From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Dec 25 11:49:58 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBPGnw127200; Sat, 25 Dec 2004 11:49:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 11:49:58 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412251649.iBPGnw127200@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 #618 TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Dec 2004 11:50:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 618 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Don't Disconnect VoIP Service Until You Are Ready to Lose Dial (Decker) Free Holiday Calling to Canada, Israel and the USA (Lisa Minter) USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart (Jack Decker) Re: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart (Aswath Rao) Verizon Takes Next Big Step Toward VoIP (Lisa Minter) Researchers Warn of Multiple Unpatched Windows Holes (Monty Solomon) Re: What Tandem in Telcom Means? (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: T1/ISDN Integration With VoiP? (Hank Karl) Re: Beware Sprint Phone Rebates (stannc@yahoo.com) My High Hopes About Google Ads (TELECOM Digest Editor) 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: Jack Decker Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 13:18:30 -0500 Subject: Don't Disconnect VoIP Service Until You Are Ready to Lose Dial A very unsettling thread over on BroadbandReports.com, about how those who have called to cancel a VoIP service at some future date have found that it stopped working a few moments later, and could not be reconnected. If the VoIP companies want to add fuel to the fire of those clamoring for more regulation, actions like this will surely do that. Note that AT&T seems to be the smelliest skunk at this picnic (but not the only one) ... http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/remark,12200955~mode=flat ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 19:22:17 -0500 Subject: Free Holiday Calling to Canada, Israel and the USA http://192.246.69.231/jeff/personal/archives/001471.html The Jeff Pulver Blog Notes, comments and observations December 24, 2004 Free Holiday Calling on the FWD Network: Sponsored by LibreTel Members of Free World Dialup are now able to place for free, calls into: Canada, Israel and the USA for the remainder of the holiday season. The call requests are being routed from the FWD Network to our peering partner LibreTel for completion. Members who place a call will hear a short audio advertisement for LibreTel at the start of each call. To place a call, dial: * [country code] number on the Free World Dialup network. Calls can not be place to mobile numbers outside of the USA and Canada. My hope is that our promotion will help some families and friends stay in closer touch during this holiday season. This promotion will be ending on January 2nd. Posted by jeff at December 24, 2004 09:15 AM [Note: If you don't already have Free World Dialup, one of the easier ways to get it might be to download the Pulver Communicator < http://www.pulver.com/communicator/ >, a combination instant messaging (works with AIM, ICQ, MSN and Yahoo IM's) and VoIP software client. You do need a headset, or a microphone plus headphones or speakers connected to your computer to use it, but if you have the right equipment you can be up and running with Free World Dialup in minutes.] ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:32:59 -0500 Subject: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart I don't know what they are putting in the water coolers at the United States Telecom Association (USTA), but this is just strange. ANYONE would half a brain would want to try to avoid the cushy little access charge scheme that the independent phone companies have set up for themselves, and I don't think there's a long distance company on the planet that hasn't tried to reduce the charges they pay to local phone companies by any legal means possible (and by some methods of questionable legality, but still, when you have are really, really idiotic system of compensation you have to expect things like that, given that the independent phone companies have somehow managed to manipulate the laws to their own benefit). What is so, well, just plain strange about this is that the USTA would make such an appeal to Wal-Mart and try to wrap themselves in the flag while doing so. A long time ago, I used to think that the small phone companies were the good guys (and a very few still are) but when I see things like this, I am starting to think they are mostly becoming just as bad as the old Bell System. Here's the press release the USTA posted on their web site (a further comment follows the release): FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Wednesday, December 22, 2004 CONTACT: Allison Remsen 202.326.7370 Telecom Association CEO Urges Wal-Mart and SAM'S CLUB To Disassociate From AT&T's Phone Card Scheme. Scheme Pads AT&T's Bottom Line at the Expense of Rural Communities WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, the President and CEO of the United States Telecom Association (USTA) sent a letter to the CEOs of Wal-Mart and SAMS CLUB urging the two companies to disassociate themselves from a scheme where AT&T exploits Wal-Mart and SAMS CLUB customers' goodwill for American troops to pad AT&T's bottom line in a controversial phone card gimmick that is currently under review by the Federal Communications Commission. "Knowing Wal-Mart and SAMS CLUB'S commitment to delivering value and service in rural America, I am writing to share my concern that your customers and your brands are being exploited by a company seeking public relations 'cover' for its scandalous business practices, which are currently under review by the Federal Communications Commission," explained Walter B. McCormick, Jr., President and CEO of USTA. If this activity continues, "the result for rural telecommunications and for the nation's commitment to