From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 4 17:07:21 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i24M7LH22360; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 17:07:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 17:07:21 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403042207.i24M7LH22360@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 #104 TELECOM Digest Thu, 4 Mar 2004 17:07:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 104 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Unauthorized Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill? (S Cline) Re: Unauthorized Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill? (SJ Sobol) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Linc Madison) Re: Roam or Not Roam, Wireless With Verizon; How do I Know? (Stan Cline) Re: (Claims to Be) Cellular-Phone Dealer in Nigeria (Steven J Sobol) Re: (Claims to Be) Cellular-Phone Dealer in Nigeria (Joseph) Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax (Alex) Vonage 14-day Warrenty (Alex) Re: Vonage Experience (Phil) Re: Wireless / Internet Phones not Yet Reliable For 911 (Sammy@nospam) How Tiny Swiss Cellphone Chips Helped Track Global Terror Web (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. =========================== 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: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Unauthorized Bogus Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill? Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 06:37:27 GMT On 2 Mar 2004 15:41:16 -0800, tryitoz@hotmail.com (Joe Donaldson) wrote: > Her LOCAL phone company had multiple charges on it that were not > authorized nor made by her or her children. Multiple calls on multiple > days. This month it was to Guyana, obviously an international call. > Previous month it was somewhere else. The company that showed up on > her bill was "USBI" to Guyana billed on behalf of ONE CALL COMM dba > Opticom. > Alltel told her that somehow her PC is authorizing these calls and > someone is using her number. It does not show up on her Long Distance That sounds about right ("porn dialer")...although I find the choice of carrier (Opticom is much, much better known as an operator service provider) a bit odd. The call involved was definitely a 1+/011+ call since USBI and not ZPDI, both of which are names used by Billing Concepts, billed for it on behalf of Opticom. (USBI = 1+/011+; ZPDI = 0+) > 1. Eliminate ability to dial international calls with Alltell. Alltel > can block such calls. > 2. Then use an MCI or ATT card only to make long distance or European > calls. That sounds like a good plan. I'd also suggest running anti-spyware and antivirus software on the PC involved ... :) 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: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Unauthorized Bogus Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill? Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 10:21:54 -0600 Joseph wrote: > This has been in the news of late and here's something I found when > referencing google: Why doesn't she just block direct-dialed international calls and use a service that offers cheap international calling where you must use an 800 number and a PIN? JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 21:11:38 -0800 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed In article , Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com > says: >> While we're on the subject of strange geography, there's a little >> island off New Foundland, St. Pierre IIRC, that is completely part of > Two islands, in fact: St. Pierre and Miquelon. They are a Department > of France (equivalent of a state). They are not part of the North > American Numbering Plan, use the French country code and from points in > North America must be dialed internationally via France, even from a few > miles away in Newfoundland. Almost, but not quite. St. Pierre and Miquelon have an international country code all to themselves, +508. When calling from within France, or other French DOM/TOMs (overseas departments and territories), or within St. Pierre et Miquelon, you dial 0508 xx xx xx, but from the rest of the world, you dial +508 5 08 xx xx xx. For example, from the USA, you would dial 011 + 508 + 5 08 xx xx xx, *not* 011 + 33 + 5 08 xx xx xx. 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: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Roam or Not Roam, Wireless With Verizon; How do I Really know? Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 06:35:30 GMT On 2 Mar 2004 15:06:09 -0800, rogoflap@yahoo.com (Roger) wrote: > Now I upgraded to the LG VX4400B and when calling from in my home, it > shows Extended Network while dialing the number. I then stick the > phone up to the ear to talk. While talking I noticed the "Roam" > showing with the time moving. Why would this be the case? This is a known bug with the 4400. > Also how do I know if I am roaming if the "Extended Network" is shown > while dialing and ringing, but then "Roam" is shown while talking. No triangle displayed = VZW network Flashing triangle = Extended Network Solid triangle = roaming 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: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: (Claims to Be) Cellular-Phone Dealer in Nigeria Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 10:23:12 -0600 Carl Moore wrote: > I have edited some headers off. I am not in the activity of trying to > sell cellular phones (on or off the net), and I have no way of knowing > the legitimacy of the following email (even though it gives an address > in Nigeria, it's coming off a French host). Yes, I do see this is not > in the familiar scam categories. I get a lot of these, presumably because I'm active in the cellular news groups. They may be legitimate. I LART them anyway. Incidentally, I don't believe any of those phones are usable in the USA. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I also get a lot of them and do the same thing. You doubted the phones were usable in the USA. I doubt they even get here to the USA. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: (Claims to Be) Cellular-Phone Dealer in Nigeria Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 09:16:41 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:18:47 EST, Carl Moore wrote: > I have edited some headers off. I am not in the activity of trying to > sell cellular phones (on or off the net), and I have no way of knowing > the legitimacy of the following email (even though it gives an address > in Nigeria, it's coming off a French host). Yes, I do see this is not > in the familiar scam categories. > From: shopcellular > Reply-To: shopcellular@voila.fr > To: shopcellular@voila.fr > Subject: buy > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:48:12 +0100 (CET) > X-ARL-MailScanner: Found to be clean > X-ARL-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=4.054, required 5, > BAYES_44 -0.00, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_11_50 0.88, RAZOR2_CHECK 1.05, > RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET 1.50, SUBJ_BUY 0.63, UPPERCASE_50_75 0.00) > X-ARL-MailScanner-SpamScore: ssss > SHOP CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS > 23, LADOKE STREET, OKOTA, > LAGOS-NIGERIA. > TEL: 234-8033823918. > E-mail: shopcellular1@yahoo.fr=20 >=20 >HELLO, > SPECIAL/CHEAPER CELLULAR PHONES OFFER. >=20 >WE ARE A INTERNATIONAL DEALERS, EXPORTERS AND SUPPLIERS OF CELLULAR PHONES = >AND ACCESSORIES IN NIGERIA. WE HAVE LARGE QUANTITY OF CELLULAR [Lots of trash deleted] First of all how much faith can someone have for an ALL CAPS post. Second of all this is *obviously* a scam. Common knowledge says don't do business with Nigeria, Indonesia or Romania when dealing with mobile phones. The old addage of if it looks too good to be true it probably is. remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You may have noticed (if you use Google a lot) there is now a new 'Telecom Digest' in Nigeria although the one in Malasia took a short vacation. Telecom Digest seems to be popping up all over the globe these days. Asking them to honor copyrights is futile of course. PAT] ------------------------------ From: alex@totallynerd.com (Alex) Subject: Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax Date: 4 Mar 2004 06:27:24 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com alex@totallynerd.com (Alex) wrote in message news:: > Hi all, > I'm looking at maybe switching to Vonage for a second home line, and > if it works out, switching my primary line to it as well (to have two > lines). Problem is I need one line to be a modem line because I dial > into my home network from work from time to time. Can anyone give > comments on the quality of this? My cablemodem is Time Warner, which > is 2-3 Megs down and 384K up, so this should be more then enough > bandwidth. > Thanks for any suggestions. > Alex. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am assuming you already have a line > with a modem attached for the occassions when you wish to do dial up > sometimes. So do I. Vonage works on your cable modem line. Your other > modem (used as a dialup on the phone line is a separate matter > entirely. It rarely suits me to use dialup these days, but I can if > I want to. From the keyboard I just turn on one or the other. You > won't really have much luck using *two* Vonage lines on the same > cable. It just stretches the limit a bit too far, IMO. But if you > decide to try Vonage, you just attach the box to your cable modem > right in between the cable modem and the computer. If you need to have > both devices (Vonage and your dialup modem) in the line at the same > time, there should be no trouble. Vonage works via the cable and your > modem works via the phone line. If you decide to try TWO Vonage lines > and your cable can handle it AND your computer is fast enough and > sturdy enough, it still should have no affect on your dialup modem > which is a separate thing entirely. One common mistake people often > times make is in calling the 'cable modem' a modem. It really isn't > a 'modem' in the sense a dialup thing attached to your phone line is. > PAT] Hi Pat, I'm an old school computer user, so when I say 'modem', I'm talking about literally an analog modem that goes to an analog POTS phone line -- same technology used in BBSes for 25+ years. I called Vonage yesterday, and told them my scenario. It took four people before I got to someone 'technical' who knew what a regular ol' modem was (not a broadband cablemodem). I'm not sure if anyone is understanding my questions because they never did give me a clear answer. I'm talking about running a regular modem, such as a Zoom, USR, etc, over a Vonage phoneline. I'm assuming if a standard telephone works over the Vonage lines then a standard analog modem would as well, which uses the same basis. I understand that all 'calls' via Vonage go over my broadband cablemodem, but instead of receiving a voice telephone call, I want to dial my home number from my laptop when traveling or from work to connect into my home network via standard PPP. Though this would go over my cablemodem via Vonage, it is totally seperate. Just as now, my dialup works via my SBC line and has nothing to do with my broadband. As for PC speed, using a standard analog modem (mine's a 28.8 USRobotics), doesn't matter, even if I'm dialing into a 286 or 8088 system. This technology is the same as it's been for 25 years. You dial the phone number, computer gives a carrier 'via modem', your modem handshakes, authenticates, and you're on. Maybe my first question wasn't too clear, but basically I want to know if with compression, or whatever Vonage uses, will impeed a data carrier signal from working properly. They say Fax machines will work, but Faxes are generally 9600 bps. I need 28,800 bps for a good PPP connection. Thanks for your time, Alex. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am defining 'modem' the same way as you, and in my computers they are all built into the computer itself, at either 28.8 baud or 56K. I've never tried what I think you are suggesting (and correct me if I am still wrong) of taking the output from the Vonage adapter and plugging it *into* a 'modem' so that the 'modem' hears *Vonage* dial tone, dials against it, and then converses through the Vonage line. That should be an interesting experiment to try, but I will make sure no actual CO line (from a telco somewhere) comes in contact with the Vonage adapter in the process. Now, I have tried something similar, plugging a traditional 'modem' and computer into a cell-socket device (to use cellular phone via a regular phone instrument) and I can tell you that was pretty crappy at best. At 300 baud it barely worked (in hyperterm, pecking on a few keys and auditing the output for accuracy) but not in a more controlled BBS type setting. Higher baud rates were totally unusable. Of course, cell phones are not Vonage phones, and that *may* work. I'll try to have a report on my experience with it in the next issue. PAT] ------------------------------ From: alex@totallynerd.com (Alex) Subject: Vonage 14-day Warranty Date: 4 Mar 2004 07:49:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi all, Sorry for so many posts on this topic ... I'm kind of posting as I go :) I called Vonage to sign-up, and I had to call three times before someone answered I could understand. Do they use folks overseas to do their phones? Also, there's a bad delay, like two seconds, between when I talk and the customer service rep hears me. I can hear my echo from their ear piece (I assume), so we keep speaking on top of one another. This isn't standard with Vonage, is it? Anyway, the person I spoke with said it takes 5-7 days to receive the router, yet my 14 day trial begins today, if I sign-up today. So literally my trial is only 7-9 days (14 - shipping time). Granted this still would probably be long enough to test the router, but if for whatever reason the router is delayed for any reason, or if I have problems getting it going, I want the full 14 days of testing. I love the idea of Vonage, but they've yet to really impress me. Thanks for any info or insight. Alex. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Vonage, like a lot of companies doing business over the internet winds up with a huge amount of credit card fraud, which partly accounts for why they take such a 'tough guy' stance in dealing with potential customers. But in actual practice, your 14 day trial starts out 3-4 days *after* you place your order, or about the time you sign for the UPS/Fedex delivery. And if you keep the box a full 14 days and then return it, they are not going to say 'oops, you are a day or two days too late in the return'. They have 'customers' (I use that term loosely) who order adapters with fraud credit cards, get the box, then deny it arrived or that they had anything to do with the fraud. If you order the adapter, recieve it and sign for it without playing games, and give it a fair trial, you are not going to hear a lot out of them about returning it anytime. And you do get a free month of service with an e-coupon (mine or anyone else who offers them) which largely offsets any losses you might suffer from having supplied them a good credit card to start with. Even if I for example, decided now to quit Vonage and send them back the box I could do so, less the month of service I owed them. About that echo: Vonage does use their own system to run their customer service department. I had a case once when talking to them that the customer service person said "I cannot hear you very well", I responded I am on *your* phone system; he said obviously you need an adjustment, and walked me through it then and there, after he called my back on my landline using *his* cellular phone. Try not to be so harsh on them being as new as they are in business. PAT] ------------------------------ From: phil_m_palmer@yahoo.com (Phil) Subject: Re: Vonage Experience Date: 4 Mar 2004 10:10:04 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Sammy@nospam.biz wrote in message news:: > Too bad. I've had Vonage for almost a year and it works great. > Phil wrote: >> I signed-up for Vonage Service. They charged my VISA for the startup >> fees -- np. >> I get the Motorola VT but it works only intermitantly. Support from >> Vonage is non-existent, at best. I called several times, mostly >> hanging-up after holding for 20 minutes. I emailed several times with >> no return emails. >> After a week of this crap, I called to cancel. The Vonage Rep said >> that he'd have to charge $41 bucks to give me an RMA and return >> address. I told him that is called extortion. He said both the startup >> fee and termination fee would be refunded when the equipment was >> returned. So I allowed him to charge my VISA. >> I am mailing the equipment back today and will followup with >> additional experience. >> ALSO, beware about Vonage's Terms of Service policy. It states that >> you have seven days after you recieve your credit card statement to >> file a