From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jan 13 17:25:23 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i0DMPNm26130; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 17:25:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 17:25:23 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401132225.i0DMPNm26130@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 #19 TELECOM Digest Tue, 13 Jan 2004 17:25:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 19 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Norvergence Bait and Switch (Kim Barker Craven) IBM Breaks U.S. Patent Record; Tops List Eleventh Consecutive (Solomon) Democratizing the Media, and More (H. E. Taylor) Analog Phone Line Question (Dmitry) MCI's Current Market Status (Brett Nelson) Executone ACD Reporting (ab) Re: Wireless and Internet Phones not Yet Reliable For 911 (John Bartley) Re: "Talibanism in Technology" (Jay Hennigan) Re: Vonage Virtual Number Crap Shoot (John R. Covert) Re: Caller ID and Spying??? (Nick Landsberg) Re: Verizon DSL - Idiots (Rich Greenberg) Re: Verizon DSL - Idiots (Carl Navarro) Re: More on NANP Numbering Compared to Europe (Paul Vader) Re: NANP Numbering; Joey's Advice to the Unwashed Masses (jbl) Access America Telemanagement (Satchel Paige) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 12:38:11 -0500 Subject: Norvergence Bait and Switch From: Kim Barker Craven Hi Patrick, I found your name when doing a search for Norvergence. I wanted to find out what you can tell me about them. I signed on with them in August, 2003 for telecom services for my home-based business for a what turns out to be too-good-to-be-true rate. Included was T1 connection, unlimited long distance on land lines and cell phones. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a case of bait and switch, when at the minute of installation, with the installer out at the street they called and said T1 was not available in my residential area, but they would provide cable (we had dsl) which is, and I quote, "almost as good" as T1. They said my contract would reflect a discount and they would fax revised contract right over. The revived contract never came but the bills persist. What really galls me is they delivered a Matrix Soho box which I am supposed to pay $200/mo for 5 years to rent. We have not used this box since day one. It appears to be nothing more than a router/firewall. Am I correct? I am trying to cancel service but they are unresponsive. Further their financing company, Dolphin capital, is threatening to ruin my credit rating because I refuse to pay for the box. What can you tell me about these characters? Thanks you for your interest. Kim Barker Craven President CREATIVE SERVICES Strategic Marketing & Graphic Design 64 Bower Road, Madison, CT 06443 203.318.9000 / fax 203.318.9001 kim@creativeservices.info www.creativeservices.info [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not mean to sound hateful to the folks at Norvergence; I really don't. But I am not a human Google search program. I have spent **all day today** -- since 10 AM Tuesday morning, seeking out and pulling all the Norvergence references -- bad or good, but mostly bad -- out of our archives to give to Mike Sullivan who has agreed to represent me pro-bono as needed in a pending lawsuit by the Norvergence people against myself. You see, they called again yesterday with demands, etc. First their lawyer, and I did not return his call. Then Ms. Susan Carol, who described her job as attempting to get accurate PR about the firm out on the net. I returned her call, and found myself 'getting volunteered' into a conference phone call on January 19 with some executives at Norvergence. I asked John Levine what I should do; also Mike Sullivan. John Levine suggested using 47 USC 230 to stop them dead in their tracks (pertinent section says no electronic publisher can be held liable for messages written by others; in other words absolute immunity) but my first thought was to try and be a little kind and more pleasant. After all, I personally have no knowlege of Norvergence and no reason to just give them bad coverage. Mike Sullivan suggested gathering up everything in the archives about the company and forwarding them to him for review, which I did earlier today, starting about eight hours ago. :( The more I did that, struggling with emacs and archives files of humongous size, the more irritated I got, to the point that now I don't really care if I ever talk to those folks at Norvergence again or not. John may have been correct: refer them to 47-USC-230 and let it go at that; even though that's *not* the way I believe the Digest should be handled. I have Ms. Carol's biography of Alex Wolf, an executive at Norvergence and I may publish that here soon to see if that will smooth things over a little. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:12:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: IBM Breaks U.S. Patent Record; Tops List 11th Consecutive Year IBM Breaks U.S. Patent Record; Tops List for Eleventh Consecutive Year; More than 25,000 IBM innovations patented since 1993 - Jan 12, 2004 12:14 PM (BusinessWire) ARMONK, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 12, 2004--IBM earned 3,415 U.S. patents in 2003, breaking the record for patents received in a single year and extending its run as the world's most innovative company to eleven consecutive years. Led by growth in patents that fuel the company's latest on demand computing and services offerings, IBM eclipsed the nearest company by more than 1,400 patents. During the past eleven years, IBM innovations have generated more than 25,000 U.S. patents -- nearly triple the total of any U.S. IT competitor during this time and surpassing the combined totals for Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Microsoft, Sun, Oracle, Intel, Apple, EMC, Accenture and EDS. IBM is the only company to receive 3,000 patents from the United States Patent and Trademark Office in a single year, passing that milestone each of the past three years. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40168237 ------------------------------ From: H. E. Taylor Organization: Organization? What organization?! Subject: Democratizing the Media, and More Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:30:29 -0800 Greetings, Here is a clip from a Dan Gillmor article that may be of interest. Are we in a 'post-broadcast culture'? Is there a tectonic shift happening here or just more 'technology will save us' wishful thinking? -het 2004/01/11: DanGillmor: Democratizing the Media, and More The broadcast culture assumes that most of us are "consumers" of mass media. We are merely receptacles for what Hollywood, the music industry and even our local daily newspaper decide we should view, hear or read. The post-broadcast culture is a democratization of media, and it comes at things from the opposite stance. It says that anyone also can be a creator, not just a consumer. There's a world of difference. [...] http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillmor/archives/001654.shtml "The universe is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper." -Eden Phillpotts PV FAQ: http://www.autobahn.mb.ca/~het/energy/pv_faq.html H.E. Taylor http://www.autobahn.mb.ca/~het/ ------------------------------ From: shark_1968@yahoo.com (Dmitry) Subject: Analog Phone Line Question Date: 12 Jan 2004 12:25:48 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, I have a live analog telephone line and can dial out just fine, but I don't know what the phone number is to dial in. Is there a number I can dial in Washington D.C area that would tell me the number I am calling from? I realize I can call any number with caller ID, but I've heard that Telco has a number which provides that information also. Thank you in advance, Dmitry ------------------------------ From: Brett Nelson Subject: MCI's Current Market Status Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 20:04:46 -0500 Organization: Bell Sympatico Over the past few months I have received several telemarketing pitches from MCI. The rates are great, but ... The company reputation was terrible, prior to bankruptcy. How are they now? Is their billing accurate? Are the conversions timely and without interruption? Are they prompt to answer and resolve customer service problems? Feedback welcome. ------------------------------ From: bothbeckers@yahoo.com (ab) Subject: Executone ACD Reporting Date: 12 Jan 2004 20:12:04 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Anyone out there know anything about reporting for the Executone Custom Plus ACD? I recently inherited reporting responsibility for 3 of them, and am frustrated by the archaic process of connecting via modem to acquire data. Anyone know what database platform Executone employed? I'd love to query the table(s) directly and forego the modem madness. I know these boxes are pretty old, but assume they're not without other means of obtaining data. Thanks for any help. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:57:17 PST From: John Bartley or K7AAY@ARRL.NET Subject: Re: Wireless and Internet Phones not Yet Reliable For 911 Pat wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Again, talking about Vonage for a > minute. > When I got my Vonage account several months ago, the Vonage people > stressed to me that I should register my '911 service' with them as > soon as possible. If you travel around a lot, and take the ATA with > you, then you are correct, it is not yet perfected. But as soon as I > gave them my street address, it went on the 911 PSAP records that way. > I got back email a few days later confirming that my address had been > registered, and the same day I got a letter from the City of > Independence telling me they had also recorded my street address for > public safety purposes based on the request from Vonage. However, I > have never moved anywhere or had the box out of service, except to > reboot it a couple of times. PAT] All this may be true, but how quickly will it be answered? In the PSAP for my county, the call comes in on a non-emergency number. Not all PSAPs can prioritize IP-orignated 911 calls alongside 911 calls from the wireline PSTN. I'd suggest calling the local non-emergency number, asking for a supervisor, and then finding out if your IP-originated calls will be answered just like 911 calls from wireline users. John E. Bartley, III K7AAY telcom admin, PDX, USA - Views mine. palmwireless (dot) cjb (dot) net Wireless FAQ for PalmOS(r) This post is quad-ROT13 encrypted. Reading it violates the DMCA. Dilbert is a documentary. