From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Nov 1 17:15:20 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iA1MFKK11014; Mon, 1 Nov 2004 17:15:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 17:15:20 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411012215.iA1MFKK11014@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 #524 TELECOM Digest Mon, 1 Nov 2004 17:15:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 524 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson VoIP Provider Presses FCC to Block Broadband Discrimination (L Minter) Re: Verizon California Terminates ISDN, FX, Other Services (Justin Time) Re: Verizon California Terminates ISDN, FX, Other Services (I. Beard) Re: When Phones Go Bad (Danny Burstein) Re: Pre-Recorded Phone Should be Illegal (John Hines) Re: Pre-Recorded Phone Should be Illegal (Eric Tappert) Re: Pre-Recorded Phone Should be Illegal (Mark Crispin) Re: New Electronic Check Law Sinks 'Float' (Isaiah Beard) Re: Home Phones Face Uncertain Future (Lisa Hancock) Management and Inovation (Lisa Hancock) Last Laugh! SPAM!! Pick the President (Group Lotto) 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 Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 14:43:05 -0500 Subject: VoIP Provider Presses FCC to Block Broadband Discrimination http://www.cabledatacomnews.com/nov04/nov04-8.html VoIP Provider Presses FCC to Block Broadband Discrimination Nuvio Filing Threatens to Re-ignite Cable Open Access Battles of Late 1990 By Alan Breznick, editor, Cable Datacom News In a case that may have major implications for both cable operators and phone companies, a little-known voice-over-IP (VoIP) provider is urging the FCC to keep broadband providers from tampering with independent IP telephony services riding on the same fat pipes. Nuvio Corp., a commercial, private-label VoIP provider based in the Kansas City suburbs, wants the FCC to prohibit MSOs, Baby Bells and other broadband providers from blocking or degrading access to other VoIP services. In a letter and corresponding white paper filed with the Commission in mid-September, the firm proposes that the agency use its Title I authority under the 1996 Telecommunications Act to ban "discriminatory practices by vertically integrated broadband/VoIP providers" offering rival services. "If these vertically integrated firms are free to discriminate against unaffiliated VoIP providers, they will almost certainly garner the major share of the VoIP market, and in doing so drive smaller unaffiliated VoIP providers out of the market," the company argues. "If left unchecked, such discrimination would seriously endanger the vibrant competition that currently exists in the market for VoIP services and ultimately harm consumers." Full story at: http://www.cabledatacomnews.com/nov04/nov04-8.html ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Verizon California Terminates ISDN, FX, Other Services Date: 1 Nov 2004 11:45:35 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Isaiah Beard wrote in message news:: > Tim@Backhome.org wrote: >> What useful purpose does ISDN serve these days? > It's VERY useful, actually. Where I work, we have a number of > Tandberg 6000's and Polycom FX devices scattered on a number of sites, > and quite a few of them are hooked up to both Gigabit ethernet and 3 > bonded ISDN PRIs each. Videoconferencing is VERY big, even bigger now > that businesses are trying to cut their travel expenses. Oh, I'm sure you meant BRI rather than PRI. > <> > E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. > Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So you are suggesting that ISDN makes > a very good backup system in the case of emergencies? PAT] In this country ISDN has almost always been targeted toward the commercial user. The reason companies like XM and other broadcasting companies use ISDN or at a minimum a 56K digital line for voice backup is no static or loss of bandwidth because of distance. Comparing the voice quality and bandwidth on ISDN and analog would be similar to comparing an FM radio signal with an AM. Both have their advantages, but the FM signal always will have better bandwidth and carry more information than an analog AM signal. That's the reason music stations have all but abandoned the AM airwaves -- music just sounds better on FM. If the music sounds better because of the increased bandwidth, wouldn't it have the same affects on voice? Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Verizon California Terminates ISDN, FX, Other Services Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 15:29:01 -0500 TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Isaiah Beard: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So you are suggesting that ISDN makes > a very good backup system in the case of emergencies? PAT] I'm saying that it's far more reliable than a commodity internet connection can be for point to point communication, emergency or not. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ From: danny burstein Subject: Re: When Phones Go Bad Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 20:54:07 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Marcus Didius Falco writes: [ snip ] > For most cell phone users, replacing a phone that's gone bad comes > with an added cost in time and aggravation: pecking away at the keys > of the new phone to reconstruct a mobile address book of often-used > names and numbers. Hence one of the beauties of the SIMcard method used on GSM (and a handful of other) phones. All the info can be stored in the thumbnail sized chip, and all you need to do is move it from the old phone to the new one. (It's pretty rare, though not impossible, for the SIMcard to fail). _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: John Hines Subject: Re: Pre-Recorded Phone Should be Illegal Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 13:44:22 -0600 Organization: www.jhines.org Reply-To: john@jhines.org hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote: > In this election season, I have been BOMBARDED with pre-recorded phone > calls pitching various candidates, flooding my answering machine. The only worse than being in a state that is out of play, and ignored, would be being in a swing state, with non-stop politicing. This election wore out its welcome along time ago. That is why I'm trying to revive the "Pat Paulsen for President" campaign of '68. So far, everyone has got a smile out of it, which is something that can not be said about the current election. ------------------------------ From: Eric Tappert Subject: Re: Pre-Recorded Phone Should be Illegal Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:52:56 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet On 31 Oct 2004 19:43:19 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote: > In this election season, I have been BOMBARDED with pre-recorded phone > calls pitching various candidates, flooding my answering machine. > I know election phone calls are legal. > However, I think pre-recorded phone calls, of any kind, should be > illegal. > The constant ringing of the phone this year was terribly annoying. > If it had been last year, it would've been devastating. Last year at > this time I was caring for a seriously ill person and was ill myself. > I was in frequent touch with doctors, phamarcies, nurses, and > families. I had to keep the phone open and answer all calls. > To a healthy person, the constant ringing was terribly annoying. I > would've gone out of my mind last year. > When you're in bad pain, a ringing telephone is not a pleasant thing. > BTW, I also received several live calls urging a deceased member of > family to go vote, even though that person was removed from the > election rolls quite some time ago. [In hindsight I wish I requested > they come and assist that person to the polls.] > When I go to the polls Tuesday, I will talk to the politicians (the > people who stand outside and give out leaflets). I will ask them for > their home phone numbers, but I have a funny feeling they, for some > strange reason, won't give them to me. Amen to that, Lisa. I happen to live in a "battleground" state and have averaged over 6 calls per day for the last two weeks. Very annoying. Telemarketers were never this bad ... Eric Tappert I hear the lawyers are going to argue that tombstones really can vote this year! :-) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One real, actual problem has been with the advance voting allowed in so many states. Florida is a good example. A gazillion old people live in Florida and quite a few of them have already voted. How the question is you voted last week, then you die yesterday or today (as many folks have already done; died, I mean.) Do you count the votes or not? Everywhere has a law saying dead people are disqualified from voting (except in Chicago). Most states have a law which says if a person dies before election day, their vote is not to be counted. Are they going to cross check the morgue records with the election records? That is a serious question under debate in Florida where there are such a huge number of senior citizens in residence and where there are many deaths each day. Someone has suggested if this election is very close, it may come down to the 537 or so people in Florida who died between the time voting started a couple weeks ago and the official close of the polls tomorrow. Here is another example: two guys are in the Army, both registered to vote out of Fort Campbell, KY/TN (which straddles two state lines.) One lives in a barracks on the Kentucky side of the line; the other in a barracks on the Tennessee side. Both were sent to Iraq (what else is new?) both submitted absentee ballots in the past few days. Both were killed in action a few days ago when the military transport bus was blown up. According to the law in Kentucky, that guy's vote *is* counted. According to the law in Tennessee, the other guy's vote is *not* counted (deceased prior to the official election day). So the one soldier's vote is counted, the other one's is not. Is that fair? Indeed, the people who have voted in advance of November 2 but who then died (for whatever reason *before* November 2) will probably give the 'army' of ten thousand lawyers we have heard about for awhile now busy-work for a long time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: Pre-Recorded Phone Should be Illegal Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 11:56:17 -0800 Organization: University of Washington My home phone was delightfully free of all such calls throughout this horrendously toxic election season. I dumped No Solicitation, Security Screen, and the other overpriced services that do little to stop the telesleaze, and replaced it with a much cheaper service that does work: Do Not Disturb. Do Not Disturb allows you to set a schedule of hours when it will block incoming calls. It's possible to set the