From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue May 25 17:08:17 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.3) id i4PL8HZ27927;
	Tue, 25 May 2004 17:08:17 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 17:08:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200405252108.i4PL8HZ27927@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 #258

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 25 May 2004 17:08:00 EDT    Volume 23 : Issue 258

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    T-Mobile USA to End Network Venture With Cingular (Monty Solomon)
    Humble Cell Morphs Into Device for All Seasons (Monty Solomon)
    Re: The Strike Goes On (Paul Vader)
    Re: The Strike Goes On (David B. Horvath, CCP)
    Understanding the WAN (David C.)
    Re: ICANN Wins Round in Internet Suit (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Verizon Payphones in non-Verizon Area (BV124@aol.com)
    Ringing Multiple Devices (was Re: Bye, Bye, Ma Bell) (Joel Hoffman)
    Re: The E-Fax Police Are After Me! (nstrom@ananzi.co.za) 
    Re: Western Union Public Telegraph Offices (Lisa Hancock)
    Northern Telecom Vantage 12 Help (jr9@sympatico.ca)
    VoIP,Inc. Announces Joint Venture With Korean Corporation (PressRelease)
    Share Day for May, 2004 (TELECOM Digest Editor)

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.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 08:33:48 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: T-Mobile USA to End Network Venture with Cingular


     T-Mobile USA to End Network Venture with Cingular and Acquire
     California/Nevada Network and Spectrum; Acquisition Positions
     T-Mobile USA for Strong Growth
     - May 25, 2004 01:15 AM (BusinessWire)

BELLEVUE, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 25, 2004--T-Mobile USA, Inc.
("T-Mobile USA"), the U.S. operating subsidiary of T-Mobile
International AG & Co. KG ("T-Mobile International"), the mobile
communications subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom AG (NYSE:DT) ("Deutsche
Telekom"), today announced it has entered into agreements with
Cingular Wireless LLC ("Cingular") to terminate their wireless network
sharing joint venture and for T-Mobile USA to acquire 100% ownership
of the shared networks in California and Nevada for $2.5 billion. The
purchase price of $2.5 billion for the GSM network in
California/Nevada will be offset by $200 million related to the
unwinding of the joint venture, resulting in a net cash payment of
approximately $2.3 billion to Cingular. In addition, T-Mobile USA
will:

    --  provide network services to Cingular under a wholesale
        arrangement until Cingular's customers in these markets
        transition to the networks it will acquire through its pending
        merger with AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. ("AT&T Wireless");

    --  replace its existing roaming agreement with Cingular with a
        new nationwide agreement with improved terms;

    --  transfer 10 MHz of New York spectrum in exchange for certain
        California spectrum owned by Cingular as specified in the
        termination provisions of the joint venture agreement;

    --  acquire an additional 10 MHz of spectrum from Cingular in
        certain key California markets for $180 million; and

    --  receive an option to acquire an additional 10 MHz of spectrum
        in other key California markets from Cingular within two
        years.

While the joint venture has owned and successfully operated the
networks that service both companies' customers in these markets since
its formation in 2001, this new agreement with Cingular is expected to
position T-Mobile USA for continued operational success and strong
growth in the future.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=41618239

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 10:05:15 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Humble Cell Morphs Into Device For All Seasons


By Yoshiko Hara

EE Times

TOKYO, Japan - The mobile phone of the future was demonstrated, in
bits and pieces, at the Business Show Tokyo 2004 earlier this month.
While no single model included all the potential features of upcoming
phones, various units had enough of them to prove that the
next-generation handset is being transformed into personal
entertainment/information devices.

Some received radio and TV broadcasts; some played music, videos and
games. Others functioned as electronic money or personal
identification systems, with the help of wireless ICs; still others
accessed the Internet to remotely control home robots.

Of all those functions, digital TV reception linked with data
transmission is expected to be one of the killer applications that
will increase the average revenue per user for carriers. Europe's
heated DVB-H activity shows that TV reception is an attractive feature
for consumers (see story, page 18), but beaming it through a built-in
tuner does not contribute to a mobile carrier's profits.  That's why
carriers are interested not only in delivering terrestrial digital TV
broadcasts, but also in downloading program-related data.

Japan's terrestrial DTV service can broadcast for mobile service and
for stationary reception of high-definition programs. Mobile
broadcasts employ 1/13 of a 6-MHz piece of bandwidth that is assigned
to each broadcaster. The rest of the 6-MHz band is used for one
channel of high-definition or three channels of standard-definition
programming.

