From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 6 13:13:04 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i16ID4W19899; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:13:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:13:04 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402061813.i16ID4W19899@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 #59 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:13:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 59 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson US FCC to Begin Weighing Internet-Telephony Rules (Monty Solomon) Mac, AOL PC Users Allowed Video Chats (Monty Solomon) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Nick Landsberg) Get Out Those Postage Stamps: No Internet Voting For Military (Burstein) GSM Gateway in the UK (Benm) Re: Unused 800 Number - Ending in 1000 - Can I Rent it Out? (Al Gillis) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading away in U.S. (Rob) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. (Justin Time) New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject (M. Quinn) A Few Messages Mangled, Sorry (TELECOM Digest Editor) 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 is 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: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 22:00:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: US FCC to Begin Weighing Internet-Telephony Rules WASHINGTON, Feb 5 (Reuters) - The Federal Communications Commission said on Thursday it plans to begin determining what regulations, if any, should apply to telephone calls that travel over the Internet. The FCC said it will discuss a formal inquiry into the fast-growing technology at its regularly scheduled meeting next week. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40456873 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 22:04:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mac, AOL PC Users Allowed Video Chats SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) -- Apple Computer Inc. released a new version of its iChat software Thursday so Macintosh users can now do video chats with America Online subscribers who have Windows-based PCs. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40450261 ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:30:52 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Ken Alper wrote: > dold@FakedXCall.usenet.us.com wrote in message > news:: >> I noticed that I have received some telemarketer calls that show an >> 800 number on caller ID, with the name of the survey or marketing >> firm. > I am VERY interested in any data like this. My firm has been trying to > do exactly this -- send an 800 number along with our name -- and we've > had absolutely no success doing so. If you can send along to me any of > the number/name combinations, I might be able to get in touch with > their telecom people and figure out how they're doing it. > --Ken Caller Name is implemented as a separate service from Caller-ID, although some providers may package them together. Caller ID (number), I'm pretty sure, is still delivered as in-band signalling by the originating switch. If the called party does not subscribe to CID, the terminating switch suppresses it. (This requires a database dip to see if the called party subscribes to caller ID. The database may be local to the terminating switch or may be a network database, depending on implementation.) Caller Name (CNAM) on the other hand, requires a database lookup in a "network" (big) database. If your number in the database does not have an asociated name, no name will show up, even if the called party subscribes to the service. If the CNAM service is unbundled from CID, and the called party does not subscribe to it, it will not be delivered, even if your company name is in the database. "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Get Out Those Postage Stamps. No Internet Voting For the Military Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 01:51:52 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC "The Pentagon has decided to scrap plans for an on-line Internet voting system for U.S. military personnel and Americans living abroad. The system had come under fire from experts who said it could be vulnerable to computer attacks. "The decision to cancel the computer voting project was made by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. "Pentagon officials say he ordered the system scrapped because of an inability to ensure the legitimacy of the votes that would be cast." http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=215A8EF4-FC2E-46DA-8F0B218EA14649D9 _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: ben77m2000@yahoo.com (Benm) Subject: GSM Gateway in the UK Date: 6 Feb 2004 03:16:40 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Can anyone in the UK recommend a GSM Gateway and/or mobile calling plan? My business uses about 600 minutes a month on calls to mobile networks. At this moderately low level, it would take me about a year to pay off the gateway I've had quoted (250 pounds). The "any network anytime" plans from the Orange and Vodafone that I've seen aren't very impressive either. Given that about 30% of my phone bill is calls to mobile phones, there must be a better solution. ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: Unused 800 Number - Ending in 1000 - Can I Rent it Out? Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 03:52:11 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Chris Barr wrote in message news:telecom23.58.6@telecom-digest.org: > We currently have an 800 number that won't be in active use for > probably 2 years. It's an attractive number, ending in 1000. > Can this be leased or rented out to another company? > In advance, thanks for any feedback. > Chris Barr Hi Chris, You could probably have your toll-free provider change the number to which that T-F goes to (that is, point your 800 xxx-1000 to the POTS number furnished by your new "customer"). That would let your new "customer" use the number but it would still be yours. You'd get the invoice, of course, and would be responsible for paying it. And, in turn, you'd have to generate an invoice to your "customer", adding 20% or whatever for your trouble. When it comes time for that relationship to end you could have your t-f provider point the t-f number back to your POTS or DID number, where there would be an intercepting recording for a month or two, until the "customers" calls dried up and it would be safe for your business to resume using the t-f number. Good luck! Al ------------------------------ From: rob51166@yahoo.com (Rob) Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. Date: 6 Feb 2004 04:24:47 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com >> As the U.S. wireless market grows, the cell phone is evolving into a >> phone in name only as calling becomes almost secondary to a host of >> other functions. >> After years of trailing Japan and Western Europe, where cell phones >> have long had color screens, e-mail, music, video games, cameras and >> other accessories that make American cell phones look backward in >> comparison, handset makers are finally pushing a new generation of >> units on the domestic market that offer the full range of functions >> available elsewhere. > What the article fails to mention is that these