From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue May 25 23:52:10 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.3) id i4Q3q9l01343; Tue, 25 May 2004 23:52:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 23:52:10 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200405260352.i4Q3q9l01343@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 #259 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 May 2004 23:52:00 EDT Volume 23 : Issue 259 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Over-the-Counter VoIP: Internet Calling Goes Retail (VOIP News) Federal Lawmakers Urge FCC To Take VoIP Under Its Wing (VOIP News) ETSI to Stage VOIP Test (VOIP News) Qwest DSL Service and Modem (Niy) Re: FCC Asked To Examine A la Carte Cable TV (jmayson@nyx.net) Re: New York Classifies Vonage as Phone Company (Jim Burks) Re: Phantom Cell Phone Call; What's Going On ...? (jdj) Re: Verizon Payphones in non-Verizon Area (Steven J Sobol) Re: The Strike Goes On (Steven J Sobol) My Vonage Posting (Steve Lopes) Gossiptel - UK Provider Offers VoIP With FREE PSTN Numbering (Call UK) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 17:22:10 -0400 Subject: Over-the-Counter VoIP: Internet Calling Goes Retail Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.reed-electronics.com/ednmag/article/CA420950?industryid=22043 Matthew Miller, Special Projects Editor -- Arrival in retail stores represents both a milestone and a litmus test for technology products and services. Cellular phones, satellite radios, and satellite-TV services have done well. By contrast, PVRs (personal video recorders) have experienced slow growth because their benefits proved tough to get across in a brief explanation. Now, thanks to Vonage and RadioShack, we'll get a chance to see how the public warms to VoIP (voice over Internet protocol) services. Vonage has announced that its service will be available in about 4,000 RadioShack stores in the United States. About 1,600 of those stores will be offering in-store demonstrations starting in July. To kick start sales, Vonage says that it is offering RadioShack customers a deal: Sign up for service and purchase the required $89.99 hardware ATA (analog telephone adapter), and the company will provide a free month of unlimited calling (normally $29.99), waive its standard activation fee (also $29.99), and provide a $30 mail-in rebate coupon. Strangely, however, this actually isn't a deal at all. If you sign up on the Vonage Web site, you pay $29.99 for your first month of service, plus the $29.99 activation fee. But you get the hardware at no additional cost. In other words, both approaches end up costing about $60. If Vonage and RadioShack are serious about making VoIP appealing to the masses, a smoke-and-mirrors "deal" is a strange way to go about it. Full story at: http://www.reed-electronics.com/ednmag/article/CA420950?industryid=22043 How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the author of this article may have gotten some things incorrect, unless Vonage has changed things around since when I first started with them. *I* had to sign up, pay for the first month's service and the cost of the adapter. There was no 'set up fee' as such. And that is the way I explain it to guys who ask for a free e-coupon for a month of service. You click on the link in the e-coupon I send you; it leads you through the sign up process, gets your phone number, etc. Then you use your credit card to pay for the adapter box and the first month of whatever service plan you wish. Whatever service plan you choose, you get the identical service free in your second month with the e-coupon. If you have meant to sign up but have not done so yet, ask me for an e-coupon. Write not for pub to ptownson@massis.csail.mit.edu PAT] ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 17:20:25 -0400 Subject: Federal Lawmakers Urge FCC To Take VoIP Under Its Wing Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.internetwk.com/allStories/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=21100196 By W. David Gardner, TechWeb News Three Republican federal lawmakers are urging the Federal Communications Commission to rule that VoIP services are "interstate in nature," arguing that such a determination would bring VoIP technology under FCC jurisdiction and away from state regulators. The lawmakers' letter was sent after the New York Public Service Commission ruled last week that VoIP provider Vonage Holdings was a telephone company and thus subject to state regulation. Signing the letter against state regulation are U.S. Rep. Mike Ferguson, R-N.J., U.S. Rep. Chip Pickering, R-Miss., and U.S. Rep. Jim Saxton, R-N.J. Reps. Ferguson and Pickering are members of the House Telecommunications Committee. "What's being encouraged is that the FCC rule on the interstate part (of telecom regulations,)" Vonage spokeswoman Brooke Schulz said. "If the FCC doesn't decide, the courts will." Full story at: http://www.internetwk.com/allStories/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=21100196 ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 17:23:39 -0400 Subject: ETSI to Stage VOIP Test Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.boardwatch.com/document.asp?doc_id=53407 SOPHIA-ANTIPOLIS, France -- At two events, one in Europe and one later this summer in the United States, manufacturers of VoIP gateways and terminals will have the opportunity to test their equipment in controlled and uniform IP network conditions. Manufacturers will learn about their equipment performance, compare the results to other implementations and derive hints for potential system optimization together with the speech quality testing experts. Anonymity is guaranteed. Full story at: http://www.boardwatch.com/document.asp?doc_id=53407 ------------------------------ From: niy38@hotmail.com (Niy) Subject: Qwest DSL Service and Modem Date: 25 May 2004 14:55:11 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Recently Qwest has a promoting package, 256k/256k, MSN, $31.99 every month, sounds not too bad. But later I found I either have to rent their modem,3$/month, or buy so called Actiontec modem from them, and charge is unreasonable, compared to other brand on the market. And technical support say I can not use other modem+router. Does anyone here use Qwest DSL service with other modem? ------------------------------ From: jmayson@nyx.net Reply-To: jmayson@nyx.net Subject: Re: FCC Asked To Examine A la Carte Cable TV Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 01:17:58 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com > Key members of the House Commerce Committee have asked the Federal > Communications Commission for a detailed study on the feasibility of > cable and satellite companies offering their subscribers the ability > to pay for the individual channels they want. I just don't see this working. If someone pays $60/month for 150 channels, they'll expect 50 channels for $20. But it doesn't worth that way. There are many fixed costs in the price cable that would be there whether they offered 1 or 1,000 channels. You might get 50 channels for $55 a month instead. Why would the consumer go for that? John Mayson Austin, Texas, USA ------------------------------ From: Jim Burks Subject: Re: New York Classifies Vonage as Phone Company Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 01:41:08 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com Tony P. wrote in message news:telecom23.251.7@telecom-digest.org: > I have to wonder how many 'favors' Verizon provided to members of the > PSC. Just because the regulators want to jump on Vonage doesn't necessarily mean they like the LECs or are doing them a favor. If they let Vonage set a precedent that any VoIP is per se unregulated, they will be out of business soon, and they are protecting their turf. Regulators subsidize rural phone companies with the Universal Service funds (UCC). They also put on pseudo-taxes for 911 and lots of other stuff. If VoIP really catches on, then all these piggy-banks either go away, or get so small it's not worth doing. AT&T tried to make the case that, since they were using VoIP in the middle, between circuit-switched at each end, those services were exempt. FCC said naaaaa to that idea. Look for them to come back with proposals for large businesses to either originate or terminate traffic on VoIP, be exempt from these regulations, and split the savings with their customers. If the Vonage precedent is upheld, there's no reason why they shouldn't. Jim Burks ------------------------------ From: jdj Subject: Re: Phantom Cell Phone Call; What's Going On ...? Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 15:57:15 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On Sat, 22 May 2004 10:18:14 -0700, DaveC wrote: > On Fri, 21 May 2004 09:34:05 -0700, jdj wrote (in article > ): >> My Sprint phone rings once approx 30 minutes after the call >> to me was made. > Your cell was busy. Not your phone, but the cell (constituting the > geographic area covered by the provider's antennae) was max'd out. Your > call went to voice mail, instead, because there was no frequency > available to deliver the call to your phone. That is very much a Bad Thing when the phone and system must, without exception or excuse, work properly and deliver all calls. I don't get a call, I lose money. Or worse. I've observed problems with call delivery with wired carriers, too. Without Ma Bell around, seems the babies are getting more careless. ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Verizon Payphones in non-Verizon Area Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 18:14:58 -0500 BV124@aol.com wrote: > Spotted one tonight in Glendale, CA (SBC-Pac Bell area) adjacent to the > Sav-On Drug store on East Broadway. I don't think that counts. ;) Greater Los Angeles is split up pretty well between SBC and Verizon. It's not strictly SBC and it's not strictly Verizon either, as far as ILECs go; which company is the ILEC depends on which city you happen to be in. Last December I was visiting family friends in Redondo Beach and noticed that they had *both* SBC *and* Verizon local phone books. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ "someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003 ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: The Strike Goes On Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 18:23:31 -0500 someone@somewhere.org wrote: > 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. This sounds like what was happening here with the grocery store strike. I'm sorry, but I sided 100% with the grocery chains this time. California grocery store hourly employees make at least 1 1/2 times what they do back in the area where I grew up, and the major concession they were fighting over was health care -- $5/week premium for an individual or $15/week for a family instead of $0/week which was the status quo. And as I understand it, the money paying the premiums up until then was from a previous settlement, was a fixed amount and the till had run dry. It was just stupid. I am probably biased by the fact that I was forced to be a UFCW member in Dayton, Ohio, working for Kroger Company at a Kroger's store there -- and the union was completely useless, but I still think fighting over $20 the $60 per month is not worth striking over -- especially given the situation in question. (Kroger, incidentally, owns Ralph's and Food4Less, two of the four major SoCal grocery chains. Food4Less employees were not striking, nor were Stater Brothers employees; Stater Brothers is the only major chain in SoCal that is still locally owned. The employees of Ralph's, Safeway-owned Von's and Albertsons, owned by Federated Department Stores, were striking.) JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ "someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I take it Ohio does not have a 'Right to Work' law on the books, which is why you were 'forced' to join the union. But there is still a way around that, partially. You can join the union, but only be forced to pay the portion of the dues which apply to the administration of the union, and withhold the (majority of) the dues which the union officials use for whatever political causes they are promoting. Federal law allows for people to be 'administrative members' only, as a free speech matter. Your money cannot be taken forcibly from you (through payroll deduction for example) to support causes you do not believe in. Ask any lawyer specializing in labor matters. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steve Lopes Subject: My Posting on Norvergence Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 19:29:53 -0400 Could you remove this posting from your website? I have resolved my differences with Norvergence. Part of my resolution with Norvergence is that I no longer post negative points of view toward Norvegence. Every time this post keeps popping up, I get a call from Norvergence. http://www.mailarchive.ca/lists/comp.dcom.telecom/2003-11/0513.html Steve Lopes [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For hopefully the last time, Steve, the answer is a three letter word, "N-O-E". Norvergence asked me to remove the message, Norvergence then tried to twist the arms of the MIT trustees, then their lawyer asked me. You asked me once before, your lawyer asked me, and now you are asking me again. Even if I were so-inclined -- I am not -- once the message leaves here and goes out on net in various archives, not all of which are my own, then even God Almighty could not get the message removed. Well, I guess God could, if she caused earthquakes and fires all over the world at the same time, but that is about it. No! No! No! PAT] ------------------------------ From: jeb@calluk.com (Call UK - VoIP PSTN) Subject: Gossiptel - UK Provider Offers VoIP with FREE PSTN Numbering Date: 25 May 2004 17:22:12 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com GossipTel have now officially launched and are taking registrations. Offering is: - Free SIP account - Free Voicemail (with email copy of message) - Free UK PSTN number (0870 National Rate number) - Full mapping of Caller Line ID (in both to/from PSTN directions) - Free calls to outbound UK 0800 numbers - Free download of softphone (X-Lite) - Pre-pay with credit/debit card for SIP to PSTN calls - Web based user console - SIPURA SPA-2000 Terminal Adapters with auto-configuration - Comprehensive NAT Traversal - Peering with other 'open' SIP networks e.g. Free World Dialup - Dedicated help/customer support line - DO ALL THAT SKYPE DOES, AND MUCH MUCH MORE! Check out the website (and sign up for FREE) at [url]http://www.gossiptel.com[/url] Full set of press releases can be downloaded at [url]http://www.gossiptel.com/about/?pr=yes[/url] ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Share Day For May, 2004 Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 11:00:00 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. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #259 ******************************