Broadcasters plan to begin mobile digital TV broadcasts in Japan
sometime next year. In the beginning, they will simulcast regular TV
broadcasts. To make use of the limited bandwidth available for mobile
broadcasting, H.264 encoding will be used to compress video data.

http://www.commsdesign.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=20900447

------------------------------

From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader)
Subject: Re: The Strike Goes On
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 11:43:16 -0000
Organization: Inline Software Creations


TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org> writes:

> According to the Independence Reporter for Sunday, May 23, the labor
> dispute at SBC continues.                                               

It's over. A tentative agreement was reached early this morning.

> at our central office in Independence, over at 6th and Maple, there
> was no sign of any action other than back on Friday (when the strike
> started) two guys with picket signs on the sidewalk in front for a
> short time, but then they went away and there was nothing.

Despite what you might have heard during the strike, the CWA has a
pretty decent relationship with SBC. It's not uncommon to see managers
buying lunch for the strikers, letting them use the bathrooms where
security allows, etc. Sometimes you just gotta strike though, or the
executives forget they have to actually make concessions now and
again.

> cages, came and went normally. Telco may just allow this strike to
> linger on and make no real effort to settle it anytime fast.  What
> is the reaction

I really doubt that was ever the plan. There is no upside to a strike
for either side.

> response in other communities?  My understanding is it is not just
> SBC on strike, but all the (remnants of) Baby Bells.

No, that's wrong. It's just the CWA members working for SBC. *


* PV   something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
       like corkscrews.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 09:09:41 -0400
Subject: Re: The Strike Goes On
From: someone@somewhere.org
Reply-To: someone@somewhere


On Mon, 24 May 2004 23:18:57 -0400 (EDT), our esteemed moderator wrote:

> According to the Independence Reporter for Sunday, May 23, the labor
> dispute at SBC continues. There was a time in the United States when
> a strike at the telephone company meant bad news. Now, all it seems
> to amount to is a slight delay in getting an answer from Directory
> Assistance or the operator.

Please hide my email address and full name, too much SPAM (and I don't 
want my comments connected back to the source).

The wife of a good friend works for SBC in the Cleveland Ohio area.
Knowing that she is "management" I spoke with him. It seems that the
Union planned to go out for four (4) days to show the company how
important they were. Senior management decided that the union members
would not be allowed back to work after those four days and all prior
offers would be taken off the table.

Except for repairs and new service provisioning, there should be no
real impact.

While I realize that I am hearing a biased viewpoint, it seems that
the union was being unreasonable in these economic times. They wanted
a raise (in excess of inflation), no co-pay for medical, no reduction
in medical benefits, and a no-layoff clause. The company was willing
to offer more money but in return for co-pay for medical. The company
was willing to promise another job in the same state for anyone layed
off.

 From my conversation, it sounds like the union is in a power play and
I'm not sure who is going to lose.  I know the employees/union members
will lose in the end, but that's the way it always is.

------------------------------

From: DaveC <me@privacy.net>
Subject: Understanding the WAN
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 12:14:50 -0700
Reply-To: me@privacy.net


I've got a pretty good understanding about the workings of the LAN,
but now my curiosity is wandering to the WAN. I'd like to understand
the area of data network switching and routing before a packet gets to
the customer's site.

Are there any good primers, intros, etc. on-line to help someone learn
about how it all works?

Thanks,

DaveC
me@privacy.net
This is an invalid return address  Please reply in the news group

------------------------------

Subject: Re: ICANN Wins Round in Internet Suit
Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting
From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 15:08:00 +0000


In article <telecom23.249.10@telecom-digest.org>, George Mitchell
<george@coventry.m5p.com> wrote:

> Monty Solomon wrote:

>> U.S. District Judge A. Howard Matz dismissed allegations that the 
>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers had violated 
>> federal antitrust laws in its attempts to bar VeriSign from adding 
>> services like Site Finder, which effectively took control of all 
>> unassigned .com and .net domain names and redirected them to the 
>> company's Web site.

