From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Oct  1 23:28:46 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id i923SkD13531;
	Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:28:46 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:28:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200410020328.i923SkD13531@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 #463

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:28:00 EDT    Volume 23 : Issue 463

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Microsoft Vows Fight on Patent Rejection (Lisa Minter)
    Re: Voicepulse Disconnects Remote Computers When Phone is Used (jdj)
    Re: Wrong Address For 911 Caller a Tragic Ordeal (Tony P.)
    Re: Mount St. Helens Erupts After 18 Years (Clarence Dold)
    Re: Mount St. Helens Erupts After 18 Years (Marcus Jervis)
    Re: Lawsuit in Colorado Over Rerouted 911 (David)
    FCC Nears Cingular, AT&T Decision (Lisa Minter)
    Red Hat Buys Technology From Netscape (Lisa Minter)

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: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Microsoft Vows Fight on Patent Rejection
Date: Fri,  1 Oct 2004 15:41:41 EDT


By ALLISON LINN, AP Business Writer

SEATTLE -

In a preliminary ruling, the government rejected Microsoft Corp.'s
1996 patent on technology for saving files on computers using
easy-to-remember names.

Microsoft vowed Thursday to appeal the U.S. Patent and Trademark
Office's decision, setting the stage for what could be long-running
negotiations. The office could eventually decide to reject it
outright, let it stand or change its scope.

The patent covers technology widely used on computers running
Microsoft's Windows operating system. In more recent years, it has
also been used for naming files from devices that work with Windows,
like digital cameras and portable music players.

The patent is part of what Microsoft says is its implementation of a
broader system used to store computer files, called File Allocation
Table, or FAT. But Microsoft does not claim control over the entire
FAT system.

"We have some rights, but no one person has firm, strong control over
all aspects of FAT," said David Kaefer, director of business
development for Microsoft's intellectual property and licensing unit.

Late last year, Microsoft began asking companies to buy licenses to
use its implementations of the FAT system, including licensing the
patent that was preliminarily rejected.

The move raised concerns that the company would discriminate against
those who develop open-source technology, restricting their ability to
compete on the widely used Windows platform, said Daniel Ravicher,
head of the Public Patent Foundation. His organization, backed by the
open-source movement, asked that the patent be re-examined.

Kaefer said Microsoft would grant the licenses to those who use
open-source technology, albeit with slightly different terms.

Greg Aharonian, a patent critic who runs the Internet Patent News
Service, believes the patent will likely end up rejected given so much
evidence the technology in question is widely used.

"It's like getting a patent on cheesecake," he said.

But he doesn't believe a rejection would have any major business or
financial impact on the company because it doesn't pose a serious
threat to cash cows like Windows or the Office business software.

Nonetheless, in cases like this, where an outside group initiates the
re-examination request, the most common outcome is that the patent is
ultimately changed but not rejected outright, patent office
spokeswoman Brigid Quinn said.


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

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

From: jdj <jdj@now.here>
Subject: Re: Voicepulse Disconnects Remote Computers When Phone is Used
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 16:48:02 -0700
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 16:04:27 -0400, Chris Eilersen wrote:

> Does anyone have any ideas why this is happening and what I can do to
> fix it?

Seems your phone may be hogging all the network bandwidth.

It also sounds like a router firmware and/or a windows driver
problem. It may also be a router config problem.

Linksys may have updated the router firmware and windows drivers since
you got your system.

Linksys may also have FAQ or knowledgebase info on this. You might
also ask Voicepulse whether they have heard of this before.

Don't expect to talk to anyone at Linksys. Seems no one is home any
more.  If you do get someone there, then you will be one of the
luckiest people around.

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.verizon.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Wrong Address For 911 Caller a Tragic Ordeal
Organization: ATCC
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 23:56:37 GMT


In article <telecom23.462.5@telecom-digest.org>, 
sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com says:

> Tony P. wrote:

>> This is going to force VoIP carriers to figure out how to deal with 911 
>> routing in a big old hurry. 

>> For the life of me, I cannot understand why they just can't use GPS and 
>> then do a database dip to route to the correct entity. 

> How would you propose installing a GPS device that works in
> determining the specific location of phone using Voice Over IP?  With
> wireless you have a transceiver that is either outdoors and can 'see'
> GPS satellites, or is indoors but can be triangulated (we hope) from
> cellular base stations with known fixed locations.  With VoIP on the
> other hand, I can plug the terminal into any number of ethernet ports,
> but most are indoors where GPS signals can't reach.

