From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Aug 13 19:16:09 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.3) id i7DNG8k23874; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:16:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:16:09 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200408132316.i7DNG8k23874@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 #379 TELECOM Digest Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:15:00 EDT Volume 23 : Issue 379 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 3L-4N Cities, Exchange Names, Lettered Dials (Anthony Bellanga) Re: NorVergence is Having Popular Leasing Hound;Threaten Me (L Hancock) Re: VoIP Terms of Service May Surprise You (Frank@Nospam.com) OneSuite Now Available For Call Originating in Canada (Ray Normandeau) Re: Wardriving Guilty Plea in Lowe's Wi-Fi Case (Gordon S. Hlavenka) NBC Olympic Profits Seen Reaching $50 Million (Monty Solomon) Re: US West History (Tony P.) Some VoIP Calls Being Blocked (Jack Decker - VOIP News) Covad Tries an End Run (Jack Decker - VOIP News) 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: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 01:53:31 -0600 From: Anthony Bellanga Subject: 3L-4N Cities, Exchange Names, Lettered Dials Reply-To: anthonybellanga@gonetoearth.com To protect myself against spam, PLEASE do NOT show my email address! Paul Coxwell wrote regarding old London UK telephone exchange names: > London used a 3L-4N system, making the selection of suitable names > somewhat harder in later years than in U.S. cities with their 2L-5N > system. The list below represents the exchange names as they stood > immediately prior to the change to all-figure numbering. It is taken > from the GPO booklet "Dialling Instructions and Call Charges, London, > 1968." > Notice that at the time of the change many exchanges were assigned a > new prefix, while others retained their existing code, now expressed > as all digits. The list shows the new prefixes resulting from the > change to all-figure numbering. Note that on British dials the letter > "O" was located on the zero, with just "MN" on the digit 6. While > this removed any possible confusion between zero/letter-O, it also > meant that no exchange names starting with O could be employed. Prior to the implemntation of STD (Subscriber Trunk Dialling in the late 1950s or early 1960s, with "area codes" of the 0XX(X(etc)) format, the UK used '0' as a standalone digit code to reach the Operator, just like in the US and Canada. When STD Codes beginning with '0' came about, the local assistance operator in the UK was changed to '100'. (snip) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My thanks to Paul for this special > report which will be specifically filed in the Archives history area. > I should point out that Chicago, Illinois also used the 3L-4D method > of numbering until about 1950 when it changed to 2L-5D for about ten > years before going entirely 7-D. Thanks again, Paul. PAT] In the US, there were only a total of four major cities that ever used 3L-4N. There were none ever in Canada. New York City (changed to 2L-5N circa 1930/31) Philadelphia (changed to 2L-5N circa Summer 1946) Chicago (changed to 2L-5N circa 1948/49) Boston (changed to 2L-5N circa 1949) In the UK, there were six "director" urban areas that used full seven- dial-pull dialling/numbering, all listed as 3-4N, these six having '0N1' format STD codes of the 1960s/70s/80s/early 1990s: 01 London (which split into 071 and 081) 021 Birmingham 031 Edinburgh 041 Glasgow 051 Liverpool 061 Manchester And the only other place in the world I can think of that had 3L exchange names (and a last four digits, for a "7-dial-pull" number, 3L-4N) was Paris (FRANCE). In Paris, the numeral '0' had the letter 'O' (as in the United Kingdom) as well as the letter 'Q'. Since the Operator and other special service codes, back in the old Exchange Name days, were two-digit codes '1X' in France, there was no "conflict" with starting off an Exchange Name with the letter 'O' (or 'Q'), thus the first digit of the office code being '0'. Paris had exchange/office codes/names OPEra (073) and ODEon (033) among others. Other towns in the UK and France had LESS than 7 "digit" (dial-pull) numbering or dialing back then. While I don't think any other parts of the world ever had any 3L-4N numbering (or at least 3-letter Exchange Names), in Denmark (at least in Kobenhaven), the dial had 3-letters for most of the digits on the dial, just like in the US, Canada, UK (at least the "director" areas). and France (at least Paris). The lettering was slightly different than the North American and even UK/France dial: 1 = 'C' (for "Central" ??) 2 = A B D 3 = E F G 4 = H I K 5 = L M N 6 = O P R (individual letters, not an abbreviation for Operator) 7 = S T U 8 = W X Y 9 = AE, (shashed-O) 0 = 'HJAELP' ("help", for Police, Fire, Ambulance, etc) Other parts of the world, at one time or another prior to the 1960s/70s did have "Exchange Name" dialing, and lettered dials, but all I've seen is one-letter-per-digit dial faces, or dialing ONLY the FIRST letter of the Exchange Name. It was only Paris (FRANCE), the six "director" cities in the UK (London, Birmingham, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Liverpool, Manchester), and only those four major urban areas in the northeast/midwest US (New York City NY prior to 1930, Philadelphia PA prior to 1946, Chicago IL prior to 1948, Boston MA prior to 1949) that ever had 3L-4N numbering and dialing, as far as I can tell. Kobenhaven (Denmark) did have a three-letter-per- digit dial face, but they had less-than-seven-digit (dial-pulls) local numbers, and possibly exchange names using only the first letter of the name to be dialed. Other parts of the US (and Canada) may have had seven-digit (dial-pull) numbers but they were 2L-5N (and even the four 3L-4N cities changed to 2L-5N at the year indicated), or 2L-4N, 1L-4N, and other less-than-seven-digits (dial-pull) local numbering. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just like the earlier article this past week, this latest article will be put in the archives. Thanks to Anthony Bellanga for the submission. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: NorVergence is Having Popular Leasing Hound and Threaten Me Date: 13 Aug 2004 10:43:35 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com nospamwanted wrote > In theory, a business owner should be a bit more (intelligent? > knowledgeable?) than the small percentage of consumers who are at the > lower end of the IQ scale. Certainly, business owners should have > insisted on an escape clause, and rejected many of the (alleged) terms > of the lease. I hate knock people who may be facing a big financial loss, but I have to ask the same question: Why did people sign up on a long term lease without an escape clause? This wouldn't be for just telecom services, but any business service. I am not in a business, but to me, escape and redress (for bad service) clauses would be a basic part of any contract to protect yourself. As to leasing of any equipment or machinery, what is the recourse if the machinery turns out to be junk and unusable? What happens if the business changes and a particular machine is no longer needed? (I had a friend who leased some electronic equipment that he didn't really need. He had no escape clause and had to pay out the lease; but fortunately the payments weren't too bad a burden for him, though obviously he lost plenty of money.) >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is why I suggested the small >> business owner *freeze all accounts payable to Norvergence and Scam >> Associates* and mitigate their own losses by paying **nothing** until >> instructed to do so by a court or their attorney. PAT] I definitely agree to that. > As the questionable practices started to become public, a few people > called. I mentioned the lease, and they were not concerned by it, > they were only concerned with saving money. One guy was more > concerned by the fact that he had to act within the week or he'd have > to wait another three months. Again, I'm surprised. Any business offer of "act now or you lose" is usually too good to be true. > I don't have as much sympathy for the guys who signed the leases as > you do. These people should have read the leases, and should have > been able to understand them. If they rejected Norvergence's offer > entirely, the worst that would have happened would have been that they > continued to pay for telecom services at their existing rate. Instead > the customers were also motivated by greed. Again I feel bad for people who may lose a lot of money, but I do have to agree with the above. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But I tend to support the little guy. PAT] I do too and I don't want to blame the victim. Owning a business involves risk and responsibility, more than if you work for someone else. The payoff is the potential to make much more money from your business if it succeeds. Anybody in business has to have a good understanding of their suppliers--to ensure they will be able deliver the contracted services and products as expected. Suppliers do screw up for all sorts of reasons. I know of several builders who had long excellent track records, but fouled up big time on the last project screwing their customers. The point is that business people must be agile and always ready for an alternative plan if a supplier screws up (or if the market changes). When IBM was building its early tube-based computers, it found that radio tubes then used weren't good enough for digital work and everything was held up. IBM set up a lab to test tubes and considered making them themselves. In the end it showed tube makers how to get the quality required and the new computers were built. ------------------------------ From: Frank@Nospam.com Subject: Re: VoIP Terms of Service May Surprise You Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:36:49 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications A person with manners and common sense has nothing to concern them with such language. As a matter of law, Vonage has that ability in any case. It's the rude and abusive folks out there that cause such language to become a part of that service agreement. Dave Garland wrote: > "If you are thinking of ditching a land-line for a VOIP provider such as > Vonage or Net2Phone, you might want to think again. Software 'End User > license Agreements' have gotten a lot of attention in the past over > their onerous and restrictive terms, but who would expect such things > from your phone company? The prime example is Vonage, which states among > other things that 'If Vonage, in its sole discretion believes that you > have violated the above restrictions, Vonage may forward the > objectionable material, as well as your communications with Vonage and > your personally identifiable information to the appropriate authorities > for investigation and prosecution and you hereby consent to such > forwarding.'" > (Slashdot article with discussion in the customary food-fight fashion) > http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/10/0023210&tid=158&tid=215&tid=126&tid=218 ------------------------------ From: rayta@msn.com (Ray Normandeau) Subject: OneSuite Now Available for Call Originating in Canada Date: 13 Aug 2004 10:43:40 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Onesuite now available for calls FROM Canada. See https://www.onesuite.com/ Long distance at MAXIMUM 2.9 Cents Per Minute for intra-USA calls. USA-Canada for 3.5CPM. If you don't use the 800# access, rate is even cheaper; E.G.:USA-Canada 1.9CPM! It is basically a prepaid phone card but you can do away with the PIN for calls from home. Program it as a speed dial, you don't even have to remember their access #. No monthly fee or minimum. There is a surchage for calls from payphones. Apparently there is NO PAYPHONE SURCHARGE if you are calling FROM CANADA. If you use the promotion code "034720367" we both get some free miniutes. We have it programmed into our cell phones for international calls. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:41:33 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: Re: Wardriving Guilty Plea in Lowe's Wi-Fi Case Jack wrote: > Personally, I like the security of wired networks, and wonder why any > retail establishment would ever use wireless in the first place -- are > they just too lazy/cheap to run networking cable to their cash > registers? Yesterday I bought a TV set at the local Target store. There was a demo unit on the shelf, and the salesguy "shot" the tag with his handheld wireless barcode scanner and immediately knew that there was another one in stock, and exactly where it was in the back room. Could he do this without wireless? Sure -- several ways I can think of, but none as convenient and efficient as using a handheld scanner with a wireless link to the store database. Using a wireless LAN for cash registers allows the store to set up kiosks, do sidewalk sales, and so on without having to run cables or settle for non-realtime data. I do feel a store is responsible for securing their data, however it's being slopped around the premises. Legally there are different "levels of care" that a business is required to observe when in custody of a customer's property. For example, they have little responsibility to guard your wallet if you leave it on a display case and drive home. But they are held to a higher standard if you've left the wallet with them for monogramming. Seems to me (IANAL, of course) that your credit information should be treated as "property" that requires a fairly high standard of care while in the custody of the merchant. Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com "If we imagined he could _find_ the car, we could pretend it might be fixed." - Calvin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:20:08 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: NBC Olympic Profits Seen Reaching $50 Million LOS ANGELES, Aug 13 (Reuters) - NBC could reap as much $50 million in profits from its coverage of the Athens Olympics that began on Friday, putting it roughly in line with the 2000 Sydney games but off the pace of the more recent Winter Olympics, sources familiar with NBC's plans said. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=43108228 ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: US West History Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:30:54 GMT In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says: > Doug Faunt N6TQS wrote: >> Am I correct in believing that US West was one of the "baby bells"? > I recommend the book "Muttering Machines to Laser Beams" by Herbert > Hackenburg Jr, published by Mountain Bell. While primarily a history > of Mountain Bell, it is also a good history of the Bell System. A > good book. > It has a particularly good account of nonsense frustrations the plant > people had to go through to divy up between Bell and AT&T at the time > of divesture. Marking tape ran literally through switching frames. I knew someone who worked for New England Telephone at the time. He was telling me how they had to determine the demarcation between the local network and long distance network. In Providence (PRVDRIWADS0) it was fairly easy because at the time AT&T had all their TD-2 microwave gear in the blockhouse at the top of the building. Today I was at a building whose windows looked at the empty towers that used to hold those TD-2 horns. I do note however that the block is now studded with 1/2 and full wave vertical dipoles. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 18:13:59 -0400 From: Jack Decker Subject: Some VoIP Calls Being Blocked http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-5307232.html By Ben Charny and Robert Lemos CNET News.com Some broadband customers who use the Internet for phone conversations are complaining that their incoming calls are being blocked. The problem, which surfaced about two weeks ago, apparently prevents some Net phone users who are also broadband customers of Adelphia Communications, Citizens Communications' Frontier and various rural cable providers from receiving calls, according to sources familiar with the situation. A handful of AT&T's CallVantage Net phone subscribers are among those affected. "We are seeing, sporadically, some instances of blocking by some cable company networks," AT&T spokesman Gary Morgenstern said. Full story at: http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-5307232.html 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/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 18:13:32 -0400 From: Jack Decker Subject: Covad Tries an End Run http://news.com.com/Covad+tries+an+end+run/2100-1034_3-5306231.html By Jim Hu Kicked around for years by regulators and local phone giants, broadband pioneer Covad is taking its future into its own hands. Covad -- one of the few start-ups to survive the telecom shakeout -- on Tuesday said it had begun selling Internet phone service to customers in 42 cities. At first glance the announcement read like another product release, but Covad's entry into the VoIP (voice over Internet Protocol) market underscores the company's efforts to preserve its future as its present business is threatened by an uncertain regulatory landscape. Born from the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Covad has made a strong run at selling broadband DSL access to consumers and small companies. But much of this consumer business is in jeopardy because parts of the Telecom Act are being dismantled. "The problem for Covad is they've been a regulatory football," said Scott Cleland, chief executive at market research firm Precursor Group. Covad's rise, fall and resurgence mirror the convoluted course of the nation's telecommunications laws. The Telecom Act, which forced the Baby Bell phone companies to lease their copper lines to start-ups at regulated rates, allowed Covad to tap into the growing demand for fast Internet access. The Federal Communications Commission hoped the Telecom Act would allow a hundred start-ups to blossom on the backs of the Baby Bells' copper wire networks. But the Bells, which built these networks, were not happy about it and complained to regulators that supporting these start-ups hurt their businesses. Eight years later, the pendulum is swinging favorably for the Bells, a group that includes SBC Communications, Verizon Communications and BellSouth. Many of the rules spelled out by the Telecom Act are in preliminary stages of elimination. Most pressing for Covad is the threat to pull back "line sharing" and to remove regulated lease rates for third parties. If line sharing disappears, Covad would have to hike prices for new DSL customers. Full story at: http://news.com.com/Covad+tries+an+end+run/2100-1034_3-5306231.html ------------------------------ 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 #379 ******************************