> To refresh people's memory, Site Finder was a VeriSign "service"
> which made nonexistent second-level domain names under .com and .net
> appear to exist, rendering one popular spam test useless.  VeriSign
> nominally discontinued this "service" months ago, but I still see
> as many as a dozen instances per day where the root name servers are
> supplying addresses instead of name server referrals in response to
> queries in the .com and .net zones.  I haven't investigated any
> further, but this seems to contradict VeriSign's statement that they
> have stopped doing this.

Nope.  not at all.  there are situations where a _host_ itself is
listed in the root registry.  i.e. where it is a declared nameserver
for a 2nd-level domain. Querying for that host *will* resolve directly
from the root servers.

------------------------------

From: BV124@aol.com
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 00:53:40 EDT
Subject: Re: Verizon Payphones in non-Verizon Area


Spotted one tonight in Glendale, CA (SBC-Pac Bell area) adjacent to the 
Sav-On Drug store on East Broadway.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 20:00:29 GMT
From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman)
Subject: Ringing Multiple Devices (was Re: Bye, Bye Ma Bell)
Organization: Excelsior Computer Services


> VoIP services have to compete on features.  For example, AT&T's
> CallVantage offers a 9-way conference bridge, and the ability to have
> a call ring up to five devices.  Both of these features can be done on
> a landline, but I don't know of any providers who offer the multiple
> ring capability.

Do you mean up to five different numbers ring at once, as in, say,
your CallVantage line, a landline, and a cellphone?  THAT would be a
wonderful feature.

-Joel

------------------------------

From: nstrom@ananzi.co.za
Subject: Re: The Efax Fax Police are After Me!!!
Date: 25 May 2004 13:55:22 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com> wrote in message
news:<telecom23.255.8@telecom-digest.org>:

> 	By the way, does anyone know of an online fax service that
> allows you to paste text into a form, put a telephone number into a
> text box in that form, press submit, and have that fax go through?  It
> is just that I send faxes so rarely (and since I have the free Efax
> account, I can't send faxes over that number), that I'd rather pay by
> the fax rather than by the month.

Try tpc.int; specifically, http://www.tpc.int/sendfax.html

If the destination number is within their coverage area
(http://www.tpc.int/fax_cover_auto.html) it should work fine for you.

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock)
Subject: Re: Western Union Public Telegraph Offices
Date: 25 May 2004 10:11:20 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa
Hancock):
 
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: By 1979, there was nothing of any
> significance left to the old Western Union empire.  
> ...Lisa, I am curious; what were YOU doing on West Lake Street,
> during the seventies or anytime since?  

I was MISPELLING!  I wasn't on Lake Street, I was downtown at LA SALLE St,
opposite the commuter railroad station (formerly Rock Island).

> The main Western Union Building downtown *was* nice at one point;
> the last time I walked past in the middle nineties (when I was
> strongly thinking about checking out of Chicago once and for all),
> the building was not in good condition,

Speaking of buildings, I was downtown visiting a friend and her window
looked out onto a vacated Western Union building.  I was all excited,
thinking maybe there were some forgotten goodies left behind (maybe
telegraph blanks, misc hardware).  My friend immediately insisted the
building (owned now by her employer) "had been completed emptied,
absolutely nothing whatsoever left in it!"  I suspect my friend,
knowing how cluttered my apt is, might have known otherwise but didn't
want me adding more junk.

I still am curious as to when telegram rates went up and voice long
distance rates when down so that the telephone became cheaper to use
than telegrams.  My guess is in the late 1950s/early 1960s, which I
believe really caused WU's downfall since that eliminated the basic
need for a telegram (speed).

Did WU's rates vary by mileage as long distance rates did or were they
flat for the whole continental U.S.?  Of course, for business users,
the convenience of a two-way conversation to make plans would be worth
paying a premium for voice long distance over a telegram.

I wonder if WU had bulk rates for high volume telegram senders, like a
business.  I was once in an industrial company's personnel office and
they had recalled laid off workers by sending them Mailgrams; I
presume they would've previously used telegrams.  Even into the 1960s
it's possible many urban factory workers didn't have their own
telephone or spoke English that well, so a telegram provided the
notice and the interpretation was done by the recipient rather than a
company secretary trying to explain it.  That is, here's a single
message and a list of recipients.

