From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 2 14:31:15 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i12JVF418636; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 14:31:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 14:31:15 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402021931.i12JVF418636@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 #51 TELECOM Digest Mon, 2 Feb 2004 14:30:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 51 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #418, February 2, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: "Superman TV" and Telephones (jbl) Re: "Superman TV" and Telephones (Joseph) EME was Re: "Superman TV" and Telephones (noname) Faked CallerID Info? (Chironex) Re: Help With Call-Attendant System? (Carl Navarro) 802.11g Wireless Router/Signal Booster/wireless Antenna to Home (O K) Free Legal Downloads For S6/Month. DRM Free (Monty Solomon) TiVo Here, There - TiVo Everywhere (Monty Solomon) TiVo Kicks Off the Year with Lower Pricing (Monty Solomon) T-Mobile and Comcast Strategic Marketing Alliance (Monty Solomon) 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, 02 Feb 2004 10:07:22 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #418, February 2, 2004 ************************** TELECOM UPDATE ************************** published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 418: February 2, 2004 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** ALLSTREAM: www.allstream.com ** BELL CANADA: www.bell.ca ** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: www.cisco.com/ca ** CYGCOM INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES: www.cygcom.com ** GROUP TELECOM: www.360.net ** JUNIPER NETWORKS: www.juniper.net ** PRIMUS CANADA: www.primustel.ca ** SPRINT CANADA: www.sprint.ca ** TELUS: www.telus.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Telus and TWU Go to Binding Arbitration ** Nortel Posts First Profit in Seven Years ** CRTC Extends Winback Prohibition ** Allstream and Call-Net Want Backlog CSAs Denied ** Worm Hits SCO With Denial of Service Attack ** MTS to Vote on Income Trust Proposal ** Bell Reorganizes Western Operations ** Telcos to Provide Ethernet Links to Competitors ** Allstream Offers Ethernet Private Line ** Cogeco Boosts Internet Access Speed ** Investment Group Buys Persona ** Financial Results Aliant Avaya Sierra Wireless ** Issues for Wireless Data Planners ============================================================ TELUS AND TWU GO TO BINDING ARBITRATION: On January 28, the Canadian Industrial Relations Board ruled that Telus had violated the Canada Labour Code and "irreparably undermined the union's efforts in achieving a collective agreement." It ordered the company to offer the Telecommunications Workers Union the option of binding arbitration. On Friday, the TWU Executive voted unanimously to accept binding arbitration. Also last week: ** Telus submitted a final offer to the union, then withdrew it after the CIRB Order. ** Over 86% of Telus employees represented by the TWU voted to authorize strike action. If the union had not accepted binding arbitration, it could have called a strike on 72 hours notice this week. ** The B.C. Supreme Court granted an injunction blocking the TWU from showing commercials that parody Telus's animal- based advertising. Telus said the commercials violate its copyright. NORTEL POSTS FIRST PROFIT IN SEVEN YEARS: Nortel Networks earned US$732 million in 2003, its first profit since 1997. World revenues for the year were $9.81 billion, down from $10.57 billion in 2002, but fourth quarter revenues were up 12% over the previous year. CRTC EXTENDS WINBACK PROHIBITION: CRTC Decision 2004-4 responds to Call-Net's "jump start to local competition" application filed last June (see Telecom Update #385). The decision: ** rejects Call-Net's request for a 50% reduction in local loop rates; ** extends the "winback" period, during which incumbent telcos are prohibited from trying to win back customers who have taken service from a CLEC, to 12 months; ** orders incumbents to provide CLEC customers served on unbundled loops the same level of installation and repair service that the ILEC provides to its own customers; ** orders ILECs to provide "prominent" reference, on bills and their Web sites, to a new section on the CRTC website that will inform consumers about local competition. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/dt2004-4.htm ALLSTREAM AND CALL-NET WANT BACKLOG CSAs DENIED: Allstream and Call-Net have asked the CRTC to reject all pending telco proposals for Customer Specific Arrangement tariffs, and to order Bell Canada to cease providing service under these contracts. They want the Commission to impose a moratorium on new CSAs until the Federal Court rules on Bell's appeal of a CRTC ruling requiring disclosure of the details of the tariffs. (See Telecom Update #405) WORM HITS SCO WITH DENIAL OF SERVICE ATTACK: On the weekend, computers infected by the MyDoom.A worm launched a Denial of Service attack on SCO, the Utah-based software company that claims to own part of the code used in Linux, putting its website out of service. MyDoom.B is expected to launch a similar attack on Microsoft on Tuesday. ** Microsoft and SCO Group have each offered US$250,000 rewards for information leading to conviction of the authors of the worms that have infected hundreds of thousands of computers and accounted for over 30% of Internet traffic at peak. MTS TO VOTE ON INCOME TRUST PROPOSAL: The Board of Directors of Manitoba Telecom Services says it will put a proposal to convert the company into an income trust to a vote at its next annual meeting. The Board took no position on the proposal. BELL REORGANIZES WESTERN OPERATIONS: Bell Canada has placed both its Bell Mobility and Bell West operations in Alberta and B.C. under a single executive. Paul Healey, head of Bell Mobility in the two provinces, will become President of Bell's Western Canadian Region. ** Randy Reynolds, formerly head of Bell West, is retiring. TELCOS TO PROVIDE ETHERNET LINKS TO COMPETITORS: CRTC Telecom Decision 2004-5 gives interim approval to Ethernet access tariffs filed by Bell Canada and Telus (see Telecom Update #370, 397), including Ethernet connecting arrangements for competitor use, and orders the other major incumbents to file similar tariffs. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/dt2004-5.htm ALLSTREAM OFFERS ETHERNET PRIVATE LINE: Allstream has launched Ethernet Private Line service at 1 Gbps within and between Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Calgary, and Vancouver. More sites are to be added later this year. COGECO BOOSTS INTERNET ACCESS SPEED: Cogeco Cable has increased the download speed of its Standard High-Speed Internet service from 3 Mbps to 5 Mbps, and of its High Speed Pro service from 5 Mbps to up to 10 Mbps. Upload speeds have been raised to 640 Kbps and 1 Mbps, respectively. INVESTMENT GROUP BUYS PERSONA: A group of investors including TD Capital Canadian Private Equity Partners and CIBC Capital Partners has agreed to buy Persona Inc, Canada's sixth- largest cable operator, for $406 million. The deal requires approval by two-thirds of the company's shareholders. FINANCIAL RESULTS: ** Aliant's 2003 profit was $185.3 million, up from $142.2 million in 2002. Total revenue grew 1.1% to $2.07 billion. ** Avaya reports September-December world revenues of US$971 million, 3% more than the same period the previous year. Net income of $10 million compares to a loss of $121 million in 2002. ** Sierra Wireless had a profit of $1.5 million in 2003, compared to a loss of $38.4 million the previous year. Revenues for the year were $34.6 million, an increase of 54%. ISSUES FOR WIRELESS DATA PLANNERS: The February issue of Telemanagement features four reports on wireless LANs, including: lessons learned from McGill's campus-wide WLAN; a user evaluation of public Wi-Fi hotspots; rethinking enterprise WLAN configurations; and key issues in evaluating wireless ROI. ** Telemanagement Online subscribers can access this issue, and an extensive library of past issues, columns, editorials and feature reports, at http://online.angustel.ca/. ** To subscribe, or to add online access to your existing subscription, go to www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub-online.html. Charter Subscriber discounts are available now. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2003 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: "Superman TV" and Telephones Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 11:28:58 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , Gail M. Hall wrote: > What struck me was that when they used their cell phones, the tones > were sounded as the buttons were pressed instead of the way my current > cell phone works. Mine makes a beep with each phone press, but I > don't hear the normal phone tones until I press "Talk" on my phone. My cell phone (an Audiovox on VZW) plays the touchtone if you dial a digit (or * or #), or a beep if you press any other button. I don't hear any tones after I press "send". On the other hand, my cordless phone at home does act the way you describe, if you dial before pressing "talk". > Another thing in the story was that they would immediately enter the > numbers over and over again and *then* get some kind of beep that > indicated they didn't have a signal. My phone has a little graphic on > it that indicates signal strength from the time I turn on the phone. > It also has a graphic that indicates battery power. I would know > without entering any numbers if I had a signal or not. I would not > have to dial any number first. A lot of people might not look first; Columbo, with all his technical "expertise", for instance, was very new to his mobile phone and possibly had no idea what all the little doodads in the display meant. > [TELECOM Digest Editor' Note: Television and Hollywood tend to take > some liberties with the realities of cell phones in their productions. > I do not think any cellphones ever worked differently than the way > they do now. PAT] Yes, but in the case of the phones, the liberties were not all that huge (this time). /JBL ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: "Superman TV" and Telephones Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 06:52:42 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NOcom On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:05:10 -0500, Gail M. Hall wrote: > What struck me was that when they used their cell phones, the tones > were sounded as the buttons were pressed instead of the way my current > cell phone works. Mine makes a beep with each phone press, but I > don't hear the normal phone tones until I press "Talk" on my phone. I'm guessing that it may may be a case of different manufacturers implementing "dialing" differently. On all Nokias I've ever used