certain duration for transmission). So the length of the stream is not known. Hence 'length' field cannot be placed at the beginning of the stream. In our case, it is not feasible to accumulate certain number of packets before starting transmission (i.e., we CANNOT buffer the data as you have suggested). That is why we came up with the idea of a postamble to inform the receiver that the transmission has stopped. So we would like to know if there are any existing ideas/protocols that follow this principle. If there is any other way of solving this problem also, pl. let us know. Thanks and Regards, Swami. bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) wrote in message news:: > In article , Swami > wrote: >> Hi, >> I have a couple of questions related to multiple access at the >> physical layer: >> 1. Do you know of any protocol/commercial product/research on variable >> length packets (I mean completely variable, and not, say, one among a >> set of lengths) for multiple access? There is an additional constraint >> that we do not know the packet length until after we have transmitted >> all the bytes. So this would mean that the datalink layer will not be >> able to place the length field in front. > IP protocol supports variable-length "trailer" packets, _if_ enabled > on the interface. > It _does_ require the length of the trailer at the beginning of the > trailer, however. > As for your 'problem' of not knowing the length, untill after > _transmission_ the cure for that is *trivial*. > You _buffer_ the data until the full packet of data has been > accumulated. Then, you *DO* know the actual byte count, and can > insert it into the header. > This is 'no brainer' stuff. and the way _all_ traditional 'variable > length' packet systems work. > There is no reason _not_ to buffer -- the receiving system can't do > _anything_ with *any* part of the data until the _entire_ packet has > been received. >> 2. Is there any protocol/product/research papers on sending a >> postamble at the physical layer level (I mean the decision is taken by >> the software/hardware closest to the point of transmission)? This is >> mainly to solve the peroblem mentioned above. If you also happen to >> know of any other means to solve the above problem, do let me know. >> Any links/pointers on this topic would be of immense help. >> Thanks and Regards, ------------------------------ From: Jim Hopkins Subject: Greenies Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 22:26:20 GMT Any old Bell System guys out there who remember the green 'analgesic tablets' that were a staple in the first aid kits? I wonder what was in those things (as I nurse a hamstring strain with nothing more than drugstore strength advil)? They would sure clear up a hangover! Jim Hopkins [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For the new guys who do not remember the old days of the Bell System, AT&T had a full-size medical unit at every company location; a full complement of on duty doctors and nurses to treat/examine employees as needed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 18:08:30 -0600 Subject: Ain't Spammers Funny? Reply-To: joey@garynuman.info My mail system just trapped a piece of spam. Actually it traps about 60 a day, but I found this one to be a particularly funny example of how spammers don't have a clue about who they're sending their mail to (ie: their advertising is not "targetted"). I won't quote the entire spam. Just the subject line and first little bit: Subj: Cure Job Monotony tommy YOUR DEGREE MAY BE CLOSER THAN YOU THINK We remove the obstacles that cause adults to abandon hope. DID YOU KNOW that you could earn your legitimate Associate's, Bachelor's, Master's or even Doctorate degree, utilizing your already existing professional or academic expertise? ================================== OK, that's the spam. What makes it funny (well, ok, maybe only to me) is that it was addressed to one of my clients. That client is New Jersey Devils defenceman Tommy Albelin, a man at the tail end of a long, successful NHL career, who earns $1.2 million (US) per year to play about 40 games (and watch the other 40 from the press box) and who is a good bet to earn his second Stanley Cup ring over the next 6 or 7 weeks. Hardly a candidate for needing "hope" with his job prospects. Then again, the man DOES drive a Volvo, a very monotonous car... :-) (Drives it like a cab driver, too - and I oughtta know, having been one.) (This spam was addressed to his "public" email address, which was obviously harvested from his website. His "private" email address gets no spam at all.) Veteran Shayne Corson just walked out on the Toronto Maple Leafs, in the middle of the playoffs. Maybe *HE* got this spam too. :-) / From the desk of Joey Lindstrom / / To my mind a bargain is something I need at a price I can afford. / -- Robert Heinlein, "Travels" ------------------------------ 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 #396 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr 16 23:14:12 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3H3EBs11373; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 23:14:12 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 23:14:12 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304170314.h3H3EBs11373@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 #397 TELECOM Digest Wed, 16 Apr 2003 23:13:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 397 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telephone to Sound Card Interface (John Smith) gc_GetMetaEventEx() Returns Metaevent.crn == 0 problem (Claude) 802.16a Questions (alnoid) Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt by Limiting Radio Play? (Paul Wallich) Re: Cell Phone Companies Seek to Block Rule (Thomas A. Horsley) Technical Obstacles to Carrers Implementing Number Portability (Joseph) Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt by Limiting Radio Play? (John Higdon) Pneumo Tubes (was Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box) (Gordon Hlavenka) Re: Meigs Field (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Greenies (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Greenies (R. T. Wurth) Suing Junk FAX Senders? ('nuther 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: esojmc@hotmail.com (John Smith) Subject: Telephone to Sound Card Interface Date: 16 Apr 2003 10:40:16 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I would like to hookup a regular cordless phone to the mic and speaker inputs of my computer soundcard. I want to do this so I can walk around the house while using internet telephony. This phone won't be connected to the home phone line. I looked around and found the following website that had some good information and a schematic that looks like it should work: http://www.hut.fi/Misc/Electronics/circuits/teleinterface.html Primary 600 ohm Secondary 600ohm centre-tapped (same as 150ohm+150ohm secondary) telephone +9-12V-------or-----------/ II /------------< soundcard speaker output modem / II / / II / / II / +-< speaker connector ground / II / | / II /---150ohm-+ / II / | / II / | / II / +-> line input connector ground / II / GROUND--------------------/ II /------------> soundcard line level input Anyone know where I can get that 600:600 center-tapped transformer? I see Radio Shack has a regular 600:600 isolation transformer (part number 273-1374) but I don't think that will work. Thanks for your time. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 19:00:29 GMT From: Claude Subject: gc_GetMetaEventEx() Returns Metaevent.crn == 0 Problem Organization: Shaw Residential Internet Trying to use gc_GetANI on a D/41EPCI but failing because returned CRN in metaevent is 0. Am I missing something? ------------------------------ From: alnoid@hotmail.com (alnoid) Subject: 802.16a Questions Date: 16 Apr 2003 13:27:27 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi folks, I hope I can post this question here - I haven't been able to find much information on 802.16a around on the internet yet. Please redirect me if there is a better place for me to ask. And perhaps it's premature to ask yet anyway! But I have several retail stores in a central area that would benefit greatly from a common "MAN" backbone. This isn't an internet access need. It's a couple dozen shops that need to share lots of data. So what is the estimated cost of implementing a 802.16a station? I assume this is a hub / transmitter, and a receiver of some kind. I've been doing LAN's for quite a while, but have not embrased wireless technologies because the distance was so limited. But if I could get two stores that are up to 30 miles away to talk to each other -- that would be worth a great deal of money and effort for me! Al ------------------------------ From: Paul Wallich Subject: Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 16:53:16 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In article , David Clayton wrote: > John Higdon contributed the following: >> In article , David Clayton >> wrote: >> Don't all the "copy protection" methods only stop pure digital copying? >> One would imagine that taking the analog feed from a CD player and >> CD)?, or is analog copying now too "old school" for the 21st century? >> Radio stations are not going to futz with that. Making realtime >> analog-to-digital recordings, with the attendant setting of levels, >> trimming of the recording, not to mention the quality hit, is not >> something the radio stations are going to do simply to indulge RIAA >> paranoia. > I would say that the analog level from a CD is the same as the digital > output, and the "quality hit" is far less than the radio station > currently has in its transmission, (digital radio will be another > matter). That's assuming the work is done right. >> Analog copying is not too "old school", but it is too labor-intensive >> for stations these days. Trust me: if a CD cannot be ripped into the >> automation, it just gets tossed. > I can quite understand that the convenience is the issue, but if it > takes 4 minutes to analog record a track onto hard disk that may be > played 500+ times it isn't really a big impost. This, ironically, is one of the places where the consolidation of radio stations in the US may be hurting the RIAA. The four or five radio sations in a given town, typically all owned by the same company, will also typically be sharing tech and administrative staff. So four minutes (really 10 by the time you do the checks and the paperwork) to do one song for one station becomes most of an hour to do one song each for half a dozen stations, becomes the better part of a day to transfer all the copy-protected disks coming in. And if anyone at one of these places had that kind of slack time in their jobs to do that, they were fired back in 1998. paul ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Cell Phone Companies Seek to Block Rule From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 22:00:48 GMT > Despite static, dropped calls and dead zones, Jeff Danielson sticks > with his cell phone service, not out of loyalty but because he can't > stand the thought of asking clients to call a new phone number. Which is, of course, why the cellphone companies are desperate to get the number portability requirement dropped -- they know pissed off customers wouldn't be as reluctant to switch services. However, this whole number portability thing got me to thinking (always dngerous). Is there anyone out there who offers a service that is basically just a phone number that gets forwarded automatically to another number of your choice? Something like that would allow you to keep the first number the same and change the second number at will (just like email forwarding services). If they successfully kill the portability requirement, something like this might be able to achieve the same thing. >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Technical Obstacles to Carriers Implementing Number Portability Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 15:13:52 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com This is a query rather than an informational type post. I've read on many occasions that implementing wireless number portability is a lot more complicated than it is for land line number portability. Could someone explain what the difficulty is or maybe even give me some reference where I could get this information? TIA Joseph Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group. ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 16:12:56 -0700 In article , David Clayton wrote: > I would say that the analog level from a CD is the same as the digital > output, and the "quality hit" is far less than the radio station > currently has in its transmission, (digital radio will be another > matter). The quality hit is a minor issue. It is the analog rip that requires level setting, trimming, and all sorts of manual operations that must be performed by a wage-earning person that makes the procedure undesirable. > I can quite understand that the convenience is the issue, but if it > takes 4 minutes to analog record a track onto hard disk that may be > played 500+ times it isn't really a big impost. It takes longer than four minutes by the time you set levels, trim the front and back, and then place it in the library. For station that insert a great deal of music into the library on a regular basis, it is a major pain. > My real point is that the various "copy protection" schemes are in > reality only "copy inconvenience" schemes to those of us who still > know how to plug a couple of RCA leads around. Well, sure; that goes without saying. But when I rip a CD for use in my home jukebox or portable player, rather than a walk-away operation, it becomes a labor intensive annoyance of cutting and trimming in an audio editor, naming files, and manually organizing everything. I'm no longer interested in fattening the pockets of slimeballs who would impose such inconvenience on me for no good reason. See, that's the thing: I don't NEED to buy their albums. I have elected to show them who is really in control by keeping my money in MY pocket rather than putting it in theirs. Radio stations have elected to not revamp their library augmenting systems to indulge the paranoid record companies. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Subject: Pneumo Tubes (was Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:33:43 -0500 Organization: Crash Electronics Reply-To: nospam@crashelectronics.com The US Navy was still using pneumatic tubes on their ships as recently as the 1980s. Because the various parts of the ship need to stay in communication with each other even if the ship has sustained heavy battle damage there are multiple redundant communications methods available. There's the 1MC, the "Now hear this" PA system. There are handheld portable radios. There's a regular dial-type telephone system -- the ship I was on, built in the 1970s, had rotary phones and electromechanical switching. There are "sound-powered" phones, those weird-looking things you see sticking off the sailor's chest in the war movies; a dynamic microphone directly drives an efficient earpiece on the other end of the wire. There are pneumatic tubes. There are even "speaking tubes" -- you blow a whistle to get the other end's attention, and then yell into the brass bell on your end. All of these systems were used on a daily basis. I haven't been aboard a Navy ship since January 1983 but I don't imagine they've discontinued the low-tech comms. Certainly ships built with these systems will still have (and use) them. Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Pneumatic air tubes were a very common way to move small amounts of paper between offices even as late as 1990. A department store I did some work for in downtown Chicago as of 1993 or 1994 used them and I mentioned here a week or so ago about the Conrad Hilton Hotel in Chicago and their network of air tubes which were controlled from a 'tube exchange' room in one of the basements. Occassionally it would happen that the 'air could go off' such as times the business was not open or during an electrical outage which stopped the air pumps from working as they should. In those cases things going up in a tube simply fell back to their starting point; thing going downward fell through to their destin- ation (in most cases, unless the tube was curved somewhere in the line; in the case of mostly horizontal tubes, the papers simply stopped and sat there until someone got around to 'turning the air back on'. I know a common compliaint of the cashiers at the depart- ment store where I worked part time was (around closing time each day) 'the air has already been turned off; this paperwork will have to go out in the morning'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Subject: Re: Meigs Field Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 08:50:10 -0500 Organization: Crash Electronics Reply-To: nospam@crashelectronics.com Zed**3 wrote: > I don't know of any other city that has > an airport with such convenient access to downtown. How about SAN in San Diego, CA? Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 20:33:33 EDT Subject: Re: Greenies Sure, although we considered them blue at Southwestern Bell in Oklahoma City. (They were actually a sort of blue-green.) As I recall, they were marked for the relief of menstrual pain, but they were widely used because they were effective against all kinds of pain. I must disagree with Pat as to the ubiquity of medical units in the Bell System (can't speak for AT&T). Only a few places, perhaps two or three, had such units in Southwestern Bell territory. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com On Tue, 15 Apr 2003 22:26:20 GMT Jim Hopkins bwanajim@swbell.net wrote: > Any old Bell System guys out there who remember the green 'analgesic > tablets' that were a staple in the first aid kits? I wonder what was > in those things (as I nurse a hamstring strain with nothing more than > drugstore strength advil)? They would sure clear up a hangover! > Jim Hopkins > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For the new guys who do not remember > the old days of the Bell System, AT&T had a full-size medical unit > at every company location; a full complement of on duty doctors and > nurses to treat/examine employees as needed. PAT] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wes Leatherock disagreed with me on the frequency of AT&T medical units. I know they had one at the headquarters building in Chicago also. He also differentiated between 'Bell System' and AT&T. Well, the *old* AT&T *was* the 'Bell System'. Someone correct me if I am wrong; back in the 1930's and 1940's wasn't there also a HOSPITAL for ailing telephone workers somewhere? I know that the old Illinois Central Railroad had its own hospital for employees in Chicago, down the street from where I lived. I think it was at 67th and Stony Island Avenue. I know that one day many years ago, when I was riding an Illinois Central suburban train and I fell down on the platform and broke my ankle, an ambulance crew from the train's medical department took me out to the ICRR Hospital. I feel almost positive -- but cannot remember any details -- the 'phone company' in the old days had such a hospital or very elaborate medical unit somewhere. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rwurth@att.net (R. T. Wurth) Subject: Re: Greenies Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 00:55:28 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet > Any old Bell System guys out there who remember the green 'analgesic > tablets' that were a staple in the first aid kits? I wonder what was > in those things (as I nurse a hamstring strain with nothing more than > drugstore strength advil)? They would sure clear up a hangover! > Jim Hopkins > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For the new guys who do not remember > the old days of the Bell System, AT&T had a full-size medical unit > at every company location; a full complement of on duty doctors and > nurses to treat/examine employees as needed. PAT] I don't know about your "Greenies", but in my former part of the former Bell System, a "greenie" was a routing slip, a small slip of green paper (about 2.5" by 5.5", always used in portrait mode) one could attach to the front of a memo upon which one would write the initials of persons one thought might be interested in reading it. After each set of initials, one wrote a hyphen and the number 2, unless a.) the person so designated was a direct or indirect report, and b.) you wanted them to followup, in which case one wrote the number 1. For normal (-2) handling, one was expected to keep it for no more , perhaps 1/2 a week to a week, then cross one's initials off and forward it to someone else on the list, or alternatively, pass it on without crossing one's initials off if one couldn't read it within the customary time and wanted another shot at reading it after others had their chance. The originator could put their initials, followed by the word "last" if they wanted the memo back for their files. New employees were issued a grey routing slip box with a Bell System logo, a pen holder, and one of those infuriating pens that had no pocket clip and no way of disarming the writing end (i. e. no cover and no retraction mechanism), so one had to put it back into its holder. The routing slip was also the official raise reporting form in my organization. One's manager would open his desk, consult his secret raise report, and write on the slip, for example: RTW (the report's initials) $xx.x K (the report's current salary) + x.x K (the raise) ----------- $xx.x K (the new salary) x.x% (the percentage raise) The slip was then passed across the manager's desk, face down, to the employee, with the numbers never spoken. Salaries and raises were always in $100 increments, so the "xx.x K" format sufficed. Later, the system was changed to use formal computer-generated individual raise forms on regular (8.5 x 11) paper. That was the way it was in Bell Labs in the late 1970's. R. T. Wurth / Rumson, NJ / rwurth@att.net Consultant to the telecommunications industry ------------------------------ From: 'nuther Bob Subject: Suing Junk FAX Senders? Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 21:07:19 -0400 Anyone followed through on this or know of any sites that advice on it ? I've read the info at the FCC site regarding my _right_ to sue ... I'm just wondering about the practical aspects or approaching this in small claims court. If there's a site or two that discusses this that would be great. Someone has apparently added my FAX # to a junk fax list. It's getting very annoying. I can report them to the FCC, but it would be so much more satisfying to get a judgement against them. Thanks for any pointers, 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 #397 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 17 13:07:33 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3HH7X717570; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 13:07:33 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 13:07:33 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304171707.h3HH7X717570@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 #398 TELECOM Digest Thu, 17 Apr 2003 13:07:39 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 398 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FireWire Port Failures in Host Computers & Peripheral Devices (Solomon) The Near Future Of Wi-Fi (Monty Solomon) The Ever-Shifting Internet Population: A New Look at Internet (Solomon) Court Hears Fight Over Numbers Used for Cellphones (Monty Solomon) Palm Pulls the Plugs (Monty Solomon) UNWIRED: How to Hook Up (Monty Solomon) Voicemail Hacking Leaves Ears Ringing (Monty Solomon) Cable's War Coverage Suggests a New 'Fox Effect' on Television (Solomon) Can Wi-Fi Take Us the Last Mile? (Monty Solomon) Queries on Fax/Modem Calls (Swami) Re: Voicemail to Emails - Computerized Telephone Answering Machines (TC) Re: Greenies (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Line Side T1 (Rafael Salas) Net Caller ID Units Available Anywhere?? (bryan3455@prodigy.net) Re: Greenies (Justin Time) Problem With Cisco 3745, ISDN PRI and Callback (Fabian Kraetschmer) Re: Ain't Spammers Funny? (Ray Normandeau) 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, 17 Apr 2003 02:29:20 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FireWire Port Failures in Host Computers and Peripheral Devices http://www.wiebetech.com/pressreleases/FireWirePortFailures.htm "FireWire Port Failures in Host Computers and Peripheral Devices" a White Paper by James Wiebe, CEO WiebeTech LLC jameswiebe@wiebetech.com http://www.wiebetech.com İ 2003 All Rights Reserved This paper may be reproduced, but only in its entirety, and only if credit is given to the author and linkage provided to the WiebeTech website. DISCLAIMER The cause of FireWire port failures is extremely complex and this White Paper cannot embody all possible failure scenarios or solutions to the problems. The author specifically disclaims any fitness for use of the information contained within this white paper. Port failures are often discussed but remain a relatively infrequent problem, especially if the FireWire storage device and the host computer are properly designed. Statistics for total failures of FireWire ports is not known. Judging from the number of posts on Apple's website: http://discussions.info.apple.com/WebX?14@103.67TDaKsJjbJ.2@.ef0a4bc as well as posts on the website: http://www.macintouch.com/firewirereader02.html this topic is assumed to be of interest to many readers. The author seeks input from anyone who may have additional information which can shed light on the subject of this White Paper. Questions concerning particular types of equipment should be directed to the respective manufacturer. 