dispute. And that you must notify them before you do so thru >> your credit card. According to VISA this total BS. Vonage cannot >> supercede VISA policy, it is called non-compliance. >> Phil >> VONAGE SUCKS! >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am truly sorry you have had such bad >> experience with them. My experience has been quite good by comparison. >> Have you tried the various techniques presented here in recent weeks >> to get around some of the intermittent problems you have had? For >> example, since I made the adjustments in my Linksys firewall/router >> they recommended, I've had no further problems with loss of dialtone >> or non-receipt of incoming calls. I *will* agree their customer >> service holding queue is pretty outrageous at times as they begin to >> learn the business a little better also. And the Motorola box they >> are using now may possibly not be as good as the Cisco, I am not sure >> on that. If you have not yet returned the Motorola to them, consider >> trying some of the fixes described on the net and see if they help >> any. Even if you decide it is not working and you must return the >> equipment, *new* customers who have *not yet* sent in for/recieved >> an adapter box can get a free month of whatever service package they >> desire by using an e-coupon from me to start the process. The e-coupon >> gets you the *second* month of service for free. Email me and ask for >> it. ptownson@telecom-digest.org PAT] PAT -- I am paying for a service -- Vonage should be the one trying fixes found on the Net -- not me! As I said before -- VONAGE SUCKS!! And since you are selling their wares YOU SUCK TOO! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, thank you for that compliment! Actually, you are NOT 'paying for a service', you are getting a month of service for free; not paying for it. Consider it like an 'extended warranty' or extended free trial. Instead of a 14 day (give or take a day or three) warranty on the box,etc you actually getting a *month plus 14 days*. But I do not want to be an apologist for Vonage. I cannot help how they do their customer service, etc. I could make some suggestions, but they have not asked me. Because I am generally impressed with their service, and because VOIP seems to be the way telephone service is going in the future, I agreed to hand out their e-coupons, and share 'fixit' tips I know about. I am not making much of an effort to sell their wares. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Wireless and Internet Phones not Yet Reliable For 911 Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 09:48:19 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications In the case of wireless service, if the user has half a brain they should understand that 911 is a crap shoot when away from home. If they have a fully functioning brain they should realize that all local and county police have a 10-digit number that will go to emergency dispatch 24 hours a day. Most of the time such numbers are listed. If they aren't they can be found easily by calling the cop's listed business number and asking. Even though I have standard wireline service at home, I have the local cop's 10-digit emergency number programmed into my cell phone in case I have a need to call them while anywhere in town. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, Sammy. I have to wonder how the same people survived before 911 was invented (in the early 1970's). Basically, 911 is a speed dial service to reach police which may or may not work as you want it to. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 08:55:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: How Tiny Swiss Cellphone Chips Helped Track Global Terror Web By DON VAN NATTA Jr. and DESMOND BUTLER LONDON, March 2 - The terrorism investigation code-named Mont Blanc began almost by accident in April 2002, when authorities intercepted a cellphone call that lasted less than a minute and involved not a single word of conversation. Investigators, suspicious that the call was a signal between terrorists, followed the trail first to one terror suspect, then to others, and eventually to terror cells on three continents. What tied them together was a computer chip smaller than a fingernail. But before the investigation wound down in recent weeks, its global net caught dozens of suspected Qaeda members and disrupted at least three planned attacks in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, according to counterterrorism and intelligence officials in Europe and the United States. The investigation helped narrow the search for one of the most wanted men in the world, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who is accused of being the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, according to three intelligence officials based in Europe. American authorities arrested Mr. Mohammed in Pakistan last March. For two years, investigators now say, they were able to track the conversations and movements of several Qaeda leaders and dozens of operatives after determining that the suspects favored a particular brand of cellphone chip. The chips carry prepaid minutes and allow phone use around the world. Investigators said they believed that the chips, made by Swisscom of Switzerland, were popular with terrorists because they could buy the chips without giving their names. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/04/international/europe/04PHON.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, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) 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 2004 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 #104 ******************************