as well as an Ericsson model that I have when you press the keys to "dial" you get regular DTMF "touch tones." > Another thing in the story was that they would immediately enter the > numbers over and over again and *then* get some kind of beep that > indicated they didn't have a signal. Again, this probably has more to do with the way a manufacturer designs their phones. Some phones will beep when they go out of range. Some phones will have blinking light that shows constantly while the phone is in use while others do not. Others will change colours as they go out of range or have something else happen such as running low on battery. You can't really make an absolute statement. Along with that is film/TV producers don't always picture phones in a realistic manner. I don't think I can count the number of times I've seen someone go to use a "fortress" type pay phone and when they insert their coins you hear a "ding-ding" like you used to get with the old three slot pay phones or having a Trimline phone ring and the ring you hear is the dual gong "500" type ringer rather than the muted gong you should hear from a Trimline. > My parents had a satellite dish for their TV back around 1980. It was > a big thing. At first it could get lots of channels, but eventually > the companies started jumbling their signals so people would have to > buy a service to descramble the signals to see the channels. By the > '90's, that satellite dish was essentially useless. The service is still very much alive though the popular satellite service is now the mini-dish rather than the BUD (big ugly dish.) True there's not as much free programming as there was, but if you have the money there's just as much programming available now as there was then. remove NO from .NOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: noname Subject: EME was Re: "Superman TV" and Telephones Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 05:20:59 GMT In article , gmhall@apk.net says: > On 12 Jan 2004 07:01:25 -0800, in comp.dcom.telecom message > , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa > Hancock) wrote: >> I saw an old episode of the TV "Superman" (mid 50s) and >> noticed how today's phones would've made a difference. > On another issue, I noticed that the bad guy had a big TV, which he > said was hooked to a satellite with 200 channels. I didn't see a box. > Also, there was no remote, so he had to use the TV's on/off button to > turn it on and off. > My parents had a satellite dish for their TV back around 1980. It was > a big thing. At first it could get lots of channels, but eventually > the companies started jumbling their signals so people would have to > buy a service to descramble the signals to see the channels. By the > '90's, that satellite dish was essentially useless. My brother-in-law > took down the dish last summer and has plans to make something else > out of it -- maybe something to let plants climb on or something. They make great EME antennae for us hams out there. EME being Earth- Moon-Earth as in bouncing signals off of it. ------------------------------ From: Chironex Subject: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 11:36:09 -0500 I recently hosted a very priveliged conference call using an online calling service. Once the call was complete, I received a list of the people connected to the call, and noticed that there was an additional caller who was not authorized. It was not the conference call service, nor was it any of my employees as I can account for all of their caller ID info. Strangely the number in question is 794-902-XXXX, which appears to be an unused area code! Is this possible and how the heck did someone do this???? ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Help With Call-Attendant System? Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 09:49:19 -0500 Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America On 30 Jan 2004 12:32:13 -0800, jcoronat@paulbunyan.net (James) wrote: > Can anyone help in constructing an automated telephone answering > system for me? > The idea is to allow a caller to sample one or more long books over > the phone. Each of the one or more books will be playing continuously, > and a caller will simply tap in to a particular recording at whatever > point it happens to be when the caller calls in. So does this mean I can listen to an entire book on your dime two minutes at a time? > It should work as follows: the caller dials our toll-free number and > connects to our system ("System" - the one you supply me). The System > should then: > 1. automatically answer the call and play an outgoing message of 1-2 > mins ("Hello and thank you for calling! To hear Book One, press"); > 2.then automatically connect to a live feed-through for 2-4 minutes > minutes (this is one of the continuously playing CD players or tape > players); > 3. then automatically disconnect or fade out the live feed-through and > play a short termination message ("Thank you for listening. For > additional information write"); > 4. then automatically disconnect the call. Without spending more than 30 seconds on the answer, it is possible to do this in two ways. One is the standard voice mail system. The other is the equipment used for time and temperature. A vox file is fairly easy to construct in software with the right equipment. If it were my system, I'd select a random or specific passage from each book and make vox files of those passages. Now you can transfer them to the VM or T&T system and give them locations. > To start the System, I'd insert my book CD or audiocassette into a CD > or tape player, set the player on "continuous play" mode, and jack it > into the live feed-through port on the machine you supply. If the > system had more than one port, I'd jack additional CD players, each > playing different books, into the other ports. Then I want to walk > away and have it service callers unattended. > To summarize: when callers dial in, they'll hear an introductory > message, then 2 to 4 minutes of the book's text at whatever point the > recording happens to be at that moment; then, a short message telling > what to do if more information is desired. At the end, the system > disconnects the caller automatically. > Does anyone know how I could assemble a system of telephone equipment > that will do this? My guess is that you can have 4-16 ports and a whole boatload of sample books on a VM system for less than $4K. It requires a computer and software(or maybe the same computer) to sample the Audiobook, and just a very small learning curve to slot the books in the right "mailbox". Carl Navarro > Sincerely, > James. ------------------------------ Reply-To: O K From: O K Subject: 802.11g Wireless Router/Signal Booster/Wireless Antenna to Network Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2004 18:57:03 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications I have a question about adding a wireless antenna or signal booster to my home network. My current setup is I have a Linksys WRT54G wireless router which supports B and G infrastructure. I have a 802.11b Wireless PCI card in my PC. In my condo, I can verify that the wireless portion of the network between the wireless router and my PC are functioning. I then take my PC to another floor in my building, and I get little to no signal. I would like to add either a signal booster and/or an antenna to make my network functional. From the reading that I have done, I can't determine where the antenna needs to be installed if I go this route. Is it installed on the PCI portion of the network, or the router portion of the network. As the router TX's and RX's, is the problem with the low transmission power from the router and therefore I need a wireless antenna on the PC, or is the problem the low transmission power from the PCI card to the router upstairs? I can't figure out which hardware I need to make this functional. Please contact me directly at okorkie3@cox.net (remove the *) Thanks, Owen ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 00:09:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Free Legal Downloads For $6/Month. DRM Free Free legal downloads for $6 a month. DRM free. The artists get paid. We explain how ... By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco Imagine a world where music and movies could be freely exchanged online, where artists are recompensed and the labels don't lose a cent, and where 12-year old girls need not fear harboring an MP3 of their favorite TV show theme tune on their PC. All that could be yours for less than the price of a subscription to Napster: for less than $6 a month. Harvard University Professor Terry Fisher has completed the first comprehensive examination of various alternative models and the one we outline here offers such tantalizing social benefits, that even the most jaded sceptic ought to pay attention. Professor Fisher belongs to the school of forensic sceptics rather than the school of wide-eyed techno-utopians, and he's spent three years trying to make the sums add up. We think it's worth a look, and we think you ought to take a look too. (To make his task even more difficult, Fisher's license model also takes on the additional onerous task of compensating Hollywood, too). How does it work? Let's look at the sums: what level of compensation do the labels, studios and artists need to make it worthwhile? http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/35260.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 02:01:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Here, There - TiVo Everywhere Stephen Williams In "Ghostbusters," one of the running gags that was assimilated into the lexicon of pop culture occurs when Bill Murray is attacked by the ghost. "I've been slimed!" he shrieks. Well, I've been TiVoed. I came face to face with this recent electronic dependency at the Consumer Electronics Show just past in Las Vegas. In fact, the spectre of TiVo was ubiquitous at CES. With more than a dozen products set to launch this year, TiVo continues to solidify its expanding niche in home video and beyond. While the DVD recorder still seems to me the logical successor to the VCR, the DVD recorder-with-TiVo now seems more logical. The digital recording technology - or near-perfect copies of it - showed up as well in home networking products, in satellite broadcast systems, in cable TV boxes; and plans are in place to invade the space of satellite radio networks Sirius and XM. http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-plgear3643969jan27,0,1537321.column ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 08:09:16 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Kicks Off the Year with Lower Pricing Company Announces All-Time Low $199 MSRP for TiVo(R) Series2(TM) Digital Video Recorders SAN JOSE, Calif., Feb. 2 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo (Nasdaq: TIVO) today announced a price change that will for the first time, push the entry price point on the TiVo(R) Series2(TM) DVR to under $200 at leading retailers across the country. TiVo Series2 DVRs will be available starting at a manufacturer's suggested retail price (MSRP) of $199 for the 40-hour, and $299 for the 80-hour model. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40373092 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 09:11:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: T-Mobile and Comcast Announce Strategic Marketing Alliance T-Mobile and Comcast Announce Strategic Marketing Alliance Companies Team Up for Customers to Experience Wireless Broadband Internet Service On the Go BELLEVUE, Wash. and PHILADELPHIA, Feb. 2 /PRNewswire/ -- Comcast Cable and T-Mobile USA, Inc. today announced a strategic marketing alliance to offer the T-Mobile HotSpot Wi-Fi Internet service to Comcast's nearly five million high- speed Internet customers. With today's announcement, Comcast customers can experience the convenience, reliability and value of a T-Mobile wireless broadband connection when they're away from home, via Wi-Fi, at the more than 4,000 T-Mobile HotSpot locations nationwide. As part of this strategic marketing alliance, Comcast high-speed Internet customers will receive a special offer when they sign up for T-Mobile HotSpot through their Comcast portal homepage. Comcast customers who subscribe to the T-Mobile HotSpot service can surf the Web, check email or view streaming media at wireless broadband speeds with a Wi-Fi enabled laptop or PDA at T-Mobile HotSpot locations. T-Mobile operates the largest commercial Wi-Fi network of its kind in the U.S. and Comcast is the nation's largest provider of high-speed Internet service. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40374961 ------------------------------ 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 2004 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 #51 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 2 18:52:48 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i12Nqmu20259; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 18:52:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 18:52:48 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402022352.i12Nqmu20259@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 #52 TELECOM Digest Mon, 2 Feb 2004 18:53:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 52 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Mydoom Computer Virus Launches Record Attack on SCO Web Site (ptownson) Justin and Janet Top Super Bowl Show According to Annual (Monty Solomon) Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. (Monty Solomon) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Sam Etler) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (John Levine) It-Stop Seeks Test Equipment (It-Stop T&M) Re: "Superman TV" and Telephones (J Kelly) Re: 802.11g Wireless Router/Signal Booster/Wireless Antenna (noname) Re: FCC Seeks to Limit F-Word on US Airwaves - Sources (Me) Re: Domain Registrars Sued Over URL Patent (Templeton Peck) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ptownson Subject: Mydoom Computer Virus Launches Record Attack on SCO Web Site Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 17:21:41 -0600 Here is the grim story as reported on Bloomberg earlier today. It appears over 250,000 computers are attacking SCO, which has been shut down since Saturday. Tomorrow, Tuesday, the trouble-makers are starting on Microsoft's web site in the same way. http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=3Demail&refer=3Dnews_index&sid=3D= azXE8LVs80lU PAT ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 17:53:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Justin and Janet Top Super Bowl Show UPDATE: Justin and Janet Top Super Bowl Show According to Annual TiVo Audience Measurement Analysis 'Wardrobe Malfunction' Most Replayed Moment TiVo Has Ever Measured Commercials and Half Time Show More Compelling for Viewers Than Action on the Field SAN JOSE, Calif., Feb. 2 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Justin Timberlake and Janet Jackson stole the show during Sunday's Super Bowl, attracting almost twice as many viewers as the most thrilling moments on the field, according to an annual measurement of second-by-second viewership in TiVo (Nasdaq: TIVO) households. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40381041 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 18:15:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading away in U.S. By Ben Berkowitz LOS ANGELES, Feb 2 (Reuters) - As a fashion color, gray is the new black, thin batteries are in and you're not in vogue if you don't have the latest ringtone. As the U.S. wireless market grows, the cell phone is evolving into a phone in name only as calling becomes almost secondary to a host of other functions. After years of trailing Japan and Western Europe, where cell phones have long had color screens, e-mail, music, video games, cameras and other accessories that make American cell phones look backward in comparison, handset makers are finally pushing a new generation of units on the domestic market that offer the full range of functions available elsewhere. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40380798 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 13:41:30 CST From: Sam Etler Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? > Strangely the number in question is 794-902-XXXX, which appears to be an > unused area code! > Is this possible and how the heck did someone do this???? There's a lot of ways to do it, but anyone with a dedicated ISDN PRI connection can set the Calling Party Number (Caller ID) field to whatever they want. Not only can you set it to a fake area code or prefix, but most networks allow you to send from 0 to 15 or more digits. AT&T's 4ESS network allows up to 17 though some digits may be stripped when the call enters another carrier's network. Now, setting your billing number is an entirely different and much more difficult matter. sam [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I *thought* (there I go, thinking for myself again) that sometime in the past two weeks a rule saying correct caller ID information had to be sent, whenever possible. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 2 Feb 2004 23:02:32 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Strangely the number in question is 794-902-XXXX, which appears to be an > unused area code! > Is this possible and how the heck did someone do this???? Most likely: he called from a PBX with ISDN trunks that permit the PBX to send any caller ID it wants. Second most likely: he has a box that sends cl-id chirps that fooled the conferencing system. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: It-Stop T&M Organization: It-Stop Test Equipment Subject: It-Stop Seeks Test Equipment Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 12:42:08 -0800 Hello, It-Stop has an immediate requirement for the following: 1 HP/ Agilent 8720D 1 Tektronix TDS 3054B Oscilloscope Please let me know if you can help. Thanks, Pete Zeiner It-Stop.com 831-685-9441 ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: "Superman TV" and Telephones Date: 2 Feb 2004 12:58:31 -0800 Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://newsguy.com] In article , Gail M. Hall says: > What struck me was that when they used their cell phones, the tones > were sounded as the buttons were pressed instead of the way my current > cell phone works. Mine makes a beep with each phone press, but I > don't hear the normal phone tones until I press "Talk" on my phone.> > [TELECOM Digest Editor' Note: Television and Hollywood tend to take > some liberties with the realities of cell phones in their productions. > I do not think any cellphones ever worked differently than the way > they do now. PAT] Was it an actual cellular telephone, or a "car phone" in the more generic sense of the word? There were other mobile telephone systems in use before the AMPS Cellular network came to be. A couple that I have used are the IMTS system and GE-Marc V. The GE-Marc type phones did work as noted above, dial the number, hit talk, it would acquire an idle channel, send some tones to the base station to tell it the ID of the "phone" in use, and then send DTMF to the base to dial out. There was really no way to know if you were in range or not without attempting to make a call. The system also worked as a two-way radio. It was rather an old, slow, analog version of the Nextel phones. The system I used to work on was on the 800MHz band alongside a newer digital/analog hybrid type of 800MHz trunked radios known as EDACS. I'm not sure if there are any GE-Marc systems still in use today, but when I left the two-way business in 1997 the company I had been working for still had quite a few of them around. The two-way functionality made them somewhat usefull. They also could run up to 25W on a mobile. I think the protable walkie-talkie type ran 5W. The portables were not full duplex so telephone useage on them wasn't much fun, the mobiles where full duplex. ------------------------------ From: noname Subject: Re: 802.11g Wireless Router/Signal Booster/Wireless Antenna Organization: ATCC Reply-To: okorkie3@cox.net Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 21:29:59 GMT In article , o*k*o*r*k*i*e@lvcm.com says: > I have a question about adding a wireless antenna or signal booster to > my home network. > My current setup is I have a Linksys WRT54G wireless router which > supports B and G infrastructure. I have a 802.11b Wireless PCI card > in my PC. In my condo, I can verify that the wireless portion of the > network between the wireless router and my PC are functioning. I then > take my PC to another floor in my building, and I get little to no > signal. I would like to add either a signal booster and/or an antenna > to make my network functional. > From the reading that I have done, I can't determine where the > antenna needs to be installed if I go this route. Is it installed on > the PCI portion of the network, or the router portion of the network. > As the router TX's and RX's, is the problem with the low transmission > power from the router and therefore I need a wireless antenna on the > PC, or is the problem the low transmission power from the PCI card to > the router upstairs? I can't figure out which hardware I need to make > this functional. > Please contact me directly at okorkie3@cox.net (remove the *) Owen - when one gets into the frequencies that Wi-Fi runs on polarization matters. I believe that your router has two antennas on it. Orient one horizontally and one vertically. On the PC on the floor above make sure it's antenna is also on the horizontal. Tony ------------------------------ From: good_timecharlie@yahoo.com (Me) Subject: Re: FCC Seeks to Limit F-Word on