From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Oct 14 18:04:41 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id i9EM4fK11413; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:04:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:04:41 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200410142204.i9EM4fK11413@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 #489 TELECOM Digest Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:05:00 EDT Volume 23 : Issue 489 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Robot Dialer Question (Scott Peterson) Verizon Planning 3-Million FTTH (Fiber) Connections (The Old Bear) Linux 9.0 and a Small Toshiba Laptop (Patrick Townson) Re: Why There's no DNS or Comparable Distributed Naming (A Burbaickij) Re: Two Way Radio Service (Scott Dorsey) Re: Deutsche Telekom AG Executives Reported To FBI (Freespeechstore) Re: Cellphone Industry Turns to Unmined Territory: Seniors (D Clayton) Last (Sad, Very Bitter) Laugh! A Nice Place to Work! (Patrick Townson) 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: Scott Peterson Subject: Robot Dialer Question Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 23:02:43 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: scottp4.removethistoreply@mindspring.com I'm in So. Calif. and the politicians are out in force. I must have had 10 recorded politicial solicitations in the last couple of days. They're all the kind that start talking and lock your phone line until the recording is done. I needed to make a phone call but the thing locked my line up for about 5 minutes. I thought these things were illegal. Is there any way or any one to complain to about these calls? Scott Peterson A composer is a guy who goes around forcing his will on unsuspecting air molecules, often with the assistance of unsuspecting musicians. -Frank Zappa [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you certain that if you hang up the phone and wait 20-30 seconds the line won't release on its own? Even that is irritating, but I can see why if you attempted to hang up and then (after 5-10 seconds) lifted the receiver again, the party would still be there. On lines which have three way calling or call waiting it takes a few seconds for the system to decide you intend to disconnect and are not just flashing the hook to (make or receive) another call. Under the old (crossbar) system, we could hang up one phone, (and admittedly) rush to another phone to pick it up to continue the conversation **provided the other end called us**. One hassle under the 'new' (ESS) style system is so much depends on the use of the switchhook, and a few seconds have to be allowed for the hook to stay permanently (up or down) to have the action take place. It is irritating, but I think if you give the other end 20-30 seconds of 'talking' to a dead connection you can get your line back. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:32:17 -0400 From: The Old Bear Subject: Verizon Planning 3-Million FTTH Cnnections (Fiber to the Home) As summarized in NewsScan for October 11, 2004: PHONE COMPANIES SPINNING COPPER INTO FIBER In a pitch to spruce up its image and retain customers, Verizon Communications and other Bell companies are going door-to-door, offering to replace customers' old copper wire with high-speed fiber optic lines capable of handling not only phone calls but TV programming and Internet connections at six times the speed of cable lines. The move signals the Bells' determination to maintain their grip on consumers' communications channels, despite cable companies' aggressive move into Internet phone service. It's a risky strategy -- the installations are being provided for free, despite the fact that they can cost the telcos up to $1,000 per house in equipment and labor. Nevertheless, Verizon says it plans to spend $3 billion to offer fiber service to three million homes nationwide by the end of 2005. source: New York Times (11 Oct 2004) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- NewsScan Daily is a lively summary of information technology news and is distributed FREE via email to its subscribers. To receive NewsScan, send email to NewsScan@NewsScan.com and in the subject line type "subscribe". For more information, see the NewsScan web pages at http://www.NewsScan.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: Linux 9.0 and Older Toshiba Laptop Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:00:00 EDT I've a Toshiba Satellite 220 CDS laptop here, from 1995-96. On booting it, I am told it has 32,512 KB memory. The hard drive is 1.34 GB and it runs at 123 megs. It has a single internal slot on the side which can be used either for a floppy drive or a CD Rom. I have both of them. It has a USB connection, places for a parallel port and a serial port. It has two slots for PCMCIA cards. My question is, if I install Linux 9.0 on this machine, will it work, and how well? I know it *barely* handles Win 98. It was originally an OEM Win 95 machine. Thanks for your comments. PAT ------------------------------ From: ariel.burbaickij@gmail.com (Ariel Burbaickij) Subject: Re: Why There's no DNS or Comparable Distributed Naming Service Date: 14 Oct 2004 01:38:00 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) wrote in message news:: > In article , William Warren > wrote: >> On 11 Oct 2004 02:19:00 -0700, Ariel Burbaickij >> wrote: >>>>> Could