From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan 1 21:23:00 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i022N0E10801; Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:23:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:23:00 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401020223.i022N0E10801@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 V23 #1 TELECOM Digest Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:23:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 1 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Tim Berners-Lee Gets His Knighthood for the WWW (Danny Burstein) Satellite Radio Goes for a Spin (Monty Solomon) Car-Monitoring Service Allows You to be Big Brother (Monty Solomon) California Plan Would Halt Trucks Remotely in Attack (Monty Solomon) GILC Alert v7i9 (Monty Solomon) Step, Panel, XB, and Tone Plants (was Re: 10 Digit) (jsw@ivgate.omahug) Voip PC to PC Talking Try Skype (Gordon Laubach) Re: 10-Digit Dialing (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: NANP Numbering (Linc Madison) Re: NANP Numbering (Arthur Kamlet) Re: NANP Numbering (Mark Brader) Re: Is That Possible? (Greg T. Knopf) Re: Taxes on Phone Bills - Ouch (John R. Levine) Barbers (was Re: 10-Digit) (Dave Close) Re: Linksys boxen (Carl Navarro) Re: Taxes on Phone Bills - Ouch (Joe@nospamcity.com) Re: Telecoms Embrace Internet Calling, But Is It Trouble? (Joe@nospam) Re: Migrating to ADSL -- Questions For the Tech Gurus (Earle Robinson) Correction, was Re: Migrating to ADSL -- Questions (Danny Burstein) N-Gage (www.gorover.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. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Danny Burstein Subject: Tim Berners-Lee Gets His Knighthood for the WWW Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 02:24:32 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC http://www.w3.org/ -- 31 December 2003 -- Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web and director of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), will be made a Knight Commander, Order of the British Empire (KBE) by Queen Elizabeth. This was announced earlier today by Buckingham Palace as part of the 2004 New Year's Honours list. The rank of Knight Commander is the second most senior rank of the Order of the British Empire, one of the Orders of Chivalry awarded. Berners-Lee, 48, a British citizen who lives in the United States, is being knighted in recognition of his "services to the global development of the Internet" through the invention of the World Wide Web. [ snippety snip ] http://www.w3.org/2003/12/timbl_knighted _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 03:03:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Satellite Radio Goes for a Spin By Lewis Wallace In a TV commercial for XM Satellite Radio, country legend Willie Nelson calls the service "the best radio there is." That's strong praise for an industry still in its infancy. So, are Nelson's words strictly an ad man's hyperbole, or is satellite radio something no self-respecting technophile can live without? The answer, of course, lies somewhere in between. For a stone digital-music geek who has an iPod jammed with thousands of MP3s and no real interest in straying from custom play lists, satellite radio is probably unnecessary. The same goes for talk-radio junkies with well-established affinities for local shows or National Public Radio. However, if you're a music lover with wide-ranging tastes, a driver who spends a lot of time on the road, or a resident of a rural area with no satisfactory radio options, satellite radio could be a digital dream come true. We tested products from the industry's dueling companies -- XM Satellite Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio -- locally and on long jaunts. http://www.wired.com/news/gizmos/0,1452,61668,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 03:04:56 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Car-Monitoring Service Allows You to Be Your Own Big Brother Don't trust your teenagers or your spouse? Networkcar can tell you where they've been driving. By Ralph Vartabedian Times Staff Writer December 31, 2003 The way George Orwell imagined Big Brother was as a police state that imposed unrelenting surveillance on an unwilling public. Orwell never imagined that people would actually make nice with Big Brother as a matter of convenience, but that's one way to view the growing stream of data from automobiles that has attracted a lot of interest from the government and, so far, not a lot of suspicion from the public. Some consumers actually are willing to pay for a service that lets the government know your car isn't breaking the law. For about a year, a La Jolla company has offered to provide remote sensing of a car's systems and to post that data to a private Web page, along with verifying to state agencies that the car is in compliance with the emission laws of California and a few other states. http://www.latimes.com/classified/automotive/highway1/la-hy-wheels31dec31,1,1009805.story ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 12:13:11 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: California