US Airwaves - Sources Date: 2 Feb 2004 15:12:47 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Jeez, Count on internet low lifes disregarding the standards of human conduct and pretending they don't matter. You better hope you don't get the world you want. You'll regret it if you do. People with no morals tend to do immoral things whenever they like and that includes violating the rules against violence etc.. Yet idiots like you think disregarding the rules of behavior we have developed over centuries is a good thing. Some people are just too stupid for words. Me wrote in message news:: > Jeeez, > Count on Michael Powell and the FCC to tackle the really important and > earth shattering issues of the day. > Monty Solomon wrote in message > news:telecom23.20.18@telecom-digest.org: >> (First paragraph of this story contains language that may be >> offensive to some readers.) >> By Jeremy Pelofsky >> WASHINGTON, Jan 13 (Reuters) - U.S. Federal Communications Commission >> Chairman Michael Powell has proposed barring the word "fuck" from most >> radio and broadcast television, regardless of the context, sources >> close to the issue said on Tuesday. >> The proposal would overturn an October FCC staff decision that ruled >> the word was not indecent when U2 rocker Bono used it while accepting >> an award during the 2003 live broadcast of the "Golden Globe Awards" >> on the NBC television network. >> To succeed, Powell will have to garner at least two other votes for >> the proposal and the four other FCC commissioners are now considering >> the issue, the sources said. >> - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40181215 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I would credit Powell with having > a modicum of good taste in his vocabulary skills. *That word* has only > appeared in this Digest twice; once many years ago in the early 1980's > then yesterday. Today's message from 'me' makes number three. Halliday > thoughtfully blocked it out in her reply. That word, like 'kike' and > 'nigger' should certainly be used in context when appropriate, but > avoided in routine discussion. That's my opinion; not to say I have > never used the F-Word when IMO it was 'warranted' in anger, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: faceman28208@yahoo.com (Templeton Peck) Subject: Re: Domain Registrars Sued Over URL Patent Date: 2 Feb 2004 11:48:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Monty Solomon wrote in message news:: > The suit accuses Network Solutions and Register.com of selling rights > to Web URLs and e-mail addresses that infringe on a patent that was > granted to Javaher and Weyer on Dec. 20, 2003. The patent covers the > method of assigning URLs and e-mail addresses of members of a group > such that the "@" sign is the dot in the URL. For example, if a group > used a so-called third-level URL, www.john.smith.com, the e-mail > address would be john@smith.com. A couple of issues: 1. Who ever heard of assigning URLs? Is there a URL registry anywhere on the Internet? 2. There is no URL of the format www.john.smith.com. Apparently the "inventors" INTENDED domain name rather than URL. However, the patent text says URL and never once mentions DNS. ------------------------------ 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 #52 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 2 23:33:02 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i134X2H21892; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 23:33:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 23:33:02 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402030433.i134X2H21892@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 #53 TELECOM Digest Mon, 2 Feb 2004 23:33:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 53 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Danny Burstein) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Sam Etler) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Clarence Dold) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Felis Inferis) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Mydoom Computer Virus Launches Record Attack on SCO Web Site (Dold) SCO Options, was Re: Mydoom vs. SCO (Danny Burstein) Re: "Superman TV" and Telephones (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: FCC Seeks to Limit F-Word on US Airwaves - Sources (Steven J Sobol) IE Handling of User Information in HTTP and HTTPS URLs (Monty Solomon) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Danny Burstein Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 00:06:11 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In John Levine writes: >> Strangely the number in question is 794-902-XXXX, which appears to be an >> unused area code! > Most likely: he called from a PBX with ISDN trunks that permit the > PBX to send any caller ID it wants. > Second most likely: he has a box that sends cl-id chirps that fooled > the conferencing system. Zeroeth most likely: he used a calling card which sent out a pseudo caller id string very loosely based on its non-dialable outgoing trunk. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 19:20:13 CST From: Sam Etler Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I *thought* (there I go, thinking for > myself again) that sometime in the past two weeks a rule saying correct > caller ID information had to be sent, whenever possible. PAT] Nope. The rules that went into effect on 1/29/2004 were set forth in the FCC's Report and Order FCC 03-153 in Part XII. This R&O created 47 CFR 64.1601(e) which states in part: "Any person or entity that engages in telemarketing, as defined in section 64.1200(f)(7) must transmit caller identification information." It goes on to say that either CPN or ANI (billing number) can be used, and when available, the name of the telemarketer or the entity for which the telemarketer is placing calls. The provided number must permit any individual to make a do-not-call request during business hours. (47 CFR 64.1601(e)(1)). It also says that tax-exempt nonprofit organizations don't have to comply. (47 CFR 64.1601(e)(3)). As you can see this only applies to entities involved in telemarketing. This is defnied in 47 CFR 1200(f)(7) as: "The term telemarketing means the initiation of a telephone call or message for the purpose of encouraging the purchase or rental of, or investment in, property, goods, or services, which is transmitted to any person." So this does not apply to businesses who have a legitimate reason for setting their Caller ID when not involved in telemarketing (and believe me, there's plenty of good reasons to do it that most people will never encounter) or private individuals who are doing it for kicks (and perhaps not so legitimate reasons). sam ------------------------------ From: dold@FakedXCall.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 00:11:58 UTC Organization: a2i network Sam Etler wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I *thought* (there I go, thinking for > myself again) that sometime in the past two weeks a rule saying > correct caller ID information had to be sent, whenever possible. PAT] There is a recent ruling that telemarketers must show a number that can actually be called back, and they should no longer show up as "out of area". I noticed that I have received some telemarketer calls that show an 800 number on caller ID, with the name of the survey or marketing firm. I've also received multiple calls from one outfit, pitching the same thing, and they show up as a personal name and number from San Francisco. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ From: Felis Inferis Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 17:24:01 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com One the one hand, your caller may have had access to a PBX or a PRI ISDN line through which Caller ID can sometimes be fabricated (see Lucky225's outstanding article in 2600, Spring 2003), or on the other hand there could have been an ANI failure. However if at any time during the call you heard any strange digital-sounding chirps or squeaks, chances are someone on the line used a device or a sound program such as S.O.B. that creates a Caller ID signal. Without knowing by what mechanism you receive your Caller ID, it's tough to say, but this one would only work if you had a normal Call Waiting Caller ID box for POTS use. Related link: http://artofhacking.com/orange.htm On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 11:36:09 -0500, Chironex wrote: > I recently hosted a very priveliged conference call using an online > calling service. Once the call was complete, I received a list of the > people connected to the call, and noticed that there was an additional > caller who was not authorized. It was not the conference call > service, nor was it any of my employees as I can account for all of > their caller ID info. > Strangely the number in question is 794-902-XXXX, which appears to be an > unused area code! > Is this possible and how the heck did someone do this???? ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 20:42:28 EST Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? In a message dated Mon, 2 Feb 2004 13:41:30 CST Sam Etler wrote: >> Strangely the number in question is 794-902-XXXX, which appears to be an >> unused area code! >> Is this possible and how the heck did someone do this???? > There's a lot of ways to do it, but anyone with a dedicated ISDN PRI > connection can set the Calling Party Number (Caller ID) field to > whatever they want. Not only can you set it to a fake area code or > prefix, but most networks allow you to send from 0 to 15 or more > digits. AT&T's 4ESS network allows up to 17 though some digits may be > stripped when the call enters another carrier's network. > Now, setting your billing number is an entirely different and much more > difficult matter. > sam > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I *thought* (there I go, thinking for > myself again) that sometime in the past two weeks a rule saying > correct caller ID information had to be sent, whenever possible. PAT] Today I got a call showing the number as 727 450-1267 with the name shown as "BLOCKED" or "--PRIVATE CALL--" (depending on which CID box I read it on). But if it is blocked, how come it displays a number? Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ From: dold@MydoomXCom.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Mydoom Computer Virus Launches Record Attack on SCO Web Site Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 00:19:37 UTC Organization: a2i network ptownson wrote: > Here is the grim story as reported on Bloomberg earlier today. It > appears over 250,000 computers are attacking SCO, which has been > shut down since Saturday. Tomorrow, Tuesday, the trouble-makers are > starting on Microsoft's web site in the same way. I read some network analysis that said this was patently not true, and that it is more of SCO trying to ... whatever it is they do instead of sell software. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: SCO Options, was Re: Mydoom vs. SCO Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 00:08:57 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In ptownson writes: > Here is the grim story as reported on Bloomberg earlier today. It > appears over 250,000 computers are attacking SCO, which has been > shut down since Saturday. Tomorrow, Tuesday, the trouble-makers are > starting on Microsoft's web site in the same way. > http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid3Demail&refer3Dnews_index&sid3D s80lU If, for some reason or another, you absolutely must get in touch with SCO: "The assault on SCO is expected to last until 12 February. Until then, SCO has said it will use the alternative domain name www.thescogroup.com." http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994629 Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 20:20:20 EST Subject: Re: "Superman TV" and Telephones jbl wrote on Mon, 02 Feb 2004 11:28:58 -0700: > In , Gail M. Hall > wrote: >> What struck me was that when they used their cell phones, the tones >> were sounded as the buttons were pressed instead of the way my current >> cell phone works. Mine makes a beep with each phone press, but I >> don't hear the normal phone tones until I press "Talk" on my phone. > My cell phone (an Audiovox on VZW) plays the touchtone if you dial a > digit (or * or #), or a beep if you press any other button. I don't > hear any tones after I press "send". > On the other hand, my cordless phone at home does act the way you > describe, if you dial before pressing "talk". On my Nokia 5165 you hear the tones as you push the buttons. This seems almost essential if you reach a menu requiring tones to navigate, or if you have to make a numeric entry with tones, or for that matter to push "*" to retrieve your messages. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: FCC Seeks to Limit F-Word on US Airwaves - Sources Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:36:50 -0600 Me wrote: > Jeez, > Count on internet low lifes disregarding the standards of human > conduct and pretending they don't matter. You better hope you don't > get the world you want. You'll regret it if you do. I'm going to try not to fan the flames here, since I just dealt with a ridiculously long thread on the exact same subject as moderator of rec. radio.broadcasting. I will, however, point out that saying the F-word doesn't make you inherently immoral. Of course, if you can prove I'm wrong, you're welcome to do so. *Your* crack about "Internet low-lifes" borders on flame-baiting, though. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 22:10:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: IE Handling of User Information in HTTP and HTTPS URLs A security update is available that modifies the default behavior of Internet Explorer for handling user information in HTTP and HTTPS URLs SUMMARY A security update is available that removes support for handling user names and passwords in HTTP and HTTP with Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) or HTTPS URLs in Microsoft Internet Explorer. The following URL syntax is no longer supported in Internet Explorer or Windows Explorer after you install the MS04-004 Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer (832894): http(s)://username:password@server/resource.ext This article is intended to notify you of this change in Internet Explorer's default behavior. If you include user information in HTTP or HTTPS URLs, Microsoft recommends that you explore the workarounds that are described in this article before you install the 832894 security update. For additional information about the 832894 security update, visit the following Microsoft Web site: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-004.asp http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;834489 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Caution to readers ... as always, when you read something someone else wrote regarding 'Microsoft Updates' you should *always* verify the message carefully. Do NOT click on any links printed in e-journals or Usenet messages or emails you recieve. Starting with a fresh browser window, type the address in carefully yourself, not just click a link you saw in this Digest, or any other email. I see nothing wrong with the link in Monty's news clipping above, but just take care. Normally, Microsoft notifies its customers through Windows Update only, not via 'security bulletins'. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #53 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 3 14:29:01 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i13JT0T27017; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 14:29:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 14:29:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402031929.i13JT0T27017@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 #54 TELECOM Digest Tue, 3 Feb 2004 14:29:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 54 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Verizon Violates DNC List (McWebber) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (AES/newspost) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (McWebber) Telemarketers Buy Suspicious Lists (McWebber) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading away in U.S. (Joseph) Re: SCO Options, was Re: Mydoom vs. SCO (Kenneth P. Stox) Switch Verizon to Cavalier, Can't Get Through From Some Places (John) 450-434 Prefix? (Carl Moore) Bluegiga Launches New-Generation Bluetooth Access Server (PressRelease) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: McWebber Subject: Verizon Violates DNC List Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 09:23:59 -0500 I am a Verizon customer. I have always been on their no solicitation, and as they acknowledge, should not receive any marketing calls from them or anyone working on their behalf. Yet, the other day I was called by a company called ICM out of Orlando, FL (http://www.icmconnect.com/ note suspicious whois info below on that domain. 407-384-4220) trying to sell me Verizon long distance. It took a little work to get any info from the rep. My caller ID showed "Out of area" even though it is in the area. I asked the rep a couple of times who she is with and she insisted Verizon. The lack of CID made me suspicious so I said, "Look, who do YOU work for" and that's when she said "ICM" When I asked where they're located all she would say is Orlando. When I asked for an address she said they didn't have an address. All she would give me was a phone number. An 800-483-4000 Verizon number, and 407-384-4220 number for ICM. I filed an FTC DNC complaint and contacted Verizon. Reply #1: (Wanted to verify my details for security, but:) "In the mean time, unfortunately, since we have no affiliation with ICM of Orlando, FL we do not have any information about them or their attempt to contact you. We do not condone their use of our name, and have not authorize them to contact anyone on our behalf. "If they contact you again, we ask that you get any information that you can, such as address, phone number, and especially any name and title of any management personnel, we will be glad to do all possible to put a stop to their calls." Then, after I wrote back with my info and pointing out that I had ICM's info and phone number, had spoken to them again to confirm they were working for Verizon, I get this: "I have taken the opportunity to contact the solicitation group directly (as they advised me you had as well), and have spoken with the director for their Verizon project. [I had only spoken to ICM, not to anyone at Verizon except this droid by email.] "Apparently they have contracted with a broad initiative that covers more than just Verizon local service, so are not one of the solicitation groups we are normally familiar. " With that said, they advised that they work from a list of prospective customers, that Verizon provides, that already fit some demographic requirements. Since you have subscribed to several calling features, they were to suggest a viable package. " With that said, I have found no reason that your request for no solicitation should have been overlooked, so in the event that there was some error behind the scenes, I have re-initiated the necessary process to have your account removed from any solicitation list we are involved with. " The representative I spoke with at ICM advised that she also took steps to have your account manually removed from their contact lists. Again, we apologize for the inconvenience, and trust that you will have no further trouble with this issue. " It has been my goal to provide you with outstanding service. I hope I have succeeded in meeting that goal. If you have additional questions or if Verizon may be of assistance to you in the future, please let us know. We look forward to serving you. Thank you for using Verizon. We appreciate your business." Sincerely, David Verizon Consumer eCenter Domain registration whois: Registrant: STEPHANIE G ICM 4037 Metric Drive # 120 Winter Park, FL US 32792 Registrar: NameSecure.com Domain: ICMCONNECT.COM Created on 03-06-2002 Expires on 03-06-2012 Administrative Contact: STEPHANIE G Phone: 407-384-4220 E-mail: accounts@itsolutionsnet.com Technical Contact: Namesecure Inc. Phone: 703-925-6988 E-mail: support@namesecure.com Name Servers: NS1.ITSOLUTIONSNET.COM 207.30.12.60 McWebber No email replies read If someone tells you to forward an email to all your friends please forget that I'm your friend. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The last two paragraphs of the letter you received from the droid at Verizon are *exactly* -- word for word ('It has been my goal...' and 'thank you for using ...') -- the same words/phrases used by *every Bell System service rep* everywhere. Substitute the phrase 'SBC' everywhere the phrase 'Verizon' appears in that letter and the letter might as well have been written by David's droid brother or sister at Southwestern Bell. Even though officially the Bell System has been dead for many years, the droids continue to act like Ma Bell was still around, as much as they are permitted, don't they? I think those people act like divestiture was merely a stumbling-block, a minor inconvenience in their path. PAT] ------------------------------ From: AES/newspost Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:17:08 -0800 In article , Sam Etler wrote: > There's a lot of ways to do it, but anyone with a dedicated ISDN PRI > connection can set the Calling Party Number (Caller ID) field to > whatever they want. Not only can you set it to a fake area code or > prefix, but most networks allow you to send from 0 to 15 or more > digits. AT&T's 4ESS network allows up to 17 though some digits may be > stripped when the call enters another carrier's network. I take this to mean that if legislation were passed saying simply that all telemarketing calls had to be made using a Caller ID that started with some special, dedicated, and universally understood "area code" -- something like 303 or whatever -- that this requirement, aided perhaps by a few technical adjustments by telcos and telemarketers, would be entirely feasible. I've long felt that this has to be the long-term solution to telemarketing. No First Amendment problems -- telemarkets can call whomever they want, about whatever they want, just so long as they identify the nature of their call with the 303 prefix. Those who don't want such calls will buy a $10 gadget from Radio Shack that blocks this prefix; or phones -- and even houses and apartments -- will start being sold with this blocking built in. