From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 3 00:52:48 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i434qmm12581; Mon, 3 May 2004 00:52:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 00:52:48 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200405030452.i434qmm12581@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 #221 TELECOM Digest Mon, 3 May 2004 00:50:00 EDT Volume 23 : Issue 221 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Sipura Low Ring Voltage Problem ... (giasone) Morkrum-Teletype (Jim Haynes) Telecom Tax Cancelled (Clark W. Griswold, Jr.) Analog-Only Cell Phone Carriers (Mark Crispin) VOIP Books (Fred Atkinson) Re: Feds: No Analog TV by '09 (R. T. Wurth) Re: VoIP Analogy (Henry E Schaffer) Re: Honesty From Earthlink (Edson C. Hendricks) Anyone Local to These Scum? (Garrett Wollman) BellSouth Imposes a Regulatory Cost Recovery Fee (Jim) Iraq/Westchester Area Code (sidd@lyonesse.membrane.com) Re: Receiving Faxes via the Internet (Gary Novosiewski) A Web Site of Interest to Ham Radio Operators (Fred Atkinson) 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 are 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: giasone888@nym.hush.com (giasone) Subject: Sipura Low Ring Voltage Problem ... Date: 1 May 2004 11:40:13 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am having trouble with my Sipura SPA-2000 (through BroadVoice). I am fairly sure that the problem is related to low ring voltage. I have had several problems related to caller ID. I cannot get caller ID to show up on my InTeleScreener device and I have trouble with call-waiting caller ID on some older Uniden 900Mhz phones (DXI 386-2). I am unable to experiment with the Sipura because the regional settings are locked by BroadVoice. Today, I bought a voltage meter so that I could check actual ring voltage. I still have my SBC POTS line as well as the BroadVoice sipura to compare. Sure enough, the SBC POTS line consistently provided an AC ring voltage of 84-85 volts. Running the same test, the Sipura only provided a maximum ring voltage of 44-45 volts even though the configuration says that it should be set to 70 volts with a range of 60-90 volts. I was very careful with my measurements and used a .1 microfarad capacitor to filter out DC when measuring AC ring voltage. Based on these findings, I have to assume that the Sipura is probably defective, or that it needs a firmware update. Has anybody else run into a similar problem? Is the unit defective and should I ask for a replacement, or is this common across all Sipuras? Other than this issue, the Sipura has worked extremely well. I currently have BroadVoice as well as FWD on line 2 running. ------------------------------ Subject: Morkrum-Teletype Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) Date: Sun, 02 May 2004 01:40:06 GMT There is some uncertainty. One essential reference is "$30,000,000 Worth of Teletype" (author unstated) in Fortune Magazine, March 1932, p. 40. This covers some early history of Teletype, and especially the Bell System purchase. As all that history says, Morkrum (Morton + Krum) was started in Chicago. E. E. Kleinschmidt was working in New York City on things like printing telegraphy and a keyboard perforator for the Wheatstone system of transmitting Morse code from punched tape. The two companies were fighting each other over patents and also were competing for the same few customers. So it made sense for them to merge, creating Morkrum-Kleinschmidt in Chicago. The product was called various things, including Telegratype. Ran Slayton's memo says "It also may be that the word TELEGRATYPE was the inspiration of the name TELETYPE when the latter was submitted in a contest to rename the Morkrum-Kleinschmidt Company several years later." I need to plow through the patent index again to see in what year they switched issuing patents from Morkrum-Kleinschmidt to Teletype. jhhaynes at earthlink dot net ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <73115.1041@compuserve.com> Subject: Telecom Tax Cancelled Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 17:55:10 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Don't get too excited though -- it was less than .50 a month. One of the pseudo "listed as a tax but really isn't a tax as it goes to the phone company" charges actually dropped off my bill this month. When the FCC mandated local number portability, they also told the phone companies that they could add a charge to everyone's phone bill to pay for implementing the feature. The good news was that the surcharge was limited to two or three years. It not only dropped off my Qwest bill this month, but I also received a credit as they should not have collected last month either. ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Analog-Only Cell Phone Carriers Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 10:57:42 -0700 Organization: University of Washington On Sat, 1 May 2004, Stanley Cline wrote: > Nearly all carriers either have digital or are adding digital (urban > carriers to address capacity/demand, and rural carriers to maximize > roaming revenue); the only carriers of *any* size that are still > analog-only are some carriers in Alaska bush country (e.g., Unicom in > Bethel) Copper Valley Wireless (Glennallen, Valdez) is another one, and unlike Bethel is on the North American highway system. They have a plan for "summer people" (I own property up there), but because they're still AMPS-only I'm still using a prepay Dobson (TDMA) phone. I keep it on life-support (minimum recharge) most of the year, and then use it heavily when I'm up there. Dobson is planning to go GSM but hasn't yet, and will probably keep prepay on TDMA for the foreseeable future. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Fred Atkinson From: Fred Atkinson Subject: VOIP Books Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 23:21:58 -0400 I was hoping for some advice in choosing the right book to bring my technical understanding of VOIP up to date. I find that most books that are 'on the cutting edge' are actually books that try to sell managers on the idea of the new technology. They don't really go into the practical considerations in any detail. Or, they write it as something for a Ph.D to read. I'm looking for something that explains it so a technical support representative can understand the issues to the point of choosing equipment, configuring the service, and troubleshooting problems with the service. Any feedback would be appreciated. Fred Atkinson ------------------------------ From: rwurth@att.net (R. T. Wurth) Subject: Re: Feds: No Analog TV by '09 Date: Sun, 02 May 2004 15:46:13 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet In article , sc1-news@roamer1.org wrote: > Now back to cell phones ... > Most analog cellular traffic nowadays comes from OnStar and other > legacy/embedded equipment and from roaming traffic when customers with > CDMA phones are roaming on TDMA/GSM systems and vice versa; very few > carriers will activate analog-only phones (usually only on low-end > "safety" plans if that) nowadays. > Nearly all carriers either have digital or are adding digital (urban > carriers to address capacity/demand, and rural carriers to maximize > roaming revenue); the only carriers of *any* size that are still > analog-only are some carriers in Alaska bush country (e.g., Unicom in > Bethel) -- and Sussex Cellular (aka SciTel Wireless) in rural New > Jersey, who is selling "unlimited" plans on an AMPS-only network, (per > FCC filings) wants to go CDMA but doesn't have the money to do so, > (again per FCC filings) is trying to get someone to provide an E911 > solution for AMPS, and has no roaming revenue issues to worry about > since practically no one roams on them. (Why Sussex won't sell out to > AT&T or Dobson is a total mystery to me. Most rural carriers *live* > off roaming revenue ...) Even small rural carriers that serve only one > or a few counties, such as Wilkes Cellular in Georgia, Farmers > Wireless in Alabama, and Pace Cellular in Louisiana, and Commnet > Wireless, a fairly unique carrier which provides roaming-only coverage > in scattered areas all over the US, are going digital! > 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 A friend from Morris County (adjacent to Sussex County) reports that Sussex offers service to roamers on a direct-charge credit card basis. Apparently they have found it more profitable to charge roamers directly than through roaming agreements. Third hand reports would seem to indicate that their charges are on the high side. In their defense, despite being part of NJ (please, no NJ jokes), Sussex County is not that densely populated and is quite hilly, so they probably have less traffic and fewer customers than average, but the hilly terrain requires many sites to fully cover the valleys, and yet they have to avoid the hilltops because the long range afforded by an hilltop antenna spoils the frequency re-use that cellular systems are based on. All in all, I'm sure many folks with hunting or fishing cabins up there wish Sussex Cellular would be bought out by a major carrier that would offer sane roaming agreements. Rich Wurth / rwurth@att.net / Rumson, NJ USA ------------------------------ From: hes@unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E Schaffer) Subject: Re: VoIP Analogy Date: Sun, 2 May 2004 19:57:28 UTC Organization: North Carolina State University In article , Lisa Hancock wrote: > Our telecom director emphasizes that the Internet is NOT free, and > VoIP represents an additional expense. He's sort of right. The usual Internet billing models are not like those for buying groceries, lumber, cars, etc. For the Internet it is common to buy a certain amount of *capacity* -- and to pay the same amount per month for it -- regardless of whether it is used or not. So it doesn't cost the purchaser any more to send another packet (or series of packets) across it - *until* the purchased capacity is inadequate and the purchaser must pay for an upgrade in service capacity. (Will that "next packet" then be assessed the entire cost of the upgrade? Of course it would be silly to do that - the flip side is that it is silly to assess zero cost to the previous packets.) > Just because the end consumer pays a flat rate (or nothing at all in > the case of employees) doesn't mean that a service is free. That's right -- but leaves out the reasoning. The service costs $$/month the added packets cost nothing *extra* (within the purchased capacity.) --henry schaffer hes _AT_ ncsu _DOT_ edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 02 May 2004 15:27:58 -0700 From: Edson C. Hendricks Subject: Re: Honesty from Earthlink > In article , Barry Margolin > wrote: > Let's consider that the original poster is wrong -- Earthlink really is > trying to fix the problem, but can't so far. Do you really expect any > CSR to be able to explain it to your satisfaction? What do you want? > "we use SQL Server 2000 build 5915, and there's a bug with index > headers on tables larger than 6,000,007 bytes, only when the first > field of the table starts with the letter J". I'm not sure whether or not I'm the "original poster," but in case I am, again, it is my "judgment" that Earthlink is not telling the truth, and not my proof. I base it on the fact that I get a widely varying range of versions about it from different Earthlink representatives. On two occasions I was assured flatly that the spam was in fact not orginating with Earthlink, but rather with some imposter. One of these was from someone identified as a "supervisor," despite a long list of reasons why that makes no sense. Others would acknowledge the problem. In my chat exchange when I inquired as to the anature of the problem, the original person responded by passing me off to someone else rather than simply answering, and the other person tried to evade answering. Actually, it is very difficult even to get Earthlink to assert that this behavior is real and due to a bug. If that were the fact, then I'd have to figure out why they don't simply say so without all the misdirection. I've