Plan Would Halt Trucks Remotely in Attack By Daniel Sorid SAN FRANCISCO, Jan 1 (Reuters) - Three years after a truck driver slammed an 18-wheeler into California's state capitol building, lawmakers are considering a plan to link trucks carrying hazardous material to a satellite tracking system that would halt them if they were used in a terror attack. The trucks would be equipped with devices that would either cut off fuel to the engine or turn on the brakes when activated. The proposed bill would implement the country's most stringent safety regulations for trucks carrying fuel and other hazardous materials, but it faces fierce opposition from local trucking companies who complain that the rules would make California truckers uncompetitive. Assemblyman John Dutra, unhappy with the slow federal pace in addressing the issue, introduced the bill in February 2003, and it passed easily in the state assembly. Amid protest from industry groups, the bill failed to get past the transportation committee in the state senate, where it will be reconsidered this year. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40109808 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 12:26:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: GILC Alert v7i9 GILC Alert Volume 7, Issue 9 19 December 2003 Welcome to the Global Internet Liberty Campaign Newsletter. Welcome to GILC Alert, the newsletter of the Global Internet Liberty Campaign. We are an international organization of groups working for cyber-liberties, who are determined to preserve civil liberties and human rights on the Internet. We hope you find this newsletter interesting, and we very much hope that you will avail yourselves of the action items in future issues. If you are a part of an organization that would be interested in joining GILC, please contact us at . If you are aware of threats to cyber-liberties that we may not know about, please contact the GILC members in your country, or contact GILC as a whole. Please feel free to redistribute this newsletter to appropriate forums. =============================================== Free expression [1] Hollywood suffers defeat in Net file sharing case [2] Controversial world info summit held [3] Christian Chinese online activist arrested [4] Zimbabwean gov't arrests 14 online dissenters [5] Protests mount against Iran Net censorship [6] Tunisian Net dissident finally freed [7] DVD programmer awaits appeals court ruling [8] Diebold backs down on Internet copyright threats [9] Report on Vietnam Net speech curbs released Privacy [10] Bush Backs International Cybercrime Plan [11] Planned VeriPay human implants pose privacy problems [12] Microsoft security flaws affect automated bank tellers [13] US gov't gets still more spy powers [14] Study: many British websites poor on privacy [15] Yahoo and Excite fix webmail security hole [16] Controversy grows over South Korean mobile phone security [17] New privacy-friendly Cryptophone unveiled http://www.gilc.org/alert/alert79.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 10:37:17 CST From: jsw@ivgate.omahug.org Subject: Step, Panel and XP Reply-To: jsw@ivgate.omahug.org > It should be noted that in the waning days of SxS, the Bell System > added electronic front and back ends to the switches to improve > performance. I'm not sure if they went as far as converting an SxS > exchange into "common control" run by the front end electronics, but > there was some up front processing. The Manawa office in Council Bluffs, IA (Omaha, NE area, 712-366) used what was called 'Directorized SxS'. This was an outboard conversion used on some Ma Bell (and maybe others) step offices to approach common control. This conversion was most likely done in the 1960's, and provided dial tone to the subscriber, and recorded the dialed number, either in dial pulses or touch-tone tones. For interoffice calls it then drove the switch train, and for intra-office it provided the signaling (MF, dial-pulse, possibly even revertive - I dunno) that the called office expected. This installation lasted until the mid 1980's when the Manawa office was cut to a DMS-10. > Panel Type and 1XB had no provision for dealing with SxS pulsing. When > 1XB came around, presumably the easterners assumed that any place which > would need them would be panel. Panel used the 'revertive' signaling method, possibly invented by Rube Goldberg which, to make it very simple, the called office advanced the contact and the calling office told the called office when to stop. This was emulated in the #1 crossbar, as it was intended to be compatible with the panel system. (I also vaguely remember that the 1ESS was able to speak revertive as well.) When placing a call from a panel office, the revertive pulse sounds could often be heard as a distinctive 'scratch-scratch' sound during dialing. I'm familiar with the way both the Omaha and NYC phone systems were back in the electromechanical days, and both used panel and 1XB extensively with lots of revertive pulsing between the various offices. (Ma Bell's first full-scale panel office was in the Atlantic office in Omaha. Years ago I provided information about this to the Digest here.) Both areas used 5XB for newer