From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Dec 10 20:25:45 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBB1PiP11637; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:25:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:25:45 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412110125.iBB1PiP11637@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 #590 TELECOM Digest Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:26:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 590 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AOL Lays Off 750 Employees (Lisa Minter) Sprint, Nextel in Talks: Reports (Eric Friedebach) Unlimited Calling Plan to India (vijay.vishy@gmail.com) Now, Kudos to Charlie Christ!! Re: NorVergence (David O. Rodriguez) Sprint, Nextel in Merger Talks (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Packet8 (Bob Kester) Automatic Number Identification (ANI) Service (Michael Quinn) How About Network Protection (Marc) Re: Information Wanted on WI-FI (David Quinton) Re: Radar Detectors (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Radar Detectors (Justin Time) Re: Radar Detectors (hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com) Re: NASA Van Crash in California Leaves 3 Dead (Henry Cabot Henhouse) Re: Anyone Using Avaya Communication Manager API? (jim.woodward@genesis Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones (phoneguide@gmail.com) Re: Online Research Worries Many Educators (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution - Vonage or Packet8 (Rick Merrill) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. 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 Subject: AOL Lays Off 750 Employees Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:16:21 EST by Elizabeth Millard, NewsFactor staff writer Approximately 750 America Online employees, primarily at the company's Dulles, Virginia, headquarters, have been laid off. The cuts were expected by many analysts, since AOL had been suggesting for weeks that it would be realigning the company and shifting some focus areas. "Whenever a company demonstrates that it's going to cut costs, you're probably going to have some job loss," John Challenger, CEO of outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas, told NewsFactor. The latest round of cuts comes a year after the company's last major layoff round, when 500 employees were let go, mainly from AOL's California offices. The new layoffs involved employees from across the company's operations, but those in the marketing and broadband areas were hit especially hard, according to news reports. No cuts were made in the company's call centers. Employees in Northern Virginia made up the majority of the cuts, but some workers were laid off from offices in Ohio, California and New York. Fresh Strategy AOL has been trying to change its corporate direction for the past two years, when it began to see its dial-up business decline. In response, AOL has noted that it will make up for subscriber loss by focusing more intently on its free AOL.com site, beefing it up with content and games, and hopefully seeing a robust profit from advertising sold on the site. In addition to the push to become a major ad-driven portal, the company has been influenced by SEC scuffles involving its parent company, Time Warner. Tough Times Although AOL's cuts were expected for the past month, they demonstrate that some job loss gloom has not lifted from the technology sector. "Cuts in the sector were expected to increase for the fourth quarter," said Challenger, adding that aggressive price competition for manufacturers, developers and service providers has been hurting job stability. "The most difficult part about these job cuts right now is that they're not being offset by increased hiring," he said. "That means it will be some time before we see a good level of hiring and job creation." NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** 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 NewsFactor. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Sprint, Nextel in Talks: Reports Date: 10 Dec 2004 11:34:28 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Sprint Corp. and Nextel Communications Inc. are in merger discussions, according to press reports. The talks are ongoing and the transaction is being treated as a merger of equals since the two companies share similar market capitalization of more than $30-billion (U.S.), Dow Jones Newswires reported, citing unnamed sources. http://tinyurl.com/6838l Eric Friedebach /KMPX Rocks!/ ------------------------------ From: vijay.vishy@gmail.com Subject: Unlimited Calling Plan to India Date: 10 Dec 2004 11:35:48 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Iam looking for a unlimited international calling plan to India from USA. I am spending hundreds of dollars every month. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: David O. Rodriguez Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:53:20 -0500 Subject: Now, Kudos to Charlie Christ!!! Re: NorVergence The link below will (hopefully) take you to an article about Florida's Attoney General doing much like New York's Attorney General earlier this week. He has reached a settlement with Patriot Leasing to eliminate the contracts for the NorVergence initiated leases. However, Charlie Christ seems to have one-up'ed New York's Attorney General Eliot Spitzer by getting Patriot Leasing to reimburse his office for costs . I wonder, is there is any action being taken by any Attorney Generals against the Salzanos? http://myfloridalegal.com/newsrel.nsf/newsreleases/9F3150A58EA704B785256F66005269B3 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:25:43 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Sprint, Nextel in Merger Talks Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 10, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18040&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Sprint, Nextel in merger talks BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Covad announces nationwide VoIP rollout * AT&T, Intel form partnership * Cisco buys remaining portion of BCN * Cable executives consider joining forces for wireless services USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA Webinar: USF&USAC, Funding Updates, Tuesday, Dec. 14, 2004, 1:30 p.m. EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Fast wireless network two years away, T-Mobile says Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18040&l=2017006 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 11:47:47 -0500 From: Bob Kester Subject: Packet8 I was a Packet8 user for about a year (until about a year ago). Here are some comments on my experiences. First, I used the terminal adapter they provided on a fixed IP address on my LAN. While, as shipped, it is configured to pull an IP address via DHCP -- it can be configured to use a fixed IP. They have a FAQ describing just how to set that up (and, I just checked, it is still there). We never had a problem with delays or echoes that some have mentioned here. Originally, the volume we were getting was a little higher than what you would expect on a POTS line (which was certainly beneficial to anyone that has some hearing loss). But, a firmware upgrade seemed to adjust that downward somewhat. When we signed up for service, their available numbers in our state were nonexistent. (Since that time they have certainly corrected that -- seems like they have numbers available in just about every town around here). But, because of that, we did not see many incoming calls, except for a few tests that we ran. The rate center we picked for our number was a local call to a military post that our daughter was able to call into from overseas. We envisioned she would be able to use that number to complete telephone calls to us -- but that particular military post she had to go thru the base operator, and they would not complete calls to that particular exchange. Since she could use a calling card to complete the call to us, that was not a big deal. And, I could have had that number moved to some other location where she could dial directly. The problems we had were primarily two: (1) Many times, when we placed a call, we would get a busy. Initially the TA only provided a reorder busy and it was hard to tell just where the problem was. (A later firmware updated provided a real busy, also.) (2) On some occasions, we would have a one-way dropout of audio. Very disconcerting! You could be talking to someone, suddenly you realized they weren't answering -- they were maybe still hearing you, maybe not. On both these problems the troubleshooting method was to run pings against their server. There were some times when that produced dismal responses, and according to them it was my ISP's problem. But, after running a traceroute to their server, and running ping on the next hop out from the destination, things always were solid. Certainly not my ISP's problem, and most likely theirs. The need to dial all numbers as 10-digit numbers were a problem for some people here :-) and as a result it didn't get the use it might have otherwise. I never had any problem with their support people. Generally, my questions were such I could email them, and always got good responses. I can't think of any situation where I needed an immediate urgent reply, and generally I made it clear in my email they could take their time in answering. But, I was always satisfied with them. Why did we drop the service? We were paying just a few pennies over $20 a month for unlimited calling in the US and Canada. Our telephone company came up with a $15 unlimited calling (US only). Since we never call Canada, that wasn't a serious consideration. In exchange for that $5 difference, we gave up the second line for outgoing calls. The needed number of redials (because of the incompleted calls) were frustrating. Again, most of our phones have a REDIAL button, but that doesn't always get used :-( The only other observation. Their records of call usage (inbound and outbound) were online, and great. You could go in and view them in real time, any time. But, when I called and canceled the service -- that apparently immediately eliminated my access to them. My account name and password were off their books! As I mentioned, my experiences are now a year old. It's a fast changing field, and I'm sure they have made many changes in the service they provide. ...Bob The FROM: email address has been set up for receiving SPAM. Don't bother using it -- email to it won't be read. Right now, you can use: TCdig01 [SHIFT/2] kesters [DOT] org (Until the scumbags figure that one out.) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 08:27:26 -0500 From: Michael Quinn Michael Organization: Booz Allen Hamilton Subject: Automatic Number Identification (ANI) Service Please withold my email address and organization, ok to use my name. Someone was recently enquiring about ANI. By coincidence a few days ago, I came across a toll-free ANI service, although that is perhaps not the the intended purpose. The following number appeared on my caller ID at home, possibly in conjunction with a blood drive or telemarketing call: (866) 849-3243 When I called the number to see who it was, it was an automated "voice messaging center" (no further info was provided) which gives an option to be removed from their call list. If that option is selected, it reads back the number from which one is calling. Worked from home as well as inside an ISDN PABX at my office. Who knows how long it will be in service, so TD subcribers may wish to take advantage of while it's there. Regards, Mike [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for this entry, Mike. And it does two jobs for you at one time. It identifies the line you are using, *AND* it eliminates your number from some telemarketing program at the same time! Works for me! PAT] ------------------------------ From: miniotdr@yahoo.com (Marc) Subject: How About Network Protection Date: 10 Dec 2004 10:38:10 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi Folks, I am looking for information and data regarding network protection in North America -- even if depending on the State : what are the actual processes for a network owner/carrier/provider to get authorizations to initiate civil engineering works on its infrastructure. For instance, say California, on the Coast : there is a landslide, after heavy rains. SBC's optical cables are down, need repair. What is the process, for SBC and its contractors (e.g. Maintenance) to get clearance for intervention on the US1 ? Shall you need a more precize question, please feel free to tell ! Thanks in advance, _Marc miniotdr@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: David Quinton Subject: Re: Information Wanted on WI-FI Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 07:55:44 +0000 On 9 Dec 2004 12:47:03 -0800, mykonosboy@tiscali.it (DVB) wrote: > Hi, > I have a PC with tecnology Centrino (Intel Pro/Wireless 2100 WLAN > 802.11b,11Mbps). > I'm going for holiday in Mexico in an hotel that provides a connection > to internet through a modem called ALAMBRICO. > I've never heard about this router, in Italy nobody knows what it is. > Do you know if I can use my laptop to connect to internet in the > hotel? whilst all the links seems to be in Spanish, many contain 801.xx. So I guess it should be OK? Interesting Xmas gifts: . Locate your Mobile phone: ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 04:03:53 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Ron Chapman wrote: > In article , Tim@Backhome.org > wrote: >> The automatic devices for slight speed violations are revenue devices >> for the most part. But, the devices that catch red light runners >> serve a genuine safety purposes. > Ah. So maybe you can explain to me why cities that employ these > devices: > (a) pay nothing for them, and receive commissions from the PRIVATE > OPERATORS who place them; and > (b) change the timing of the lights with such devices, in order to > DRAMATICALLY shorten the time of the yellow light, a change which > drastically increases the likelihood of your getting caught by the > device? > By the way, such a change in timing is: > (a) NOT within national traffic guidelines, and > (b) NOT implemented on traffic lights that DO NOT have such cameras in > place. > Hmmmmm. > Tim, you're wrong. The sole reason for these devices is revenue > enhancement. > If the lawmakers want to make everything I do illegal, then I guess > I'll be a criminal the rest of my life. I can only speak for Southern California. All of your concerns have been addressed. The yellow lights have been extended a small interval beyond what the state recommends just to avoid that accusation. Perhaps in your area it is different. Running red lights is already illegal and very, very dangerous. Where they have been installed around here side-collision fatalities have decreased. That is significant. If you drive like you should you won't run red lights. And, dont' tell me that running a red light is like driving 40 in a 35 mph zone. If you believe that you are probably a problem driver that needs to be caught by these red light devices. So, please don't tell me I am wrong. That itself shows an inclination on your part to be unreasonably opinionated about the issue of red light enforcement. There are drivers in these parts that don't feel red lights apply to them, because they are "special." ------------------------------ From: Justin Time Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: 10 Dec 2004 05:33:44 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Ron Chapman wrote: > Ah. So maybe you can explain to me why cities that employ these > devices: > (a) pay nothing for them, and receive commissions from the PRIVATE > OPERATORS who place them; and The quick answer to point (a) is there is no expenditure of public funds for either the equipment or its maintenance. Your point that the cameras are then used as a revenue stream is correct. > b) change the timing of the lights with such devices, in order to > DRAMATICALLY shorten the time of the yellow light, a change which > drastically increases the likelihood of your getting caught by the > device? Now this is a bold statement with no proof to your allegation. While I am not saying that retiming of traffic lights hasn't occurred, can you cite some specific examples of cities where this has been done? I know that in the city where I work, one unit was removed because it was found to be installed at an intersection where the light was improperly timed to allow traffic to clear an intersection before the light at the next intersection turned red. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: 10 Dec 2004 08:06:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Ron Chapman wrote: > Ah. So maybe you can explain to me why cities that employ these > devices: > (a) pay nothing for them, and receive commissions from the PRIVATE > OPERATORS who place them; and That is not true. The cost of the machines is deducted from the net revenue of the fines received. Everybody supposedly thinks its good when govt "privitizes", and here is an example of govt doing just that. > (b) change the timing of the lights with such devices, in order to > DRAMATICALLY shorten the time of the yellow light, a change which > drastically increases the likelihood of your getting caught by the > device? I find that very hard to believe. As as the claim of "revenue enhancement", allow me to note: 1) One city is installing the cameras at intersections with a seriously high accident rate. I'm familiar with these intersections, and motorists routinely keep going even after the yellow goes to red. In other words, these aren't questionable instances, but rather the motorists entered the intersection clearly after their light went to red. The sloppy driving of motorists brought this enforcement onto themselves. 2) My own town set up a speed trap and I watched it work. The speed limit was 25 mph on a narrow residential street and prominently posted. They set the flag cutoff at 40 mph. Despite it being 40, they still cited many drivers flying through. 3) At city council meetings, residents regularly come in to complain about speeders on their local streets and demand the cops do something about it. City govt is under pressure from such residents. The reality is that motorists, for a variety of reasons, are just too damn impatient and drive too fast and recklessly. Advocates for higher speeds claim roads are safer because fatalities are down. That is true, but fatalities are down because cars and roads get safer--airbags, more people using seatbelts, better road crash protection, less drunk drivers. What the advocates don't say is that the basic accident rate (including minor ones like 'fender benders') is sky high and total property damage in dollars continues to climb. I wish the cops didn't need cameras and speed traps, but motorists have only themselves to blame. ------------------------------ From: Henry Cabot Henhouse III Subject: Re: NASA Van Crash in California Leaves 3 Dead Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 11:19:45 -0800 Oh my, how news accounts vary ... I was watching the live local TV news coverage. A motorist saw the van drive off and called the CHP, who responded very quickly. Assessing the situation, they called for paramedics, etc. The officers scaled down the treacherous terrain to see what they could do ... Nothing about a victim of the crash "climbing up" to get help... Lisa Minter wrote in message news:telecom23.586.2@telecom-digest.org ... > By ROBERT JABLON, Associated Press Writer > LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE, Calif. - > A commuter van from NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory tumbled 200 feet > off a twisting mountain road Wednesday, killing three people and > injuring seven, at least four of them seriously, authorities said. > The van was carrying 10 people to the laboratory when it plunged off > the Angeles Crest Highway in the Angeles National Forest at about 6:30 > a.m. Wednesday morning and rolled down a mountainside about 15 miles > north of downtown Los Angeles, Los Angeles County Fire Department > inspector Ron Haralson said. > "One person was able to get out of the van and make his way up to the > road" to get help, Haralson said. > The van was carrying six employees of the lab in Pasadena, two > contractors and two NASA employees, said Blaine Baggett, a spokesman > at JPL, which is the control center for several NASA projects, > including the Mars rovers. The victims' names were not immediately > released. > "It's a very, very sad day for all of us at JPL," Baggett said, adding > that employees will be offered grief counseling. > Three people were pronounced dead at the scene. One person was flung > from the van. Others lay trapped in the battered white van in the > middle of a dense forest until firefighters arrived and tore off the > doors to reach victims, who were then taken by helicopter to > hospitals. > Of the survivors, one person was in critical condition, three were in > serious condition, two had minor injuries and one person was still > being evaluated, Haralson said. > The cause of the accident was not immediately known. Clouds and fog > shrouded the site, at an altitude of about 1,500 feet. Snow dotted > flanks of the mountain, but the road itself was clear. > Hundreds of cars a day travel the highway, a twisting, two-lane > blacktop with steep drops. Commuters living in the Antelope Valley > area northeast of Los Angeles use it as a shortcut to reach a freeway > in Pasadena. > About 450 of the 5,500 people who work at JPL participate in its > vanpool program, which involves about 30 vans, Baggett said. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The fact that one news source reported it one way and another source reported it another way does not mean the one contradicts the other. I am sure CHP had *many* phone calls about the matter right after it happened. I remember in 1972 when the Illinois Central Railroad suburban train I was riding on collided with the other suburban train leaving a few hundred people dead; as one of the few (and probably first) person to walk off the train and view the carnage all around me, I of course walked a few steps to the nearest fire department 'call box' (as they were known in those days; you opened the door on the little box and pulled the lever) and put in an alarm. Some people fleeing for their lives from another exit on the train probably did the same thing from pay phones on the station platform, etc. I did not wait for 'my' firemen to arrive and explain myself; thirty seconds or a minute later when I heard the sirens in the distance and knew they were on the way, I walked out to the street and flagged a cab and continued on my way to work. Later that day, the _Chicago Daily News_ had me listed as the person who had first notified authorities; on the TV news that evening, they interviewed some excited lady who they said was first at the report. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jim.woodward@genesis-data.com Subject: Re: Anyone Using Avaya Communication Manager API? Date: 10 Dec 2004 12:46:30 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Chip, Do you still require more information on CMAPI?? Or have you resolved your problem?? Jim ------------------------------ From: phoneguide@gmail.com Subject: Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones Date: 10 Dec 2004 12:57:45 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com ROLM was originally an IBM CBX / PBX voice switching venture that was in North America's arrival was purchased away from the German company SEIMENS. IBM made many advancements and improvements to the systems proprietary operating system and architecture (Americanizing it). IBM later sold the ROLM CBX / PBX product back to SEIMENS for a handsome profit. SEIMENS then revised the o/s and architecture with it's own German touch. Their new systems struggled mightly to hang on as third most distributed voice switching platform in North America. Consumers and system administrators were clearly NOT impressed with what had been re-engineered or otherwise taken back to a Version 1.0 release. The early versions of HICOM (SEIMENS revised ROLM) lost much of the market it had locked into for years. Loyal customers were no longer loyal to the ROLM name. A terrific interactive ROLM User Guide still exist and serves those who still run on the american~ized ROLM 9751 9004 & 9005 platforms. That web-site is http://www.9751.com Joseph Bergstein wrote: > In a message from Martin McCormick, he states: >> The Rolm PBX'S are made by Seimens, as far as I know. > ROLM PBX'x have been made by the Rolm Company since they were founded. As I recall, ROLM actually started out manufacturing MILSPEC Nova (Data General) computers in the early '70s. I recall seeing them as the console computer on early Amdahl 470 mainframes. > Rolm PBXs up to and including the current 9751 are still made by > ROLM. Since the ROLM - Siemens merger, and subsequent acquisition, > the two firms indicate that they are merging their technology > platforms, but so far Siemens does not make ROLM PBX's, per se > (other than now owning the ROLM company). ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Online Research Worries Many Educators Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 16:07:02 -0500 Ron Chapman wrote: > It's all about EDITING. Or, as I described it years ago, editorial responsibility. Although mistakes happen, CNN, the New York Times, Newsweek, and the Encyclopedia Brittania invest a fair bit of time making sure that what they publish is correct, or at least defensible. Of course, people who are not as concerned about editorial responsibility -- or who lack the faculties to meet what you and I might describe as editorial responsibility -- print all sorts of drivel on flyers and hand them out to everyone who walks past them on the street, but we can see the difference between those and publications. And, as you point out with the dog comment, on the internet it can be difficult to tell the difference between those who take editorial responsibility seriously and those who don't. We certainly can't expect kids learning how to do research to know. Geoffrey Welsh ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Dropping SBC For a VoIP Solution -- Vonage or Packet8 ?? Organization: Comcast Online Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 21:47:13 GMT Ringo Langly wrote: > Hi Rick, > I guess I don't understand ... the Telephone Adapter (DTA310 in my > case) has one RJ45 connector plus my ISP only allows one public IP > address. If I connect the Telephone Adapter to my cable modem first > then it will get the public IP address -- not my router, which will > leave my network without Internet access. > I appriciate the suggestion, but either I've missed something or you're > mistaken. The only way to connect (unless I had two IP addresses from > my ISP) is the way it is currently connected: > Cablemodem >> Router >> Telephone Adapter / Computers Then your TA has no way to perform QoS (Quality of Service) and your voice performance will suffer if any computer IO is happening at the same time. You are forced to use phone OR computer but not both. Sympathy, Rick ------------------------------ 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 #590 ******************************