Another cost/curve breakdown would be person-to-person calls, which
are essentially obsolete.  I believe the premium for such a call is
extremely high relative to direct station dialed.  This began in the
mid 1970s when AT&T introduced lower dialed-direct rates -- operator
handled rates started to go up while dialed direct would go down.
The only thing I don't know if it's worth going person when calling
from a payphone since the payphone LD rates are so damn high.
Unfortunately, it's virtually impossible to find out how much you'll
be gouged for a payphone LD call today.  Back in the 1970s, before
the rate drop, it was typical for business to make all their calls
person-to-person (remember that charges didn't start until the
desired party got on the line, and that could mean a savings of
several minutes while the recipient was located.)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Western Union had 'day rates' (for
delivery same day), 'overnight rates' (for delivery next day) and
'priority rates' (for same day delivery, even late at night). Mail-
grams were in connection with the post office, when messenger service
was discontinued. You sent the mailgram by phone (or in one of the
dwindling number of public offices) and it was transmitted to a 
teletype machine at the post office of record for the requested
zip code. At the receiving location, postal clerks attended to the
teletype machine, folding and inserting the message into a window
envelope, and the local postal carrier delivered it to you. Even with
the postal service's spotty record for delivery on a timely basis,
they are usually able to offer next day delivery within the same
zip code. At least they were then, in the 1960's. I dunno any longer.

I could not imagine *you* (Lisa) ever being on the corner of Lake
Street and Kedzie Avenue. There was a WUTCO public office there for
many years, a few blocks down the street from the telephone company
(in those days we called it euphemistically 'Kedzie Bell' since it
was and still is the Chicago-Kedzie central office of Illinois Bell/
Ameritech/SBC. And telco had a public business office there also, long
since gone. It was quite a grand old business area, between the WUTCO
office, the telephone company, a hospital, any number of theaters and
other stores in the 1930-60's era. But by 1960, things had changed 
there. The Jewish people had long since moved out, going to Rogers
Park and Skokie; the area was becoming increasingly minority; most of
the merchants had long since either begun using iron gates across
their storefronts at night time or had vanished entirely, and those
who remained took the hint and fled for their lives that Tuesday
night in April, 1968 when Dr. King was assassinated and the whole
neighborhood went up in flames and rioting. 

WUTCO was already limping along in bankruptcy at that point and 
decided to close their inceasingly shabby public telegraph office
and rented it out to some agent who partioned off the huge, formerly
glamorous office into a small section with heavy glass behind which
he could stand to sell money transfers (the one area the company was
still making money at). Telco closed their public office also, and
over a few months consolidated their operators from the second floor
of the Kedzie c.o. building to wherever else in the USA they put them.

Lisa, you mentioned that you had meant to say 427 South Lasalle Street,
the main, downtown office of WUTCO. Quite a historic location, where
the original telegraph office had stood which was destroyed in the
great fire of October, 1871; where the grand WUTCO office building was
constructed early in the twentieth century, whose first floor public
telegraph office ran a very close second only to Illinois Bell's
upscale taste in public office furbishings. And when you passed by
the area in the late seventies, it was all gone. Only the little dingy
storefront with bullet proof glass remained and the cut-rate liquor
store next to it, occupying the rest of the (now) greatly partitioned
(former) public office. Ditto the former WUTCO public telegraph office
at Lawrence and Broadway on the north side or the south side version
at 63rd and Englewood. When AT&T is bankrupt and gone (how long that 
will be, I won't venture a guess), I wonder what will happen to their
grandiose office building on Wacker Drive downtown.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 00:46:44 EDT
From: jr9@sympatico.ca
Subject: Northern Telecom Vantage 12 Help


Hi all.  Are any of you familiar with the old Vantage 12 phone system
from the 1980s?  A local church has one and we would like to enable
toll denial on some of the sets, but the programming manual we have
seems to be for a later version of the control card, and the codes
don't work.

According to the manual, all programming uses the 'Feature' key, but where
the manual says the phones should have the 'Feature' key, the phones
instead have the 'Privacy Release' key ... and using it does not seem to
work for the programming.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Jeff

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 19:57:53 +0400
From: Editor PressReleaseNetwork.com <editor@pressreleasenetwork.com>
Subject: VoIP, Inc. Announces Joint Venture With Korean Corporation


PRESS RELEASE NETWORK
http://www.pressreleasenetwork.com

Fort Lauderdale, FL - May 25, 2004 (PRN): VoIP, Inc. (OTCBB: VOII)
today announced that it has signed a Joint-Venture Agreement
("Agreement" with iCable Systems Co., Ltd., a Korean corporation
("iCable').

