From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 14 15:51:43 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBEKphF03245; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:51:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:51:43 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412142051.iBEKphF03245@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 #597 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:52:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 597 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Will the Sprint/Nextel Merger Bring the End of Motorola? (John Stahl) Cellphones Aloft: The Inevitable Is Closer (Monty Solomon) Verizon Mulls Sprint Acquisition (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Telecom Terms (Venkat) Re: Dialogic JCT Series (David) Re: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? (John Levine) Re: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? (Charles G Gray) Re: Strange Wireless Problem (J.P. Wing) Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: (Celling Your Soul) (Mark Atwood) Re: 35 Billion Sprint-Nextel Merger May Close This Week (Kenneth P Stox) Re: Radar Detectors (Rick Merrill) Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (John Bartley) Re: Broadcast Fax Provider? (T. Sean Weintz) Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence (Scott Dorsey) Re: Cingular Migration (John Levine) Re: Cingular Migration (Tony P.) Re: Cingular Migration (Justin Time) Re: Cingular Migration (Daniel J McDonald) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:02:43 -0500 From: John Stahl Subject: Will the Sprint/Nextel Merger Bring the End of Motorola? Just like the phrase often heard: "The check's in the mail." The oft used of late in most every merger and/or acquisition, phrase has been: "This acquisition or merger will have absolutely no effect on operations." This phrase has been shown to be, in almost every case, untrue as the reports all indicate! Here is another by-product of another upcoming telecom industry merger, coming to light before the completion, which could very well be ... "the straw which breaks the 'camel's' back for Motorola." As a side note, one might also wonder as with the recent announcement from Cingular that quite a large number of (redundant?) AT&T Wireless workers will be let go, how many Nextel workers will be getting pink slips from Sprint? > Motorola May Lose Big Customer if Nextel Merges > By KEN BELSON NY Times > Published: December 14, 2004 > Sprint's negotiations to buy Nextel have ignited fears that Motorola will > lose its exclusive deal to supply phones and equipment to Nextel. > If a merger occurs, she (Ms. Kalla) and other industry analysts say, > Sprint will induce Nextel's more than 15 million subscribers to turn in > their handsets, which use an unconventional technology called iDEN. > Sprint is likely to encourage these customers to buy its handsets, which > use a more common technology known as C.D.M.A., or code division multiple > access. And to handle the influx of millions of extra customers, Sprint > will probably have to order more equipment from Lucent, Nortel and other > vendors. > Ms. Kalla said she expected Sprint to take as long as five years to shut > down the iDEN network, giving it time to expand its C.D.M.A. network > without pressuring Nextel customers to swap handsets. Complete article at NY Times web site (free registration required): http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/14/technology/14phone.html?th John Stahl Aljon Enterprises Telecom/Data Consultant [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You see, the phrase 'no change in operations' is true to them ... none of them realize what miserable screw ups they are where customer service is concerned. When they say 'no change in operations' that's what they mean. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 08:42:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cellphones Aloft: The Inevitable Is Closer By KEN BELSON and MICHELINE MAYNARD The day may finally be coming when you will be allowed to nmake calls on your own cellphone from an airliner. Trouble is, so will the passengers sitting on either side of you, and in front and in back of you, as well. Federal regulators plan next week to begin considering rules that would end the official ban on cellphone use on commercial flights. Technical challenges and safety questions remain. But if the ban is lifted, one of the last cocoons of relative social silence would disappear, forcing strangers to work out the rough etiquette of involuntary eavesdropping in a confined space. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/10/technology/10phone.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But, as was pointed out here in the Digest yesterday, quoting USA Today, it may be a long time before we actually get to that point. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:26:29 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Verizon Mulls Sprint Acquisition Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 14, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18102&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Verizon mulls Sprint acquisition BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Analysis: Sprint, Nextel merger plays to strengths * Qwest hits DSL milestone * Z-Tel turns to VoIP USTA SPOTLIGHT * SUPERCOMM: TIA's and USTA's Premiere Event EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Wi-Fi ubiquity poses problems for cell carriers * Vote for VoIP poll: VoIP is ready for the mainstream REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * International Telecommunication Union issues broadband guidelines * Federal attorneys may seize Rigas family's cable assets Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18102&l=2017006 Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ From: Venkat Subject: Telecom Terms Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 00:46:04 +0530 Organization: Cisco Systems Inc. Hi All, I am new to telecom and I would appreciate if you people can give me definitions of each of the following terms (I am not looking for expansion of acronyms, but some explanation), and their use and also some real world examples where it is used, you can also point me to some good sites. Analog Telephony ------------------ Telephone ----- ? Local Loop -----? Void Switch CO(Central Office) PBX(Private Branch Exchange) Trunks Telephone Signalling Supervisory signaling Addressing Pulse DTMF : Dual Tone MultiFrequency Foreign Exchange Trunks FXO : Foreign Exchange Office FXS : Foreign Exchange Station DID DOD Loop Start Signalling Ground Start Signalling E&M Wink start Immediate start Delay start Digital Voice Technology ------------------------ Analog versus Digital Digitizing Analog Signal Digital to Analog Conversion process Voice Compression Techniques G.711, G.729 etc Channel Signalling Types T1/DS1 E1 Digital Channel Signalling Types CAS CCS TDM : Time Division Multiplexing ISDN Q.930/931 Messages Q.SIG Protocol SS7 I understand its a lot of work, but it should prove a real source of information for a beginner. Regards, Venkat [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For starters, 'tele-phone' is a combin- ation of 'phonic' which has to do with hearing, and 'tele' which refers to communication or transfer of information. 'Tele-gram' is made up of two parts, one of which comes from 'grap' or visual inspection of 'tele' or the transfer of information. If something is 'very graphic' it means it is 'a lot to look at'. So when you use a 'telephone' you communicate information by hearing and speaking; when you use a 'telegraph' you communicate information by reading. But what you may wish to review for many terms used in telephony and computers in general is to look at http://telecom-digest.org and review the dictionary and acronymns files therein. That's not complete either, but a good start on many terms. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Reply-To: FlyLikeAnEagle@United.Com Subject: Re: Dialogic JCT Series Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 04:19:55 GMT Maverick, A quick search on those boards will find the Intel site with far too much reading material. On the pages that show the cards you are intersted in, look for the SDK or software pages. The old package and easiest to find is "SR 5.1.1". The new package is called "SR 6.0". These are the new interfaces (APIs) that work across most of the Intel Dialogic boards, including the JCT boards. The hardware specs can be found on the page that shows all the Dialogic boards. A google search on "D41JCT D82JCTU" will lead you to the page I am referring to. The easiest way to get started with this stuff is to contact one of the support/resellers for Intel. It isn't easy getting the price and facts directly from Intel. My reseller (Cygcom) was able to provide some good starting help and point me to the various Intel sites that don't seem to have links google will find. David On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:26:24 UTC, Maverick wrote: > Hi, > I am interested in knowing the capabilities of Dialogic JCT series > boards. Can any one please tell me if the JCT boards specially the low > density boards ( for instance VFX/41JCT or D/41JCT-LS ) will provide > the following: > - PABX integration ( which PABXs can be integrated ) > - support of VoIP/GSM ( the data sheet tells us that such boards > support GSM and 7.26, but how do I access it..??? ) > Any help in this regard is appreciated. > Thanks in Advance. > Maverick ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 2004 07:46:50 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Was Telstar a production unit, expected to be a workaday medium, or > just an experiment to see how satellite communications would work? The latter. It was an AT&T ratepayer funded technology experiment. They'd already had some success with the Echo I satellite which was just a big mylar balloon. Telstar had an amplifier and ran uplink and downlink on separate frequencies. I think it was the first satellite to use solar cells and nicads. Since it was in LEO, it wasn't very useful for telephony since it was only visible both from Maine and from Britain or France for 20 minutes at a time. They did experiments with voice and telex but what most people remember is TV, since it was used to transmit the first live TV across the Atlantic. It was only 20 minutes at a time, but since the satellite's orbit was known, the 20 minutes could be slotted into TV schedules. (Before that, transatlantic TV involved video tapes and airplanes.) I get the impression that Telsat just did what it did, and all of the operations were on the ground at the three ground stations which had movable dishes to track Telsat as it passed overhead. Telstar only worked for about six months, apparently damaged by radiation from above ground nuke tests. There was a second larger Telstar II in 1963 in a higher but still not synchronous