From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 14 14:35:03 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i0EJZ2j02959; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:35:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:35:03 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401141935.i0EJZ2j02959@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 #21 TELECOM Digest Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:35:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 21 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson My Email With Norvergence (Robert Johnson) Anti-Spam Conference at MIT Coming Soon! (Monty Solomon) Boston's Next Exciting Technology Platform -- RFID (Monty Solomon) "Bush in 30 Seconds" Winning Ads (Monty Solomon) Sony Handhelds Get FCC Nod (Monty Solomon) EFFector 16:37: EFF Defends Right to Own Smart Card Technology (Solomon) 800/555-1140 was Re: Analog Phone Line Question (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Habeas.com and Spam? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Maps of Central Office Locations (John E. Connerat) Re: Wireless and Internet Phones not Yet Reliable For 911 (John Bartley) Re: FCC Seeks to Limit F-Word on US Airwaves - Sources (Laura Halliday) Re: FCC Seeks to Limit F-Word on US Airwaves - Sources (Me) Re: Verizon DSL - Idiots (yeltrabnhoj@email.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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: My Email With Norvergence From: Robert Johnson Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:09:14 -0800 (pat can you remove my email address) I emailed Norvergence to see exactly what their product offering was about, they denied it was a VoIP offering, yes say it uses compression ... hmm, how about that, two mutually incompatable statements, then again, I think TELECOM Digest Readers ought to see for themselves. From: Timothy Mack Subject: RE: Questions about your Service Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:09:00 -0500 Mr. Johnson, The Norvergence cost savings solution is not a VoIP solution. As our website states, it is a patented hardware solution that uses compression and encryption to get a voice transmission of far greater quality and the most secure data transmission utilizing the full bandwidth available on a T-1 circuit. The most obvious benefit is the savings in cost over a standard trunk line/PBX or fractional/integrated T-1 solution, as well as savings on cellular service. If you would like to set up a meeting with one of our representatives to further discuss how this solution can benefit your business, please follow the link below. Complete and submit the brief form, and you will be contacted by someone in our scheduling department for an appointment. Thank you for your interest in Norvergence. http://www.norvergence.com/CS_Form/form.cfm -----Original Message----- From: Roe Ventola Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 10:33 AM To: Timothy Mack Subject: FW: Questions about your Service Roe Ventola Vice-President of Sales Support Ext 4535 866-217-6678 voice 866-742-6678 Fax Norvergence.com -----Original Message----- From: Rashan Thompson Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 10:30 AM To: Roe Ventola; Scott Bufton; Beverly Thomas Subject: FW: Questions about your Service -----Original Message----- From: Robert Johnson Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 12:52 AM To: customerservice Subject: Questions about your Service After reading your site, I am having trouble figuring out exactly what your product is, if it is simply a VoIP solution why isn't it marketed as such?, and what is the advantage for purchasing your product/service over ordering either a Fractional T-1 that carries both data and voice, or ordering two seperate T-1's for whatever purpose? Robert Johnson Robert K. Johnson Jr. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 00:21:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Anti Spam Conference at MIT Coming Soon! NOTHING BUT NET By Alex Salkever Yahoo's Risky Antispam Gambit It's bypassing the Internet's standards body and implementing its own tech solution, a unilateral move that many experts criticize. On Jan. 16 some of the e-mail business' biggest brains will gather on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus at Spam Conference 2004 . The one-day powwow will mark the event's second year and will feature 18 presentations from a wide variety of spam fighters. The conference is quickly becoming a hot ticket. Top-level technology executives from the Big Four Internet service providers that handle the majority of e-mail traffic in the country -- Microsoft's MSN ( MSFT ), Yahoo! ( YHOO ), America Online ( TWX ), and Earthlink ( ELNK ) -- will probably attend. So will a host of academics and company officials from the plethora of antispam software, hardware, and services outfits that have sprung up over the past two years. The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), the body that oversees the adoption and application of new tech standards to the Internet, will be represented by none other than Eric Raymond, the open-source guru and Linux legend. http://businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2004/tc20040113_3442_tc047.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 21:50:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Boston's Next Exciting Technology Platform -- RFID Radio frequency identification is poised to revolutionize retail, starting with the lowly pallet By Robert Weisman, Globe Staff, 1/12/2004 When a stubble-faced man strolls into a drugstore hunting for a Mach3Turbo razor, Gillette Co. executives say the chances are as high as one in 10 that it will be out of stock. That problem, multiplied across an industry nettled by theft and product shrinkage through the supply chain, costs businesses an estimated tens of billions of dollars a year in North America alone -- not to mention the enmity of frustrated customers. But it has also sparked a new technology application, emerging from the Boston area and gaining a toehold on both sides of the Atlantic, that could spawn one of the biggest industries of the next five years. This new killer app, called radio frequency identification, or RFID, is being tested not in the clean rooms of cutting-edge research labs but on commonplace crates and shipping pallets in trucks and warehouses. By beaming a signal from bookmark-sized tags to interrogator devices, called readers, RFID heralds a new era of products smartly tracked through distribution and shelves amply stocked at point of sale. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/01/12/bostons_next_exciting_technology_platform/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:58:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: "Bush in 30 Seconds" Winning Ads Press Release http://www.bushin30seconds.org/release-winner.html Winning Ads http://www.bushin30seconds.org/ Finalists http://www.bushin30seconds.org/finalists.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 00:18:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sony Handhelds Get FCC Nod By Richard Shim Staff Writer, CNET News.com A trio of handheld computers from Sony Electronics has received wireless regulatory approval from the Federal Communications Commission. The grant for the three Clie devices came down from the U.S. federal agency last week. While Sony representatives declined to comment on the handhelds or their availability, wireless products are generally released shortly after the FCC deems that they do not interfere with other products. In the past three years, Sony has announced new handhelds in March. http://news.com.com/2100-1041-5140474.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:37:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 16:37: EFF Defends Right to Own Smart Card Technology EFFector Vol. 16, No. 37 January 12, 2004 donna@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 276th Issue of EFFector: * EFF Defends Right to Own Smart Card Technology * Californians: Come to an Important E-Voting Meeting * EFF Secures Protection for ReplayTV Clients * EFF Comments on Intel's Draft Policy for LaGrande "Trusted Computing" Initiative * EFF Helps eVisa Win Ninth Circuit Appeal, Right to Use English Language * Nominate a Pioneer for EFF's 2004 Pioneer Awards * New EFF T-Shirts, Hot Off the Presses * Deep Links (15): What Happens in Vegas, Stays...in an FBI Dossier? * EFF Court Docket: 02.03.04 - MGM v. Grokster; 02.09.04 - OPG v. Diebold * Staff Calendar: 01.13.04 - Wendy Seltzer speaks at IDLELO First African Conference on the Digital Commons, Cape Town, South Africa; 01.22.04 - Fred von Lohmann speaks at "Washington in the West" Conference, Long Beach, CA * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/16/37.php ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 15:27:47 GMT From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: 800-555-1140 was Re: Analog Phone Line Question Organization: Excelsior Computer Services > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That toll free number, 800-555-1140 > also works fine here in my town. I bet it will for everyone. PAT] Hmm. Just tried it from a cell phone, and the ANI was *not* my cell number. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried *my* cellular phone also from here, and it did not return correct results either. However my Vonage phone did have the correct results, and my wireline phone as well. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:53:25 GMT From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Habeas.com and Spam? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services Recently I've started getting a lot of spam (well, not a lot, but perhaps a half-dozen messages a day) signed by "Habeas.com." Habeas' website advertises that it is "sender warranted email," and that one of the main uses of the website is deliver spam-free e-mail. Does anyone know if they are for real? Should I report the spam to them? Should I just block anything that has Habeas headers in it? (So far, I've never received any legitimate e-mail with Habeas headers.) Thanks. -Joel Hoffman (joel@exc.com) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 12:04:25 -0500 From: John E. Connerat Subject: Maps of Central Office Locations I am trying to determine the location of the central office for the 404-624-xxxx area. At one time, Mapquest had a reasonably good map service that allowed you to type in the area code and exchange, and it would show you the approximate central office location for the information that you typed in. I can no longer find that service on Mapquest. Is it available anywhere else? I am trying to troubleshoot a DSL connection and I do not know how far away the service location (404-624-xxxx) is from BellSouth's central office in that neighborhood. It may come as no surprise, but the DSL "helpdesk" has no idea either. Thanks, John Connerat A ------------------------------ From: John Bartley Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:23:37 -0800 Subject: Re: Wireless and Internet Phones not Yet Reliable For 911 > On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:57:17 PST, John Bartley wrote: >> 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. > [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] Please read what I wrote, which was: I'd suggest calling the local *non-emergency* number [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Good point, my bad. Thanks for the correction. PAT] ------------------------------ From: marsgal42@hotmail.com (Laura Halliday) Subject: Re: FCC Seeks to Limit F-Word on US Airwaves - Sources Date: 14 Jan 2004 09:39:16 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Monty Solomon wrote in message news:: > (First paragraph of this story contains language that may be > offensive to some readers.) > By Jeremy Pelofsky > WASHINGTON, Jan 13 (Reuters) - U.S. Federal Communications Commission > Chairman Michael Powell has proposed barring the word "f***" from most > radio and broadcast television, regardless of the context, sources > close to the