installations until the early 1970's. There were pockets of SxS around both Omaha and NYC, often appearing as DID implementations, but occasionally for POTS, as in the Manawa office I mentioned above. (I remember specifically that Columbia U in Manhattan and Union Pacific in Omaha used such a scheme.) Many of the CDO's in the hinterlands surrounding Omaha (but in the dialing area) used direct-control step well into the 70's. IIRC, the panel and 1XB offices (and some others) reached the direct-control step offices by way of a tandem office that provided the expected pulse signaling to drive the switch train. > It was only when 5XB came out that there was an alternative to step in > large step cities. I do remember that some 1XB offices were retrofitted to receive (and presumably transmit) MF for interoffice signaling. (The O Street office in Omaha was an example.) I assume that if they could speak MF, that there were provisions for dial pulse signaling as well. > Interestingly I have found historical references to a Panel system > being installed and utilized in the Providence, RI CO on Washington & > Greene. I was always fascinated with the dialing arrangements in some parts of Rhode Island I visited during my younger days. IIRC, the Coventry area was direct-control SxS (early 70's) and had a few varied access codes to dial nearby areas. (Dusting off very rusty memory cells ...) I also vaguely remember that the Scituate area had at least one office with the 'directorized' step, and offered 7-digit 'sane' dialing into the Providence area. > I think there was also some SxS gear because my grandparents phones had > the standard SxS dialtone and when called had the SxS ring and busy > signals, though those may have been Panel signaling I'm not familiar > with. It seems like many of Ma Bell's step offices used a similar type of tone plant, one with the 'flatulent' ringback, and that most of their panel offices (as well as most 1XB and many 5XB) used the very familiar 'metropolitan' tone plant, but I know of many exceptions, making it not trivial to determine the CO type just by the dial/ring/busy tones. I do remember, for example, that some of Ma Bell's step offices had a ring tone that appeared to come from the same type of tone plant used in the newer 5XB offices, one that to the untrained ear sounded very much like today's standard ring tone. There were variations on this theme. The Manawa office I cited above had a ring tone that I had/have never heard elsewhere. It could best be described as a muted blast of an air horn, with a similarly raucous busy tone. I also remember one panel office that served the Boro Park/Sunset Park area of Brooklyn that had a very mechanical-sounding 'flatulent' ring tone and equally funky busy tone. IIRC, the dial tone from this office was similarly unusual. And then there was this strange ring tone best described as a 'low rumble' that occasionally appeared on some of Ma Bell's 5XB offices. I never figured that one out. It was barely audible on some LD calls. It almost sounded like only the spurious harmonics of the ring signal. ------------------------------ From: gordonl@rocketmail.com (Gordon Laubach) Subject: Voip PC to PC Talking Try Skype Date: 1 Jan 2004 14:23:25 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com For FREE great VOIP Pc to Pc talking try Skype.. http://www.skype.com/ 4,968,275 downloads and counting Much easier to use than FWD;.. ( sorry to say) cuts thru the firewalls... The best Audio I have Used.. Skype is the next phenomenon from the people who brought you KaZaA. Just like KaZaA, Skype uses P2P (peer-to-peer) technology to connect you to other users not to share files this time, but to talk and chat with your friends. The technology is extremely advanced but super simple to use... You'll be making free phone calls to your friends in no time! Free unlimited worldwide phone calls to other Skype users Superior sound quality better than your regular phone Works with all firewall, NAT and routers nothing to configure! Friends list shows you when your Skype friends are online and ready to talk or chat. Super-simple and easy to use. Your calls are encrypted "end-to-end" for superior privacy Based on cutting edge peer-to-peer technology developed by the creators of Kazaa and Joltid. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 19:39:59 EST Subject: Re: 10-Digit Dialing In a message dated 30 Dec 2003 19:19:54 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) writes: > I don't know of the Bell System priorities in the old days. But a > reading of the "Engineering & Science" histories of the Bell System > indicates that small areas did receive attention. "Community dial > offices" were developed. The plans for nationwide direct distance > dialing took into account the many varied dial plans of small offices. As I mentioned, the first dial office in Oklahoma City, in 1920, used A.E. SxS because there was no W.E. SxS equipment. By 1927, there was #1 SxS from W.E., and it was installed in the downtown office in Oklahoma City. CDOs, much smaller places, usually without local operators after dial equipment was installed, were usually W.E. 350 SxS and 355 SxS. But most of these