orbit, which ended AT&T's satellite program. By that time, Congress had chartered Comsat as the national satellite operator. They launched Intelsat I aka Early Bird into synchronous orbit in 1965, which started the modern communication satellite era, John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ Subject: Re: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? From: Charles G Gray Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 08:09:23 -0600 Telstar I, the first active satellite repeater ("bent pipe") was launched on 10 July 1962 by NASA, in conjunction with AT&T. If you "Google" for "Telstar", and look at the first 5 or 6 entries you can get full details (and some very good photos and diagrams) on the launch and transmission capabilities. Note that it was only 34.5 inches in diameter, and impossible to see from the Earth. Telstar I operated from 10 July 62 to 23 November 62 and 4 January 63 to 21 February 63. Transistor failure due to Van Allen Belt radiation damaged the command subsystem, but it was recovered for the second short round of tests, until it failed completely. Telstar II operated from 7 May 63 to May 65. An earlier satellite, Echo, was launched on 12 August 1960. It was a passive reflector balloon 33 meters in diameter, made of 0.013 cm thick aluminized plastic. It orbited at 1000 miles and could be seen from the Earth. I was living in El Paso, Texas at the time, and if we went out into the desert away from the "ground light" we could see it pass overhead. It was in an almost perfect circular orbit, inclined at 47.3 degrees. Communications were established between Jet Propulsion Laboratories (JPL) in Goldstone, CA and Bell Laboratories at Holmdel, NJ. JPL used a 26 meter parabolic dish antenna with 10 Kw transmit power. Bell Labs used a horn reflector with a 6 x 6 meter aperture. It could support two-way live voice and fax was demonstrated on 22 September 1960. See "Engineering and Science in the Bell System - 1925-1980" for more information. Note that the first transatlantic telephone cable (TAT-1) was not laid until 1956, and it carried only 36 voice channels. No transatlantic television capability existed until Telstar. In the 1960's "time assignment speech interpolation" or TASI was installed on TAT-1 which allowed 48 voice channels over the 36 cable pairs. TAT-2 was laid in 1959 and had 48 cable pairs supporting 72 voice channels. TAT-3 came to service in 1963 with 138 pairs for 276 voice channels. Now we are up to TAT-14, which is a dual reverse protection (self healing) ring, capable of carrying 16 10 Gb/s on four fiber pairs. Regards, Charles G. Gray Senior Lecturer, Telecommunications Oklahoma State University - Tulsa (918)594-8433 ------------------------------ From: J.P. Wing Subject: Re: Strange Wireless Problem Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:36:01 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com A User wrote in message news:telecom23.596.9@telecom-digest.org: > On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:29:11 -0500, Matt B. > wrote: >> Hello all, >> I'm having a strange problem and I hope you can help ... A few >> co-workers are using wireless-enabled laptops. They are able to >> receive e-mail from the POP3 server, but are unable to send. They get >> the error "The server has timed out ... might be server problems, >> etc.." If they plug in to a wired connection, it works fine. >> Everyone is using Outlook 2000 or 2003. It doesn't matter where they >> are using the wireless connection -- at home, at the office, at >> great-grandma Edna's ... it all does the same thing ... and we are at >> a loss! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! >> Thanks, >> Matt B. >> e-mail: moc.oohay@02091bttam <--Blocked...reverse it > You need to use the SMTP server of the the ISP you are on, or it will > be blocked. This is normal antispam behaviour. There are some SMTP servers that let users authenticate with username and password, basically granting them access from anywhere. I have a Powerbook and a .Mac subscription and use it all over the place, and I am able to send mail over my .Mac connection no matter where I am. Perhaps MSN/Hotmail offers a similar solution for Windows users. J.P. Wing ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: Politics (Celling Your Soul) From: Mark Atwood Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy! Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:21:33 GMT Steve Sobol writes: > Tony P. wrote: >> In article , dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org >> says: >>> One thing I've noticed lately, is a lot of telemarketing calls from >>> Quebec. Note that Canadian telemarketers are not bound by US law. >> I've noted the same thing. Is there some particular reason this occurs? > Because they aren't bound by US law ... But the people they are marketing on behalf of *are*, and they are responsable for assuring the legality of all marketing efforts they have subcontracted for. Mark Atwood | When you do things right, people won't be sure mark@atwood.name | you've done anything at all. http://mark.atwood.name/ http://www.livejournal.com/users/fallenpegasus ------------------------------ From: Kenneth P. Stox Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks Subject: Re: 35 billion Sprint-Nextel merger may close this week Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:07:07 GMT Telecom dailyLead from USTA wrote: > Telecom dailyLead from USTA > December 13, 2004 > http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18081&l=2017006 > TODAY'S HEADLINES > NEWS OF THE DAY > * $35 billion Sprint-Nextel merger may close this week I wouldn't count on it, according to today's WSJ, it appears that Verizon make make a run on Sprint. Could be an interesting time for the telecom market. ------------------------------ From: Rick Merrill Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Organization: Comcast Online Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:55:57 GMT DevilsPGD wrote: > In message Geoffrey Welsh > wrote: >>> A few years ago on a major road in my city, a system was trialled >>> where computerised signs would advise drivers what speed to travel at >>> to get the "green wave" of traffic lights. >> Shouldn't that be the speed limit?!? > Traffic light timing changes throughout the day (and in some cases, > dynamically based on traffic) -- this is unique, since it effectively > dynamically changes the speed limit (and this limit was not enforced). > For recreational use only. This was tried three decades ago in Woburn MA to synchronize the rt38 on-ramp with the traffic passing by on rt "128". It never worked for me, but the variable speed limit might help. - RM ------------------------------ From: John Bartley Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:02:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? > In article , Monty Solomon > wrote: >> A middle-level executive at Time Warner has approached several cable >> companies and broached the idea of restricting the ability of >> customers who use those company's Digital Video Recorders to record >> several popular Time Warner TV programs. On Mon, 13 Dec 2004, in comp.dcom.telecom Barry Margolin wrote: > Sounds like another good reason to support standalone DVRs, like > ReplayTV and TiVo, rather than cableco-supplied DVR services. Sadly, this is not an adequate solution. Unless you record a program off t o tape, disc or PC media, programs can be deleted through the capabilities of existing, standalone equipment. TiVo and ReplayTV have already demonstrated their ability to change the programming on DVRs without the consent of the user, as has DISH Network. Unless the user hacks the hardware and its current code to prevent it, the DVR manufacturer can slipstream the ability to do exactly what Time Warner wants into a user's DVR. My Dishplayer just had another new feature pushed to it over the weekend, without my consent. I've seen other 'upgrades' pushed to other DVRs, DISH and otherwise, without user consent. I regret that Mr. Margolin's solution is not adequate to protect television programming. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:38:20 -0500 From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Re: Broadcast fax provider? Organization: DSL.net Hey -- thought some of you here might want to have some fun with this fax spammer -- Notice he has a toll free number. Call him up and let him know what you think of his business! bkokinadis@gmail.com wrote: > If anyone is looking for broadcast fax solutions contact me at > brettkokinadis@openfax.com. We provide world-class service at the cost > of pennies instead of in-house fax solutions! > We focus on Broadcast fax (with or without mail merge), fax on demand, > email and voice broadcasting. > Call us today for a free quote or to learn more about our services. > www.openfax.com > 1-866-OPENFAX (1-866-673-6329) Ext. 1002 > brettkokinadis@openfax.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I used to publish here a 'business directory' for faxers, spammers, scammers and other vermin which posted an 800 number in their trash. Digest readers were then able to let their fingers do the walking as they inquired about all the fabulous offers being presented on the net. If anyone of you wishes to edit another issue of the Telecom Digest Business Directory please be my guest. Use good editing procedure (as we read recently on the net, a lack of good editing is a major problem around here), which means, in this context run a few thousand spam messages through an editor, grepping out all the lines with toll free numbers in them and a line with information. Put them in a list, one after another, and send that *edited only, please!* list as a message here to the Digest. The guys will know what to do when they read the list. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: 14 Dec 2004 13:46:25 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Joseph wrote: > On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:35:20 -0700, DevilsPGD > wrote: >>> Then their billing arrangement is broken. The FCC regs are that the >>> pay phone operator gets their kickback of (usually about $0.30 [a]) >>> for _each_ call. If you (typically) hit the " * " button on the keypad >>> to tell your phonecard service to let you make a second call without >>> having to hangup and redial the whole kit and kaboodle, the FCC regs >>> treat that one as, yes, a second call, with an additional $0.30. >> Interesting, do you know what defines when a second call starts? > Why is this such a difficult question? You finish one call and begin > another one. When the second call answers the second call starts. Most of these guys don't have supervision to tell when the second call answers. They cannot tell if the call DOES answer. Most of them wait a predetermined time (thirty seconds is common) and if the call has not terminated, assume it's begin. What if you are calling internationally, and the call set-up time is ten minutes or so? -- scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 2004 08:02:35 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Cingular Migration Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Cingular and AT&T Wireless are migrated, does it mean they are one > company? Yes, or they will be momentarily. > But how come there are advertisments saying current AT&T Wireless > customers can migrate to Cingular? Because their networks are still separate. They both use the same GSM technology, which means that users of one can roam on the other's network now for free, but it'll take a while to combine the two networks into one. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Cingular Migration Organization: ATCC Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:14:03 -0500 In article , jrefactors@hotmail.com says: > Cingular and AT&T Wireless are migrated, does it mean they are one > company? But how come there are advertisments saying current AT&T > Wireless customers can migrate to Cingular? I am confused, and don't > know how the telecom business works. > Please advise. > Thanks. They might be migrated on the balance sheet, but it will be a hell of a long time before they're migrated WRT billing systems and even wireless systems. ------------------------------ From: Justin Time Subject: Re: Cingular Migration Date: 14 Dec 2004 06:08:17 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com jrefact...@hotmail.com wrote on Dec 13, 10:10 am: > Cingular and AT&T Wireless are migrated, does it mean they are one > company? But how come there are advertisments saying current AT&T > Wireless customers can migrate to Cingular? I am confused, and don't > know how the telecom business works. > Please advise. > Thanks. Cingular bought the assets and liabilities of AT&T Wireless as of October 17, 2004. The migration -- or moving -- that is going on is being done in several ways. Customers of ATT Wireless have the option of remaining on their existing cellular plans and equipment or they can migrate -- move -- to Cingular and buy new equipment with new service plans and be subject to new service contracts. The conversion of all ATT customers to Cingular must be complete by March 16, 2005 as the name AT&T Wireless will revert back to AT&T where it has already been announced the brand will then be used to resell service from Sprint. AT&T Wireless will go from being a provider to a reseller of service. For those AT&T customers who do not migrate -- that is change plans, service or commitments -- they will be rolled into the Cingular network with their existing equipment and plans, and in some cases with no commitment contracts. I, for one, am on an old AT&T Regional Business Plan that has an extremely large "home" calling area and no long distance charges for calls originated within my "home" calling area. There is no equivalent plan available in the new Cingular offerings and AT&T stopped offering this particular plan about 2 years ago. As I have been a customer for several years, I also have no service commitments which makes me one of their prime targets for "roll-over" or migration. The cellular business is very cut-throat and the intent of the various companies is to offer a potential customer a wide set of offerings in order to get a commitment to spend a fixed amount with the company for a specific period of time. Often the offers include free or heavily subsidized phones with all the latest gadgets including cameras, "smart phones", so-called free services like cellular to cellular calling and long distance, a limited amount of messaging or other incentives to get a person to sign a contract or renew a contract for a new period. And with the average requested commitment being 2 years with an expected life cycle of a telephone of 18 months, it becomes a cycle designed to trap a consumer into a company or pay a hefty "termination penalty" to get out of their contract early. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Cingular Migration Organization: io.com From: djmcdona@io.com (Daniel J McDonald) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:02:09 -0600 In article , wrote: > Cingular and AT&T Wireless are migrated, does it mean they are one > company? Yes, but two networks. ATTWS uses TDMA primarily, with a few pockets of GSM, where Cingular is all GSM-based. > But how come there are advertisments saying current AT&T > Wireless customers can migrate to Cingular? That is, trade in their old TDMA phone for a GSM phone, or even their old attws GSM phone for a Cingular GSM phone ... This is, obstensibly, because Cingular has "many more features" on their phone programming, but really just represents what they want to do with their spectrum. > I am confused, and don't know how the telecom business works. I suspect if you knew how it worked, you would be even more confused ;-) > Please advise. If you live in a rural area, or travel in/through rural areas, stick with your TDMA phone until they pry it from your cold, dead hand. If you are just in big cities, changing won't hurt you, since the coverage for the GSM service is much better in the bigger cities. The goal is, supposedly, to provide GSM coverage everywhere TDMA coverage was over a two year period. But as long as I can get signal in lots of places where my wife's GSM phone is dead, I'm sticking with TDMA. Daniel J McDonald CCIE # 2495, CNX Visit my website: http://www.austinnetworkdesign.com ------------------------------ 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 #597 ******************************