someone explain to me why there is no such service as DNS/whois >>>>> towards it in SS7 network? After all, we have exactly same concerns >>>>> here (distributed and independent administration of different subsets >>>>> of address space, mapping must be often provided between pointcodes >>>>> (numerical address) and its current owner), so why it was decided not >>>>> to do it this way but instead some arcane lists are distributed by ITU >>>>> exclusively? >> [large snip] >> I don't think it's needed in the way the Internet uses the term: DNS >> is essential for the internet because the number of separate nodes has >> grown too large for any one node to handle, so there has to be a >> lookup mechanism to spread the workload, and that's DNS. >> Central Offices don't need a dns-like service because: >> A. STPs already perform an equivalent function: there >> are few enough exchanges that each one can keep a >> basic routing table in memory and pass off any >> unknown npa/nxx codes to an STP for resolution. The >> STP routes the original SS7 traffic on behalf of the >> CO, unlike a DNS which returns a routable (IP) address >> to the requesting node. > This is not really correct. I think you're conflating the functions > of an STP and a tandem or gateway switch (which is an SSP, in the > usual terminology, but which is not an EO ("End Office"); people often > assume the terms are equivalent but they are not. > because STPs do, in fact, include a somewhat DNS-like address lookup > facility, Global Title Translation ("GTT"). It is correct to think of > GTT as the analogue to DNS in the SS7 protocl suite. > What GTT does is take a name for a service (a token that is of a type > *other than* 'SS7 network address and subsystem number') and return a > network address (which may be an alias for many hosts in the network, > just as a DNS query may return multiple addresses or a single anycast > address; SS7 had anycast long before IP did). > There is no particular reason one could not implement GTT with DNS as > a backend. (In fact, I designed a product that did this and have some > related claims in one of my patents). In practice, GTT data is > usually fully resident in each STP, downloaded there periodically by > various centralized provisioning systems. > But GTT is only used for end-to-end services; more precisely, it is > only generally used for TCAP "queries" (which can also be thought > about as remote procedure call over SS7). LNP is one such service, > which is one reason people sometimes confuse GTT, which translates > from data that is of one type (e.g. telephone number, trigger type, > and some digits) to another (a destination point code and subsystem > number) as DNS does, with LNP, which just uses remote procedure call > to translate from one telephone number to another (approximately. I > am well aware that it does not work quite this way!) > ISUP call signaling does *not* use GTT. Instead, switches have static > call-routing tables with, usually, a digit-at-a-time resolution > starting at the left hand side of the called number. Just like in IP > networks, there is sometimes a "default route" -- if there is not, the > calling party switch itself will play you an error message. The > output of these routing tables is a destination point code (an SS7 > address) and a trunk group number. The ISUP messages will go via an > STP (usually, in the absence of F-links) and may make several network > hops but the actual voice path *must* be direct. > This is a key point. STPs do not "route" voice; and they don't do > translation on ISUP messages because the calling switch essentially > can't require it -- it _has to_ know who the next hop in the voice > path is, because it has to know which of its trunk groups is hooked up > to it! > (Things can work a little differently in the presence of internetwork > gateways, but that is a very special case). > Calls may hop across many switches, end-office to tandem to tandem to > IXC gateway to IXC gateway to tandem to end-office, but at every hop > the next neighbor is known -- has to be, or you couldn't hook up the > voice path right. Again, LNP complicates things (the "translate this > number to another number" RPC can be invoked *anywhere* in the call > path) but it is still not right to think that normal call signalling > involves anything like DNS, nor, really, that that would be very > useful for that purpose, at least not in my opinion. > Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com > But as he knew no bad language, he had called him all the names of > common objects that he could think of, and had screamed: "You lamp! > You towel! You plate!" and so on. --Sigmund Freud Well, I also do not think LNP is as close as it can be to DNS and generally I keep idea of it pretty much strange. I would consider lifetime personal vanity numbers as: 1) far better alternative than LNP 2) It comes really far closer to DNS than LNP because it indeed involves GTT (again how this personal lifetime vanity numbers are normally implemented is pretty strange, you have to update your real number call is routed to all the time you changes your location, normally I would expect the possibility to define the scheme how some predifined set of numbers should be dialed with different preferences and, indeed, some new implementations do just exactly this) 3) I was not talking about terminal equipment but about pointcodes. The closest form of whois service here is operational bulletin #797 from ITU-T. It costs 20 Swiss franks and actually does not prevent anyone from lokking in this information. So I do not understand why it is not possible to build normal whois service based on its data. ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Two Way Radio Service Date: 14 Oct 2004 10:46:13 -0400 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Geller wrote: > Hey guys ... > Is there any two-way radio service provider.? Sure. I got a box of Motorola HT220s in the garage. I'll provide as many as you want. > Can any one give me the list of service providers.?? Look in your local yellow pages under "land-mobile" or "radio, two-way" scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: freespeechstore@aol.com (Freespeechstore) Subject: Re: Deutsche Telekom AG Executives Reported To FBI For Abuse! Date: 14 Oct 2004 08:22:02 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in message news:: > Freespeechstore wrote: >> FSS does not spam! Anybody can make a report to antispammers ... a >> well documented fact. The FSS email system works similar to the >> media, i.e. usatoday.com, but FSS has more controls, as well as >> instant and permanent opt-out! The site is not about negatively, but >> the speeches about such do get the most responses. Posting is FREE. >> Come on in and say something positive! > I think a quick search of news.admin.net-abuse.sightings will prove > this incorrect. > scott > "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." Old news, Scott ... I finally realized (almost a year ago) that the members of NANAE were "FANATICS" and subsequently have been monitoring (not responding in their forums to libelous statements, defamation of character, restraint of trade, etc,) those who abused us for litigation purposes. We have two years to file on each count! Time will tell who wins. This is far from over! And, there it is Scooter! Hide and watch! http://freespeechstore.com/ http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&scoring=d&q=+news.admin.net-abuse.sightings+freespeechstore&btnG=Search http://freespeechstore.com/Qresults.asp?Search_Keyword=nanae&btnSearch2=Find+Speech [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This thread has come to an end with my thanks for everyone's participation (endurance?) PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Cellphone Industry Turns to Unmined Territory: Seniors Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 16:34:31 +1000 dog4dogg@yahoo.com (kansasman) contributed the following: > Marcus Didius Falco wrote in message > news:: >> From the New York Times -- >> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/11/technology/11cell.html?oref=login >> By MATT RICHTEL >> Having equipped most adults and half of all teenagers with cellphones, >> the mobile phone industry is turning its attention to the last >> untapped demographic -- people over 65. >> But its dreams of collecting monthly subscription fees from >> grandparents talking to their grandchildren, retirees calling friends >> from their recreational vehicles or patients checking in with their >> doctors may exact a hefty and unexpected price. The mobile phone >> industry has roused the interest of AARP, the powerful lobby and >> advocacy group for older Americans. >> And AARP is not happy with what it has heard from its members: >> complaints about incomprehensible service contracts, confusing bills >> and dead zones that are not clearly marked on coverage maps. They are >> the same concerns that have been expressed for years by other consumer >> advocates, who now have a new champion in the 35-million-member AARP. ...... And here's me thinking that the major obstacle for just about anyone over 45 for using mobile phones more often is the bloody user interface! Just ask an "older" person how easy it is to use a tiny keyboard and read a display full of data, both obviously designed for sharp-eyed teenagers. Making phones smaller and smaller is great for carrying them about, but there comes a point when their "usability" for a fair segment of the population is compromised. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@XYZ.myrealbox.com Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. (Remove the "XYZ." to reply) Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you say is true if you intend to use the phone for more than making telephone calls. For its original and intended purpose -- making phone calls -- small is okay with me, and I am an older person. And although I really love typing with my thumb (three taps to make a letter /c/ for example), I strongly dislike writing lengthy editor's notes or otherwise writing email, so I very seldom use that wonderful feature of my cell phone, nor the use of the cell phone to read web pages. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: Last, Very Bitter, Sad Laugh! A Nice Place to Work! Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:13:29 -0500 From: Ken Bryant To: kpbryant Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 11:16 AM Subject: Nice Place to Work! Audit: TSA Spent Lavishly on Awards Ceremony Thursday, October 14, 2004 WASHINGTON - The government agency in charge of airport security spent nearly a half-million dollars on an awards ceremony at a lavish hotel, including $81,000 for plaques and $500 for cheese displays, according to an internal report obtained by The Associated Press. Awards were presented to 543 Transportation Security Administration employees and 30 organizations, including a "lifetime achievement award" for one worker with the 2-year-old agency. Almost $200,000 was spent on travel and lodging for attendees. The investigation by the Homeland Security Department's inspector general, Clark Kent Ervin, also found the TSA gave its senior executives bonuses averaging $16,000, higher than at any other federal government agency, and failed to provide adequate justification in more than a third of the 88 cases examined. The report said lower-level employees were shortchanged, with a far lower percentage receiving bonuses. "A substantial inequity exists in TSA's performance recognition program between executive and non-executive employees," the report said. TSA spokeswoman Amy von Walter said the agency believes the bonuses and party were justified "given the hours and productivity of the work force during this critical period." This year, said von Walter, the TSA will conduct awards ceremonies at individual airports, as well as a much smaller and less expensive event at its headquarters in November. Congressional skeptics have criticized the TSA's hiring and spending practices during its short existence. Republicans say the agency has grown far larger than they envisioned when it was created following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. +++What a shock!+++ Ervin also is investigating why the agency's private recruiters worked out of lush resort hotels with golf courses, pools and spas. Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., said that he had not seen the full report but that it indicated "a colossal waste of money." "There's something terribly wrong with that agency," Dorgan said. "Of all the agencies, that's the one that's supposed to be working full-time against terrorist attacks." The awards banquet, which cost $461,745, was held at the Grand Hyatt, which bills itself as "one of the most magnificent" hotels in the nation's capital. According to the report, the agency chose that site because it was the only hotel available on Nov. 19, 2003, the agency's second anniversary. It also was one of the few places that could accommodate about 600 honorees and as many guests. While the inspector general noted the agency sought competitive bids for the party planner and chose the company with the lowest estimate, it found the "costs of the ceremony and reception were higher than necessary." The event planning company, MarCom Group Inc. (search) of Fairfax, Va., was paid $85,552 for its work and given an additional $81,767 for plaques, $5,196 for official photographs, $1,486 for three balloon arches and $1,509 for signs. The reception included finger food, coffee and cake that averaged $33 per person. Seven cakes cost a total of $1,850; three cheese displays, $1,500. In a written response, the TSA said the costs "were neither extraordinary nor incurred without careful consideration of the amount, the reasonableness of the cost, and value the activities would have to = the employees." The inspector general also expressed concern that the TSA was more generous than most other federal agencies in awarding bonuses to executives. Federal agencies on average gave cash awards to 49 percent of their executives in 2002, while 76 percent of TSA executives received them in 2003. The inspector general reviewed 88 employees' files and found that 38 percent "had no individual recommendation and justification for the performance award." "The legitimacy of such large awards is called into question by the lack of an appropriate selection process and the reliance on boilerplate justifications that could be applicable to anyone," the report said. The report also noted that fewer than 3 percent of nonexecutive employees received bonuses in 2003. In its response, the TSA said that executives who got a bonus didn't get a pay increase and weren't eligible for a presidential awards program that can amount to as much as 35 percent of their base pay. The agency agreed, however, that more could be done to equalize treatment of top executives and lower-level employees. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Kenneth P. Bryant is a cousin of mine. Isn't it good to know that we take such excellent care of those brave, courageous public servants who put their lives on the line for us each day in these times of 'terrorist' activities by talking sassy and rude and arrogrant and demanding to those us waiting in a line with a hundred people ahead of us; demanding to inspect every little piece of metal in our pockets or in our legs or heads. If Bush wants to cut back on 'terrorism', an army of new public servants working in airports is not going to do any good; maybe if he issued a **very strong, very meaningful apology** to the people of the middle east whose lives he has made such hell for the past few years it would be a good way to start. But what the heck; a man who thinks many of his own citizens are second class or less sure isn't going to be apologizing to folks in far away middle east countries anytime soon. Certainly not when there are hogs to be slopped on his own payroll, like TSA. 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. 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 #489 ******************************