1. INTRODUCTION FireWire allows users to connect storage devices and other peripherals to host computers, giving unparalled flexibility in data capture, storage, transportation, and backup capabilities. FireWire allows devices to be hot swapped from one computer to another. Hot swapping allows FireWire storage devices (as well as other peripherals, such as video cameras) to be physically attached to a FireWire port, automatically mounted on the desktop, accessed, and then unmounted / disconnected at the command of the user. The resulting ease of use has caused FireWire technology to be widely accepted by millions of users. FireWire is directly supported by a variety of operating systems, including Windows 98SE, ME, 2K, WP and Mac OS9.1, 9.2 and OSX. Linux also is capable of supporting FireWire, although the process of setting up first use on that platform may be a little more difficult. Users have reported failures of FireWire ports on host computers after attaching FireWire devices to those ports. This can be quite unsettling to the user, since the failure of the FireWire port can be crippling to the utilization of the computer. For instance, it may become impossible to create backups or attach FireWire peripherals to the computer after failure of the port. The purpose of this report is to provide background and technical analysis of the failure of the ports. In conclusion, methodologies will be suggested which may substantially reduce the incidence of damage to host ports. 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FIREWIRE OPERATION In order to understand the issue, it is necessary to understand just a little bit of how FireWire operates. FireWire allows the attachment of external devices to host computers through a cable which is composed of the following wiring components: * Serial Data Pairs, of which there are two, giving a total of 4 wires. * Power, which is generally somewhere between 8 to 24 volts DC. * Ground, which is a lead that provides a current return for the Power line. * Shield, which helps prevent the emission of Radio Frequency Interference from the FireWire cable. The Power and Ground lines must be present to allow FireWire devices to be bus powered. For instance, portable FireWire drives usually run off of bus power, meaning that they will function when attached to a powered FireWire host. Other types of FireWire devices, such as Desktop FireWire drives, usually (but not always) require a separate power supply. As a result, they do not utilize any power from the Power / Ground pair provided by the host FireWire port. They obtain their power from an independent power supply. Manufacturers are not required to provide Power and Ground within the FireWire host. Two different types of commonly used FireWire connectors have been defined for FireWire 400 usage. One of these types is the more common six pin connector, while the other type is a physically smaller connector which omits Power and Ground. Obviously, bus powered FireWire devices will not work when attached to a FireWire host which does not provide bus power. Apple computers generally include all of these lines in their FireWire ports, while certain PC computers with FireWire capability (such as the Inspiron 8200 from Dell or various Sony Vaio laptops) omit the Power and Ground lines. The omission of these lines prevents the use of "bus-powered" storage devices. This is why portable FireWire drives won't work when attached directly to PC laptop computers, such as the Dell or Sony models. No power is present on the port. 3. FIREWIRE FAILURE SCENARIO A typical failure scenario is as follows: The user attaches a FireWire storage device to the computer. The user expects the device to mount on the desktop, but this does not occur. Repeated attempts to mount the storage device (usually by connecting and disconnecting the FireWire cable) produce the same results. Ultimately, the user attempts to mount other FireWire devices on the same port without success, and consequently verifies that the port is no longer functional. Various attempts to resolve the situation may be attempted, all without success. This may include machine rebooting, Parameter RAM resetting, power disconnection for extended periods of time, etc. It's worth noting that the host FireWire port may be on the motherboard (as is the case for most Apple computers) or it may be on a PCI FireWire host adapter card. The result is the same; the particular port no longer works. The port may still be capable of supplying power to the attached FireWire device, but the device is no longer seen on the desktop or in the various disk management utilities. The failure of the host's FireWire port can produce a very bad day for the user. The knowledge of possible damage (and consequential repair cost / hassle) to the computer is compounded by the frustrating inability to mount and use external storage devices. 4. FAILURE CAUSES 4.1 LOSS OF POWER FROM THE PORT What went wrong to cause the failure of the FireWire port? In order to answer the question, let's consider the two main functional components of the FireWire interface: the Data lines and the Power lines. A failure mode is the loss of Power through the FireWire port. A second failure mode (which the author believes to be far more likely) is a failure of the port's ability to supply Data to the FireWire device. These failure modes cause us to consider: why would a port lose the ability to supply either Power or Data? In the testing and development of FireWire storage devices, we (WiebeTech) have accidentally shorted the FireWire Power / ground lines together many times. This can cause a variety of results: the immediate shutdown of the entire computer system; the shutdown of an individual port; etc. Apple documents that their ports are provided with triple redundant fusing for protection against power shorts such as the one just described. The applicable document can be accessed at the following URL, showing FireWire specifications on all Apple computers: http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=58207 The Apple document states: "Power safety -- The FireWire bus has three self-resetting fuses. If your device unexpectedly shuts down, it may be due to an overloaded fuse. If this occurs, disconnect the device immediately." Field experience shows that the power side of the FireWire host port rarely fails. Fuse protection appears to adequately protect the port against most problems. 4.2 LOSS OF DATA TRANSMISSION FROM THE PORT The second failure mode is the failure of the port's ability to supply Data to the FireWire device. As previously stated, the author believes this to be the most common failure mode when FireWire ports fail. FireWire ports within most peripherals are composed of two devices: the FireWire bridge, which connects to the drive and to the FireWire "PHY", and the "PHY", which connects from the FireWire cable to the FireWire bridge. The PHY receives nearly no mention in most discussion of FireWire devices, but it is actually responsible for the electrical connection to the FireWire cable, and ultimately, the host device. The host devices' FireWire connection is very similar, using a PHY to connect the motherboard electronics to the FireWire port. The author has direct experience observing the failure of FireWire ports in peripheral devices under developmental test conditions. This experience shows that most port failures occur within the PHY, not in the FireWire bridge, and not in the power supply portion of the port. Post mortem examination of the decapped (plastic removed) failed PHY shows gross failure of the circuitry which attaches the Data lines. After removing the plastic package from the integrated circuit, an examination of the integrated circuit under a microscope shows clear evidence of electrical damage to the part. In other words, something zapped the PHY. How is this possible? It really wasn't supposed to be possible for the PHY to fail. However, there are at many different events which can cause the PHY to fail. Some of these are very easy to understand, while others are a bit more difficult to understand. 4.2.1 FAILURE BY ELECTROSTATIC DISCHARGE (ESD) The failure scenario is as follows: The user inserts a FireWire cable into the host. The user then picks up the other end to attach to the FireWire device, and inadvertently discharges ESD through one of the Data lines to the host port. Part destruction occurs. In the real world, this does not (or at least should not) happen frequently. The user is far more likely to discharge through the Shield of the FireWire cable, which will dissipate the discharge directly to a ground within the host computer, without damaging internal circuitry. 4.2.2 PORT FAILURE BY BAD CABLE OR BAD INSERTION This failure scenario actually has three sub-scenarios, each of which will be described in turn. 4.2.2.1 PORT FAILURE BY REVERSE INSERTION In this scenario, the user inserts the cable with the connector twisted 180 degrees. An examination of the FireWire six pin ports suggests that this is not possible, but it has actually been done many times. It is more likely to happen when the port is worn, or when the port easily "spreads" when reverse inserted. Some FireWire ports are built with the metal seam at the narrow end of the port, making it much easier to reverse insert the cable. The resulting (errant) electrical connections cause Power lines to be directly connected to Data lines. This invariably fries the PHY attached to that port. 4.2.2.2 PORT FAILURE BY BAD CABLE Any internal failure of a FireWire cable which results in Power being shorted to a Data line within the cable usually will result in the failure of the port to which it is attached. The author was directly told of a typical experience at a major computer company. An employee observed that his FireWire drive would not mount. Suspecting trouble and wanting to verify it, the employee tested the device on three more computers. The device wouldn't mount on any of the four computers. The ultimate cause of the problem was a bad cable which fried four host ports on the four computers. The FireWire drive was not at fault. The author assumes that each of the four PHYs was destroyed. 4.2.2.3 PORT FAILURE BY FIREWIRE CABLE TWISTING In this scenario, the user correctly attaches the FireWire cable to the computer and the storage device. A rotational twisting force is applied to either connector at either end of the cable, in relationship to the port in which it is inserted. As the connectors are pushed out of position by the rotational torque, a short occurs between the Data lines and a Power line, resulting in port failure. 4.2.3 PORT FAILURE BY INDUCED UNDER/OVER VOLTAGE CONDITION This is the scenario which is most difficult to understand. Essentially, the PHY creates or experiences a damaging voltage on one of the Data lines. This error condition is very transient in nature and is caused at startup time of bus powered FireWire devices by a bump or droop on a power supply within the FireWire device. The bump or droop is understood through a detailed analysis of the actual circuit of the FireWire device, cable, and host port as current starts to flow through the Power lines at startup time. Equivalent circuitry must be considered: IE, inductance within power lines, etc. (The engineering analysis is far beyond the scope of this paper.) As a result, the external FireWire device may briefly experience or transmit a damaging voltage to the host computer's FireWire port, resulting in the destruction of the port. This failure mode is the one most likely to have created the impression that bus powered devices cause FireWire host port failures. 5. PREVENTING FIREWIRE PORT FAILURE 5.1 OBVIOUS PREVENTATIVES Certain preventive measures seem obvious: * Always use high quality FireWire cables. * If a cable is worn out, replace it immediately. (Cables used at WiebeTech are used heavily throughout every business day; they are generally replaced every month, if not more frequently.) * Never insert a cable backwards into a port. If this happens before the cable is also attached to the host (or to the peripheral device), get the port repaired prior to further use of the device (or host). Discard the cable and use a new one. * If a device does not mount, attempt mounting it with a new cable on the same port. Always suspect the cable before suspecting a failure of the device. Try powering the host down; rebooting; etc. Port failures on machines tend to follow the cable. 