> E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
> Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

Suction cup mounted antenna in the nearest southwest facing
window. Put solar cells on the thing to keep it charged and hell, use
bluetooth or 802.11 for it to transmit it's location.

Not hard at all. 

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

From: dold@XReXXMount.usenet.us.com
Subject: Re: Mount St. Helens Erupts After 18 Years
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 22:40:00 UTC
Organization: a2i network


Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Mount St. Helens, the volcano that blew its top with cataclysmic force
> in 1980, erupted for the first time in 18 years Friday, belching a
> huge column of white steam and ash after days of rumblings.

I drove to Mt. St. Helens in 1989.  As you drive in last few miles,
you see the mountain now and then, and then lose sight of it on the
windy road.But you don't lose your sense of direction.  Thousands of
trees, like toothpicks, all point toward (or away from) the crater.
Acres and acres of that was more impressive than the crater itself,
where we weren't allowed to get very close.

GPS: 46.19, -122.2
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/recenteqsUS/Quakes/uw10010614.htm


Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA  38.8-122.5

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For people who wish to see an
absolutely breathtaking view of Mount St. Helens, I recommend taking
a look at http://www.fs.fed.us/gpnf/volcanocams/msh which operates
24 hours per day snapping new pictures at five minute intervals. Very
unfortunatly, during the Friday afternoon action, the servers were
so overloaded it was very difficult to get through. After the
immmediate action was over it was easier to reach the page. Be sure
to clean your cache at least every five minutes unless your computer
will do that automatically. 

For those of us who have been more provincial in recent years --
seldom getting more than a mile or two from our homes -- *good* web
cams are the next best thing to being there in person. Oh, 35-40 years
ago I traveled everywhere; would fly to New York City for a weekend of
shopping, touring, etc, then a month or so later I'd be in San
Francisco for several days at a time. I still remember quite well one
trip I made (via San Franciso to Seattle, then onward to Vancouver and
Victoria, BC, winding up in northern BC for a few days and riding in 
a rented car with a friend from northern BC back to Chicago traveling
across southern Canada to Windsor, Ontario then dropping back into the
USA at Detroit. Those good times are long over for me; now I must 
content myself with looking at the three thousand or so constantly
changing images in the Web Cam Watcher software program. :(     PAT]

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

From: Marcus Jervis <marcusjervis@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Mount St. Helens Erupts After 18 Years
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 23:05:51 +0000


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As this issue of the Digest was being
> edited and getting ready for release, the thing everyone has been
> expecting for several days finally happened: Mount St. Helens blew her
> stack, spewing ashes and hot lava everywhere in the vicinity of
> Vancouver, WA. The seismic activity in California over the past few
> days was a good indicator something was about to happen. Officially,
> I guess, the eruption started at 12:45 PM Pacific time, and lasted

No, no no.

There is no lava.  Vancouver, WA, across the river from Portland,
Oregon, is not covered with ash.  The mountain shot off some steam for
about 25 minutes.  The mountain did not blow her stack.

There was no lava flow during the big eruption in 1980, but lots of
ash spread over downwind communities.  At that time the bulk of the
airborn ash landed to the southeast.  University of Washington
geophysicists have also said that there is no connection between the
volcano activity and the seismic activity in California.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My note quoted the Associated Press
article which Lisa Minter printed in full. Some of the related
articles (which we did not print here) had geophysicists stating that
much of the seismic activity *was* due to the volcano planning to
erupt. The AP article used the phrase 'she blew her stack' and
'although mostly hot boiling water and steam, a little debris also
shot out.' It was quite an exciting afternoon, if the amount of
network congestion at volcanocams was any indicator. 

A local newspaper in the area talked about it some also today, and
you may wish to read it:

http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20040929/topstories/445.shtml

PAT]

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

From: David <FlyLikeAnEagle@United.Com>
Reply-To: FlyLikeAnEagle@United.Com
Subject: Re: Lawsuit in Colorado Over Rerouted 911
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 02:34:00 GMT


Hello everyone,

My comments are inline.

On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 19:08:18 UTC, Rick Merrill <RickMerrill@comTHROW.net> 
wrote:

> Carl Moore wrote:

>> There are other readers more knowledgeable than I on this, but I have
>> learned of a lawsuit (by a woman in the Denver area) over a wrong
>> address for home telephone number.

> My local E911 dispatcher acknowledges that CallVantage will not give
> them the info needed to work with their equipment. In other words,
> although the land lines have E911, and cell phones are supposed to
> soon, VoIP does not have the capability and it is not on the
> horizon. 