issue said on Tuesday... Thus codifying the bizarre double-standard of U.S. television, totally weirded out on sex and language, but turning a blind eye to violence of all kinds. The standards in other countries are a little saner. Most countries consider the context and time of day. An example that comes to my mind immediately was Phoenix, done by the ABC some years ago (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103511/). Among other things it had nudity, violence and profanity. But the show was about the Major Crimes Squad of the Melbourne Police (not the nicest of people themselves...), tracking down some obscene scum who had set off a car bomb. Again, not very nice people. In context, it was completely appropriate. Edited to U.S. standards it would have lost all its impact. Laura Halliday VE7LDH "Que les nuages soient notre Grid: CN89mg pied a terre..." ICBM: 49 16.05 N 122 56.92 W - Hospital/Shafte ------------------------------ Reply-To: Me From: Me Subject: Re: FCC Seeks to Limit F-Word on US Airwaves - Sources Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:42:35 GMT Jeeez, Count on Michael Powell and the FCC to tackle the really important and earth shattering issues of the day. Monty Solomon wrote in message news:telecom23.20.18@telecom-digest.org: > (First paragraph of this story contains language that may be > offensive to some readers.) > By Jeremy Pelofsky > WASHINGTON, Jan 13 (Reuters) - U.S. Federal Communications Commission > Chairman Michael Powell has proposed barring the word "fuck" from most > radio and broadcast television, regardless of the context, sources > close to the issue said on Tuesday. > The proposal would overturn an October FCC staff decision that ruled > the word was not indecent when U2 rocker Bono used it while accepting > an award during the 2003 live broadcast of the "Golden Globe Awards" > on the NBC television network. > To succeed, Powell will have to garner at least two other votes for > the proposal and the four other FCC commissioners are now considering > the issue, the sources said. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40181215 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I would credit Powell with having a modicum of good taste in his vocabulary skills. *That word* has only appeared in this Digest twice; once many years ago in the early 1980's then yesterday. Today's message from 'me' makes number three. Halliday thoughtfully blocked it out in her reply. That word, like 'kike' and 'nigger' should certainly be used in context when appropriate, but avoided in routine discussion. That's my opinion; not to say I have never used the F-Word when IMO it was 'warranted' in anger, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: yeltrabnhoj@email.com Subject: Re: Verizon DSL - Idiots Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:18:02 GMT Organization: (reverse to reply) (John Bartley, K7AAY, Portland OR) On 10 Jan 2004 15:46:33 GMT, kd1s@aol.comremvthis (Kilo Delta One Sierra) wrote: > Verizondroids tell me it's not available, that I'm close to 5 miles from the > CO. > Now I know for a fact that I'm nowhere near 5 miles from the > CO. More like a mile maximum. So I went on their web site and sure > enough I get the 'future notification' page. I plug in the phone > number of the restaurant below me which is served on the same cable > group, same CO and guess what, it's available. Their test reads like you are 5 miles out, probably because of a) lines adequate for voice, but not higher frequencies, or b) a 'pair gain' device, which 'gains a pair' for another phone user, at the cost of the higher frequencies needed for DSL. The copper wiring of phones is really old tech, and telcos don't want to spend the $$ on 'physical plant' if they can avoid it. However, there are ways to game the system. You could order a second phone line with DSL, then drop the first and move the old number to the new line. You can also start kvetching about 'poor fax performance', 'fax calls ring through and answer but don't connect', 'snow and black horizontal lines and bars on faxes'. The tariffs, regulations under which the phone companies are REQUIRED to deliver, often have fax performance standards included, because fax is such an old technology. However, DSL came late to the game, and by then the telcos figured out if they induced state PUCs to leave performance standards for DSL out of the tariffs, they would be under less pressure to deliver. Nobody but a fool goes into a federal counterrorism operation without duct tape - Richard Preston, THE COBRA EVENT. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, this stalling for time rather than invest money and time in needed repairs is nothing new with telco. Back in the early 1970's as Illinois Bell was getting ready for the new phone system called 'ESS' (Electronic Switching) they would not do anything they didn't absolutely have to do to repair the old crossbar, panel and stepping switch mechanisms. My office phone in those days was WEbster-9-4600 on a stepping switch I think, in the WABash central office. Over fifty years old, the 'Wabash Cannonball' as it was often- times called, did not get its name from nothing. If you had the phone to your ear when you called any number in the downtown area that was not one of the 'newer' (at that time) crossbar offices, you *always* got a loud bang in your ear as the call was setting up. And if it got to be too noisy (because for example, the switch train derailed on the way to its destination) you just hung up and dialed again. I asked my service rep Miss Prissy (she was trained directly by Ernestine) if the company's intent while waiting for 'the day' (of cutover to ESS) was to just let Wabash go to hell and do nothing. Miss Prissy was understandably shocked by my phraseology. But it was true; at least two calls or maybe three had to be made to get inside plant work done in those latter days of stepping switch 'service'. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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 #21 *****************************