schedule to be 24 hours/day. Callers who know the 4-digit override passcode that you set (and can change at any time) can break through the block and then the call will ring through. There are two additional options in Do Not Disturb. If you enable emergency breakthrough, the caller can press "*" and then record his name. Your phone will then ring, and you'll be given that name and asked whether or not you want to take the call. The other option, which I recommend *against* due to prerecords, happens if you have voice mail. The caller can press "#" or wait long enough and the call will be transfered to voice mail (where the prerecord can dump its advertisement on your voice mail). I suggest just cancelling voice mail and use an answering machine. This works well for me, because an analysis of my incoming calls (as recorded on Caller ID) showed that almost all of the legitimate calls came from the same handful of callers. They all have my passcode, and they all continue to call me. The one bug with Do Not Disturb is that emergency breakthrough calls shows up as 000-000-0000 on the caller ID instead of the caller's number. So, if such call comes in when you're not around, you know that you got such a call but no record of where it was from. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: New Electronic Check Law Sinks 'Float' Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 15:26:23 -0500 DevilsPGD wrote: > Rick Merrill wrote: >> IF these images were accessed it would give criminals access to an >> image of the customer's signature. Said criminal could then use a >> laser printer with 640 dpi resolution to print checks that would be >> indistinguishable from the photo check after a 240 dpi Scan!? > I'm curious, is there a requirement that the bank which accepted the > cheque store it for any period of time? Quite the reverse actually. If they send the check along electronically, then the original is destroyed. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Home Phones Face Uncertain Future Date: 1 Nov 2004 12:54:46 -0800 w_tom wrote > Common mistake when predictions are based upon business school > concepts rather than first learning the details. While some of what you say is true, I must disagree with other parts. Business school concepts definitely have their place. > Third generation cell phone technology has finally made standard > (POTS) phones obsolete. "Technology" is not _instant_. Just because a new technology is perfected does not mean other technologies are "obsolete". A lot of technocrats are so enamoured with new stuff they fail to understand the big picture. First, it takes time to implement new technology. For example, a great many people out there do not have cell phones nor wish to have one. Others have them but use them only for emergencies and have $15/month plans. Many people get something new only when their existing machine wears out; not everyone is enamored with the "latest and greatest". Secondly, new technologies must mature. Things are improving, but many cell phone users get cutoff in mid conversation. When compact discs were first introduced, their sound and operation needed tweaking to get widespread acceptance so serious listeners would replace their vinyl. Third, new technologies have a new cost that not all consumers are willing -- nor should -- have to pay. A consumer perfectly happy with POTS service should not have to pay the $40/month for cell phone service. An occassional $15/month emergency-only cell phone user likewise shouldn't be forced to upgrade. The computer manufacturers finally learned that people weren't so ready to upgrade their PCs so often. Fourth, the implementation and marketing of technology is critical. Dilbert might make fun of the marketing types, but they are necessary. The genius of Edison was not in the light bulb, but rather a whole power generation and distribution network to make the light bulbs work and earn money from them. > The baby Bells are not dominated by myopic MBA managers whose > education literally destroys both innovation and what little remains > of AT&T. AT&T management has a static perspective because they view > from anti-innovative B-school concepts. If AT&T still ran the baby > Bells, then Nokia's predictions would have merit. But baby Bells > (about 10 years too late) suddenly realized that they too will go > the way of the anti-innovation AT&T. Baby Bells are finally, after > more than 50 years, rewiring their entire network. Being an "MBA manager" is neither good nor bad in itself. Sure, one could point to plenty of very successful businessmen who had an 8th grade education, just as one could point to 3-pack-a-day smokers who lived to be 105. But most business people make good use of skills taught in business school. I don't agree on AT&T being "static" at all. Their management tried quite a few different avenues, they just didn't work out, it was not for lack of trying. Guessing wrong does not make a company "myopic", hindsight is always 20/20, foresight is not. Over history, many 'wrong' business predictions were perfectly reasonable and logical at the time they were made. When a businessman takes a longshot and wins, people call him "shrewd". If his longshot loses, people call him other less complimentary things. We read about the success stories with great fanfare, but not about the many more losers. Baby Bells most certainly did NOT wait "50 years" to rewire their networks. A lot of people believe -- wrongly -- that the phone network at the time of divesture was all ancient. True, some of it was, but a very great deal of it was state of the art for its day. Bell Atlantic was 100% ESS after divesture, and shortly later was 100% digital, just to give an example. Trunks between offices were advanced high capacity. > But don't expect mobiles to replace land line just as IBM found new > purpose in their core businesses (once IBM replaced their MBAs with > computer guys, then IBM rediscovered innovation meaning that a main > frame is no longer a dinosaur). While agree mobiles won't replace totally land lines, there are a couple of errors here. What I expect is that mobile were supplement land lines. A suburban family with teenagers that might have had two or even three voice lines in the house may get by with a single line, and use cell phones for the rest. As to IBM, IBM did not go back to its "core business", nor did it replace its MBAs with computer guys. Actually, IBM has reduced its core business -- manufacturing and selling computers -- and wisely supplemented it with consulting and service bureau work which was once a small subsidiary. The "computer guys" didn't make this transition, but rather an outsider, the former head of Nabisco (Gerstner sp?). I don't know if he had an MBA or not, but I think he did. > Devil is always in the details which means the manager must have 'dirt > under his fingernails'. That is true. > Without a long detailed list of advantages and disadvantages for > each technology combined with a list of future markets and > innovations, then one can only make predictions like business school > graduates and that BBC article. Not true. Predicting the future, whether it be the tomorrow's weather or markets for new technologies, is always a gamble. There are always variables that are a guess, plus variables no one expects. > These latter people routinely stifle innovation because they don't > have education from where innovation happens. Spread sheets and > marketing mentalities are important peripheral parts of business; > but only with a short term perspective. Without a "marketing mentality", innovation is worthless. Without a good cost/pricing strategy, products cannot be manufacturered nor services provided. Having technology without a way to get it in the hands of customers is worthless. The Watson father/son didn't know squat about any technology, but they knew marketing. The ENIAC-Univac people were experts in technology, but didn't know squat about marketing. It didn't take long for IBM, using its marketing skills, to quickly surpass ENIAC-UNIVAC's way superior tech skills. > To see the future of land lines with a long term perspective, one > must apply knowledge and experience of the technology. Yes and no. In the late 1970s, the "knowledge and experience" of computers was using punch cards as an input medium. Note that when more modern gear (ie key-to-disk, on-line terminals, PC-DOS) replaced the punch card, they kept the principles -- 80 column screen, auto numeric shift, 'drum card' field setup, etc. That's what the technies were used to. But the techies were wrong! It turned out that the future belonged to something entirely new -- the GUI screens and Windows that had no connection to the punch card style whatsoever. > Any land line company that intends to be alive in 10 years will have > replaced or duplicated their entire network in fiber -- and learned > new products based upon the new demands of that technology. Who knows if fibre will be dominant in ten years? Keep in mind there's an excess today of fibre capacity; that means some companies that built fibre networks are losing money from lack of use. Don't ask me why, but Picturephone service never caught on, while cell phones cameras and text messaging are very popular with kids. (Punching in text on a tiny phone keypad seems ludicrous, but they love it.) > Standard technologies potentially on the chopping block: faxes, > portable phones, conventional dial up phones, international shortwave > broadcasting, and maybe even conventional letters. It takes an awful lot for a technology to become truly discontinued. What usually happens is that an older technology remains in use, but yields market share to newer technologies. They still make typewriters for example, but most such work is done on computers now. Further, older technologies may offer a backup. (Yes, there are some exceptions). > Any Baby Bell that uses the > bean counter concepts of cost controls is doomed just like Western > Union and AT&T. "Beans" are basic to a business. If you don't count your beans, you will go out of business. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Management and Innovation Date: 1 Nov 2004 13:33:20 -0800 [I created a separate subject and post to discuss a different issue] w_tom wrote > Remember what happens to companies who don't innovate. Any Baby > Bell that uses the bean counter concepts of cost controls is doomed > just like Western Union and AT&T. AT&T and Western Union both were > dead center in a wonderful future -- and instead failed to innovate > their core business. As mentioned in my other post, hindsight is 20/20 and it's easy to criticize past managements for "failing to innovate". But the issue is not so simple, and people must realize that. Western Union's core business -- record message transmission -- became obsolete with the advent of cheap long distance service in the 1960s. In the 1950s and earlier, long distance