gimmicks of color, > polyphonic tones, etc. are just that gimmicks. Color phones are many > times useless outside as the screen gets washed out in bright light > where a regular monochrome handset you can still see what's in the > display. Polyphonic ringtones may sound somewhat cool, but if you > can't hear them in a noisy environment they are also useless. > Believe it or not some people want a mobile phone that they can > actually make and receive calls on.... easily. It's going to be many > years if never that cell phones supplant personal computers as a way > to communicate data. Going by the way mobile phone technology here in Western Europe and over in Japan is advancing, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that mobile phones will have most, if not all, the facilities of a standard PC or laptop in the not too distant future. After all, the vast majority of mobile phones over here already have web and email access. Personally, I'd much rather carry a palm-sized unit around than have to lug (sorry, carry) a laptop with all the paraphenalia associated with it -- or even worse a briefcase with reams of paper. At least with a mobile palm-sized unit you can download directly from that straight to your PC at home or at the office without having to worry about finding a phone socket for your laptop, or the hassle of connecting to your mobile and hoping that you're able to get a decent signal. Just my 2 pence-worth! ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. Date: 6 Feb 2004 06:06:29 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Phil McKerracher wrote in message news:: > Justin Time wrote in message > news:telecom23.56.8@telecom-digest.org: > [Some quoting omitted, part of it erroneously attributed to me] >> By the time you dig through your carry case to pull out the keyboard, >> unfold it, attach the PDA -- and then find the device won't balance on >> your knees, the meeting is over and you have no notes. Your fancy >> $500 PDA with built-in phone, is now as useful as a brick ... > That's why no keyboard is actually available for mine. You either > write on the screen as you would on paper, or record a voice memo > (useful if only one hand is free). You can also take a picture with > the camera ones. I've taken a picture of a train timetable and an > information board with a digital camera to save transcribing the bits > I want, for example. >> ... And who wants to hold one of those things up to your ear and >> try to make a phone call? > I don't find this a problem at all, the palm size is comfortable. >> My Nokia 8260 still runs fine and does everything I need it to do, and >> my portfolio with notepad takes all the notes I need along with >> holding much more information than any PDA. >> Rodgers Platt > Surely you don't really mean the "holding much more information" bit? > I currently have a couple of e-books in my xda, taking up much less > physical space than paper would. They can also be read in a dark > bedroom or plane without disturbing other people. > Paper notes are much harder to back up, search or share. I don't see > any advantage at all, except that there's no battery to go flat. > Phil McKerracher > www.mckerracher.org Have you ever tried to sketch out a diagram about how a system will interface with another, or when your customer comes up with an idea for a product or a modification to one you already have on a PDA -- even one that "recognizes" handwriting? Keeping notes in a diary may make them "more difficult" to share, but the support systems available are much more robust, and my day timer notebook will never die because the battery went flat. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:19:41 -0500 From: Michael Quinn Organization: Booz Allen Hamilton Subject: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject A few weeks back in the long thread on spoofed caller ID, someone mentioned a recently enacted federal law that requires telemarketers to deliver a caller ID number (whether accurate or not). Here in Nothern VA, we have been using Verizon's Anonymous Call Reject, which does not allow "out of area" numbers to even ring the phone unless the caller provides some additional information (or enters a PIN); we pay $7.50 per month or so for this. I think it was about this time that I started to notice a significant increase in telemarketing calls which now display the number and the name, although sometimes the name says "out of area" or "not available" (or even "ohio"), which of course ACR doesn't look at -- as long as they deliver a number, however inaccurate, ACR lets the call through. The net result is that our dinner and evening hours are now once again filled with ringing phones. Before this, there was a fair chance that an incoming call was from someone we wanted to hear from, so we'd pick up after looking at caller ID; now we have to deal with at least double or triple the number of calls. Has anyone else noticed this phenomenom? I guess for the small number of folks with ACR it's a step backward, even though it may be an improvement for the majority. I'm wondering what will happen if I cancel ACR -- even more calls I suppose. Regards, Mike Quinn Springfield VA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That was a very big hassle I had with SBC (Southwestern Bell Tel) when they had my phone service. They claimed (the chairman's office, yet, when I appealed) that they had met all requirements to subscribers of anonymous call blocking and last call reject 'as long as the calling party supplies some number.' No matter if it was all zeros, if the name was bogus or missing, etc. SBC still wanted the couple bucks per month for providing 'anonymous call rejection'. They claimed 'the call was not anonymous, we did give you the number and often times the name.' Yet, even though the call was not 'anonymous' by telco's definition, they still were not able to block future calls from the same 'number'. I think what you will find, Michael, is that telco makes too much money from telemarketers to abuse them too badly. Telco turns a blind eye to the way they rig their phone systems (with skimpy or non- existent details of ID) because the telemarketers would suffer from it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 12:32:57 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: A Few Messages Mangled, Sorry On Thursday evening, a few messages (maybe four or five) intended for the Digest got mangled beyond repair and totally lost, sorry. You probably got an auto-ack saying they got here. My clumsy fingers are at fault, sorry. There was a huge amount of spam that slipped through the filter as usual, with the four or five good, legitimate messages stuck in the middle of them. Unfortunatly, my favorite mail clients, ('mail' "mailx' and 'Mail') while good for years ago, are not as good as in the past, and one false move with your fingers can cause massive repercussions. Especially with the large amount of spam; one has to read very closely the subject lines as they go past, only zapping the known spam that the filters did not remove. Anyway, please resubmit them promptly for prompt action here. 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: 620-330-6774 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 second 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 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #59 *****************************