came after World War II. It was in the 1920s, perhaps earlier in a few places, that SxS was installed in a quie a few places it is now hard to consider a "small office";: indeed, many of them were multi-office cities by the time the first dial equipment was installed. These "small places" include such places as Los Angeles, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Oklahoma City, Tulsa, Wichita and many others. > I dare say that the big cities received more attention because the > more complex calling patterns required it and the cities generated > more revenues. I suspect businesses in big cities tended to spend > more in long distance and premises equipment (key sets, PBXs, etc.) > than in a small town which justified the greater interest. I'm not sure how the usage of long distance and premises equipment particularly affected the type of central office equipment to be installed. Those were all the smae for all types of offices, Panel, step, #1XB. > Step by Step was cheaper to install and run since it was simpler. > Crossbar and panel required technicians with a higher level of > training. > As to inter-office connections, remember that when Panel and #1 > crossbar were developed (1920s and 1930s, virtually all long distance > was handled manually by operators, indeed even establishing a > connection took some time and effort. Gradually, operators could dial > calls in distant cities and routing was simplified. The vast majority of interoffice trunking in cities with more than one office was local trunking between offices. Los Angeles was probably almost unique in having substantial operator dialing to interzone (or "multiple message unit") and toll offices before World War II. Indeed, in the last 1940s my experience on outgoing long distance calls from Los Angeles was that you dialed the code "110" for the long distance operator, who then had to determine from Rate and Route not only the routing (including intermediate distant tandem points), but also what manual toll tandem in L.A. to access because the volume of toll trunks was so great that they had to be allocated between different manual toll tandem boards in the L.A. area. I still remember my first call where the operator dialed directly to a distant point when I was living in Dallas. It was to Corpus Christi, and when I passed the number to the toll operator in Dallas the next thing I heard was the number ringing in Corpus. Before that time, the originating toll operator would pick a trunk to Corpus, where the inward operator would answer "Corpus Christi," and the originating operator would pass the number for Corpus inward to dial. > Panel DID contain capacity for manual/automatic dial interface. > I'm also curious how the last manual systems (1960s) worked in terms > of handling modern higher call volumes. For example, in suburban > Philadelphia (Upper Darby) there was the FLanders exchanges, which > didn't convert until around 1962. It was an old suburban community, > with a big transit terminal and shopping district, and residential > neighborhoods. (In the 1980s I asked Bell of Pennsylvania for > information and they said they had no historical information.) Pat has given an answer to this; I believe various systems, including the ones he mentioned, were used. No local dial-manual interfaces existed in Oklahoma after the downtown office in Oklahoma City was converted to dial in 1928. It is my belief, based on stories of old timers, that customers in the "Northwest" office dialed the local operator at the downtown office and passed their number; customers in the downtown office (still "Number, please") passed their call to the operator orally just like any other call, and she dialed the number in the "Northwest" office. One issue, of course, was of interoperability between dial and manual offices. But a more pressing issue in places that were all SxS and had grown to where the trunking arrangement, directly controlled by the pulses the customer dialed, had become complex and was rapidly becoming more complex, had no way of interfacing with offices designed for such complex arrangements. Panel, and later #1XB, the apparently logical answer, had no provision for interfacing with step offices, only with each other. It wasn't until #5XB came along that there was a solution other than kludges (used in most places), putting senders in the step offices (the L.A. solution) or just accepting that there were some local routes that couldn't be economically automated and requiring customers to dial "operator," who then completed the call for the customer (a solution that was adopted in Houston). An interesting corollary to this is that large and small SxS offices could interface seamlessly, as long as the complexity of the trunking did not overwhelm certain routes. The CDO behind the barber shop in Britton, Okla., a suburb of Oklahoma City, was originally toll, then interzone from most of Oklahoma City. Then it became part of the local dialing area, with "88-" prefixed to the number, working out of the 84- office (a large step office) with suitable digit absorption. Finally, with the change to 7-digit (then as two letters and five) it became TRinity 8-, with one more digit to