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is all sort of a moot point in my case; here is why. The City of Independence Police Department Administrative number 332-1700 is answered by the same *one person* (depending on time of day/day of week) who responds to 911 calls for police and the Montgomery County Sheriff and the Sheriff's administrative number 330-1000. In other words, one person does all the 911 and the administrative phone work for the City of Independence and the County of Montgomery. Coffeyville however has their own police department and 911 dispatcher, also a single person (per time of day and day of week) who does it all, including the Sheriff sub-station there. When you live in a rural area of s.e. Kansas with a total (county) population of less than thirty thousand people -- eight thousand people live here in our town -- you can get away with that. I am not sure, but I think she answers the 'oh' zero calls on the city hall centrex as well. I have never called 911 since I believe 911 should be for *dire emergencies* only and not just to ask questions, etc, and the couple of times I have called 332-1700 (police) or 332-2500 (city clerk) I have never had it ring more than two times. I think once I was told that on average, the phone person gets a total of perhaps twenty calls per day on all the lines she supervises, or less than one call per hour. I am not that worried about it, especially when I look out my window across the street and see the Police Chief raking up leaves in his widowed mother's back yard (house catty-corner from me [where he used to live as as a small child, and she still resides.]) By the way, I am sort of shocked to hear you suggest I should use Vonage to dial 911 'just to test it out or ask a supervisor about it'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jay Hennigan Organization: Disgruntled Postal Workers Against Gun Control Subject: Re: "Talibanism in Technology" Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 18:06:01 -0800 On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:47:33 -0500, Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > From: K.Ellis > To: David Farber > Sent: Jan 10, 2004 11:24 AM > Subject: "Talibanism in Technology" > Interesting read. > "Talibanism in Technology" > deals with seven reasons why women in technology are invisible > http://www.dqindia.com/content/special/103022602.asp I disagree with much of the article, particularly as it relates to technology in modern times. The online community is far less dependent on the classic "networking" addressed in the article of after-work time, golf on the weekends, etc. These things may still play a role in gender discrimination in conventional brick-and-mortar companies, but to give it a technical slant is misleading. The online technical community networks through email, web pages, netnews articles, and text messaging. These media are for the most part blind to gender and race issues although some inference could be made based on the names involved. The references given are also ancient and irrelevant to modern technology, going back to the time of the cotton gin and Taj Mahal. Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Administration - jay@west.net WestNet: Connecting you to the planet. 805 884-6323 WB6RDV NetLojix Communications, Inc. - http://www.netlojix.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:00:40 EST From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: Vonage Virtual Number Crap Shoot Here is the list of Florida virtual numbers from the Vonage "Add Virtual Number" page. When you select a state, you can then select any area code in that state, and then once you've selected an area code, you can select one of these exchanges (or you can leave it at "any location"). You then press "Next" and before it goes on, it confirms that it will give you a number in the exchange you want (unless you picked "any"). Now, I don't think that the "Keys" are all one exchange, so that does look like a crap shoot. But in all other cases, if you select an exchange that is a local call to your mother, you'll get a number in that exchange. As another reader already suggested, use the web site at http://members.dandy.net/~czg/search.html to find out what is local to your mother. Just put in the area code and first three digits of her number, for example 321 455, and click on "search". You'll get a page listing the rate center for that exchange, which in the case of the example is "Cocoa, FL". If you click on the name of the rate center, another page comes up showing a list of other rate centers which are local to Cocoa. Good luck. 305 Keys 786 Miami 813 Plant City, Tampa Central, Zephyrhills 772 Port St. Lucie, Stuart, Vero Beach 561 Belle Glade, Boca Raton, Boynton Beach, Delray Beach 954 Coral Springs, Fort Lauderdale, Hollywood, Pompano Beach 941 Bradenton, North Port, Palmetto, Sarasota, Venice 727 Hudson, New Port Richey, St. Petersburg, Tarpon Springs 321 Apopka, Cocoa, Cocoa Beach, East Orange, Eau Gallie, Geneva, Kenansville, Kissimmee, Melbourne, Montverde, Orlando, Oviedo, Reedy Creek, Sanford, Titusville, West Kissimmee, Winter Garden, Winter Park 904 Fernandina Beach, Jacksonville, Jacksonville Beach, Orange Park, Ponte Vedra Beach, St. Augustine 863 Lake Wales, Lakeland, Mulberry, Winter Haven /john ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: Caller ID and Spying??? Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 22:42:43 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Paul Vader wrote: > desiv writes: >> As far as I know, Caller ID is data sent over the phone line from the >> phone company. When my mom called this lady, QWest detects that this >> woman is on the phone, and forwards the call and ANI info to Callwave. >> They (Callwave) then sends it to this woman's PC. So, if this my mom > If this other guy was calling and trying to get past call-blocking, he > might, if he was behind a PBX or on an ISDN line, reprogam the number > emitted by their system. Telemarketers do this all the time, and I > think the rules which make it illegal came into effect on january 1st. >> Now, I'm not asking how HE did it (if he did) ... What I want to know >> is how would that be possible??? > Caller-ID isn't perfect, but in this particular case it looks like some > sort of database corruption -- maybe this callwave thingie mixed up > information from two different calls? [Snip] I would