affordable, reliable access to a dial tone is devastating. To date, AT&T has admitted to avoiding more than $500 million in obligations owed to help maintain rural telecom networks and universal service. "In this latest attempt to avoid paying what it owes, AT&T has employed a two-part scheme. In the first part, AT&T claims that because it briefly diverts long-distance calls between two towns in the same state to an out-of-state 800 platform, the company can avail itself of the lower rates carriers charge for interstate calls rather than paying the higher rates owed to local telecom providers for intrastate calls. The second part of the scheme involves playing a brief audio clip promoting companies like Wal-Mart and SAMS CLUB. AT&T claims that by including this brief audio clip, calls placed using these cards are no longer phone calls but are instead 'enhanced' services which have no obligation to support universal service, the joint industry fund that ensures affordable, reliable telecommunications services for rural and fixed-income Americans as well as for connecting schools and libraries to the Internet." The letter explains that while hiding behind the flag for its own financial gain, AT&T has blocked rivals from donating free calls to military families. Also, this latest scheme raises consumer phone bills and undermines affordable, reliable telecommunications in rural communities. "This is a case of for-profit patriotism, and it stands squarely at odds with what our member companies understand to be the core values of Wal-Mart and SAMS CLUB," explained McCormick. "We urge you to disassociate Wal-Mart and SAMS CLUB from AT&T's unconscionable refusal to meet its obligations to rural telecommunications and its cynical exploitation of the goodwill of all Americans toward our troops and their families." To view the full text of the letter, go to www.usta.org. [Actually it is at http://www.usta.org/getFile.php?k=0C948152754A4104BBF64FAA44CB646B ] ### About USTA USTA is the premier trade association representing service providers and suppliers for the telecom industry. USTA's 1,200 member companies offer a wide range of services, including local exchange, long distance, wireless, Internet and cable television service. [The aforementioned further comment:] So, this is a trade association trying to engage in protectionism for its members, just the same as when trade associations of plumbers or electricians or whatever try to get laws passed that would bar homeowners from doing their own plumbing or wiring. Of course, many homeowners just ignore such laws when they do get passed, and it doesn't surprise me that long distance companies and others would try to get around usurious and ridiculous access charges that the small phone companies somehow feel they are entitled to, this often after collecting ridiculously high monthly rates from their customers. I'm certainly not saying that either AT&T or Wal-Mart is on the side of the angels, so to speak, but to try and make this an issue of patriotism when it is really an issue of money and greed is reaching pretty low. Also, whether the USTA wants to admit it or not, the fact that a call is routed outside of a state can make it interstate. I recall when Merit/Michnet (not sure which moniker they were using at the time) set up their network of dialup access numbers back in the early 90's. Most of their numbers were in Michigan but they also had an access point in Washington, D.C. and another in Chicago (if I recall correctly). The whole point of having those two access points was that under the law it made the entire network an interstate network, thereby reducing their costs. Maybe a legal loophole, but what organization or business doesn't take advantage of any legal loophole they come across that will save them money? Now, this may be a case of "a pox on both your houses", because the letter does state this: "AT&T has used its position as a U.S. military contractor to block rivals from donating free calls to our military families. As you likely are aware, AT&T has an exclusive contract with the U.S. military. In a formal filing with the FCC, Sprint recounted that AT&T used its role to bar U.S. military personnel from using free calling cards that Sprint had distributed to troops in Iraq and elsewhere. While AT&T's 'free' minutes for the troops only accrue when your customers donate their purchased minutes, the company actively ensured our troops never received no-strings-attached donations. The clear message: Good-faith giving should not come at the expense of AT&T's bottom line." Now if this is true, it is also reprehensible, and those who have read this list for a while know that I generally don't have a high opinion of AT&T anyway (nor of Sprint, for that matter), but note that this is dragging in an unrelated issue. But to be fair about it, I would have to see AT&T's response, because frankly, I don't believe much of what the USTA is saying in this letter. Basically what it appears that the USTA is trying to do is get Wal-Mart to act as an enforcement arm for the companies they represent -- is it because their appeals to the FCC and to many state commissions to do their dirty work have fallen on deaf ears of late? Why they think Wal-Mart would want to get involved in this is beyond me; after all, Wal-Mart is a user of telephone service, and I'm sure that if they give this a moment's consideration they will realize that high access charges also affect their bottom line. Hopefully whoever receives this letter at Wal-Mart will either promptly file it in the paper shredder, or else send a response telling the USTA to take a flying leap. It is not patriotic to gouge telephone users, and it's certainly not patriotic to tie the issue of access charges to the issue of free phone cards. This letter reminds me of something that a social activist group might write to a company to try and get them to use paper instead of plastic, or to save the spotted owls, but the USTA isn't any