5.2 PREVENTING PORT FAILURE WHEN USING BUS POWERED DEVICES What follows is three different methods for preventing port failure when using bus powered devices. All require support from the FireWire peripheral manufacture and from the host computer. Other methods are also available - this is not meant to be an exhaustive list. 5.2.1 ESD AND OVER/UNDER VOLTAGE This technique requires installation of protective devices on the FireWire port on the host computer. The protection is installed on the motherboard close to the PHY device, with direct connections to the Data lines. An excellent example of how Apple has implemented this technique in certain reworked motherboards is found at the following URL: http://www.medicalmac.com/mac98e.html Through proper implementation of this technique, the FireWire port is protected against Electro Static Discharge (ESD) as well as problems caused by bus powered devices. The author believes that Apple has been implementing the technique in all recent and currently shipping Apple computers. Suppression of ESD and over/under voltage is a primary method of reducing or eliminating port failure and must be implemented on the host computer to be effective. 5.2.2 VOLTAGE TRANSIENT SUPPRESSION CIRCUITRY ON BUS POWERED DEVICES WiebeTech has implemented a proprietary technique which prevents transients at power on time from being transmitted to the host computer via the Data lines. This resolves issues related to use of bus powered devices. This technique has been used with excellent results in WiebeTech's bus powered FireWire DriveDock devices, which are capable of bus powering 3.5 inch IDE hard drives. 5.2.3 THE USE OF A POWER SWITCH IN BUS POWERED DEVICES. WiebeTech recommends the use of power switches in bus powered FireWire devices. This prevents the PHY within the FireWire device from transmitting voltage transients through the FireWire cable to the PHY on the motherboard of the host computer. Simply put, the FireWire device is not powered up until all connections have been made and voltages have had a chance to stabilize. This technique is used on WiebeTech's portable drives, including the MicroGB+; MicroGB+Combo; and 3.5 inch bus powered UltraGB. 5.2.4 CURRENT LIMITING OF POWER ON TRANSIENTS WiebeTech has also implemented a technique which allows the power supply of the FireWire device to "soft start" while the device is still in the off position. This is implemented in WiebeTech's UltraGB 3.5 inch bus powered drive. The UltraGB has a three position switch: Bus Power - Off -AC Power. When the Off position is selected AND when the device is attached to a host through a FireWire cable, the internal power supply ramps up to voltage through a current limiting circuit into a power storage circuit. This provides important benefits: a substantial amount of power may be "saved up", helping large drives to spin up successfully; and power on transients are filtered through the current limiter, substantially reducing bumps and droops in the power supply. 5.3 OTHER METHODS OF RESOLVING HOST PORT FAILURES 5.3.1 REPAIR THE MACHINE If the user has a computer under warranty, it is likely that the manufacturer will repair the damaged port without charge of any kind. It may be worthwhile checking with the manufacturer, even if the computer is out of warranty. 5.3.2 ADD AN INEXPENSIVE FIREWIRE HOST CARD If the machine is out of warranty and has available PCI slots, the simplest way to repair the computer is to add a FireWire PCI card. They are inexpensive and very easy to install. Most operating systems do not require the installation of any additional software drives to support FireWire usage through a PCI card. 6. CONCLUSIONS Most of the failure modes of FireWire ports are believed to be caused by low quality or worn out FireWire cables, operator error during device and cable insertion, inadequate PHY port protection, and improper design of external FireWire devices which causes voltage surges to the host port. 6.1 CABLE PREVENTATIVES * Users are encouraged to use high quality FireWire cables. * Users are encouraged to replace worn out FireWire cables. * Never plug a FireWire cable in backwards (although it seems impossible; it's been done many times.) * Don't apply twisting torque to cables that are inserted into sockets. * If a device doesn't mount, do not test the cable on another machine. 6.2 HOST PORTS * Older computers may not have FireWire port protection built into them. This appears to place them at higher risk of failure. * Recently manufactured computers are likely to have enhanced port protection. * If your port fails while the computer is within warranty, you won't have any problems getting it repaired. * If your port fails while the computer is out of warranty, an inexpensive solution is to use a low cost PCI FireWire host card. (assuming you have open slots). 6.3 FIREWIRE PERIPHERALS * FireWire Peripherals should have a transient limiting circuitry on the Data lines at power up time, in order to prevent transients from causing damage to the host's PHY. * An alternative method is to use FireWire devices that are turned on via switch after attachment to the FireWire cable. * Another method is to use FireWire peripherals with built in inrush current limiting on the Power lines. * Always follow the attachment and power up recommendations of your host and peripheral manufacturer! The author hopes this material has been helpful in shedding light on the issue of FireWire port failures. Copyright 2003 WiebeTech LLC, All Rights Reserved. FireWire ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 01:20:52 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Near Future Of Wi-Fi Arik Hesseldahl NEW YORK - Before it was Wi-Fi, the wireless networking technology that is currently the hottest accessory for a notebook PC was best known by a jumble of letters and numbers: IEEE 802.11b. This arcane designation was assigned to the technology by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, a global organization that sets standards for many of the technologies we use in daily life. And if the 10 megabits per second you're getting from your Wi-Fi network now just isn't cutting it, there are a few new wireless technologies -- some already on the market and some still cooking in the IEEE's oven -- that will eventually speed up data transmission speeds considerably and add other capabilities. http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/15/cx_ah_0415tentech.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 01:56:48 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Ever-Shifting Internet Population: A New Look at Internet Pew Internet Project The Ever-Shifting Internet Population: A new look at Internet access and the digital divide http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=88 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 02:43:01 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Court Hears Fight Over Numbers Used for Cellphones By MATT RICHTEL with JOHN FILES The wireless telephone industry appealed to a federal court in Washington yesterday to block a government effort to allow consumers to keep their cellphone numbers when they switch mobile phone carriers. The Federal Communications Commission, which has long sought to encourage competition by letting cellphone users move the same number from one wireless network to another, is seeking to bring about so-called portability of numbers by this November. But ever since it adopted the rule in 1996, the agency has delayed carrying it out because of objections from the industry, which argues that it will have to spend an extra $1 billion and that it is unnecessary because the mobile phone business is already highly competitive. The issue is a hot button for many cellphone users and consumer groups, who say that Americans should have the same ability to keep their mobile phone numbers as they do to retain their home phone numbers when they move locally. They also point to several other countries, including Britain, Spain and Australia, that have adopted portability without doing serious damage to the industry. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/16/technology/16CELL.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 02:45:09 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Palm Pulls the Plugs Free at last: A case study in learning to love the unchained corporation of tomorrow. By Brad Stone It was a scene to give any IT guy chills: 12 top executives of Palm Inc. were meeting in the boardroom last December. As usual, attendees had opened their laptops, unsheathed their PDAs, and were attempting to log on to the company's wireless local-area network before getting down to business. But this time, the network wasn't working in half of the room. CEO Todd Bradley and his staff were getting nothing but sluggish connections and frustrating error messages. Mike Allison, director of the company's global tech infrastructure, quickly found himself on the receiving end of an angry phone call from his boss, CIO Marina Levinson. "I don't get yelled at that often," Allison recalls, "so there must have been some urgency." Allison was ordered to diagnose and fix the problem immediately. But he could find nothing wrong with the company's network or the building's Wi-Fi nodes. Finally, he discovered that someone had set up a so-called rogue network -- an unauthorized Wi-Fi hub -- and it was crowding out the corporate LAN at the access point serving the executive conference room. The execs sitting around the table were inadvertently logging into the rogue node -- a dead end. With the help of a laptop and Kismet sniffer software, Allison identified the position of the rogue network. To his astonishment, its signal emanated from the office of Eric Benhamou, the chair of Palm and 3Com. A pioneer of computer networking in Silicon Valley, Benhamou is also an Apple enthusiast and a lover of Wi-Fi. He had brought from home a Mac laptop and an Apple AirPort, which he had installed himself on the corporate intranet. Allison politely informed Benhamou that his home-brewed wireless network was, well, mucking up the works. Allison turned it off, and the Palm executive boardroom was once again bathed in glorious, empowering radio waves from a legitimate 802.11 access point. Connectivity was restored, and all was well. In its Silicon Valley offices, Palm has one of the most sophisticated wireless networks anywhere. Eighteen Cisco Aironet nodes cover 140,000 square feet across all three Palm buildings in Milpitas. Of the 700 employees on the campus, more than half have Wi-Fi cards. Palm also put in 30 Bluetooth access points throughout the offices to connect (albeit slowly) PDAs to the Internet. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.05/unwired/palm.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 02:48:10 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: UNWIRED: How to Hook Up How to Hook Up A step-by-step guide to building your own network. By Paul Boutin http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.05/unwired/network.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 02:51:09 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Voicemail Hacking Leaves Ears Ringing CALIFORNIA Voicemail Hacking Leaves Ears Ringing Customers and their long-distance providers are at odds over who is liable for charges rung up by scammers. By Kathy M. Kristof, Times Staff Writer Voicemail can cost you. Just ask K.C. Hatcher, a San Francisco-based graphic artist. AT&T wants her to pay $12,000 in long-distance charges rung up by a hacker who apparently changed Hatcher's voicemail message to accept third-party billed calls to Saudi Arabia and the Philippines. http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-fi-phonehack16apr16,1,6980247.story ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 02:53:07 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cable's War Coverage Suggests a New 'Fox Effect' on Television Cable's War Coverage Suggests a New 'Fox Effect' on Television By JIM RUTENBERG The two commentators were gleeful as they skewered the news media and antiwar protesters in Hollywood. "They are absolutely committing sedition, or treason," one commentator, Michael Savage, said of the protesters one recent night. His colleague, Joe Scarborough, responded: "These leftist stooges for anti-American causes are always given a free pass. Isn't it time to make them stand up and be counted for their views?" The conversation did not take place on A.M. radio, in an Internet chat room or even on the Fox News Channel. Rather, Mr. Savage, a longtime radio talk-show host, and Mr. Scarborough, a former Republican congressman, were speaking during prime time on MSNBC, the cable news network owned by Microsoft and General Electric and overseen by G.E.'s NBC News division. MSNBC, which is ranked third among cable news channels, hired the two shortly before the war in Iraq, saying it sought better political balance in its programming. But others in the industry say the moves are the most visible sign of a phenomenon they call "the Fox effect." This was supposed to be CNN's war, a chance for the network, which is owned by AOL Time Warner, to reassert its ratings lead using its international perspective and straightforward approach. Instead, it has been the Fox News Channel, owned by the News Corporation, that has emerged as the most-watched source of cable news by far, with anchors and commentators who skewer the mainstream media, disparage the French and flay anybody else who questions President Bush's war effort. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/16/international/worldspecial/16FOX.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:08:00 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Can Wi-Fi Take Us the Last Mile? New FCC rules make it harder for DSL upstarts to compete with the Baby Bells. But the wireless revolution might keep the big guys honest. By Cory Doctorow, April 2003 Issue So much for consumer choice. The Federal Communications Commission has turned its back on the public by abandoning rules that require the Baby Bells to accommodate competition in broadband services. Until recently the Baby Bells -- heirs to the nation's local telephone lines after the AT&T (T) breakup in 1983 -- were required to share their lines with new rivals at set prices. This created a competitive marketplace that allowed nimble players like EarthLink (ELNK) and Covad to roll out flexible, low-cost alternatives to the Baby Bells' highly restrictive DSL plans. http://www.business2.com/articles/mag/0,1640,47997,00.html ------------------------------ From: swami18@lycos.com (Swami) Subject: Queries on Fax/Modem Calls Date: 16 Apr 2003 20:21:29 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, We have a few questions related to fax/modem calls: Based on the info present in ITU-T Rec. T.30, V.25 and V.8, we conclude the following: * If network echo cancellers should be disabled, a 2100 Hz PHASE-REVERSED Answer tone should be sent by the called equipment(fax machine/modem). * For fax calls, a 2100 Hz answer tone is needed, but it does NOT have to be phase reversed. So our questions are: 1. Can fax calls take place even in the presence of echo cancellers (i.e., without disabling them)? 2. We assume that for modem (data) calls, echo cancellers should be disabled. Is this correct? 3. For our application, we need to identify fax calls (irrespective of whether echo cancellers have to be disabled or not ). So how is this normally done at present? For e.g, does the voice/fax discriminating equipment (a) detect the 1100 Hz Calling Tone or (b) detect the 2100 Hz answering tone (whether phase reversed or not) or (c) uses a more complex detection method? Thanks and Regards, Jude, SureshJ and Swami. P.S. We also referred to an earlier thread in comp.dcom.fax on the same topic: (http://groups.google.com/groups?q=2100+group:comp.dcom.fax&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group=comp.dcom.fax&selm=365c66e9.10811874%40news.xs4all.nl&rnum=1) but our queries weren't answered fully. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 04:23:18 GMT From: TC Subject: Re: Voicemail to Emails - Computerized Telephone Answering Machines Organization: SVR WebProxy See www.Asterisk.org with 2 x100p from www.digium.com a boat load of other features. Tony Toews wrote in message: > Folks, > I'd like the ability to have a computer answer my two telephone lines, > record the voice mail and email me the resulting .wav files. (My > telco, Telus in Alberta, for unexplainable reasons, is cancelling this > service.) > Does anyone have any suggestions on this? > I've found the following which appears to do what I want. > IVM Phone Answering and Call Attendant Software > http://www.nch.com.au/ivm/index.html > The following also does similar but not quite. > Advanced Call Center: Answering Machine Software > http://www.voicecallcentral.com/advancedcallcenter.htm > but not multiple lines. > Call Attendant Pro > http://www.nch.com.au/ivm/index.html > but only works on Win95/98. Yuck. > Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP > Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can read the > entire thread of messages. > Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at > http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 23:29:17 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelectronics.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: Re: Greenies Jim Hopkins wrote: > Any old Bell System guys out there who remember the green 'analgesic > tablets' that were a staple in the first aid kits? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For the new guys who do not remember > the old days of the Bell System, AT&T had a full-size medical unit > at every company location. My father-in-law retired from TPC about 10 years ago; we're down to our last little teensy tube of "Telephone Ointment" (for burns) and that's gonna be a problem. I'll ask him if he knows what's in the green pills... (or do we find out in the Matrix sequel? :-) Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. ------------------------------ From: rsalas@amerfirst.org (Rafael Salas) Subject: Line Side T1 Date: 16 Apr 2003 23:45:56 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Does anyone know how to setup a line side T1 on a Avaya G3SI for an IVR? ------------------------------ From: bryan3455@prodigy.net Subject: Net Caller ID Units Available Anywhere? Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 12:07:54 GMT I have approximately 2000 of these units available. The Net Caller ID device is a Caller ID / Call Waiting ID unit that also has a serial cable to connect it to your PC, these units come with windows software to allow you to have your incoming calls announced, and logged. Alot of Linux users have experimented with these devices as well, there are several perl scripts available for logging the data from these devices to your Linux machine. Anyways, I am selling these units for $11.95 each, until the supply is exhausted. http://www.dfwmetrotechs.com ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Greenies Date: 17 Apr 2003 06:19:30 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Jim Hopkins wrote in message news:: > Any old Bell System guys out there who remember the green 'analgesic > tablets' that were a staple in the first aid kits? I wonder what was > in those things (as I nurse a hamstring strain with nothing more than > drugstore strength advil)? They would sure clear up a hangover! > Jim Hopkins > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For the new guys who do not remember > the old days of the Bell System, AT&T had a full-size medical unit > at every company location; a full complement of on duty doctors and > nurses to treat/examine employees as needed. PAT] Never having been a "Bell" employee, but someone who was in their offices quite frequently fixing computer equipment, I remember the 'greenies.' If I remember correctly from what the real Bell employees said, they were spiked with an extra heavy dose of caffine and may have had an extra added ingredient that was similar to an amphetamine. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: fabian@klinikum-hannover.de (Fabian Kraetschmer) Subject: Problem with Cisco 3745, ISDN PRI and Callback Date: 17 Apr 2003 07:14:17 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, I'm trying ta get callback on our ISDN E1/PRI line up and running. The client (Win2k) calls, the callback is initiated - to this point: 16:41:23: RELEASE_COMP pd = 8 callref = 0x800F 16:41:23: Cause i = 0x829C - Invalid number format (incomplete number) 16:41:23: ISDN Se1/0:15: TX -> RRr sapi=0 tei=0 nr=6 16:41:23: ISDN Se1/0:15: CCPRI_ReleaseCall(): bchan 31, call id 0x8011, call type DATA Any clue what "Invalid number format (incomplete number)" is? Any configuration-idea what I can do to solve this Problem? Here're parts of my config: [...] isdn switch-type basic-net3 [...] interface Serial1/0:15 no ip address encapsulation ppp ip tcp header-compression passive ip mroute-cache dialer rotary-group 1 dialer-group 1 isdn switch-type primary-net5 isdn incoming-voice modem 64 no cdp enable [...] Thanks in advance, Fabian Kraetschmer Datenverarbeitung Klinikum Hannover In den Sieben Stücken 2-4 30655 Hannover Germany Tel.: +49 (511) 906 3819 Fax: +49 (511) 906 3822 http://www.klinikum-hannover.de Intranet: http://intranet.klk-h.de ------------------------------ From: rayta@msn.com (Ray Normandeau) Subject: Re: Ain't Spammers Funny? Date: 17 Apr 2003 08:17:50 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Joey Lindstrom wrote in message news:: > My mail system just trapped a piece of spam. Actually it traps about > 60 a day, but I found this one to be a particularly funny example of > how spammers don't have a clue about who they're sending their mail to > (ie: their advertising is not "targetted"). I get spam for septic tank cleaners and I live in the heart of NYC. No septic tanks near my apartment building. Invalid Email above, but you may reach me via "List Owner" at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nyctalent/ It seems that Yahoo only allows email to ONE "List Owner" at a time, thereby eliminating ALL addresses in a spam list except for the first one! ------------------------------ 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 #398 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Apr 19 01:11:52 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3J5BpQ27502; Sat, 19 Apr 2003 01:11:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 01:11:52 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304190511.h3J5BpQ27502@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 #399 TELECOM Digest Sat, 19 Apr 2003 01:11:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 399 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Denial of Service Attack Shuts Down Digest (Patrick Townson) No Digests For Several Days! (Michael Neary) Honesty and the Internet (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: 18 Apr 2003 11:54:19 -0400 From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Denial of Service Attack Shuts Down Digest On Thursday I got only a few messages, and ran them all in the issue which came to you early in the afternoon. Then no more messages arrived here yesterday ... or today as of now, Friday midnight. I discovered telecom-digest.org was out of order, but mail addressed to ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu was still getting through okay. I sent off a note to John Levine (who manages and supervises the Telecom- digest.org domain name, and got the answer below back from him shortly thereafter: > Some spamer has launched a large denial of service attack against my > name servers so all of my domains disappeared. I've put on some > band-aids and it should be mostly back now. But it did not appear to me that the problem was entirely fixed, as I responded to John a bit later: >> Well, it still does not seem the mail is coming through ... I am sedning >> test messages via telecom-digest with no luck. John then responded: > Hmmn, the DOS comes and goes. I'll see if I can patch around it some > more. > Regards, > John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for > Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, > Sewer Commissioner "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, > crestfallenly. I asked John Friday morning sometime what the status was now. He then replied: > I have 200 other domains I have to fix, too. Telecom will be fixed > when I can fix it and the DOS attack is under control. I guess the attack is still going on ... so Friday afternoon I decided to spend my suddenly idle time looking over the mailing list using the majordomo John had installed to handle subscription requests: >> Another One of Yours? >> Is that site (where the majordomo for TELECOM Digest is housed) one >> of yours also? And John replied: > They're a client of mine, it's the same server with the same DOS > problem. So that's where things are at as of now, early Saturday morning. I would like to know what kind of moron would deliberatly work to shut down network computers. Until telecom-digest.org gets back on track -- and I am sure it will as soon as humanly possible for John Levine, you can send your email through our backup address which (like it was for years up until 1995 or so) is ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu and I will get it that way also. I am certain John will have telecom-digest.org back on track as soon as possible. I guess the moron took all of the domain names for him out of service. I will ask John, once the problem is cured, if he will will report extensively on it here. The Denial of Service is still in progress as of now I guess. PAT ------------------------------ From: Michael Neary Subject: No Digests For Several Days! Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 18:10:01 -0700 Reply-To: mike@neary.com Hi, I'm missing several Digests! Last received was 392, and the web site shows several additional issues. I'm on Earthlink, so I checked Spaminator(r) to see if they stopped those issues. They didn't. Any clue as to what else could be wrong? Thanks, Mike [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Read the earlier message in this issue. Some moron is giving John Levine a hard time right now with an ongoing DOS attack which has knocked out several domain names including my own. The mailing list is now handled like this: Where before, I mailed out a few thousand copies to the list which was kept here, now I mail it to the majordomo c/o John Levine, and the majordomo handles it. The DOS started a couple days ago about the time we were at issue 392 more or less. The majordomo is limping along like the rest of us. I will get this issue out on Usenet to comp.dcom.telecom and it may or may not get promptly out to the mailing list. Those of you who read Usenet please mention this to the guys who are on the mailing list in case they do not see it right away. Heck, right now you cannot even access the mailing list by the command set given to use in email to check your own status. :( As soon as the DOS is either over with or under control I will be back with more issues of the Digest. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 12:18:56 -0400 From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Re: Letters from Baghdad A few weeks ago, when the thread about the war in Iraq was at its peak here, I mentioned being a regular reader of a Yahoo Blog or diary being written by a fellow allegedly from Iraq. I mentioned that I had personally never known anyone before from the middle east; that is, to put an actual name on an actual person. That makes a difference, you know. Everyone can express opinions pro and con on a variety of subjects; that is what we do here, and what makes this Digest so interesting for many people to read. Even just reading a little from Raed 'in Iraq' affected me a little, it helped me put a 'human face' on the war; gave it a real-time perspective. When his daily journal entries quit appearing as of March 24, there was much concern about him and his safety. It was suggested maybe he had ben blown to bits in the US-led war there, or that he may have been captured by the Iraqi government and was in a prison or something. Now we are told there is a possibility that 'Raed' was never actually in Iraq; that it may have been a hoax, albiet a very cruel one being played on us. In fact, around the last week in March, a person with the same name was arrested in *New York City* (not Iraq!) by the FBI and charged with several offenses, including possibly treason for aiding the enemy (Iraq) and most certainly for overstaying his visa. My first clue on what happened to Raed was when the message below arrived in my mail earlier this week. No names given, they don't matter; anyway I do not know if the person wants the additional correspondence on the topic: ============================= Pat -- http://www.denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2003/04/WheresRaed.shtml You might want to check out Steven Den Beste's take on "Where is Raed?" We need to wait on this, but the coincidence is kind of startling. ============================== Yes, it is startling ... and it leads me to a general question to the group: To what extent morally and legally are we required to be honest with people we meet via the Internet? In reading the above article by Den Beste, we take side trips into the world of DIShonesty and the net. People who make various pretensions for whatever reason. Sometimes it leads to many broken hearts and suspicion with other netters. And is it not true that the only things we have to trade on here are our integrity and honesty since we never actually ever meet 99 percent or more of the people we chat with here? One of the side trips we take in Den Beste's article shown above is the story of a 'woman' (apparently non-existent) who 'died from an aneurysm after a battle with cancer' (which apparently did not happen either). She was a high school age girl. A lot of people got emotionally hurt by that one. In Den Beste's account, you can read a very long thread by the people convinced she was real and the people who were convinced the person who put her together was a complete liar. I only spent a short time of a few days reading 'Raeds story on the blog which had his name. But it got to me a little also, and this latest message quoted above sort of bummed me out. Anyone who wants to write something on the topic 'Honesty and the Internet' should feel free; I will run the articles next week if the DOS is over and we are back in service. In the meantime, and as a lighter note to end this abbreviated issue of the Digest I would refer you to http://telecom-digest.org/honesty.jpg for a cute cartoon on the topic. Its funny, but also very sad. Anyway, once again, have a happy Easter or Passover, and I will be back once I get the go-ahead from John Levine. 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 #399 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Apr 19 18:57:36 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3JMvaI03354; Sat, 19 Apr 2003 18:57:36 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 18:57:36 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304192257.h3JMvaI03354@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 #400 TELECOM Digest Sat, 19 Apr 2003 18:57:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 400 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Problem Recieving TELECOM Digest Messages (TELECOM Digest Editor) AOL v. "Spammers" (Monty Solomon) FTC in Court Action Against Another Spammer (Danny Burstein) Re: Postamble and Variable Length Packets (Hank Karl) Monitoring DHCP on Novell Servers (B.H.) Re: Greenies (Jim Hopkins) Re: Greenies (Ed Ellers) Re: Cell Phone Companies Seek to Block Rule (Joseph) Re: Voicemail to Emails - Computerized Phone Answering Machines (David) Re: Voicemail Hacking Leaves Ears Ringing (Dave Phelps) Mapping Call Failures to Announcements (Mitch McConnell) Re: Cell Phone Companies Seek to Block Rule (Linc Madison) Re: Displaying Witheld Numbers in UK (Tim) Securing 802.11 Transmissions, Part 1 (Monty Solomon) NASCAR Fan Faces Prison Time For Flooding Fox With E-mails (M Solomon) Human Error Blamed For Releasing Prepared Obits at CNN (Monty Solomon) U.S. Sides With Record Labels in Internet Case (Monty Solomon) Baghdad by the Lake (Dave Close) Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Play? (John Higdon) Can we Trade Telecommunications Links? (David Seldon) Last Laugh! I Liked it Better Back in the Days When You Had (The Clown) 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, 19 Apr 2003 15:14:59 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Re: Problem Recieving TELECOM Digest Messages I dunno how soon John Levine noticed it, but I think the DOS attack he has been under for a few days began early this past week. Reason is, outbound delivery of the Digest has been flaky since around last Monday more or less. I do not know that was all due to the DOS, but various people have written me saying they missed several back issues of the Digest from about issue 390 forward. Now and again, when someone writes me with that complaint, I just remind them that in these spam- filled times, all sorts of obstacles to *legitimate* (or opt-in mailing lists like this one) are lurking out there. But this past week has been ridiculous in terms of complaints. So my assumption is that the Denial of Service attack which some moron caused for John Levine earlier this week had role in it also. A couple of recent typical complaints are like those shown below: From jacobim@nswccd.navy.mil Sat Apr 19 12:08:19 2003 Delivered-To: virtual-telecom-ptownson@telecom-digest.org Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 10:02:30 -0400 From: Mike Jacobi X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ptownson@telecom-digest.org, jacobim@nswccd.navy.mil Subject: Problem recieving TELECOM-DIGEST messags I haven't recieved any TELECOM-DIGEST messages in about a week. I attempted to resubscribe, but your system said that I was already subscribed. Is there a problem? If so, can you fix it? I am subscribed from the address (deleted). Mike Jacobi The problem is John Levine, who manages and supervises the telecom-digest.org domain (and many others) as well as the majordomo which handles the mailing list was the recipient of a *massive* Denial of Service attack a few days ago. In fact there were even ripple effects with the incoming mail for the Digest. I got no mail Thursday or Friday at all due to this event. John has been struggling now for several days to get the DOS under control. If you look on Usenet under comp.dcom.telecom there was an explanation of this late Friday night/early Saturday morning in Digest issue 399. Sorry about the trouble with the moron spammer who did this mess. PAT ========================= Pat, I have been getting the digest for "years" and suddenly it stopped on 4/10. I have sent in a donation, though not in the last couple of months. Can you please check the list and let me know if I have an internal issue I need to deal with. Mark Bryan Verizon Select Services Inc. Internet: markbryan@verizon.com Office: 813-978-7777 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not put people on or off the mailing list based on their donations, etc. I just give what I can and ask readers to do the same. You have no 'internal issues' to deal with. The net as a whole needs to deal harshly and sternly with the problems that have arisen on the net in recent years, i.e. spam and vandalism. Gosh, we are starting to look just like RealWorld here aren't we? :) Some reminders: when you *think* you are writing to me you should get one of those god-awful acks by return mail shortly afterward. If it does not arrive then you can write to me directly at ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu in the event some moron decided to wreck the telecom-digest.org domain like a few days ago. If that still does not work, re-think your message. My spamassassin filter may have tossed you in *my* internal spam bucket which I do glance at before I dump it out, but I do not autoack to those because mostly they are spam. If I do not 'nod my head' to your message (preferably through telecom-digest.org) or otherwise via massis, then I *did not get your message* which is not unusual in these times. I put out at least one issue of the Digest each day, and usually two or three. If you do not get at least one issue each day or more, or there is some inconsistency in the numbering, etc, then maybe you missed one or more issues in the mail or maybe I had another bout with my deseased brain or deseased heart. You can verify this by looking at http://telecom-digest.org and seeing when the latest issue was released, or by examining Usenet comp.dcom.telecom and seeing what it is doing. Ditto http://telecom-digest.org/TELECOM_Digest_Online I must sadly say I have come to the conclusion that being on the mailing list no longer guarentees delivery of the Digest. The spammers have accomplished that for us. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 16:30:41 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL v. "Spammers" AMERICA ONLINE, INC. v. BYTE NIGHT, ET AL. (April 11, 2003) Complaint Seeking Injunctions Against Alleged Senders Of Unsolicited Bulk Email, Or "Spammers," Which Promote Pornographic Websites. [PDF] [WARNING, EXHIBIT A CONTAINS SEXUALLY EXPLICIT IMAGES] http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/aoltimewarner/aolbytenight041103cmp.pdf AMERICA ONLINE, INC. v MARYLAND INTERNET MARKETING, INC., ET AL. (April 14, 2003) Complaint Seeking Injunctions Against Alleged Senders Of Unsolicited Bulk Email, Or "Spammers," Which Promote Computer Software And Mortgage Offers. [PDF] http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/aoltimewarner/aolvmim041403cmp.pdf AMERICA ONLINE, INC. v. JOHN DOES 1-10 (April 14, 2003) Complaint Seeking Injunctions Against Alleged Senders Of Unsolicited Bulk Email, Or "Spammers," Which Promote Online Pharmaceuticals Including "Mexican Steroids." [PDF] http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/aoltimewarner/aolmexi041403cmp.pdf AMERICA ONLINE, INC. v. JOHN DOES 1-30 (April 14, 2003) Complaint Seeking Injunctions Against Alleged Senders Of Unsolicited Bulk Email, Or "Spammers," Which Promote Digital Cable Descramblers, Sexually Explicit Websites, Male Sexual Organ Enhancement Drugs, "Generic Viagra," And Online College Degrees. [PDF] [WARNING, EXHIBIT A CONTAINS SOME SEXUALLY EXPLICIT IMAGES] http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/aoltimewarner/aoldescram041403cmp.pdf AMERICA ONLINE, INC. v. JOHN DOES 1-20 (April 14, 2003) Complaint Seeking Injunctions Against Alleged Senders Of Unsolicited Bulk Email, Or "Spammers," Which Promote Mortgage Offers. [PDF] http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/aoltimewarner/aolmort041403cmp.pdf ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: FTC in Court Action Against Another Spammer Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 20:01:10 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC "The Federal Trade Commission has asked a U.S. District court judge to block an allegedly illegal spam operation that uses deceptively bland subject lines, false return addresses, and empty "reply-to" links to expose unsuspecting consumers, including children, to sexually explicit material. [ snip] "The FTC also alleges that the defendant used false "reply to" or "from" information in the e-mail, making it appear that some innocent third party was the sender. This practice is known as "spoofing." As a result, thousands of undeliverable e-mails flooded back to the computer systems of these third parties, deluging their computer systems with an influx of spam that couldn't be delivered to the addressee. In addition, it unfairly portrayed these innocent bystanders as duplicitous spammers, often resulting in their receiving hundreds of angry e-mails from those that had been spammed, according to the FTC. [ snippety snip of rest] and, for those wondering whether spammers make money, here's some more from the complaint (a scanned in pdf, alas, so retyped) "Indeed, during just a ten week period from December 16, 2002 through February 28, 2003, Westby was paid $844,000 by one adult verification service (as a commission) for signing up new customers" http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2003/04/westby.htm _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Hank Karl Subject: Re: Postamble and Variable Length Packets Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 22:33:33 -0400 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ Take a look at Frame Relay. On 17 Mar 2003 18:35:45 -0800, swami18@lycos.com (Swami) wrote: > Hi, > I have a couple of questions related to multiple access at the > physical layer: > 1. Do you know of any protocol/commercial product/research on variable > length packets (I mean completely variable, and not, say, one among a > set of lengths) for multiple access? There is an additional constraint > that we do not know the packet length until after we have transmitted > all the bytes. So this would mean that the datalink layer will not be > able to place the length field in front. > 2. Is there any protocol/product/research papers on sending a > postamble at the physical layer level (I mean the decision is taken by > the software/hardware closest to the point of transmission)? This is > mainly to solve the peroblem mentioned above. If you also happen to > know of any other means to solve the above problem, do let me know. > Any links/pointers on this topic would be of immense help. > Thanks and Regards, > Swami. ---------------- Hank Karl Eastern Regional Manager +1 (203)207-0047 hank@Nine-9s.com www.nine-9s.com Representing: http://www.telesoft-intl.com/ ISDN, T1 RBS, E1 R2 CAS, Frame Relay, ML-PPP, X.25, ... http://www.agoralabs.com/ elemedia H.323, Video Codecs SIP -- watch this space! ------------------------------ From: bhasan_75@yahoo.com (B.H.) Subject: Monitoring DHCP on Novell Servers Date: 18 Apr 2003 10:03:22 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Any help you can provide will be much appreciated. Basically, we are trying to monitor the availability and performance of the DHCP, Print Queing, and File services that our Novell servers provide. I haven't even got to the later two yet but I am thinking that I can use concord application response agents to test those. I am currently stuck on the DHCP issues. We currently have about 130 novell servers in our infrastructure that provide DHCP. We dont have sysedge on any of them due to budgeting restrictions and dont currently own managewise or any of the Novell Management tools. The novell snmp.nlm is loaded I have attempted to use the Netcool DHCP ISM to monitor but it will only work for the one DHCP server that is on the same network that our management station is on. Our novell folks claim that they can only attach one Novell DHCP server to provide DHCP for each subnet. So that ruled out the ISM's. I than moved to using the Service Response plugin. I was thinking that I can use the tcp connect app to telnet to the ip and port of each dhcp server. I think I can do this using a sysedge agent on a unix machine from each subnet to test each novell server, which will solve the problem described above. Only problem is I dont know exactly what that tells me. I am assuming that if it does work that means that the dhcp port is open and available but does it necessarily mean that DHCP is working. So, long story short I was wondering if anyone knew of a way to use the Concord tcp connect or custom app Service Response option, or any other option you can advise me on to test both availability and performance of DHCP on a Novell server. I cant come up with the syntax for a command that will do this without actually changing the ipaddress of the machine that I am running the command from. I want to be able to simulate an end user making a dhcp request without actually changing anything. Any help you can provide will be much appreciated. ------------------------------ From: Jim Hopkins Subject: Re: Greenies Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 23:28:49 GMT I think Wes means that the SWBT unit of the Bell System in OKC didn't have such a thing. AT&T at that location didn't either, I don't think, but OKC was pretty much a backwater compared to KC, Dallas, Chicago, and the like. We did have a company doctor, who was a practitioner that I assume the company had some sort of a contractual relationship with and who did such things as pre-employment physicals and the like. I don't remember the pills being advertised for menstrual pain, and I expect that would have been a constant joke around the shop. They were on all the trucks, and this was before the introduction of women to the outside plant force, or even the switchroom with only a few exceptions (early 70's). We may be talking about a different thing, because if I remember these pills right, they were clearly green. Someone wrote me off the group that he thought they might have been APC tablets, which are a combination of asprin, phenatacine (I think I spelled that right) and caffeine. The phenaticine ingredient in APC's, as I understand, was later found to be carcinogenic, so if they were APC's maybe that's why they're not around anymore. wrote in message news:telecom22.397.10@telecom-digest.org... > Sure, although we considered them blue at Southwestern Bell in > Oklahoma City. (They were actually a sort of blue-green.) > As I recall, they were marked for the relief of menstrual pain, > but they were widely used because they were effective against all > kinds of pain. > I must disagree with Pat as to the ubiquity of medical units in > the Bell System (can't speak for AT&T). Only a few places, perhaps > two or three, had such units in Southwestern Bell territory. > Wes Leatherock > wesrock@aol.com > wleathus@yahoo.com > On Tue, 15 Apr 2003 22:26:20 GMT Jim Hopkins bwanajim@swbell.net wrote: >> Any old Bell System guys out there who remember the green 'analgesic >> tablets' that were a staple in the first aid kits? I wonder what was >> in those things (as I nurse a hamstring strain with nothing more than >> drugstore strength advil)? They would sure clear up a hangover! >> Jim Hopkins >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For the new guys who do not remember >> the old days of the Bell System, AT&T had a full-size medical unit >> at every company location; a full complement of on duty doctors and >> nurses to treat/examine employees as needed. PAT] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wes Leatherock disagreed with me on > the frequency of AT&T medical units. I know they had one at the > headquarters building in Chicago also. He also differentiated between > 'Bell System' and AT&T. Well, the *old* AT&T *was* the 'Bell System'. > Someone correct me if I am wrong; back in the 1930's and 1940's wasn't > there also a HOSPITAL for ailing telephone workers somewhere? I know > that the old Illinois Central Railroad had its own hospital for > employees in Chicago, down the street from where I lived. I think it > was at 67th and Stony Island Avenue. I know that one day many years > ago, when I was riding an Illinois Central suburban train and I fell > down on the platform and broke my ankle, an ambulance crew from the > train's medical department took me out to the ICRR Hospital. I feel > almost positive -- but cannot remember any details -- the 'phone > company' in the old days had such a hospital or very elaborate medical > unit somewhere. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Greenies Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 15:44:48 -0400 Jim Hopkins wrote: > Any old Bell System guys out there who remember the green 'analgesic > tablets' that were a staple in the first aid kits? Western Electric used to handle most purchasing for the Bell System, and they had quality control people constantly doing tests on things like pens and paper towels to make sure that the vendors were meeting specs. I wonder what sort of testing they did on these pills ... :-) ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Cell Phone Companies Seek to Block Rule Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 08:54:13 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On Wed, 16 Apr 2003 22:00:48 GMT, tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) wrote: > However, this whole number portability thing got me to thinking > (always dngerous). Is there anyone out there who offers a service that > is basically just a phone number that gets forwarded automatically to > another number of your choice? Something like that would allow you to > keep the first number the same and change the second number at will > (just like email forwarding services). > If they successfully kill the portability requirement, something > like this might be able to achieve the same thing. Well, having a programmable 800 number such as you could get through Kall8 will target any number you like whether domestic or international. The only thing is that it will cost domestic long distance for every call sent to the 800 number. In the case of a target of a domestic number that would be 6.9 cents/minute. Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group ------------------------------ From: David Subject: Re: Voicemail to Emails - Computerized Telephone Answering Machines Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 23:44:11 GMT Look at the program Communicate i2000 from www.01com.com . I use it as an answering machine. The book (unusual that they give you a very complete book) says that you can do exactly what you want to do. The latest version does work with XP. Upgrade is available on-line. David On Tue, 15 Apr 2003 04:36:39 GMT, Tony Toews wrote: > Folks, > I'd like the ability to have a computer answer my two telephone lines, > record the voice mail and email me the resulting .wav files. (My > telco, Telus in Alberta, for unexplainable reasons, is cancelling this > service.) > Does anyone have any suggestions on this? ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Voicemail Hacking Leaves Ears Ringing Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 13:03:05 -0500 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , monty@roscom.com says: > CALIFORNIA Voicemail Hacking Leaves Ears Ringing > Customers and their long-distance providers are at odds over who is > liable for charges rung up by scammers. I don't see what the disagreement is. If the customer's equipment is responsible, then the customer is resposible. That's it. If the customer wants to go after the vendor that configured the equipment, then that's fine. The buck should truly stop with the vendor responsible for configuration, if configuration negligence can be shown on the vendors part. OTOH, if it was because a VM subscriber used a stupidly obvious password, then the customer pays the bill. Frequently, a LD carrier will forgive debts rung up by a phreaker, but it is just only goodwill, not because the LD carrier is responsible. Why do people confuse goodwill with liability so often? Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: m.mcconnell@computer.org (Mitch McConnell) Subject: Mapping Call Failures to Announcements Date: 18 Apr 2003 14:20:54 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hello all, I have been reading GR-675-CORE (about announcement systems) and GR-674-CORE (special information tones) and have a question or two, as I am not all that facile with navigating the Telcordia specs. I understand that at some level, call failures must map cause codes to special information tones (SIT) and announcements. GR-674 specifically mentions Call Classification Categories that map pretty closely (e.g., NC=no circuit, RO=reorder, etc.). So, is there a direct mapping of cause code to call failure classification? Another question: how flexible are class 5 switches with respect to customizing which announcements get played? I assume that operators can customize which voice file gets played, for language or other reasons. Do the various types of call services (like CLASS) specify how/when announcements get played? Thanks in advance, Mitchell J. McConnell ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: Cell Phone Companies Seek to Block Rule Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 14:25:58 -0700 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , Thomas A. Horsley wrote: > If they successfully kill the portability requirement, something like > [a service that auto-forwards from an unchanging number you give out, > to a possibly changing number for your cellphone, etc.] might be able > to achieve the same thing. There's one enormous catch, though: the subscriber would have to sign up for the auto-forward service before getting the cellphone number. The problem is that many people have given out their cell numbers as a contact point for them. There isn't -- and if the cell companies have their way, there won't be -- any way to keep your cellphone number if you drop that particular cellular carrier. Personally, I think it is every bit as important to have cellular number portability as to have landline number portability. Right now, I'm reasonably happy with my cellular carrier, but if that changes I want to be able to change, too. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: tim@happylife.co.uk (Tim) Subject: Re: Displaying Witheld Numbers in UK Date: 19 Apr 2003 08:53:04 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ phil@mckerracher.org (Phil McKerracher) wrote in message news:: > tim@happylife.co.uk (Tim) wrote in message > news:: >> Does anybody know of how to build a device, or if there is one >> available, that can filter out the pulse at the begining of the data >> burst that tells BT Caller Display units not to display witheld >> numbers? I have seen this pulse using a Digital Storage Oscilloscope. >> We are bothered by nuisance calls and the only way to do it officially >> is to get the Police involved, I just want to find out who is doing >> this, without getting the perpitrators into trouble. > The pulse you see on a scope is probably the "wetting" pulse, a burst > of current that overcomes oxidation on cable joints that forms when > the phone is unused for a while. > Allegedly, witheld numbers can sometimes be seen by diverting all your > calls to an alternative provider (e.g. of 0845 numbers) who doesn't > implement the withheld flag properly. But it's a lot of trouble and > success isn't guaranteed. Easier to get BT's nuisance calls department > on the case, that's their job. > Phil McKerracher > www.mckerracher.org Thank you for your help, but I don't really understand. Do you mean that I should transfer one of my phone lines (I have two, one BT the other Servista, used for Internet access)? What do you mean by 'e.g. of 0845 numbers'? Please explain. Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 19:00:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Securing 802.11 Transmissions, Part 1 ::: Securing 802.11 transmissions, Part 1 ::: Write down your most private information, and then throw that piece of paper out the window. After all, that's essentially what wireless data transfers are doing to you when they're not secured. Read on about securing that Wi-Fi LAN-sent data. http://www.ibm.com/developer/library/wi-80211security.html/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 14:21:51 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: NASCAR Fan Faces Prison Time for Flooding Fox With Angry E-Mails By Mark Pratt, Associated Press, 4/16/2003 20:21 BOSTON (AP) A NASCAR fan faces up to a year in prison for flooding Fox Entertainment with more than a half-million e-mails because he was angry the network aired a Boston Red Sox game instead of an auto race. Michael Melo of Billerica has agreed to plead guilty to a federal misdemeanor charge of damage to a protected computer system, his attorney said Wednesday. The action forced the network to shut down part of its Web site. Melo designed a program that repeatedly sent the same six e-mails to Fox Entertainment Group Inc. in Los Angeles over a few days in late April and early May 2001. The messages were sent through the company's Boston-area affiliate, according to the federal complaint. "He was just very upset that the Red Sox would pre-empt NASCAR, so he decided to send these messages to express his views," said Melo's lawyer, Andrew Good. Fox received more than 530,000 e-mails from Melo. Fearing a hacker was attacking its computer system, the company shut down a portion of its Web site, costing Fox $36,000, according to federal prosecutors. http://www.boston.com/dailynews/106/region/NASCAR_fan_faces_prison_time_f:.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 10:51:55 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Human Error Blamed For Releasing Prepared Obits at CNN.com By Anick Jesdanun, Associated Press, 4/17/2003 13:24 NEW YORK (AP) CNN blamed human error Thursday for exposing obituary mock-ups that its Web site's designers had prepared for Ronald Reagan, Bob Hope and other prominent figures. The mock-ups had been on a development site meant for internal review. But the public briefly had access to them after the password protection was disabled. CNN was investigating the cause of the error, which was discovered and fixed Wednesday. CNN spokeswoman Edna Johnson said technicians were trying to determine how long the mock-ups had been exposed on CNN.com. Although the prepared obituaries were no longer accessible to the public, the search engine Google still had a reference Thursday to Reagan's mock-up, titled 'Ronald Reagan Remembered.' Another Web site, The Smoking Gun, also had copies of mock-ups for Reagan, Hope, Fidel Castro, Pope John Paul II, Nelson Mandela, Gerald Ford and Dick Cheney. http://www.boston.com/dailynews/107/nation/Human_error_blamed_for_releasi:.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 14:35:50 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Sides With Record Labels in Internet Case By Andy Sullivan WASHINGTON, April 18 (Reuters) - The U.S. government sided with the recording industry in its dispute with Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE:VZ) on Friday, saying a digital-copyright law invoked by record labels to track down Internet song-swappers did not violate the U.S. Constitution. The move, while expected, came as a blow to the Internet provider as it struggles to shield its customers. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33888425 ------------------------------ From: Dave Close Subject: Baghdad by the Lake Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 11:58:53 -0700 Copyright The Economist Newspaper Limited 2003. All rights reserved. From The Economist print edition http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=1719610 Baghdad by the lake Apr 17th 2003 | CHICAGO Mayor Daley overreaches himself A DICTATOR on the rampage; airfields destroyed; a pre-emptive strike; calls for outside intervention to bring democracy. It is not difficult to see why one cartoonist has lampooned Richard Daley's Chicago as 'Baghdad by the lake'. Alas for the mayor, he may not get his lakefront park any time soon. The city is short of money, and the assault on Meigs could make the site less attractive to the businessmen who have helped to pay for other green projects. Many ordinary Chicagoans actually prefer a park to an airstrip serving a tiny elite, but the mayor's tactics have incensed them too. The uproar may die down; but the feeling at the moment is that the normally sure-footed Mr Daley may have overreached himself. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA "You can't go to Windows Update dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359 and get a patch for stupidity." dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu -- Kevin Mitnick ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 13:16:04 -0700 In article , Paul Wallich wrote: > And if anyone at one of these places had that kind of slack time in > their jobs to do that, they were fired back in 1998. The ONLY people that would be able to sit around making analog dubs at today's radio stations might be interns. However, entrusting analog dubbing (which requires meticulous level setting, determining start, end and cue points, and labelling), producing a recording that will be in the system indefinitely and heard over and over again to a high schooler, does not float the boat of many music and program directors. Furthermore, the preferred way to transfer a CD is digital ripping. Any CDs that still permit that method will still be added to the library in that manner. So analog dubbing would require that the station maintain two separate modes for entering songs into the library. We all know that the Internet music sharers will right readily analog dub the new CDs to MP3s and put them up on the web sites as they always have. The bottom line is that all the record companies will accomplish with their new scheme is to inconvenience its paying customers and to restrict airplay for new songs. If the record companies thing for one second that this move will even slow down the trading of songs on the net, they are even more deluded that I thought originally. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 16:09:43 -0400 (EDT) From: David Seldon Subject: Can we Trade Telecommunications Links? Hi, I visited your www.telecom-digest.org website, and would like to trade links with you. I've added your website's listing to my link directory: http://www.phone-bill-busters.com/links/themeindex.html The listing is in the 0ur Fave Telecom Links theme at this page: http://www.phone-bill-busters.com/links/0urfavetelecomlinks.html Please review your listing. We use the descriptions, titles and meta tags you have listed on your site to arrive at a category. If you wish to change categories, please email me. To be fair to all, you are only allowed one listing per URL, per category. My website is: http://www.phone-bill-busters.com/ You are now listed as a regular listing but I hope you decide to be a Link Partner. Our Link Partners receive preferential treatment with a listing at the TOP of each Theme page, bold print, etc. They also receive a lot more traffic than our regular listings. We are trying to become the largest Telecom Links Directory in the world. The number visits we receive is increasing, and our link partners report an increase in traffic to their sites after becoming a Link Partner. Best of all, this is a FREE service and it takes just a moment to add our link to your site. Info to add my website's link to your website: http://phone-bill-busters.com/links/link_information.html Please contact me with any questions at all. Regards, David Seldon dseldon@phone-bill-busters.com http://www.phone-bill-busters.com/ ------------------------------ From: TheClownBOXMAN@AOL.COM (The Clown) Subject: I Liked it Better Back in the Good Old Days When You Had ... Date: 17 Apr 2003 21:58:52 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I liked it better back in the good old days when you had Cell phones, email, im, gps. yes back in the good old days ... ------------------------------ 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 #400 ******************************