telephone calls were extremely expensive and telegrams were cheaper. But once LD rates dropped, a phone call cost the same and was both faster and more efficient (two way conversation). With money transfers, the widespread advent of everyday people having credit cards eliminated much of that need. So, Western Union's "core businesses" were obsolete (and this was even before cheap faxes). WU was further hampered by adverse regulatory actions which favored AT&T at WU's expense and by a tough labor situation. WU was blocked from going into potentially profitable businesses. There was nothing WU for "innovate" when the core business itself was obsolete. The only choice WU had was to go into entirely new lines of business. [This is only a brief summary of WU's issues.] Over the years, there have been some companies that have done just that -- doing things today that are a far cry from their past. There is today a big convenience store chain that was once an iron maker, for example. I don't call that "innovation". The truth is that in many cases, management most certainly wanted to innovate and had the correct direction in mind. However, legal, regulatory, labor, or other external constraints blocked them from doing what they wanted. Western Union had severe regulatory restraints. Actually, the Baby Bells were blocked by regulation from doing some things they're doing today. Let's look at Sears and Montgomery Ward. At the end of WW II, Sears invested in suburban expansion, Montgomery Ward expected a recession. Historically, M/W was correct because recessions occured after wars and the Great Depression preceeded WW II. But M/W turned out to be wrong and Sears correct. Let's look at the Penn Central: Many people blame its management for the bankruptcy, feeling if there was more "innovation" the company would have survived. But the truth is that the Penn Central did try to improve things and innovate but that wasn't enough to save it. It faced drastically changed business conditions in its service territory. But government regulation and labor laws blocked management from meeting those challenges. Subsequently, the laws were changed but it was too late for the PC. BTW, the PC was criticized for going away from its "core business", but its other investments were what carried it. Let's look at domestic steel, which died in the 1980s and mgmt is blamed. But in the 1970s, steel got him with a simultaneous triple whammy: 1) Drastic increases in pollution control laws that were extremely expensive to comply, 2) drastic increases in the cost of energy, and 3) drastic reduction in demand as a result of foreign competition of both raw steel and finished goods (like cars) and cheaper substitute materials. It should be noted that until this triple whammy hit, demand for domestic steel had been very strong and growing since WW II. The result was way too much high-cost capacity for low demand, and many steel companies went bankrupt. Thousands of steel workers lost their jobs. There was certainly some things steel management could have done differently, but that would've only made things slightly better and wouldn't have changed the big picture. Now this is not to say management is always blameless. There are many examples of where management simply blew it (why some supermarket chains flourish while others languish). Sometimes management clings to a past or charges headstrong to a future that no one else sees or agrees with. Sometimes innovation -- the way an outsider sees it -- isn't as easy as it looks. ------------------------------ From: Group Lotto Reply-To: gl@domain670.com Subject: Last Laugh! SPAM!! Pick the President Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 15:30:36 EST Which President would you put on the face of a $1,000,000 bill? Bush? Clinton? Reagan? Go Here: http://t1.domain670.com/track.php/FCE06B7C99/fast/2?email=telecom-request%40massis.lcs.mit.edu Until then, if you win $1,000,000 cash, we hope you'll settle for smaller bills. Play GroupLotto now and, you get to play for FREE. Enter now. Get 10 FREE chances to WIN over $1,500,000 CASH. http://t1.domain670.com/track.php/FCE06B7C99/fast/2?email=telecom-request%40massis.lcs.mit.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Somehow in preparing this message for inclusion in the Digest I accidentally trucated the other 63,000 bytes of HTML code which were included in it. Sorry to disappoint you. I did send a note to Resident President, White House and gave them my permission to put my face on the new three dollar bill, which has been proposed in an effort to balance our National Budget. They could put my picture on it then include as a free gift in every box of cereal sold, or maybe in boxes of the Monopoly game. We should get our National Budget crisis solved that way sometime in the 29th century. 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 ! ************************ career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management (MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35 credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including data, video, and voice networks. The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum. Classes are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning. Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at 405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at http://www.mstm.okstate.edu ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #524 ******************************