be absorbed. Incidentally, the office no longer exists, as you would expect, the municipality of Britton has been absorbed into Oklahoma City and no longer is a separate legal entity. But the location of that CDO is still the location of the rate point for the "Britton" zone, which includes at least three separate wire centers, each with ESSs serving multiple prefixes. If you make a toll or other detail-billed call to a number served out of those offices, it will show on your bill as "Britton, OK", no doubt to the confusion of many callers. (That, of course, is not unique anywhere around the country -- there are many rate points like that around the country that, in many cases, have no current place name to give you a clue.) In a message dated 12/30/03 3:31:48 AM Central Standard Time, editor@telecom-digest.org writes: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Two points of interest to add to the > note from Wes Leatherock ... '3 or 4 chair barbershops'; there is no > such animal any longer. The very few barbershops which remain these > days are almost always single person proprietor places. Only rarely > will several barbers work as a group. There simply is no longer any > demand for their services. I go to a salon here in Independence which > has two beauticians on duty; a mother and daughter, but 'Classy > Clippers' as it is known has been around for twenty years at least. > Several multi-chair shops *used to exist* years ago in Chicago. Pat, This is straying far afield from telecom news, but I can assure I had my hair cut this morning in a 3-chair barber shop. And all three barbers were there (on New Years' Eve!). Sometimes I have my hair cut at another 3-chair shop that is on the other side of the center. And again sometimes at a 5-chair barber shop, with all the barbers usually pretty busy. Between those threet is a 4-chair barber shop, with the last chair behind a partition and nominally a style shop, but the barber will do ordinary haircuts if he has no style customers. These are all within three or four miles of my house in Oklahoma City, and I think I saw another one in the other direction a few days ago. I may try it soon. A new "salon" not far from the three I mentioned is having its grand opening special with $2.99 haircuts. I don't know how much male trade they have; the few times I've tried a salon type of place I wasn't entirely satisfied (but of course this is true of some barber shops, too). In a message dated Tue, 30 Dec 2003 04:34:28 -0500, COTTP writes: > Interestingly I have found historical references to a Panel system > being installed and utilized in the Providence, RI CO on Washington & > Greene. > The missing link is between the Panel. I think there was also some SxS > gear because my grandparents phones had the standard SxS dialtone and > when called had the SxS ring and busy signals, though those may have > been Panel signaling I'm not familiar with. I have lived and worked in places served by Panel, #1XB, and SxS, and never noticed a different in the dial tone, ringing and busy signals. Those were produced by a ringing machine which is used in all kinds of offices. (Of course, when a deviant ringing machine is used, as the A.E. ringing machine I mentioned that was in use in the Oklahoma City Jackson office until around 1960 or a little later. It sounded different because the A.E. machine did produce somewhat different tones, but those were used throughout the office, including the numerous expansions of the office with W.E. SxS.) Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 14:39:19 -0800 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed In article , Rob wrote: > OK, I know that this may very well seem a dumb question, but why is > the NANP numbering system different to other phone systems throughout > the world? Why do so many other countries have numbering systems different from the NANP? (Hint: where was the telephone invented?) The answer is that the telephone systems in North America and Europe evolved very differently, under very different economic and social conditions. Europe does not have the vast swaths of sparsely settled territory that exist in the United States and Canada. Also, the telephone systems in Europe developed under government control, mostly under the direction of the postal authorities, while in the US and Canada the telephone systems, especially for intercity calling, were developed by for-profit corporations. > The vast majority of countries in the world have area codes beginning > with '0', whereas in NANP countries the area code commences with '1', No, very few countries in the world have area codes beginning with '0'; Russia is one of a handful. (Moscow = +7 095) For instance, area codes in the UK do not ever begin with '0'. Likewise, area codes in the NANP never, ever begin with '1'. Most countries have '0' as an access prefix, which is customarily quoted as if it were part of the area code, although it is not. In the NANP, we quote the area code as the area code. My area code is 415, not 1415. The leading '1' is quoted separately, since it is an access code. That may sound like a pedantic point, which it may be, but it's also an important element in the