From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jul 22 17:36:56 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.3) id i6MLaun28119; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 17:36:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 17:36:56 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200407222136.i6MLaun28119@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 #346 TELECOM Digest Thu, 22 Jul 2004 17:36:00 EDT Volume 23 : Issue 346 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Norvergence/Adtran Magic Box Costs $2,297.40 (William Van Hefner) Meridian Norstar - Caller ID Install For Only One Line (Rich) Conference Bridge, Conference Over SONET (hitesh) Re: Wireless Tower Suppliers (Jack Adams) Re: Power of the Net in Next Election (Robert Bonomi) Re: Power of the Net in Next Election (Linc Madison) Re: Truth or Fiction? Osama Found Hanged (David Horvath) Re: Verizon as Local Telephone Provider?? (Lisa Hancock) Re: Verizon Fios - Fiber-to-the-Premises Network (Steven J Sobol) Re: Motorola and AT&T Wireless Bringing 3G/UMTS to North America (Paul) Re: AT&T Wireless Delivers 3G UMTS Service in The United States (Paul) Re: Phone for Noisy Environment (Justin Time) Last Laugh! Let Diety Sort it Out (David Wolff) 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: William Van Hefner Subject: Norvergence/Adtran Magic Box Costs $2,297.40 Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 08:57:54 -0700 The Norvergence saga is in low gear right now, while bankruptcy proceedings have been rescheduled for Monday the 26th of July. Some of the interesting developments I have noticed this past week include the fact that Norvergence's own attornies have filed to be released from their duties. That's pretty bad, when even your own lawyers abandon you. There was also a VERY interesting document submitted to the court from Adtran, manufacturers of Norvergence's magic "Matrix device". Although the document is a very bad reproduction, from what I have been able to make of it, it seems that the Norvergence Matrix device had a wholesale value of approximately $2,297.40. That's a far cry from the $15,000 to $25,000 that customers were reportedly asked to pay for it. There is no mention of what the Norvergence "SOHO" box cost. I'd be shocked if that thing had a wholesale value of over $100 though. You can download the Adtran filing and other court documents at http://www.thedigest.com/docs/norvergence/ . I'm trying to keep this archive as up to date as possible, and upload new docs several times per week. Pretty much every document from the bankruptcy case is there, with the exception of some useless stuff like proof of service statements and such. William Van Hefner Editor - WWW.TheDigest.Com postmaster@thedigest.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Did the attornies give a reason for thier request to be dismissed? I imagine one reason was they were unable to interview "Mr. Green" as attornies sometimes refer to their fee. No fee paid, i.e. 'no interview with Mr. Green' and they ask to withdraw. Often times also, in a bankruptcy case, the attorney asks to be declared a priority (or administrative creditor) so that he himself does not have to get in line with the other creditors to pick through the remains. I cannot imagine any other aspect of Norvergence's behavior was so henious that a lawyer somewhere would not want to handle it. Not getting the fee paid would be a problem however in a straight chapter 7. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rich@virtuallearning.net (Rich) Subject: Meridian Norstar - Caller ID Install For Only One Line Date: 22 Jul 2004 08:59:35 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hello, I have eight(8) lines coming into my Meridian phone system. The 8th line is going directly to a phone set bypassing the Vmail and the Autoattendant. The user of the phone set wants Caller ID. I have called the BELL and had them install it on the line. However, I can't seem to get Call ID/Call Display to work on the set. I have used Feature 811 but it only shows me the name of the line that the incoming call is using. I don't know how to set the Call ID/Call Display in the Admin Console for Meridian. Can anyone help me out? Thanks, Rich ------------------------------ From: hitesh@ossi.co.in (hitesh) Subject: Conference Bridge, Conference Over SONET Date: 21 Jul 2004 05:14:11 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, Can anyone tell me how a conference bridge works? I want to establish a conference call using orderwire byte of the SONET frame, any idea?? How to do it? Also any devices for such application? I want to set up a conference call over SONET/SDH network using the "section orederwire byte(E1)". In order to do that it is required to add two voice siganls a)incoming voice of all other nodes (conferee) b)outgoing voice at that node. So, I wanted to know how the digital conference bridges work. a) how is the echo cancellation done? b) how overflow is avoided during the addition? c) are there any small bridges available? and their details? Or any info over the matter. Thanks, Warm regards, hitesh ------------------------------ From: adamsjac@telcordia.com (Jack Adams) Subject: Re: Wireless Tower Suppliers Date: 22 Jul 2004 13:50:32 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com For starters, you might try: http://www.pcia.com/ Since it's an industry infrastructure association, I'd begin there. However, I'm not sure about Asia PAC. http://www.antennasystems.com/towers.html Is typical of the domestic companies supplying structures. tristanhunt777@hotmail.com (Tristan Hunt) wrote in message news:: > Can anyone point me in the direction of any manufacturers/suppliers of > mobile phone / wireless telecommunications towers (of the galvanized > steel variety) located in China or another Far East country? > I figured with all the towers that have sprung up across China in the > past 10 years, someone has to be achieving economies of scale there. > The project is physically located in the Eastern Hemisphere, and > reliability with respect to timing & quality as well as low costs are > our primary concern. Thanks. ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: Power of the Net in Next Election From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 15:44:26 +0000 In article , Dave Close wrote: > Wesrock@aol.com writes: >> As someone noted on another list, the Congress sets the dates for >> elections, not the Constitution, which says in Article II, Section 1: >> "The Congress may determine the time of >> chusing [sic] the Electors, and the Day >> on which they shall give their Votes; >> which Day shall be the same throughout >> the United States." >> Note that both the date of the election, and the date on which the >> Electoral College will meet, are designated by Congress. > A quibble. In most or all States, electors are not directly > chosen. The State legislature must actually elect the electors at some > time after the election, In most, if not every, State, the legislature has, *long*before* November, _adjourned_ until January. The electors are certified directly by the election commission, and the tally is confirmed by the Secretary of State, just like the results for any other office on the ballot. > and it may be that date to which the above sentence refers. If that > interpretation held, Since Federal Statute _expressly_ sets the date of the 'general election' for members of the House, Senate, and electors for President, > it might be possible to hold elections on different dates in various > States, so long as the official confirmation of the results occurred > at the same time everywhere. > No where that I know actually lists the electors on the ballot. That > lists the persons those electors are committed to support, leading > many to believe erroneously that there is such a thing as a popular > vote. Try reading the _fine_print_ on the ballot. In the jurisdictions I am familiar with -- which is, admittedly, _not_ every one -- the ballot line reads something close to: 'Elector for Richard M. Nixon/Spiro T. Agnew, John Q. Smith'. With 'elector for' and the actual person's name being in type about 1/2 the size (or less) of that of the Candidates. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Power of the Net in Next Election Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:56:17 -0700 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed In article , Daniel W. Johnson wrote: > Linc Madison wrote in message > news:: >> However, theoretically, Bill Clinton could be elected VP and then >> become President. > I think that in this particular case, the last sentence of the twelfth > amendment might come into play. Thank you for conveniently ignoring the fact that I already dealt with that exact point in the very same post you are responding to. The Twelfth Amendment says, "But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States." Bill Clinton is ineligible to be *ELECTED* President again, courtesy of the Twenty-Second Amendment. However, he is *NOT* ineligible to *SERVE* as President. Those criteria remain as in Article II, Section 1. Bill Clinton is a natural-born citizen over the age of 35, and has resided in the United States for 14 years. The 22nd is very specific in only excluding certain people from being *ELECTED* President. Bill Clinton could serve as President if he is elevated to the office by succession from the office of Vice-President, Speaker of the House, President Pro Tempore of the Senate, or Secretary of one of the cabinet departments. Of course, it's all a purely theoretical discussion, since it doesn't have a chance of ever actually happening. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * lincmad@suespammers.org * primary e-mail: Telecom at LincMad dot com All U.S. and California anti-spam laws apply, incl. CA BPC 17538.45(c) This text constitutes actual notice as required in BPC 17538.45(f)(3). DO NOT SEND UNSOLICITED E-MAIL TO THIS ADDRESS. You have been warned. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:48:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Truth or Fiction? Osama Found Hanged From: David B. Horvath, CCP Reply-To: dhorvath@cobs.com On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 14:24:38 GMT, PeterReid@columbia.edu posted: > http://www.theparadise.x-y.net/OsamaFoundDead.zip > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why does this remind me of all the > stories about Adolph Hitler committing suicide in 1945 as USA > troops closed in on him and then a couple years later, around 1947 > or so the rumors about Hitler escaping and being seen in Brazil > and other South American countries. Of course no one has ever been > able to prove it true, nor have any if the people who saw him in > Brazil ever been identified either. I wonder if this Osama Bin Laden > story -- which came to me several times today, reminiscent of spam -- > will now be spread forever. Anyone want to see if that 'OsamaFound > Dead.zip' link is in fact some virus in waiting? PAT] The .zip contains a .exe (no .jpg, or .gif or .bmp or ...). I got rid of the .zip without running the .exe. Unless proven otherwise. I assume that this is a virus. Please don't publish my email address (too much spam); name is fine. - David ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Verizon as Local Telephone Provider?? Date: 22 Jul 2004 08:10:42 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com jjk2c@netzero.com (jjk2c) wrote: > I will be moving to southern Illinois soon. It is my understanding > that my new local phone provider is Verizon. Does anyone know if the > phone service have been deregulated there yet? Verizon is way too big to make generalizations about. As Pat said, you have to be more specific. Also Verizon includes former 'independent' GTE customers. I suspect that is the arrangement where you're going since it's not SBC (Illinois Bell). Much local service today is under the same rates/rules it's been for many years with just minor modifications. As to choosing a carrier and a calling plan (most carriers have multiple plans), it depends on your individual calling patterns. For myself, for example, I have a very traditional plan that is not cheap; but for my particular situation, the new super plans (ie nationwide unlimited service) would end up costing me more. > However, neither one is able to verify my address on their website so > that I can set up service. I would strongly recommend you talk to _all_ carriers directly rather than using their websites. Websites are imperfect. Sadly, today you may need to make multiple phone calls to be certain you have the correct information. > So that leads me back to my original question. Does anyone know if I > am going to be stuck with Verizon, or do I have any other options? I > have Verizon for my cell phone, and I think they are pretty good for a > cell phone, but I think their local service is just a little bit > ridiculous. You also will have check the cell phone rules in your new location; the plans may be different. Again, the best plan depends on your own calling situation. As to your question of deregulation, that varies by state. In my state, Verizon has deregulated some premium services and I think business service, though basic residential remains regulated. All I know is when they got deregulated, the prices shot UP. Return call (*69) went from 25c to 75c. Call Waiting went from $3.00 to $4.50. Payphones went from 20c to 50c. Toll calls from payphones, even with a calling call are like $25. ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Verizon Fios - Fiber-to-the-Premises Network Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 00:51:45 -0500 Mark Atwood wrote: > Plus the big MSOs are looking at the same thing. The economics of it > are such that it's probable that in a few years, all new cable > installs will be glass, all upgrades of existing plant will be to > glass, and the existing coax will be either abandoned or replaced > piecemeal. I'm paying $39.95 per month for 3MB down/256K up Charter Pipeline cable Internet right now. (And getting those speeds, too, as I live in a relatively unpopulated area.) You'd better believe the cable companies are going to be doing the same thing. I mean, come on, cable operators were laying fiber for residential customers long before phone companies were. :) > It wont kill the MSOs, just like it wont kill the ILECs. They will > just end up truely being in exactly the same business, providing > exactly the same service, pretty much exactly the same way. Yeah, well ... all other things being equal I'd rather be a cable customer than a telco customer any day. Telcos are stupid AND malicious. Cable companies are usually just stupid. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: Paul Subject: Re: Motorola and AT&T Wireless Bringing 3G/UMTS to North America Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 11:45:55 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Can someone clarify, isn't UMTS the EDGE technology ATTWS has already rolled out? I thought EDGE currently is only about 115Kbps and might max out practically speaking at 230Kbps if they allocate enough "slots" per user at the tower (which has been debated may not happen for a long time for various technical and business reasons) When I did research on this a couple months ago, from what I read about EDGE on ATT's own customer forums, the initial implementation does not sound good (slow and buggy). And I sure don't consider 115K exactly "broadband"... -- Paul Monty Solomon wrote in message news:telecom23.342.13@telecom-digest.org.: > Motorola and AT&T Wireless Bringing 3G/UMTS to North America > - Jul 20, 2004 11:57 AM (PR Newswire) > Consumers Gain Mobile Broadband Capabilities -- Video Streaming*, > High-Resolution Imagery and Rich Data Experiences -- via New A845 Handset > Network Launch Expands Motorola Lead in 3G/UMTS > LIBERTYVILLE, Ill., July 20 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Motorola, Inc. > (NYSE:MOT), a global leader in wireless communications, and AT&T > Wireless (NYSE:AWE) today announced the availability of the Motorola > A845 on North America's first 3G/UMTS network. The launch of AT&T > Wireless' network and the availability of the model A845 makes mobile > broadband a reality in the United States. Delivering higher speeds > than ever before, the AT&T Wireless 3G/UMTS network paired with the > Motorola A845 brings consumers richer data experiences including video > streaming*, video capture and playback, MP3 downloading and > multi-media messaging. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=42603232 ------------------------------ From: Paul Subject: Re: AT&T Wireless Delivers 3G UMTS Service in The United States Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 12:45:19 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com For those that are interested, ATTWS customer forum, and thread on UMTS is located here: http://forums.attwireless.com/attws/board?board.id=umts The "sticky" message at the top of the thread re "UMTS launches today" explains the offering more in depth. -- Paul "Monty Solomon" wrote in message news:telecom23.342.12@telecom-digest.org... > Working with NTT DoCoMo, Company Launches Commercial 3G Service in > Four Cities Provides Streaming Video Services > > Gives Businesses High-Speed Mobile Data Access > > SEATTLE, July 20 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- AT&T Wireless (NYSE:AWE) > today began offering customers in Detroit, Phoenix, San Francisco and > Seattle broadband mobile wireless services with its launch of the > first commercially available true 3G UMTS (Universal Mobile > Telecommunications System) network in the United States. The company > said it is also deploying UMTS technology in Dallas and San Diego, and > expects to offer service in these markets before the end of this year. > > AT&T Wireless said its wireless broadband service turns these markets > into "metropolitan hotspots," offering customers continuous, > high-speed wireless connections. Customers can now use a handset, PDA > or laptop to receive streaming audio and video services; create and > share video clips; experience richer and more visually compelling > content; and connect to critical business information, in most areas > throughout these cities. The company also noted that it launched > commercial service in these four cities in fulfillment of NTT DoCoMo's > shareholder rights agreement. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=42602512 ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Phone for Noisy Environment Date: 22 Jul 2004 12:27:01 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com J Kelly wrote in message news:: > Can anyone recommend a GOOD quality phone for use in a noisy > environment? Most phones sold today are total pieces of crap. > Requirements are a volume control for the earpiece, be able to > withstand a reasonable amount of abuse (dropping the handset, etc, not > purposely abusing it), works with a POTS line, and hopefully costs > less than $50. Don't need speaker phone, memory dialing, etc, but > some of that might be nice, as would be noise cancelling. This is > used in an area that has a lot of very large fans and motors running > making a lot of noise. Even the 'office area' in this facility has a > lot of noise and I'm half deaf besides. > Thanks. The best answer for you is a headset. Lots of cabled headsets are available that will work in your price range, but you will probably want one with a noise-cancelling microphone if the noise level is such that can be heard over a normal phone. The Plantronics line is probably the best known, and its available from a great many distributors. Some of the headsets have volume controls, some are in-the-ear and some are over the ear. How much do you want to spend? ------------------------------ From: dwolffxx@panix.com (David Wolff) Subject: Re: NYS AG Spitzer Settles With "optinrealbig.com" Spammer Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 18:35:20 UTC Organization: Public Access Networks Corp. In article , Scott Dorsey wrote: > A correction in something I wrote here: in article > , Scott Dorsey > wrote: >> In article , Danny Burstein >> wrote: [snip] >> Something? This is nothing. Why is this man not being locked in jail >> for God's sake? Between he and Richter, they are probably responsible >> for 50% of the total incoming mail I see on my servers. > Err ... between he and RALSKY, sorry. Brain jammed. Who cares. Decapitate them all. Let sort them out. Death to spammers -- David ------------------------------ 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 #346 ******************************