From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 1 21:45:56 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i222jtK23932; Mon, 1 Mar 2004 21:45:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 21:45:56 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403020245.i222jtK23932@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 #99 TELECOM Digest Mon, 1 Mar 2004 21:46:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 99 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Motorola BSR 64000 CMTS/Router Platform by Time Warner (Monty Solomon) TiVo Fourth Quarter FY '04 Conference Call and Webcast (Monty Solomon) Verizon Wireless and Verizon Airfone Offer 10 Cents-a-Minute (M Solomon) Sharing Passwords (Bit Twister) Re: Verizon/BA/NYNEX/NYTel Upstate NY (Mark J Cuccia) Re: Technology Triumphs Do Not Call List - Block Unwanted Calls (Joseph) RI & Providence Plantations; St. Pierre/Miquelon; Newfoundland (Brader) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Joseph) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (Phil Earnhardt) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 19:59:53 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Motorola BSR 64000 CMTS/Router Platform To Be Deployed Motorola BSR 64000 CMTS/Router Platform To Be Deployed by Time Warner Cable For Advanced Data Services - Mar 1, 2004 10:24 AM (PR Newswire) Reliability, Ease of Operation, Performance, and Density Cited as Key Factors In the Selection for the Deployment of DOCSIS(R) 1.1-Based Services HORSHAM, Pa., March 1 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Motorola, Inc. (NYSE:MOT) today announced that Time Warner Cable, North America's second largest cable operator, has approved the Motorola Broadband Services Router (BSR) 64000 for deployment of DOCSIS(R) 1.1-based IP services throughout its cable systems in the United States. The operator will begin deploying the Motorola BSR 64000 with a fully redundant configuration in its key San Diego market, which will mark the first deployment of the Motorola BSR 64000 in a Time Warner Cable system. Time Warner Cable selected Motorola after extensive lab and field testing proved that the Motorola BSR 64000 CMTS/router would support - and further increase - the operator's penetration of advanced high-speed data services. The Motorola BSR 64000 carrier-class features - specifically its reliability, ease of operation, performance, density and high availability - in particular helped distinguish the platform. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40722084 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 20:07:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Fourth Quarter FY '04 Conference Call and Webcast TiVo Inc. Invites You to Join Its Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2004 Conference Call and Webcast SAN JOSE, Calif., March 1 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo Inc. (Nasdaq: TIVO) announces its Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2004 Financial Results conference call and webcast is scheduled for Thursday, March 4, 2004, at 2:00 PM Pacific Time. Details below. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40725828 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 20:04:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Verizon Wireless and Verizon Airfone Offer 10 Cents-a-Minute In-Flight Calls And Discounted JetConnect Services 'Excuse me, I believe the call on the seatback phone is for you.' Airfone(R) Service for Verizon Wireless Plan Lets Customers Make and Receive In-Flight Calls and Charge Them to Their Verizon Wireless Bills BEDMINSTER, N.J., March 1 /PRNewswire/ -- Verizon Wireless, the nation's largest wireless service provider and operator of the most reliable wireless network, today announced it is teaming up with Verizon Airfone to offer discounted in-flight calls for Verizon Wireless customers. Beginning today, Verizon Wireless frequent flyers can stay connected while in flight for just 10 cents-a-minute when they sign up for the new Airfone Service for Verizon Wireless $10 monthly subscription plan. Verizon Wireless customers who want to make and receive calls while in flight need only register as a user on a Verizon Airfone handset to make and receive calls for 10 cents-a-minute with a monthly subscription or 69 cents-a- minute with no subscription. Callers dialing the customer's Verizon Wireless phone number will reach them on board any of the more than 2,000 planes served by Verizon Airfone nationwide. Charges will be billed directly to the customer's Verizon Wireless bill. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40725518 ------------------------------ From: Bit Twister Subject: Sharing Passwords Organization: home user Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 01:36:59 GMT Is password-lending a cybercrime? By Mark Rasch, SecurityFocus http://theregister.co.uk/content/55/35942.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You may wish to read the article referenced above, then reach a decision of your own. My personal feeling is this: If you willfully provide a password belonging to your self to some other person, then YOU should be responsible for whatever damage is caused as a result. If your password was used *without* your knowledge or permission then AFTER you have signed off on an affidavit denying any knowledge or permission given for its use, you are not responsible. That's my opinion. