From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jul 20 01:05:38 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.3) id i6K55bn25125; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 01:05:38 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 01:05:38 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200407200505.i6K55bn25125@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 #341 TELECOM Digest Tue, 20 Jul 2004 01:03:00 EDT Volume 23 : Issue 341 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson VoIP: The Next Household Word? (VOIP News) Vonage(R) Names Bill Rainey President of Vonage Canada (VOIP News) VoIP Options Answer the Call (VOIP News) NYS AG Spitzer Settles With "optinrealbig.com" Spammer (Danny Burstein) Re: Payphone Ringer Troubleshooting (Scott Dorsey) Re: Norvergence Contract (DevilsPGD) NorVergence & the Calif Public Utilities Commission (David O. Rodriguez) Re: Lingo v. Packet8 (Clark W. Griswold, Jr.) Re: The Convention in 1904, One Hundred Years Ago (SunGard BSR) 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: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:09:09 -0400 Subject: VoIP: The Next Household Word? Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61314-2004Jul19.html By Cynthia L. Webb washingtonpost.com Staff Writer More companies and consumers, especially in urban areas, are tapping into VoIP. That's shorthand for "voice over Internet Protocol," which is nothing more than industry lingo for a simple but extraordinary concept: using the Internet to make telephone calls. Using the Internet instead of the telephone network has its perks, but there are still plenty of stumbling blocks keeping it from becoming the de facto way of making phone calls. The San Jose Mercury News produced a series on the VoIP phenomenon that looks into all these facets. Here, according to the Merc, are some of the advantages: "Software applications can be added to phones, turning them into mini-computers for such tasks as tracking inventory or looking up a number on the company directory. It also offers potential big savings by allowing companies to change the way they manage their phone systems." And some more: "In addition to voice mail, call waiting and caller identification, Internet phone customers can retrieve voice mail online as e-mail. They also can arrange conference calls with point-and-click ease on their computers and sometimes even pick their area code. Allen Long, president of Long and Associates consulting firm in Castro Valley, said today's Internet phone price savings may shrink, especially if authorities decide to regulate the service. Federal and state regulators are weighing whether to treat the technology as a phone rather than information service. If it's a phone service, the government may require payment of access charges and universal service fees." Full story at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61314-2004Jul19.html (Free registration required) 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/ ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:39:01 -0400 Subject: Vonage(R) Names Bill Rainey President of Vonage Canada Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-19-2004/0002212515&STORY&EDATE= EDISON, N.J., July 19 /PRNewswire/ -- Vonage, the leading broadband phone company, today appointed C. William (Bill) Rainey, President of Vonage Canada, a subsidiary of Vonage Holdings Corp. effective immediately. In the newly created position, Rainey will report directly to Jeffrey A. Citron, Chairman and CEO of Vonage Holdings Corp. Mr. Rainey's responsibilities will encompass the development, execution and expansion of Vonage's Canadian service offerings. (Photo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20040719/NYM015 ) Prior to joining Vonage Canada, Mr. Rainey capitalized on his 20 years of experience in technology, finance and communications as Senior Vice President Commercial Services, Group Telecom (GT), which was acquired in May by Bell Canada. Mr. Rainey was in executive and management roles with Telus, Canada's second largest telecommunications company for six years and with Royal Trust/Royal Bank for five years. He began his career with Xerox Canada, spending 10 years in sales and marketing there. "To manage Vonage's growth in Canada, it's paramount that we build a world class management team with local knowledge and we are very excited to welcome Bill to lead our Canadian team," said Jeffrey A. Citron, Chairman and CEO of Vonage. "His solid telecommunications and management background will prove indispensable as Vonage accelerates its international expansion." Mr. Rainey will oversee all Vonage Canada business units including finance, operations, marketing, product development, sales, customer service, communications and administration. Mr. Rainey holds a B.S.C. from the University of Alberta, in Edmonton, a certificate of management from the University of Calgary's graduate studies program and has completed the executive and finance programs at Queens University in Kingston. Mr. Rainey lives with his wife and two children in Oakville, Ontario. Full press release at: http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-19-2004/0002212515&STORY&EDATE= ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:02:47 -0400 Subject: VoIP Options Answer the Call Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56841-2004Jul17.html By Rob Pegoraro Sunday, July 18, 2004; Page F07 If the Internet can be your bookshelf, your radio and your TV, why can't it be your phone as well? It's been able to be that for years, actually. But until recently, sending and receiving phone calls online were pastimes best left to techies who could reel off their computers' numeric Internet Protocol addresses from memory -- you couldn't simply plug a regular phone into the Internet. Now you can. Naturally, it comes at a price, but the fees charged by most "voice over Internet Protocol" ("VoIP" for short) services fall far below those of land-line phone service. And unlike land-line phone service, you can find real choice in the VoIP market. Companies act as though they actually need to win over their customers, competing to offer the best bundle of services for the lowest price. Full story at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56841-2004Jul17.html (Free registration required) ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: NYS AG Spitzer Settles With "optinrealbig.com" Spammer Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 18:36:43 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC I'm not elated about the low cost to the spammer, but at least it's something: "State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer today announced the settlement of a lawsuit against email marketer Scott Richter and his company, OptInRealBig.com, LLC. The suit alleged that unsolicited emails, or spam, sent on defendants' behalf contained falsified headers, falsified routing information, and deceptive subject lines, and were illegally routed through a worldwide network of more than 500 vulnerable computers." http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2004/jul/jul19a_04.html _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Payphone Ringer Troubleshooting Date: 19 Jul 2004 18:47:15 -0400 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Tad wrote: > I have an Automatic Electric manufactured coin station of a fairly > modern vintage(it has the "loud" button next to the keypad if that > helps date it). It is branded GTE. > Some time ago, the ringer completely ceased to function. All other > functions of the phone seem intact. Check the blocking capacitor on the ringer. They often fail. Also make sure there is good DC continuity across the ringer itself and that the ringer coil is not open. > Does anybody have any troubleshooting tips for identifying and perhaps > repairing the problem with the ringer? Schematics perhaps? I'm faily > well versed with the use of a VOM/DMM for troubleshooting. You need the book "Old-Time Telephones" by Meyer, which has all you need to work on Fortress phones. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Norvergence Contract Reply-To: bond-jamesbond@crazyhat.net Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy! Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 21:12:03 GMT In message Fred Goldstein wrote: >> At the bottom is place for the person who signed the front to put >> his initials, thus confirming he has read the fine print. I never >> saw this side of the agreement, but someone put my initials there >> for me, and it's as plane as day that it is not my hand-writing. > I Am Not A Lawyer, but I have a sneaking suspicion that having > somebody else sign for you, to paraphrase Chrysler, changes > everything. Check with a lawyer. But if you didn't sign the paper > and Norvergence forged your name to it, then it's possible that your > liability transfers elsewhere. This could get interesting. The question, though, is proof. do not creep a coconut -- NANAE ------------------------------ From: David O. Rodriguez Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:59:41 -0500 Subject: NorVergence and the California Public Utilities Commission Pat, The following is an e-mail sent to me by Mr. Duane Filer, an Investigator for the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). I reported NorVergence's practices to the CPUC in person on mid November of 2003. Unfortunately, it seems to have sat somewhere within the CPUC until I decided to follow up with them in June of 2004. Then came July 1, 2004, and it was simply too late for them to do anything about it. It's best to read the bottom e-mail first. The attachment is enclosed. I hope you can read it as well. David From: Filer, Duane To: 'dor@writeme.com and NJ.com' Subject: RE: Check out this page on NJ.com Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 17:06:15 -0700 Mr. Rodriguez, Attached is an email I sent today to CPUC staff about Norvergence - it outlines about all we tell anycustomers who call us...rest assured, should any of the Norvergence execs try to start a company and do business again in California- we have requirements in place to check the "fitness" of companies applying for a certificate in California- and hopefully we can eliminate the bad companies before they get started. Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. You would make a good investigator! -----Original Message----- From: dor@writeme.com and NJ.com [mailto:dor@writeme.com] Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 1:09 PM To: DAF@cpuc.ca.gov Subject: Check out this page on NJ.com Dear Mr. Duane Filer: http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/business-0/1089878219230891.xml?starledger?btel David O. Rodriguez says: Mr. Filer, In a little less than one hour from when I send this e-mail to you, all NorVergence customers in California may lose their telephone service. Is there anything that can legally be done to stop the outage and/or to prosecute NorVergence's executives? David Norvergence, Inc. Gone belly up! I guess this is the best we can tell any customers that might call CAB: Norvergence filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy -- it has laid-off (fired) it's workers and gone out of business. Customers will need to obtain a new long distance carrier ... if they go on the internet and type in Norvergence in Google -- they will see websites of various carriers offering their services to Norvergence customers (one such website is www. t1price.net ) Unfortunately, we can't help them with any money they've lost for purchasing the 'matrix box' ... if they are leasing, we don't think legally they have to continue paying. The 'matrix box' is not compatible with any other long distance company -- so it is only good as a conversation piece :) (sorry about that.) Since Norvergence is broke, and we will be pulling their CPC&N customers should seek legal counsel if they have any further questions. I don't know what else to say ... If we hear of any class action suits or anything; we will let everyone know. If Norvergence is in fact bankrupt, they're not going to be able to hold people to the terms of a contract that they aren't delivering their end of the bargain on. These people should cease payment on their leases. As for what recourse they might have, I don't think we can offer them much. From: Filer, Duane Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 2:40 PM Subject: Norvergence, Inc. (U-6798) - Gone Belly up! An ex-employee of this IEC company, based in Newark, NJ (and has a CPCN in California), walked in our office late last month and gave us a horror story of how this company was ripping people off by offering a 'matrix box' that was suppose to eliminate all per-minute charges for local and long distance charges ... customers were leasing these boxes thru 5-year contracts; thing is, many of the boxes never worked, were never delivered, etc ... but the company that billed for them stated the signed contracts were valid -- and the customers would continue to owe the balance of the 5 year leased contracts ... before I could even begin to investigate, on 7/7 banks forced Norvergence to file involuntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy ... among other debts, they owe Qwest 13 million dollars!!! They fired