social action group with high ideals - it is a trade organization trying to protect and enhance the bottom line of its members. So in that context, this letter is just strange. All of the above (except for the press release and the excerpt from the letter) is just my opinion, of course. But we really need access charge reform and it is organizations like the USTA that are standing in the way, and I for one would be just as happy to see them get run over (figuratively speaking) because they represent the old way of doing things, which basically amounts to gouging telephone users for every cent they can get (again my opinion). ------------------------------ From: Aswath Rao Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 22:43:40 -0500 Subject: Re: USTA sends strange letter to Wal-Mart I also hope that access charge regime gets fixed soon. At least then VoIP proponents will develop truly new features rather than just being an arbitrage player. Aswath > All of the above (except for the press release and the excerpt from > the letter) is just my opinion, of course. But we really need access > charge reform and it is organizations like the USTA that are > standing in the way, and I for one would be just as happy to see > them get run over (figuratively speaking) because they represent the > old way of doing things, which basically amounts to gouging > telephone users for every cent they can get (again my opinion). ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Researchers Warn of Multiple Unpatched Windows Holes Researchers warn of multiple unpatched Windows holes Vulnerabilities could leave systems open to remote attacks News Story by Paul Roberts DECEMBER 24, 2004 (IDG NEWS SERVICE) - Antivirus company Symantec Corp. warned its customers about a number of critical holes in Microsoft Corp.'s Windows operating system that surfaced late yesterday and that could make Windows systems vulnerable to compromise by remote attackers. Symantec acted after security researchers published the details of the heap overflow vulnerabilities in messages posted to online security news groups Thursday, including the Bugtraq mailing list, and on xfocus.net. The flaws affect most supported versions of Windows, but Microsoft has not yet issued a patch for the newly disclosed holes. Windows users are vulnerable to Internet based attacks until patches are issued, Symantec said. http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/holes/story/0,10801,98532,00.html Three Serious Windows Vulnerabilities Surface By David Morgenstern December 24, 2004 Symantec Corp.'s Security Response service on Friday confirmed that unpatched Windows vulnerabilities could pose a serious risk for exploits via malicious Web pages and e-mail messages. One of the three security vulnerabilities involves image handling-a source of recent exploits on Windows and Unix operating systems. The other two risks are found in the Help system and in Window's ANI (Automatic Number Identification) authentication. Symantec said the Microsoft Windows LoadImage API Function Integer Overflow Vulnerability could be exploited via browsers or e-mail client software. Users who open an HTML message or Web page bearing the image could face security risks. http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1745642,00.asp Exploits released for new Windows flaws Published: December 23, 2004, 3:31 PM PST By Robert Lemos Staff Writer, CNET News.com A Chinese security group has released sample code to exploit two new unpatched flaws in Microsoft Windows. The advisory comes in the week before Christmas, a time when many companies and home users are least prepared to deal with the problems. Security firm Symantec warned its clients of the vulnerabilities on Thursday, after the Chinese company that found the flaws published them to the Internet. One vulnerability, in the operating system's LoadImage function, could enable an attacker to compromise a victim's PC when the computer displays a specially crafted image placed on a Web site or in an e-mail. The other vulnerability, in the Windows Help program, likewise could affect any program that opens a Help file. http://news.com.com/2100-1002-5502534.html ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: What Tandem in Telcom Means? Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 00:53:57 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Wesrock@aol.com wrote: > In the late 1940s I made a call from a coin box in Los Angeles, and > the operator had to go to rate-and-route to learn which (manual) toll > tandem to plug into which had trunks toward the destination. L.A. had > so many outgoing manual toll trunks that they had to be distributed > among various tandems; as I recall, for my call the operator was > director to (manual) toll tandem No. 4. which had trunks for the MX > (multi-switch) routing to the destination. If you were calling out of the area before DDD came in effect in the late 1950s, there was always rate-and-route for calls out the LA area, and probably most areas of the country. ------------------------------ From: Hank Karl Subject: Re: T1/ISDN Intergration With VoiP? Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 11:25:47 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:05:11 GMT, Dave wrote: > If I have VoiP and use a converter to what normally would be a POTS > line, what if, instead, the converter went to a T1 or ISDN set up? > Could I have 23 or 24 incoming VoiP calls, each going to a different > DID number? Could I have an outgoing call center with 23 or 24 agents > each talking over VoiP at the same time to 23 or 24 different people? I assume you mean "23 agents each talking to one other person", not "23 agents each talking to 23 other people". The answer is yes, assuming you have sufficient bandwidth on the IP connection. I have heard that some high compression codecs (like G.723.1) may cause stress if you're using it all day long, and also may noticeably degrade the way your voice sounds. ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: Beware Sprint Phone Rebates Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 21:42:27 -0500 Organization: what do you want Nate wrote about Beware Sprint Phone Rebates on Date: 23 Dec 2004 09:20:02 -0800: > After my previous Sprint contract was up, I called to see about a > phone/plan upgrade. The salesman sold me a new plan and a new phone > with a big rebate. Well, the rebate was turned down because the > "saleperson" never changed my original plan. Called Sprint and > after talking to two people (including a supervisor), they wouldn't > do anything except say "talk to the rebate people". I explained > that the "rebate people" aren't the ones who screwed up. They > didn't seem to grasp this concept. It looks like Sprint may have > sold me a very, very overpriced phone. Can you say lifelong loss of > a Sprint customer? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is a typical tactic by Sprint. > We have had other messages in the Digest from people who said Sprint > was not honoring their rebates very well. PAT] I was hosed by Sprint's rebate nonsense last year as well. On the other hand, when I switched that same family member over to Verizon in November, they received the rebate check from the Verizon phone in three weeks. -Stan ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 18:24:57 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: My High Hopes About Google Ads Some readers may recall that three months ago, I signed up -- at their encouragement -- with Google Ad Sense, in the hopes I could convert this Digest into an advertiser supported forum. They had contacted me and said I was 'pre-approved' for their ad program. I spoke on the telephone to one of their (frankly, sort of smooth talking) sales reps in New York City who evaluated this site, and told me I should 'easily' expect to make 'several hundred dollars' per month. Nothing could be further from the truth. Thus far, now three months and a couple weeks later, they have not sent a single check, nor will they explain *how* they calculate the payouts. For example, one day there may be 20 click throughs and the Google scorecard says that is worth 10 dollars. A couple days later there are 20 click throughs and Google says it is only worth 10 cents. I do not get any answer from them in email about how they calculate these things. I run three clusters of ads (one horizonal banner at the top of the page on latest-issue.html and two 'tower' groups verticaally along the left side of the page, supposedly with four ads in each tower cluster). But often times, the two vertical towers are totally blank and the top horizonal thing is a single public service ad. They (Google) say that is because they do not have appropriate ads to give me. Now and again, they run the same identical ad two or three times on the latest-issue.html page, and if I read their terms of service correctly, they claim they will not run the same ad more than once on a page, but that does not seem to apply to them either. I have checked my pages both through the direct URL of 'massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives' and also through the more well-known alias 'telecom-digest.org' but also through the lesser known aliases of 'telecom-digest.net' and 'telecom-digest.com' and I also set up an alias to test with of 'telecom-digest.us.tf' and others, such as 'telecom-digest.n3.net' and sometimes *they* get a full compliment of ads when the original (via massis) get no ads at all. When I use another redirection alias, through 'us.tc' or 'net.tc' still other ads show up in German or French. I just wish they would explain their rationale for what they do, but they will not! They claim they will only pay with a written check mailed to your address (no PayPal payouts which is much more convenient) and that they will only pay for those months on which you get at least one hundred dollars in revenue, and that they 'reserve the right' to not pay that if they choose to charge you for your 'costs' in running their search engine or if they decided you were cheating on them, etc. And they won't give any real, consistent explanation for how they come to those conclusions. And guess what! Surprise ... I have yet to have a single month on which I 'earned' a hundred dollars. The closest I have come was last month (November) in which they admitted (by their calculation which is the only thing they will use) to $98.60. So, of course no check, since it was not the hundred dollars they insist on, which their smooth talking sales rep told me should be 'easy money'. And of course, if you quit their program, then you do not get anything accrued at all as of that point. Over all, I do not think Google Ad Sense is a very good program; it just clutters up a person's web pages with a bunch of ads, (of which I disapprove anyway), and it would be different if they actually paid on a timely basis and if they explained how they do it. So far I have gotten nothing from them except canned answers about their 'policies'. I cannot recommend it to web page publishers. Another similar program is called 'Bidvertiser' and I am thinking very seriously about writing off what I have lost on Google Ad Sense unless I can find an attorney willing to sue them to try and collect the approximatly two hundred dollars they always find reasons not to pay on, and see how the Bidvertiser program works instead. Bidvertiser says they will pay via PayPal anytime you, as a publisher, collect at least ten dollars due. There is also a similar program through Yahoo, I believe. I have experimented with Bidvertiser on a non-telecom web site I also operate, and it seems to be doing okay, although the payouts are much less, but at least it gives the appearance of being a more honest operation. Any thoughts from readers? Patrick Townson ------------------------------ 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 #618 ******************************