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 13:16:51 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: Verizon/BA/NYNEX/NYTel Upstate NY Earlier, I wrote, regarding how *MUCH* VZ/BA/NYNEX/NYT would like to sell-off: (snip) > WOW! This is even *MORE* than I thought they would have planned to > have sold off! > (Note that Rochester NY is its own LATA and not part of any > NYTel/NYNEX/ BA/VZ LATA; It has been an independent LEC/telco for > decades; Also, the entire Citizens/Frontier Rochester NY Telco area > split off to NPA 585 in Fall 2001. But some of NYT/NYNEX/BA/VZ in NPA > 716 also split off to the new NPA 585 as well at the same time) > It appears that all of the following LATAs of NYT/NYNEX/BA/VZ in > *upstate New York* (some of these LATAs also spill over slightly into > PA and MA, but I think those out-of-state ratecenters associated with > NY state LATAs are served by "independent" telcos) ... would be sold > off, according to what was mentioned in the Syracuse Post-Standard > newspaper article: > LATA 140 "Buffalo": > all of NPA 716 and parts of a large amount of NPA 585. > LATA 138 "Binghampton": > MOST all of NPA 607 (to the south) > LATA 136 "Syracuse": > all of NPA 315, a small part of NPA 607 (to its north) > LATA 134 "Albany": > all of NPA 518 > LATA 133 "Poughkeepsie": > the northern part of NPA 845 (which split from NPA 914 in 2000) (and > maybe some residual "wireless" 914-NXX codes that didn't seem to go > mandatory as 845-NXX in 2000, yet these are associated with > ratecenters within the Poughkeepsie LATA); > and the "non-Westchester County" areas of LATA 132 "New York City > Metro" which would include all of the remaining parts of NPA 845. > However, there are some ratecenters which are in this NYC Metro > LATA 132, which "straddle" the county line of Westchester with an > adjacent county to the north or west. Also, the "non-Westchester > County" areas of LATA 132 "New York City Metro", which VeriZon would > want to sell-off, seem to include all of Putnam County and Rockland > County, and the southern part of Orange County. The northern part of > Orange County would most likely be in the "Poughkeepsie" LATA (133). > And all of this "non-Westchester County" area of LATA 132 (NYC) and > all of LATA 133 (Poughkeepsie) is what split off to NPA 845 (previously > NPA 914) in 2000, NPA 914 being retained by NYC-132-LATA-associated > Westchester County which VeriZon wants to retain. > I suppose that those two extreme-southwest-CT towns of Byram and > Greenwich (still part of NPA 203) which have always been > NYT/NYNEX/BA/VZ and are also associated with the NYC LATA #132, will > be retained by VeriZon, unless there might be forthcoming plans to > sell those off as well, possibly to SBC-SNET? BTW, the ratecenter of > Woodbury CT within SBC-SNET's LATA 920, was the only "independent" > telco within the state of CT (if you consider SNET to have been "Bell" > all along, even though AT&T only owned a minority share in the old > pre-1984 "Bell System" days), however, around 1999 or 2000, SBC-SNET > actually purchased the Woodbury Telephone Company! I forgot to mention the other areas of the New York City Metro LATA #132 which I would assume that VZ/BA/NYNEX/NYTel would retain ... *OBVIOUSLY* the five boroughs of New York City itself: Manhattan (New York County), NPAs 212 overlaid with 646, and ... Bronx (Bronx County), Queens (Queens County), Brooklyn (Kings County), and Staten Island (Richmond County), these latter four being NPAs 718 overlaid with 347; ALL FIVE boroughs of New York City also having been overlaid with NPA 917 as of 1-January-1992. And Westchester County as mentioned (which retained NPA 914 when NPA 845 split off in 2000, the new 845 NPA being for the other counties or portions there-of in the NYCity Metro LATA #132, as well as for the Poughkeepsie LATA #133 northern part of NPA 914 splitting to NPA 845; it seems that all of NPA 845 would be the southernmost part of what VZ/BA/NYNEX/NYT would like to sell-off, both the 845 NPA part of the NYCity Metro LATA as well as the Poughkeepsie LATA part of NPA 845). I mentioned those two VZ/BA/NYNEX/NYT towns in southwestern CT, which had been NYTel for *DECADES*, Byram and Greenwich, in NPA 203 (still), both being in the New York City Metro LATA #132, rather than being SBC-SNET in their CT LATA #920. It "appears" that VZ/BA/NYNEX/NYT would retain these areas, UNLESS they were to transfer them to SBC- SNET. Both of these have been associated with NYTel and home on White Plains for decades as well. They might need a "re-home" to the SBC-SNET New Haven CT tandem and to be re-associated with the SBC-SNET Connecticut LATA #920 if ever the ownership of these ratecenters would be transferred by VZ to SBC. And then there is Long Island ... Queens and Brooklyn/Kings are on L.I., but they are indicated above as actually being in New York City itself. But there is also Nassau County (NPA 516, retaining this area code when NPA 631 split off in 1999/2000), and also Suffolk County (NPA 631, split off from NPA 516 in 1999/2000). These two Long Island counties would most likely be retained by VZ/BA/NYNEX/NYTel. Also, not counting recent CLECs/ wireless, these two counties always seem to have been 100% "Bell", except for the unique community/ratecenter/LATA of Fishers' Island, NY. Fishers' Island, NY is an island associated with NY State and Suffolk County, and had been NPA 516, changing to NPA 631 with the split of 1999/2000. But they are their own indepedent "Fishers' Island Telco", and they have *always* "homed" on SNET/CT, *NOT* on Garden City L.I. NY in Suffolk County. At the time of divestiture, they were initially planned to be associated with the SNET/CT LATA #920, but for various (foolish) NY State political reasons, were made into their own unique LATA, all to themselves. There is a ferry boat connecting the island with New London CT and all telephone traffic seems to have to route through CT, either via AT&T or SBC-SNET. Even 411 and 911 and '0' calls from Fishers' Island do not route 'directly' to VZ/BA/NYNEX/NYTel on Long Island, but rather route "via" AT&T's (or SBC-SNET's) facilities in Connecticut! But I would assume that Long Island (all of 516/Nassau County and virtually all of 631/Suffolk County) would be retained by VZ/BA/NYNEX/NYT in addition to NYCity itself, and Westchester County (NPA 914). And, *IF* this intended sale of "upstate NY" would go through, which I doubt (I think NY state regulatory is *NOT* going to allow this), then what is retained of the old NYTel (Westchester County southward and eastward), would be *DISCONTIGUOUS* from the old New England Tel (RI, MA, VT, NH, ME). The old NYNEX was made up of NYTel (NY) and New England Tel, with NY state being adjacent to MA and VT. But that part of NY state would now be sold off by VZ/BA/NYNEX/NYTel! Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA CSA ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Technology Triumphs Do Not Call List - Block ALL Unwanted Calls Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 11:21:23 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On 29 Feb 2004 18:19:56 -0800, Ken@Privacy-Call.com (Ken Chase) wrote: > Callers on the consumer's 'Excluded' list cannot ring the phone or > leave a message, including cell phone, out-of-state, and interna- > tional callers. And how would one use this device if they have people calling them from international locations where the CLIP is not even present? I guess that means no one from outside the NANP can ever call you! remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ Subject: RI & Providence Plantations; St. Pierre/Miquelon and Newfoundland Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 16:25:51 EST From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) Lisa Hancock writes [spelling corrected]: > While we're on the subject of strange geography, there's a little > island off Newfoundland, St. Pierre IIRC, that is completely part of > France with no connection to Canada. Two islands, St. Pierre and Miquelon, plus some tiny ones nearby. They are designated a "Territorial Collectivity" of France, which in practice means they're something like Puerto Rico in relation to the US. Total population of the islands is about 7,000. They are not part of the North American Numbering Plan, but instead have their own country code, +508 (the leading 5 means a non-NANP number in the Americas; France itself is +33). One interesting quirk is that they use a time zone closer to that of France than their geographical position warrants: zone -3 (-2 during daylight saving), or two hours east of Eastern Time, one hour east of Atlantic Time, half an hour east of Newfoundland Time. Because of the curves and wiggles in the coast of the island of Newfoundland, this means that if you go directly *east* from St. Pierre or Miquelon, the next land you reach will be part of Newfoundland, meaning that you have to set your watch *back* half an hour! > As to "Rhode Island and Providence Plantations", could someone explain > that name? Simple. Rhode Island is an offshore island, also called Aquidneck Island. Its largest city is Newport. Providence Plantations is a section of mainland centered around Providence, and forms most of the state's area. Presumably the island was the important part when the name began being used and so was named first, but the full name was so it was already being shortened in speech before Providence became more important. Mark Brader "How can we believe that?" Toronto "Because this time it's true!" msb@vex.net -- Lynn & Jay: YES, PRIME MINISTER My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 11:13:58 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On 29 Feb 2004 17:55:14 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote: > As to "Rhode Island and Providence Plantations", could someone > explain that name? Rhode Island's first permanent settlement (Providence Plantations) was established at Providence in 1636 by English clergyman Roger Williams and a small band of followers who had left the repressive atmosphere of the Massachusetts Bay Colony to seek freedom of worship. Canonicus and Miantonomi granted Williams a sizable tract of land for his new village. http://www.state.ri.us/rihist/earlyh.htm remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Date: 1 Mar 2004 15:47:17 -0800 Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://newsguy.com] I called Qwest today to ask the details about the service. Apparently, this is a "stealth" deployment -- the website has press releases but no particulars published about the pricing of the service. ;-( You can see the press release at http://www.qwest.com/about/media/pressroom/1,1720,1454_current,00.html The rep thought that pricing/service details would be published in a week or two. OTOH, the rep I asked a week ago told me that the information would be available on 2/28 when the service was rolled out. All services are for "up to 1.5Mbps [download]" DSL service. Qwest does offer a lower-cost 256K/256K service to their telephone customers, but will apparently only offer a single speed of "naked DSL" service. The service rep read off some confusing pricing numbers; I repeatedly asked for clarification. She put the call on hold twice to consult with her associates to clarify the numers. I am still confused by what the rep said, because a "Qwest-only" ISP doesn't seem to be available with any of Qwest's services before they had "naked DSL". Note: the rates do not include a DSL modem: $33.00 DSL only no ISP (customer would arrange for 3rd party ISP) $39.99 DSL with Qwest as ISP, no e-mail or web hosting $44.99 DSL with MSN as the ISP if you sign up for Qwest's national wireless plan $49.99 DSL with MSN as the ISP $57.99 DSL with Qwest as the ISP One new thing was mentioned in the press release: standalone DSL is part of Qwest's plan to offer broadband VoIP by the end of the year. I know little about the Vonage service, but I see no reason why one couldn't use that service with any of Qwest's DSL offerings -- including "naked DSL" -- today. --phil ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #99 *****************************