Under the Agreement, VoIP, Inc. and iCable have formed iMax Solutions,
Inc., a Nevada corporation ("iMax") to act as a joint venture vehicle
for both of the companies to develop Voice Over-IP related products
with exclusive marketing of iCable products in North and South
America.

iCable is an R & D oriented company with 37 highly qualified Voice
Over IP engineers focusing on the VoIP and WiMax Technologies. iCable
products are based on the Broadcom® Corporation (NASDAQ: BRCM),
BCM1112 CHIP; Broadcom Corporation, the leading provider of silicon
solutions enabling broadband communications.

As a manufacturer of these products, iCable projects $30 million in
sales for 2004 and $50 million for 2005 for the Korean based
company. iCable's lead product is their S-MTA (Stand-alone Multimedia
Terminal Adaptor) which provides two VoIP telephone lines for
customers having broadband-cable or DSL Internet access. Key features
include a built in DHCP server; other products include the S-MTA with
built in Cable Modem, ADSL Modem, & 911 Life Line patent pending
technology. Each of these products are available with integrated WiFi
access point. A new product, the IP Set-top box, will be used in the
new world of technology where, Voice, Video and Data converge and will
be known as the "Triple Play".

Under the Agreement, 51% of iMax will be owned by VoIP, Inc. and 49%
by iCable. The Agreement is subject to VoIP, Inc. paying iCable $5
million dollars in two equal installments. The first installment is
due on June 30, 2004, with a 30 day grace period; the second payment
is due on July 30, with a 60 day grace period. VoIP, Inc. will attempt
to obtain the necessary funds through private placements of equity or
debt securities, and if unable to do so, will either forfeit its
rights under the venture or will attempt to renegotiate the deal.

Under the Agreement, iCable will contribute all of its rights and
interest in contracts and rights with current customers in North and
South America.  iMax shall have the exclusive right to use iCable's
intellectual property and rights to its products in North and South
America. iCable has guaranteed iMax Solutions minimum yearly sales for
2004, 2005 and 2006 of $10 million, $25 million and $40 million
respectively.

The entire Agreement between the respective parties can be found in
VoIP, Inc.'s Form 8K filing with the U.S. Securities & Exchange
Commission on the SEC's website at
http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/webusers.htm which will be filed
by VoIP, Inc. within two business days from the date of this press
release.

Further information on iCable can be found at: http://www.icablesystem.com

VoIP, Inc.'s (http://www.voipincorporated.com) goal is to become a
world leader in providing voice over IP customer premise equipment and
in addition, premium voice over IP subscriber-based enhanced telephony
services, as well as innovative WiFi and WiMAX technology solutions
for residential and enterprise customers globally.

Steven Ivester
VoIP, Inc.
Tel: (954) 434-2000
12330 S.W. 53rd Street
Suite 712 - Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33330
Email: sivester@voipincorporated.com
Website: http://www.voipincorporated.com


Editor & CEO
Press Release Network
editor@pressreleasenetwork.com
http://www.pressreleasenetwork.com

------------------------------

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <editor@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Share Day For May, 2004
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 3:50:00 EST


Instead of changing the Digest over to an advrtising supported forum,
I have always elected to keep it as a user supported forum, and for
the most part keep it spam and virus free. I am *only* able to do this
because of financial support from readers here, and if you would
rather not see these messages every month, then please pitch in and
help now and then!  Consider it sort of like public radio, which goes
on for days at a time trying to raise money ... and maybe I should
adopt the same system. Turn over the entire Digest once or twice a
year to fund raising (entire issues, etc) and stop doing it when the
budget for the year has been raised. But for now, I will stick with 
the present system of devoting a few messages at the end of each 
month to raising money for the Digest publication expenses. Out of 
400-500 messages per month, in a spam, virus free environment, two
or three (only) devoted to fund raising. You know who you are; please
provide some help here financially.

You can use Pay Pal to donate with a credit/debit card by going to our
web site http://telecom-digest.org and at the bottom of the home page
look for the PayPal 'donate' button.  Or if you prefer, send a check
or money order to Patrick Townson/TELECOM, Post Office Box 50,
Independence, Kansas 67301-0050.  The amount you send is entirely up
to you.  You know best how much you can afford and whether or not this
Digest has any value for you.  Thank you very much.

Patrick Townson, Editor/Publisher
TELECOM Digest

------------------------------

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 #258
******************************