all their staff and closed their offices -- but at least customers still had service. Then yesterday, they completely fell apart and were forced to file Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and as of last nite -- ALL THE PHONE LINES WERE DISCONNECTED. See the attached articles. Norvergence customers, about 10,000 nationwide and primarily small businesses -- are now left to migrate to other IEC's for service ... see the attached articles I got off the web. Now my question, CAB was aware I was gathering any CAB complaints to review...we only had 7 ... but now, California customers are starting to call CAB consultants and me ... the 'matrix boxes' the customers have either purchased or are still being charged for are worthless -- they are not compatable ... customers want to know if they have any recourse. I would assume they would have to get in line in bankruptcy court ... but the company is broke ... the ex-workers last pay checks bounced, etc ... What should CAB or any other staff being called tell any callers?? I don't thing there is anything we can do ... do they have any recourse? Do they need attornies? Help ... [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: However we did have a note here last week from a former customer of Norvergence who stated he spent several hours recently on the phone with technical people at Adtran (apparently the makers of the 'Norvergence Matrix box') who told him the matrix box was not *totally* useless, as Mr. Filer stated in one of his memos to Mr. Rodriguez. Apparently Norvergence boxes have their software locked up and a 'simple' unlocking procedure allows the box to be used with other carriers, much the same way that Vonage telephone adapters can be reprogrammed for other VOIP carriers **if -- and only if -- you know perfectly well what you are doing and promise not to have a complete hissy fit when the whole thing blows up in your face.** In other words, not 'totally useless' with other carriers but I would strongly suggest if you want to go that way, you get professional help from the Adtran people. And in the meantime, freeze all accounts payable to the outfits handling Norergence paper unless and until your attorney tells you otherwise. Do not fall for that old, stale, 'holder in due course' routine the lender/leasor tries to hand you. Your attorney needs to decide that. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <73115.1041@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Lingo v. Packet8 Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 17:38:36 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com seandarcy@hotmail.com (sean darcy) wrote: > I'm trying to decide between Packet8 and Lingo. My criteria are 1. > voice quality. 2. voice quality and 3. small adapter I can take with > me in briefcase. > I'd appreciate any comments on your experience with either. Can't speak to Lingo, as I have not tried it. My experience with Packet8 was good. I would grade the voice quality as better than cellular, not quite toll quality. That was over a 1500/384 DSL line - speed and latency will affect the connection quality. As with cell to cell calls, the multiple compression/decompression steps involved with calls to non-wireline devices. Packet8 does not support fax or data calls at this time. I have read reviews that suggest the AT&T service has very good quality, but have no direct experience to support that claim. Despite recent price reductions, AT&T is still more expensive. The Packet8 box is quite small -- about the size of an old external modem. It would certainly fit in a slim briefcase. A Google search on Packet8 should find earlier discussions that appeared here a few months back. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The Convention in 1904, One Hundred Years Ago Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:14:39 -0400 From: Carpenter, J > I have a suspicion that it's going to be worse than that. Madison > Square Garden (round by the way) is directly on top of Penn Station > -- the terminus for the Long Island Railroad. They are planning to > close ALL THE DAMN > EXITS EXCEPT FOR TWO on a building the size of a > midtown city block. In Boston, where the Democratic Convention is being held, I'm sure many commuters wish this is all they were doing. Fleet Center, where the convention will be, sits on top of North Station. For the week of the convention, they are closing the station completely. Commuters who take the train in will instead have to take busses from outlying stations where the trains will have their last stop. The subway stations that also stop in the Fleet Center area are also being closed completely. To make matters worse, Interstate 93 (the major north/south artery that was just buried as part of the "big dig") passes underground within several tens of feet from the Fleet Center. The Interstate is being closed completely during convention hours. To avoid clogging local streets, traffic is being detoured approximately 15 miles north and south of Boston. Finally, helicopter traffic is being banned, so all traffic reports will have to rely on fixed cameras and the drivers themselves. Anyone who can is avoiding Boston next week, either by taking vacation or working from home. Those who can't are working earlier hours or sleeping at the office. I think even the Mayor has advised people to avoid the city if they can. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Isn't it really bizzarre that an event like a political convention -- allegedly a democratic process -- and a 'public' event is totally closed to the general public? The Libertarian Party had their convention two weeks ago; anyone could go who wished to attend. Their electors (for the Electoral College) were appointed, their candidates chosen, etc. In years gone past, even with my libertarian leanings, I never voted for the Libertarian candidate; I knew it would be a wasted vote, and instead voted for the Demopublican or Republicratic candidate who was the least offensive to me, hoping that (least offensive of the bunch) person would get elected. I mentioned to someone the other day that I intended to vote for the Libertarian party candidate this time -- in other words, do the right thing this time around based on my conscience rather than expedience. She screamed at me and mocked me and said, "Well *thank you* for your vote assuring Bushitler gets re-elected." And she may be right, but at least I will vote as my conscience tells me is right for the first time in many years. 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: 620-402-0134 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 #341 ******************************