equation. > and then numbers on the same area code, or even numbers in > neighbouring codes (i.e. 919, 252 and 304), aren't always regarded as > local, as they are here in the UK. For example, my local calling > area not only covers my own exchange (01685) but also all numbers on > the neighbouring exchanges of 01443, 01639, 01874 and 01495. Another pedantic point: 919, 252, and 304 are not neighboring codes. I suspect you meant 804 (Richmond VA) rather than 304 (WV). Even before the advent of the newest area codes like 028 for Northern Ireland, it was never true that all calls within a UK area code were local. All calls within a *CHARGING GROUP* are local, and in the majority of cases the charging group coincided with the 01xxx area code, but there were several exceptions. Then along came 091 (now 0191), which includes multiple charge groups, and finally 028 and 023. It is also important to remember that, even with the recent explosion of area codes in the NANP and the recent consolidation of area codes in the UK, there are still far more than twice as many area codes in the UK as in the NANP. Area code +1 867 alone is more than sixteen times the land area of the entire UK, although it has about the same population as Worthing, West Sussex (just west of Brighton). Worthing is the 62nd-largest city in the UK. For Welsh examples, Swansea and Newport each have more people than +1 867, and Cardiff has more than three times as many people. The full NANP has about eighty times the UK's land area, with only about five times the population. In short, you *usually* have local calling within an area code because your area codes are *vastly* smaller in land area and population. (Of course, there are exceptions at the extremes: +1 213 has a tiny land area, and +44 20 has a huge population.) If the NANP's area codes covered the same average land area as the UK's area codes, there would be about 40,000 of them. No, thank you. Even if the NANP's area codes only covered the same average population, there would still be over 3,000; again, no, thank you. In North America, at the advent of national numbering, the decision was made by AT&T to take advantage of certain efficiencies in routing by adopting a fixed numbering format, known as 3-3-4. The area code is always three digits, the central office code is always three digits, and the line number is always four digits. By contrast, most of the world adopted variable numbering formats. Each has its advantages and disadvantages, and those comparisons weigh differently today than they did in the middle of the last century. > Also, how are calls charged between countries within NANP -- that > is, is a call from Canada or the US to Bermuda or Barbados regarded > as international, even though they're technically (I think!) on the > same phone system? Being on the same phone system is a separate issue from being international. The country code isn't the end of the story as far as billing rates. For instance, on many carriers, it costs less to call a Mexican border town than to call the Yucatan. Likewise, each telco sets its own rates for calls to each country in the world. Although few telcos did so, it was in theory possible to charge differently for Switzerland and Liechtenstein, even before Liechtenstein got its own separate country code. Calls to +41 75 (now +423) could be charged at one rate, and calls to other points in +41 at a different rate. Likewise, calls, whether within the NANP or from outside, can be billed differently to +1 202 or +1 613 or +1 242. Indeed, one of the questions I find most interesting is why so many overseas telcos bill much higher rates for +1 808 (Hawaii) and +1 907 (Alaska) than for other points in the United States. Of course, even within the United States, many telcos bill higher rates for Hawaii and Alaska than for the "contiguous 48." Another related point is that, by the standards of most people in the NANP, the UK has no local calling at all. In most of the NANP, all local calls are included in the monthly line rental at no additional charge. In the UK, that's only true in Kingston-upon-Hull, and with some of the new cable-based telcos. For BT subscribers, it can be less expensive to call the United States than to call your neighbor! My local calling area includes all of +1 415, +1 510, +1 650, +1 925, and +1 408, almost all of +1 707, and about half of +1 831. The total population in that area is about six million, and I have untimed calls at no additional charge. That's on a regular landline, although not with the traditional dominant telco. Many people now have the option for about $20/month of having unmetered calls within the entire USA, and for an extra $5 you can add Canada. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * lincmad@suespammers.org * primary e-mail: Telecom at LincMad dot com All U.S. and California anti-spam laws apply, incl. CA BPC 17538.45(c) This text constitutes actual notice as required in BPC 17538.45(f)(3). DO NOT SEND UNSOLICITED E-MAIL TO THIS ADDRESS. You have been warned. ------------------------------ From: kamlet@panix.com (Arthur Kamlet) Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Date: 31 Dec 2003 18:18:53 -0500 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. Reply-To: ArtKamlet@aol.REMOVE.com In article , John R. Levine wrote: > It's not one phone system, it's one numbering plan. Phone switches > have no trouble looking at the dialed digits and figuring out that a > call staring with 1212 goes to New York, 1416 to Toronto, and 1758 to > St Lucia. The numbers are all the same length, but the numbering plan > is designed so that switches can route long distance calls based on > the first few digits. And then there are overlays [1-800 +7D] Art Kamlet ArtKamlet @ AOL.com Columbus OH K2PZH ------------------------------ Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 00:57:12 EST From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) Charlie Gibbs: > That leading 1 is _not_ part of the area code. It started out as > a prefix identifying long-distance calls, ("Access code" in North American jargon.) > but it's nowadays better thought of as the country code - corresponding > to your 44 - followed by a 3-digit area code. No, it is not better thought of as the country code. It's only a coincidence that the country code is also 1. Proof of this is that we have *two* access codes -- we can use access code 0 to request alternate billing (originally, to request operator assistance, but these days it's usually done automatically) on the call. Mark Brader | "The net exists to be used. It is a powerful tool msb@vex.net | and as long as people treat it as a tool and not a toy Toronto | it will prosper." --Jerry Schwarz on Usenet, 1982 My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ From: Greg T. Knopf Subject: Re: Is That Possible? Date: 30 Dec 2003 16:34:04 EST Organization: Concentric Internet Services Reply-To: gtknopf@concentric.net Hello, dado wrote: > Hi, > Can PBX (private branch exchange) line access the internet ?? > Here is the situation: > The City A (central region) has its own leased line and it's server. > Other cities B,C,D just connect to the central region (city A) > through pbx line. (We all in the same country). > My question now, is that possible that cites (b,c,d) can get the > internet connection through pbx line ?? If that is possible what are > the requirements?? Much of this depends on the PBX type you are using, the type of telco line tying them together, and the protocols supported by them. With that caveat: At all sites you would want to establish a Local Area Network with a hub or a switch. Then each site would need a router, with the central site A having a router capable of multiple serial connections. If possible, then dedicate some of your bandwidth tying the sites together through the PBX setup, let's say a 64kbps channel, for a data connection. At sites B,C, and D this data connection is attached to the local router, which in turn sits on the LAN via the local hub or switch. There are a lot of "ifs" here, so it might be helpful to post your PBX info or info about what type of connections tie the remote sites to the central site. Good luck, - Greg gtknopf@concentric.net info@knopfnet.com ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Taxes on Phone Bills - Ouch Date: 1 Jan 2004 02:01:16 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Monthly fee: > Line with local service: $8.95 > Taxes: 911 Tax, Al Gore Tax, Spanish American War Tax, State Utility > Tax,Sales Tax =$6.00. > I dropped the second line because of 67% taxes. If not for that, I > would have kept it. You forgot the $6 access charge which is really part of the local service price although telcos would like you to believe that it's something else. That makes the effective tax rate somewhat lower. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 23:53:46 -0800 From: Dave Close Subject: Barbers (was Re: 10-Digit Dialing) Date: 31 Dec 2003 23:52:08 -0800 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Palmer House Hotel in Chicago and > the Conrad Hilton Hotel both had (maybe still) multi-chair shops. The > lead barber was also the cashier. Of course in addition to a haircut > many guys went in the shop every day to also get a shave and a facial. > Palmer House had twelve chairs I think; but it used to be that all > guys would get a haircut once a week or every two weeks at least. No > more. PAT] I've been going to a four-chair shop in Fountain Valley California for most of the last ten years. Fountain Valley is in Orange County, the epitome of suburbia by some reconning. The owner just retired and sold the shop last month, but it still has four chairs and stays busy. However, what has disappeared are real haircuts. I'm told that using a straight razor is essentially optional on the California license exam and most barbers skip that. A few places seem to recognize the problem, but solve it by pretending to shave my neck, not really doing it. Since I can't see the process, I can only infer their action by the lack of a smooth result. I feel like such an old-timer! 