dealt with Earthlink long enough to know that they've never before been reluctant, at least with me, to admit technical shortcomings. In other experiences, I don't even have to ask, they simply explain what I'm describing to them as such. My judgment here does not rely on what might be plausible, but rather on how I see Earthlink behave when asked politely to explain things. ------------------------------ From: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Anyone Local to These Scum? Date: Sun, 2 May 2004 23:45:23 UTC Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science I receive about a dozen spams a day from an outfit calling itself "InfoSource Group" advertising the "2004 American Medical Directory". They seem to be incredibly persistent; I've observed (and reported) them using dozens of different cable-modem ISP accounts, mostly on Comcast. They seem to have at least figured out that spamming doesn't pay for on-line merchants, so they are doing it the old-fashioned way: > complete the information below and fax it to 905-751-0199. > (tel: 905-751-0919). Now, I certainly would not suggest that someone in the 905 area code call up their fax machine and send a copy of the Toronto phone book, since that would violate Bell's copyright and besides, it might be considered telephone harassment. However, if you happen to be in a position to track down the particular telemarketing office that is accepting these calls, and explain to them that it would not be wise to associate themselves with these sleaze, I would certainly owe you the beverage of your choice should you ever be in Boston. Garrett A. Wollman | As the Constitution endures, persons in every wollman@lcs.mit.edu | generation can invoke its principles in their own Opinions not those of| search for greater freedom. MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - A. Kennedy, Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. ___ (2003) ------------------------------ From: time50@hotmail.com (Jim) Subject: BellSouth Imposes a Regulatory Cost Recovery Fee Date: 2 May 2004 17:46:26 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com This is the message BellSouth sent me: Thank you for taking time to contact BellSouth Internet Service. We appreciate the opportunity to address your concerns because it is our goal to provide the highest quality Internet service available. BellSouth imposes a Regulatory Cost Recovery Fee of $2.97 per month to offset its costs incurred in complying with obligations and charges imposed by state and federal regulatory bodies, including the recovery of the Federal Universal Service Charge, and state regulatory orders affecting broadband. BellSouth's Regulatory Cost Recovery Fee is not a tax or charge imposed by a government entity. The Federal Universal Service Charge: All telecommunication service providers are required to contribute to the Federal Universal Service Fund. The universal service fund subsidizes programs for schools, libraries, and health care providers. BellSouth recovers the cost of these contributions through a surcharge on its customers' bills. Again, thank you for this opportunity to address your concerns. Please feel free to contact BellSouth Internet Service again if you have additional questions or comments. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 May 2004 21:25:47 -0400 From: sidd@lyonesse.membrane.com Subject: Iraq/Westchester Area Code Hi, First thank you for the excellent work with Telecom Digest. I have a question: In the article http://www.nationinstitute.org/tomdispatch/index.mhtml?pid=1396 that speak of with a satellite phone, a regular Iraqi cell phone ("Iraqnafone"), and a special CPA phone with a 914 (Westchester, NY) area code just to stay in touch with people. Even then, most of the time you can't call one type of phone from the others. Why would you not be able to call one from another except for lack of coverage perhaps? Thank you again for the excellent Telecom Digest! sidd [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you for your compliments, Sidd. I do not know the answer to your question regards compatibility, but perhaps the guys who click on the link in your message will read the Nation Institute article and be able to explain it better. I do know that over the weekend two guys I know from Fort Riley US Army got back here after a year in the war in Iraq. They mentioned to me the satellite phones in their canteens over there which they are allowed to use as desired to call back to the USA, but they said sometimes the line of guys waiting to make calls was very long, yet the canteen phone clerk had two or three phones to 'spare' but they could only be used 'a certain way' because they were incompatible with the other phones, and could not be used in calls back to the USA. Maybe that will say something about it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Gary Novosielski Subject: Re: Receiving Faxes via the Internet? Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 03:58:05 GMT Phil Stripling wrote: > I've used CallWave for years to receive faxes, with no charge. > http://www.callwave.com/landing/p47c2.asp for information. Years ain't what they used to be. The web site says it's no charge for only 30 days, and $~4 a month thereafter. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Fred Atkinson From: Fred Atkinson Subject: A Link of Interest to Ham Radio Operators Date: Sun, 2 May 2004 18:53:20 -0400 Some time back, I sent you an email asking for another link on the telecom-digest.org site. I never saw it up there. Did you ever see it? It's for ham radio operators, but it's IT related. And there are a good number of hams in the IT/telecom community. The name of the article is Your Own Ham Domain and the URL is (on my ham domain site, appropriately enough): http://www.wb4aej.com/hamdomain Use your own judgement as to whether or not it is appropriate. If it is, I'll appreciate the post. Best wishes, Fred ------------------------------ 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 #221 ******************************