agree with the database corruption theory. The way the caller-name service works is that there is a dip into a (large) database system which looks up the name based on the calling number. If the calling number was shown correctly but the name was not, then there was some kind of screwup in the database or in communicating with the database, e.g. the responses to two different queries got transposed by this "callwave thingie." Nick Landsberg "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Verizon DSL - Idiots Date: 12 Jan 2004 14:34:09 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , Kilo Delta One Sierra wrote: >> If the web site tests the line and says it's eligible why not place >> the order on-line so you don't have to deal with the "morons." > Because if I key my phone number into the web site -- it says it IS > NOT available. If I put another number in from same building, same > cable it say sit is. Its quite possible that this is correct if your line is connected to the CO by any one of several devices under the generic name of "Pair-gain", which enables n copper wires to service n+m phone lines. One of the more common types of these is the SLC-96 which services 96 telephones over 3 T-1 lines (= 6 copper pairs). The store may have a direct copper connection back to the CO. 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: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Verizon DSL - Idiots Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:20:35 -0500 Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America On 12 Jan 2004 14:34:20 GMT, kd1s@aol.comremvthis (Kilo Delta One Sierra) wrote: >> If the web site tests the line and says it's eligible why not place >> the order on-line so you don't have to deal with the "morons." > Because if I key my phone number into the web site -- it says it IS > NOT available. If I put another number in from same building, same > cable it say sit is. > And dslreports.com shows me roughly 6000 feet from the CO. Giving the telco the benefit of the doubt, it could be that DSL is "not available" because your line is already being used by pair gain devices like subscriber carrier. You need to point out to them that it's not a distance problem, so what will it take to get DSL on your line ... Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader) Subject: Re: More on NANP Numbering Compared to Europe Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 17:16:37 -0000 Organization: Inline Software Creations BV124@aol.com writes: > I was given to understand that Area Code "224" was an overlay to Area >Code "847". Am I wrong? You're not wrong. It's not used much though - 224 has existed since late 2001, and I've never met anyone with a 224 number. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That may be correct, I do not > know. Having washed my hands of the whole ugly scene called 'Chicago' > officially in 1999 with only one very short, limited visit since, in > the year 2001, I have more or less lost track of things there. If 224 > is 'only' an overlay as compared to a complete change of area code > once again, It is indeed an overlay, but not in Chicago -- 847 is used in the suburbs only. * * PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something like corkscrews. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When I use the word 'Chicago' in this context I am talking about the politics of the entire metropolitan area, which is how things are at there. The stench goes way beyond Howard Street on the north or Cicero Avenue on the west. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: NANP Numbering; Joey's Advice to the Unwashed Masses Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:55:09 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > Tuesday, January 6, 2004, 12:47:27 PM, Earle Robinson wrote: >> Here in France if I dial a number, and there is no call waiting on >> that line, I get a busy signal, just as in the states. But, all I need >> do is to punch the 5 on the touch pad and hang up. ... > You are intimating that this service is unavailable here (later, in > your original post, you clearly state that we "don't have" this > feature). In fact we do, and depending on the phone company you're > with, it might be pay-per-use, or a flat-fee charged monthly, or may > be included in a service bundle. But we do have this feature. > Granted, it takes three keys rather than one, but hey. In fact, here in Arizona's Qwestland we do it with one key. If a local number is busy I get a recording (played over the busy signal) informing that I can dial "3" and hang up to get called back when the number is free, and that it will cost me $.75. What it doesn't say is that since I have this feature in my service bundle, I don't actually get charged any fee (as you say). /JBL ------------------------------ From: dor@writeme.com (Satchel Paige) Subject: Access America Telemanagement E-Reunion Plans Date: 12 Jan 2004 16:12:09 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Anyone out there who used to work at Access America Telemanagement? Whether it was in California (Originally as Access West), Illinois or Connecticut. (Where else were they located?) Anyone remember Michael and Jarie Shocket or Will Musco? Hows about The Barnard's: Jim, Jim Jr. and Billy? What is Richard Petty (not the former race car driver)up to these days? Sean Crilly John Chaloupka Linda Lewin James Magnone Ron Sherman Ron Lewis Henry Braithwaite Murry Morganstein Marianne Mote Tom Quigly Add more names. Let's have a reunion. I thought those were great times. ------------------------------ 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 #19 *****************************