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 ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Linksys boxen Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 10:00:01 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 22:16:38 -0600, Gary Breuckman wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually I could use a 'pass through' >> socket back there, to attach a second Linksys box as well. But I am >> trying to *avoid* the additional hardware expense and keep my system as >> simple as possible. PAT] > If you mean a Linksys hub or switch, yes, but you do not need another > router. > Also, if you have four ports AND an uplink connector, be advised that the > uplink shares the port next to it, you can't use BOTH the port and the > UPLINK at the same time. > -- Gary Breuckman > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What I have is a little blue box with > squat legs that says Linksys Etherfast Cable/DSL Router on the front. > On the back side are six modular connectors (lines one through four) > plus a 'pass through' and a connector to the cable 'modem'. I assume > if I strap another box on either through the 'pass through' or the > socket next to it, I would not need another connector to the cable > modem as well. But then I could have the luxury of a second VOIP > phone, but just imagine the traffic jam going through the cable! PAT] Actually, you unplug one of your 4 devices from the Linksys Router box, and add a 4/5/8/12/16 port hub or switch to that port and plug whatever you unplugged into the hub or switch. A Linksys 8 port switch is designed to stack on top of the router, but I'd just go by price. :-) Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: Joe@nospamcity.com Subject: Re: Taxes on Phone Bills - Ouch Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 05:34:07 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Second line for basic charge of $8.95? Wow! David wrote: > I recently got ADSL service and looked at what it would take to keep > my second phone line for fax use. > Monthly fee: > Line with local service: $8.95 > Taxes: 911 Tax, Al Gore Tax, Spanish American War Tax, State Utility > Tax,Sales Tax =$6.00. > I dropped the second line because of 67% taxes. If not for that, I > would have kept it. > David ------------------------------ From: Joe@nospamcity.com Subject: Re: Telecoms Embrace Internet Calling, But Is It Trouble? Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 05:40:08 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > It's not entirely bad news for the industry: Net-based calling is > already lowering traditional phone companies' capital costs, and will > continue to do so. And a rack of VOIP equipment is about the size of a > microwave. Just one of those can replace floors' worth of old-school > telecom switches, which are about the size of an industrial > refrigerator. It will be decades, however, before the upgrades are > complete. Those old-school telecom switches are still needed to complete the VOIP call to 99.99% of the subscribers. And, likewise they are need to originate most calls to VOIP subscribers. Cell phones are going after the local provider a lot faster than VOIP. And, the cell phone providers use pretty much the same old-school telecom switch as do the old-school wireline providers. Apparently the reporter doesn't get it. ------------------------------ From: Earle Robinson Subject: Re: Migrating to ADSL -- Questions For the Tech Gurus Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 22:42:30 +0100 Please accept the following, but please hide my email address. Thank you. In fact, ADSL and ISDN may co-exist quite nicely and this is what happens in Germany. A relatively small amount of the lower bandwidth is left for ISDN, enough for the 2 b channels and the d channel, and the upper bandwidth devoted to ADSL. The reason for this is ISDN has long been very popular in Germany, so the best way to get ADSL subscribers is to offer ADSL on top of ADSL. Thus, Mr. Warren is mistaken in saying this is technically impossible. Earle Robinson ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Correction, was Re: Migrating to ADSL -- Questions For the Tech Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 02:41:08 +0000 (UTC) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In an earlier posting I wrote the following about ISDN (excerpted): > The standard setup for ISDN in the US uses the exact same type of > (physical) wire pair that a regular phone line would, but the > signalling on it -- even though it's using the same frequencies as a > standard voice line -- is very different. While most of my post was correct, I've since discovered that I should have paid more attention to my kindergarten teacher. The common ISDN circuits in the US actually do use more frequencies on the copper wire than just the regular voice ones. My apologies. Now to crawl back under my rock. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Chris@chris-s.co.uk (www.gorover.com) Subject: N-Gage Date: 31 Dec 2003 16:02:15 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com http://www.n-gage-help.com Seems to be best for Nokia N-gage at the moment! Chris ------------------------------ 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, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the 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 fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 V23 #1 ****************************