> Tony P. wrote:

>>> <snip>

>> This is going to force VoIP carriers to figure out how to deal with 911 
>> routing in a big old hurry. 

I work on parts of the "911 problem".  The VOIP Systems are not part
of the PTSN (Public Telephone System) and claim they should not be
regulated as phone companies.  A few are growing up, but slowly.  It's
not a hard problem to solve.  I've seen several good solutions and
came up with another after reading this post.

I'm not sure why CallVantage didn't know where the caller was; they
did.  It's always sad when the left hand doesn't know what the right
hand is doing.

Even in the cellular world, the problem wasn't that hard.  Phones are
starting to get GPS locations.  It's a start.  Even with GPS Phones,
sometimes the 911 center has to call the cell company to get your
location.

The sad part of the 911 system is that it was built on incomplete and
partial standards.  That left the dozens of telephone providers to
create their own solutions.  Making a change to your landline's
location during a move across town may take your provider a few
minutes, days, or longer to actually make it to the 911 center.  There
isn't much agreement on what is an important update period.  The
Canadian system is a bit more reliable and requires an update period
of a few hours nation wide.  I've not heard how they handle the move
request though, perhaps it still take a while to hit their national
update system.
 
>> For the life of me, I cannot understand why they just can't use GPS and 
>> then do a database dip to route to the correct entity. 

> You must be thinking cellphone. But a telephone adapter (TA) for VoIP
> can be moved to another location, even across country, plugged into
> broadband and it should work.  THe USER must access the company
> database and change their address.  Even then it will not work the
> same way that cell phones work (or will work).

True, but there are ways to handle that most of the time.  The
networking people just need to get with the phone people and get a
solution made.  I don't think they are trying.

I also read fairly often that those 911 Surcharges you pay on your
monthly cell and landlines don't always get into funding the 911
system.  I've never been thrilled with lawmakers creating taxes and
then mis-spending the money.
 
> But I certain agree that this problem needs to be solved and soon. - RM

I agree.  There are so many problems with the 911 system.  At least it
is there.  Many countries are not working that hard, though a few may
be doing better.

David

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

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: FCC Nears Cingular, AT&T Decision
Date: Fri,  1 Oct 2004 15:40:27 EDT


by Ron Orol in Washington

Federal Communications Commission member Kathleen Abernathy said
Thursday, Sept. 30, that the agency will rule on Cingular Wireless LLC
$41 billion acquisition of AT&T Wireless Services Inc. in the next few
weeks.

Speaking to reporters, Abernathy said that while agency staff have yet
to circulate a draft order among the commissioners, it would be
"weeks, not months, before the FCC completes action on the
merger. That suggests the companies remain on track to close the deal
in October.

Abernathy said FCC commissioners expect to receive a formal
recommendation from the agency's wireless telecom bureau in the next
few days, which they will then begin reviewing.

"It's a very complex merger," she said. "We will need to take time to
understand how the analysis was developed and what the conditions
are."

Observers do not expect the FCC to require Cingular to divest
significant amounts of wireless spectrum or customers to win approval
for the transaction.

Separately, sources said Thursday that Cingular remains close to
securing clearance of the transaction from the Department of Justice.
All substantive disputes have been resolved, and the consent decree
clearing the deal should be completed within days, they said

At her FCC press conference, Abernathy said agency economists and
lawyers are debating whether wireless and wire-line phones are
becoming interchangeable, which would suggest that there is a broader
telecommunications market rather than distinct wireless and wire line
markets. But she did not say that the FCC intends to find a broader
telecommunications market in its Cingular review. Most observers
expect it will be several years before the agency makes this leap,
which would widen the door to telecom industry consolidation.


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, Yahoo News. .

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

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

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Red Hat Buys Technology From Netscape
Date: Fri,  1 Oct 2004 15:40:49 EDT


SEATTLE (Reuters) -

Linux said on Thursday that it had bought Netscape's computer user
identification and management technology from America Online
Inc., a unit of Time Warner Inc. 

Raleigh, North Carolina-based Red Hat, which provides update and
support services for the Linux operating system, said it will
integrate the assets from Netscape Security Solutions into its
products in the next 6 to 12 months.

The technology purchased by Red Hat for an undisclosed amount is used
to manage user profiles in large corporate networks.

Red Hat is focusing its efforts on selling more of its update and
support services to large companies that are using Linux, a software
operating system that can be copied and modified freely, unlike
proprietary software such as Microsoft Corp.'s Windows.

Netscape was bought by AOL which later merged with Time Warner.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance Reuters News Service and Yahoo News..

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

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

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. 

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 #463
******************************