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, don't dump on the good people of Denver, CO where 303 is located. I am sure you were just using that as an example. Maybe '666' could be used; that superstitious number which is the mark of the anti-Christ or Satan will never be used as an area code. But you know, of course, telcos talk out of both sides of their mouth on the telemarketer 'problem'. They make too much money from the sales droids on the phone (their own and other companies) to push too hard on eliminating their ability to talk to people. PAT] ------------------------------ From: McWebber Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 09:28:23 -0500 Chironex wrote in message news:telecom23.51.5@telecom-digest.org: > Strangely the number in question is 794-902-XXXX, which appears to be an > unused area code! > Is this possible and how the heck did someone do this???? I got a telemarketing call once and the caller was abusive. When I tried to call the number in the CID I got a standard TelCo number disconnected recording. > Today I got a call showing the number as 727 450-1267 with the > name shown as "BLOCKED" or "--PRIVATE CALL--" (depending on which CID > box I read it on). Ditto. Just last night I got a call from an outfit trying to sell mortgages due to my filling out spammer's forms to catch who they sell the leads to: (http://www.google.com/groups?selm=Z76cnfWo4fyVO1OjXTWcow%40comcast.com&oe=U TF-8&output=gplain) The first call from them last night showed Out of area and the next call from his boss to get details from me on the spammer they bought the lead from showed a phone number and ANONYMOUS CALL below. McWebber "Richter points to the lack of legal action against his company as proof that he's operating appropriately." Information Week, November 10, 2003 ------------------------------ From: McWebber Subject: Telemarketers Buy Suspicious Lists Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 10:11:02 -0500 Recently I got two calls from telemarketers that ask for my name and when I ask how they're spelling my name they give me a misspelling that exists only on the old Internic, (now Network Solutions), whois database. I got a call yesterday, despite being on the DNC list from (561-338-7877 Hunter Scott Financial) a telemarketer with some investment scam. Played dumb when I mentioned the DNC list and thought all they had to do was promise not to call me again. McWebber No email replies read If someone tells you to forward an email to all your friends please forget that I'm your friend. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading away in U.S. Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 21:24:03 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NOcom On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 18:15:15 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > By Ben Berkowitz > LOS ANGELES, Feb 2 (Reuters) - As a fashion color, gray is > the new black, thin batteries are in and you're not in vogue if > you don't have the latest ringtone. > As the U.S. wireless market grows, the cell phone is evolving into a > phone in name only as calling becomes almost secondary to a host of > other functions. > After years of trailing Japan and Western Europe, where cell phones > have long had color screens, e-mail, music, video games, cameras and > other accessories that make American cell phones look backward in > comparison, handset makers are finally pushing a new generation of > units on the domestic market that offer the full range of functions > available elsewhere. What the article fails to mention is that these gimmicks of color, polyphonic tones, etc. are just that gimmicks. Color phones are many times useless outside as the screen gets washed out in bright light where a regular monochrome handset you can still see what's in the display. Polyphonic ringtones may sound somewhat cool, but if you can't hear them in a noisy environment they are also useless. Believe it or not some people want a mobile phone that they can actually make and receive calls on.... easily. It's going to be many years if never that cell phones supplant personal computers as a way to communicate data. remove NO from .NOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: Kenneth P. Stox Organization: Imaginary Landscape, LLC. Subject: Re: SCO Options, was Re: Mydoom vs. SCO Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 05:51:17 GMT Danny Burstein wrote: > If, for some reason or another, you absolutely must get in touch with SCO: > > "The assault on SCO is expected to last until 12 February. > Until then, SCO has said it will use the alternative > domain name www.thescogroup.com." Strange. www.sco.com resolves to 216.250.128.12, and www.thescogroup.com resolves to 216.250.128.21. Now then, if I was someone with more than one interconnected neuron, and I was expecting a DOS attack, wouldn't I try to locate the other server on another network? Naahhhhhh! ------------------------------ From: jvj1@yahoo.com (John) Subject: Switch Verizon to Cavalier, Can't Get Through From Some Places Date: 2 Feb 2004 22:08:45 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, I recently switched from Verizon to Cavalier (in Maryland). All is working fine until today. My daughter's phone tries to contact me for some emergency. The school (walking distance from home) tells me that they cannot call me and told me that they are getting my voicemail. I called Cavalier. They told me that it is the problem with how the school is dialing. So, I go to the school and dial our home. I'm getting Verizon voicemail and it is asking me to enter a mailbox. I called Cavalier again and explained the problem. They put me on hold and told me they fixed it. I called the school half an hour later and asked to call me at home. No calls from them ... meaning things are still are not working. I seem to get calls from other parts ... Long Distance and International. Cavalier doesn't seem to want to send anybody to check it out. Anybody knows what could be the problem? Wondering, where else people cannot call me..:-/ Thanks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Please answer a few questions for me. You said you switched *from* Verizon to Cavalier. Yet the school calls go to *Verizon* voice mail ... and the voicemail equipment (from *Verizon*) asks the caller to 'enter a mailbox number'? It sounds to me like the school phone (if their phones are on Verizon) is getting sent to a generic voicemail inbound line. Verizon voicemail cannot detirmine who the call is for so it asks the calling party to enter a mailbox number. When you switched to Cavalier, did you intend to retain the Verizon voicemail (or does Verizon supply the voicemail for Cavalier under some contract, etc?) Did you (and/or your daughter) use the same telephone to placed the call to you that would ordinarily be used for such? If Voicemail does not have an account for you (either because you have now dropped Verizon or have not properly configured your Cavalier phone voicemail correctly) then calls to it intended for 'no accounts' get handled like calls where Voicemail does not know who is calling it; a generic greeting 'what mailbox do you want?' is substituted. Another clue was that Cavalier first told you the school was not dialing the number 'correctly'. What is the 'correct' way to dial it? If Verizon, (or whoever is the inter exchange carrier) and Cavalier have their tables (databases) set up correctly then it shouldn't matter how you dial, but this leads me to wonder if (whoever extended dial tone -- Verizon? -- to the school and you on your attempt) has some database error. Obviously you can see there are a lot more questions to be answered in the process of resovling this mystery. In fact, let's get even a bit more extreme: what do you get if you dial your Cavalier number from a next door neighbor or even dial from your home phone? ***Make certain you use a phone subscribed to Verizon for your tests.*** And if possible, also test using a phone which is subscribed to Cavalier. Also try these tests before and after you have done whatever three-digit diddle is required to turn voice mail on and off (in other words ring through to me.) Then please write again, and we will try to resolved it further. Do not trouble the droids with all this, not at first. It would be good if you could tell them exactly what is wrong before they begin working on it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:55:14 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: 450-434 Prefix? One of the calls appearing on a just-received AT&T bill says it was from "CANADA USA" (leaving blank space where a U.S. point would have the state name). The telephone number shown was 450 434-0000, but I am sure I placed the call from the 450-246 prefix, which was found along the Autoroute 15 just north of U.S. border in Quebec province. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 14:55:29 +0400 From: Editor (PressReleaseNetwork.com) Subject: Bluegiga Launches A New-Generation Bluetooth Access Server. PRESS RELEASE NETWORK http://www.pressreleasenetwork.com Bluegiga Launches A New-Generation Bluetooth Access Server, First To Combine Multiple Bluetooth Modules With WLAN, GPRS Connectivities Bluegiga WRAP Multiradio Access Server Integrates Bluetooth, WLAN, GSM, GPRS And Ethernet LAN, Software Customizable For Easy Integration In Corporate IT Infrastructure Espoo, Finland - Feb 3, 2004 (PRN): Bluegiga Technologies, a provider of wireless local area networks and M2M communications systems based on Bluetooth technology, today announced the commercial availability of WRAP Multiradio Access Server, the first device in the market to integrate multiple Bluetooth modules with other wireless technologies. With the WRAP Multiradio Access Server, Bluetooth enabled cell phones and other devices utilizing wireless Bluetooth technology are flexibly connected with other wireless and wireline networks. The WRAP Multiradio Access Server enables the use of cell phones and other devices with Bluetooth technology to wirelessly access and synchronize content and applications in both the corporate intranet and the Internet. First applications include the synchronization of email and calendar systems and news services. In corporations utilizing telephony systems based on VoIP technology (Voice Over IP), an attractive future opportunity is the use of Bluetooth enabled smartphones as VoIP terminals. Bluetooth technology has become a new standard connectivity in cell phones, PDAs, laptops and other wireless devices. With GSM-level data security and low power drain, Bluetooth technology is an ideal and cost efficient way to integrate these wireless devices in the corporate networks, allowing full utilization of smart handheld devices, said Tom Nordman, General Manager, Bluegiga Technologies. The WRAP Multiradio Access Server enables a new level of efficiency and flexibility in wireless applications. The Bluegiga WRAP Multiradio Access Server combines a Bluetooth access point with local application hosting and processing capability and transparent routing to other networks. Designed to enable smooth wireless transmission of services and content, the device suits the needs of both corporate IT departments and original equipment manufacturers. Software customizability allows the deployment of Bluetooth connectivity as a new virtue of existing networks without network reconfiguration. With three built-in Bluetooth modules, Bluegiga WRAP Multiradio Access Server manages up to 21 simultaneous connections, in contrast to conventional access points supporting just seven connections. Support for WLAN, GSM and GPRS technologies are added with a CF card. Wireline interfaces include Ethernet LAN, USB and RS232. Routing between different communication technologies is completely transparent to the users. Support for a higher number of simultaneous Bluetooth connections enables the provision of Bluetooth Hotspots, offering a wireless Internet connection to cell phones and PDAs. As a new service targeted to the users of Bluetooth enabled smart devices, Bluetooth Hotspots open up a variety of opportunities for local wireless marketing and promotional purposes. Applications for a Bluetooth Access Server include a range of telemetry solutions, such as wireless monitoring of patient condition in medical institutions. An emerging field is Machine-to-Machine communication (M2M), utilizing systems based on Bluetooth technology in remote monitoring, control and configuration of machines in industrial plants, allowing e.g. an engineer to problem-shoot a paper machine located in another country. Bluegiga WRAP (Wireless Remote Access Platform) Multiradio Access Server is easy and fast to deploy. With dimensions of 130 x 80 x 35 mm and weight of 450 g, the device is suitable for both desktop and wall mounting. The device is already in volume production and immediately commercially available via Bluegiga Technologies and its partners around the world. Technical data is available at http://www.bluegiga.com/wrapas Press photos are available at http://www.netprofile.fi/bluegiga About Bluegiga Technologies: Bluegiga Technologies provides wireless local area networks and M2M communications systems based on Bluetooth technology. Bluegiga WRAP Access Servers integrate Bluetooth-enabled devices as part of a corporate network. Bluegiga WRAP THOR Bluetooth modules are robust, lightweight and flexibly embeddable. Software configurable for versatile integration, Bluegiga products are ideally suited in enterprise proximity access, telemetry, remote monitoring and cable replacement applications. Founded in 2000, Bluegiga is based in Espoo, Finland and privately held. Bluegiga products are globally available via a network of qualified distributors, original design manufacturers and system integrators. For further information, please visit http://www.bluegiga.com. For more information, contact: Bluegiga Company Contact Mr. Tom Nordman General Manager Tel: +358 9 4124 0450 Email: tom.nordman@bluegiga.com Website: http://www.bluegiga.com Bluegiga Agency Contact Mr. Ile Knnen, Netprofile Finland Tel: +358 9 6812 080 Email: ile@netprofile.fi editor@pressreleasenetwork.com http://www.pressreleasenetwork.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: 620-330-6774 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 #54 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 4 00:54:19 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i145sJl01098; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 00:54:19 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 00:54:19 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402040554.i145sJl01098@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 #55 TELECOM Digest Wed, 4 Feb 2004 00:54:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 55 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson PluggedIn: Going Mobile on a PC is Risky Business (Monty Solomon) Cisco Systems Reports Second Quarter Earnings (Monty Solomon) Jackson, Timberlake Apologize for Flash (Monty Solomon) New Verizon Advertising Socks it to Cable (Monty Solomon) MTV Blames Janet Jackson for Super Bowl Incident (Monty Solomon) Re: 450-434 Prefix? (Dave Garland) Re: 450-434 Prefix? (John Levine) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading away in U.S. (Phil McKerracher) What If ...? Was Re: Verizon Violates DNC List (George Mitchell) SIP IP PHones (George Muenz) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Hank Karl) Re: Switch Verizon to Cavalier, Can't Get Through (John) 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: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:16:19 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: PluggedIn: Going Mobile on a PC is Risky Business By Caroline Humer NEW YORK, Feb 3 (Reuters) - In any local coffee house, airport lounge or hotel lobby, technophiles and technophobes alike can be found hunched over their notebook computers. Toting around a computer filled with valuable data, however, is a growing risk: If the computer is lost or stolen, the user loses everything -- from a prized doctoral thesis to bank account numbers to records of passwords. When the thrill of being unplugged outweighs the danger of losing essential data, there are a number of technologies that make it easier to back up those files, keep them hidden and even track down the missing computer itself. It starts with that techno-mantra: back-up, back-up, back-up. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40400174 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:19:37 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cisco Systems Reports Second Quarter Earnings SAN JOSE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 3, 2004--Cisco Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq:CSCO): -- Q2 Net Sales: $5.4 Billion (14.5% increase year over year; 5.8% increase quarter over quarter) -- Q2 Operating Cash Flows: $1.7 Billion -- Q2 Earnings Per Share: $0.18 GAAP before accounting change; $0.10 GAAP after accounting change Cisco Systems, Inc., the worldwide leader in networking for the Internet, today reported its second quarter results for the period ended January 24, 2004. Net sales for the second quarter of fiscal 2004 were $5.4 billion, compared with $4.7 billion for the second quarter of fiscal 2003, an increase of 14.5 percent, and compared with $5.1 billion for the first quarter of fiscal 2004, an increase of 5.8 percent. Net income for the second quarter of fiscal 2004, on a generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) basis, before the non-cash cumulative effect of an accounting change, was $1.3 billion or $0.18 per share, compared with $991 million or $0.14 per share for the second quarter of fiscal 2003, and compared with $1.1 billion or $0.15 per share for the first quarter of fiscal 2004. Net income on a GAAP basis, after the non-cash cumulative effect of the accounting change, was $724 million or $0.10 per share. Pro forma net income for the second quarter of fiscal 2004 was $1.3 billion or $0.18 per share, compared with $1.1 billion or $0.15 per share for the second quarter of fiscal 2003, and compared with $1.2 billion or $0.17 per share for the first quarter of fiscal 2004. A reconciliation between net income on a GAAP basis and pro forma net income is provided in a table immediately following the Pro Forma Consolidated Statements of Operations. Net sales for the first six months of fiscal 2004 were $10.5 billion, compared with $9.6 billion for the first six months of fiscal 2003, an increase of 9.8 percent. Net income for the first six months of fiscal 2004, on a GAAP basis, before the non-cash cumulative effect of the accounting change, was $2.4 billion or $0.33 per share, compared with $1.6 billion or $0.22 per share for the first six months of fiscal 2003. Net income for the first six months of fiscal 2004, on a GAAP basis, after the non-cash cumulative effect of the accounting change, was $1.8 billion or $0.25 per share. Pro forma net income for the first six months of fiscal 2004 was $2.5 billion or $0.35 per share, compared with $2.1 billion or $0.29 per share for the first six months of fiscal 2003. During the second quarter of fiscal 2004, Cisco(R) completed the acquisition of Latitude Communications, Inc. for a purchase price of approximately $86 million. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40406614 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:22:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Jackson, Timberlake Apologize for Flash By NEKESA MUMBI MOODY AP Music Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- CBS, MTV, the NFL, Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake all say they're sorry _ but none of that is deterring the federal government from looking into the Super Bowl's too-revealing halftime show. Federal Communications Commission chief Michael Powell on Monday promised an investigation into whether CBS violated decency laws, with potential fines of up to $27,500. If applied to each CBS station, the fine could reach into the millions. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40401895 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:23:59 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New Verizon Advertising Socks it to Cable TV Commercials Stress it's an 'Easy Call' to Choose Verizon Online DSL Service Over Cable Companies' Offering NEW YORK, Feb. 3 /PRNewswire/ -- Verizon's new advertising campaign takes a peek inside the broadband-buyer's decision-making process and explains why Verizon Online DSL service is a better choice than cable for high-speed Internet communications. In two new television commercials, set to run in more than 20 major markets nationwide beginning tomorrow, consumers looking for broadband service come to the realization, after talking with a representatives from identified cable companies, that Verizon Online DSL with MSN Premium offers more of the features that they need at a lower price than the named cable provider can offer. In living room and home-office settings, fictitious consumers first hear about the hidden fees, limited service offerings and features they don't get when applying for cable modem service from identified cable television companies. Then, in a replay of the conversation with a Verizon representative, the consumers learn about the advantages of choosing Verizon Online DSL with MSN Premium service. After the consumers decide that Verizon is the better choice, Verizon's longtime spokesperson, James Earl Jones, concludes by saying, "That's an easy call." - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40406904 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:25:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: MTV Blames Janet Jackson for Super Bowl Incident By Kenneth Li NEW YORK, Feb 3 (Reuters) - Singer Janet Jackson masterminded the Super Bowl halftime stunt that left her right breast exposed and prompted a federal probe into television indecency, the head of MTV said on Tuesday. "Janet Jackson engineered it," MTV Chief Executive Tom Freston told Reuters in an interview. The blame on Jackson comes on a second day of fallout after pop idol Justin Timberlake tore off half of Jackson's black leather bustier while the pair were singing a duet, exposing her right breast at the conclusion of Sunday's Super Bowl halftime show. Freston, whose company produced the halftime show for CBS, said Timberlake was informed of the stunt just moments before he took the stage with Jackson. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40402505 ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: 450-434 Prefix? Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 13:35:59 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when Carl Moore wrote: > One of the calls appearing on a just-received AT&T bill says it was > from "CANADA USA" Oops. That wasn't supposed to be used until after the invasion had begun. :) ------------------------------ Date: 3 Feb 2004 22:01:23 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: 450-434 Prefix? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > One of the calls appearing on a just-received AT&T bill says it was > from "CANADA USA" (leaving blank space where a U.S. point would have > the state name). The telephone number shown was 450 434-0000, but > I am sure I placed the call from the 450-246 prefix, which was found > along the Autoroute 15 just north of U.S. border in Quebec province. The Jan 1 prefix list from CNAC says that 450-246 is Lacolle, 450-434 is Ste Therese. Both are near Montreal, but you were probably in Lacolle. Maybe your call got splashed. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "I shook hands with Senators Dole and Inouye," said Tom, disarmingly. ------------------------------ From: Phil McKerracher Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading away in U.S. Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 21:42:36 GMT Organization: blueyonder (post doesn't reflect views of blueyonder) Joseph wrote in message news:telecom23.54.5@telecom-digest.org: > ... Color phones are many > times useless outside as the screen gets washed out in bright light > where a regular monochrome handset you can still see what's in the > display... Unless the screen is "transreflective" as on the O2 xda, which I have found surprisingly good, even in bright sunlight (Australian summer). > ... Polyphonic ringtones may sound somewhat cool, but if you > can't hear them in a noisy environment they are also useless... True, but a well chosen one (e.g. spanning a range of frequencies) can actually be more audible than a monophonic one. They also avoid confusion about whose phone is ringing. > Believe it or not some people want a mobile phone that they can > actually make and receive calls on.... easily Again, I've found it very convenient to have all my Outlook contacts in the xda, dialable with a single tap on the number. > ... It's going to be many years if never that cell phones supplant > personal computers as a way to communicate data. Hmm. Again, my xda is very useful for sending and receiving e-mail on the move. I have used it recently to e-mail diagnostic oscilloscope traces from a lab, to retrieve a streetmap of my current location from a car and to find a timetable for buses from Heathrow. It's MUCH more convenient to carry than a laptop, and the battery lasts all day. It hasn't "supplanted" my PC because I prefer to use that when I'm at home, but I wouldn't be without it when I'm on the move. That's not to say it's perfect - it crashes regularly for a start - but I think the principle is good. Phil McKerracher www.mckerracher.org ------------------------------ From: George Mitchell Subject: What If ...? Was Re: Verizon Violates DNC List Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 14:01:58 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com > TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to a message: > Even though officially the Bell System has been dead for many years, > the droids continue to act like Ma Bell was still around, as much as > they are permitted, don't they? I think those people act like > divestiture was merely a stumbling-block, a minor inconvenience in > their path. PAT] Verizon, of course, would have been an impossibility pre-divestiture, and even at the beginning of 1999, who would have dreamed of a merger between the largest independent telco with a big chunk of the old Bell System? As I was pondering Verizon's history this morning, it occurred to me to wonder what was on Judge Greene's mind when he repartitioned the old Bell System into the seven Baby Bells. What would have hap- pened if he had simply spun off the existing Bell operating companies with the nominal corporate structure which existed at the time? Surely some of us would still be dealing with New England Telephone, or Paci- fic Northwest Bell, etc. Would anything the size of Bell Atlantic have merged together by this point, to be merged in its turn with GTE? -- George Mitchell (obfuscated email address) ------------------------------ From: run1500@yahoo.com (George Muenz) Subject: SIP IP PHones Date: 3 Feb 2004 17:00:12 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi: We are looking to implement the Asterisk System. Looking at a few handset vendors as well. Would apprecaite any feedback or comments on these as well as if you know any vendors who can supply this cheap, or resources where they can be searched. Handsets Polycom SoundPoint IP 600 SIP Zultys ZIP 4x4 Snom Snom200 VoIP phone ipDialog SipTone Ethernet Thanks, George Muenz ------------------------------ From: Hank Karl Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 22:27:59 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 19:20:13 CST, Sam Etler wrote: > As you can see this only applies to entities involved in telemarketing. > This is defined in 47 CFR 1200(f)(7) as: > "The term telemarketing means the initiation of a telephone call or > message for the purpose of encouraging the purchase or rental of, or > investment in, property, goods, or services, which is transmitted to > any person." In the documentation at http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/edcams/donotcall/businfo.html Its defined more widely. Anyone selling goods over the phone is a telemarketer. This also applies to some incoming calls. If you call in to a catalog and they try to "upsell" you, that call is covered under the regs. Of course, the caller-id part is not applicable. IANAL, but these regs seem to apply to a lot more businesses than the ones I've thought of as "telemarketers" (i.e. boiler rooms full of phones and people trying to sell just about everything you don't want). These rules seem to affect even a local business calling consumers. > So this does not apply to businesses who have a legitimate reason for > setting their Caller ID when not involved in telemarketing (and > believe me, there's plenty of good reasons to do it that most people > will never encounter) or private individuals who are doing it for > kicks (and perhaps not so legitimate reasons). > sam > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I *thought* (there I go, thinking for > myself again) that sometime in the past two weeks a rule saying > correct caller ID information had to be sent, whenever possible. PAT] It has to be correct for the organization making the call, but does not have to be the line's number. For example, a computer manufacturer may try to hide the fact that they outsource support to India. So when that third-party company calls you, they can put (for example) "Dell Support" and an 800 number instead of their actual company name and international number. See http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/edcams/donotcall/businfo.html for more. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Since you mentioned Dell Support, let's chat about them for a minute. Has anyone seen that very funny commer- cial on television where a car load of people pull up to a Radio Shack store just at closing time? The clerk is walking out, and locking the door of the store when he sees this car full of people looking at him and giggling. The clerk approaches the car questioningly, and asks the people, "May I help you?" The people in the back seat reach out, grab the clerk and pull him into the car and speed away. The clerk is shown now sitting in the back seat, yelling frantically at the people saying, "Let me go! What do you want from me?". The car driver turns around and says to the folks in the back seat, "do not tell anyone about this." The poor Radio Shack clerk is looking frantic at this point, convinced he is going to get kidnapped, molested, whatever. The car pulls into a garage and we see everyone dragging or pulling the store clerk into the house where we see a computer monitor. "What we want you to do," says the man to the clerk, as he points at the computer screen, "is make this go away!" On the screen we see a message in large letters saying, 'ERROR CODE 417'. In the next scene, we see the car driving the clerk back to the store; they push the clerk out of the car in sort of a rough way, and then speed away, with the shocked clerk standing there shaking his head. A voice in the background warns us sternly: "Don't go there and do that! Instead get a Dell and all the help you need making it work correctly." (Picture of Dell Computer and sales/tech support phone number.) OUr local Radio Shack store has a sign by their computers saying 'we do not have Dells, dude! Much better deals!" PAT] ------------------------------ From: jvj1@yahoo.com (John) Subject: Re: Switch Verizon to Cavalier, Can't Get Through From Some Places Date: 3 Feb 2004 20:22:51 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com jvj1@yahoo.com (John) wrote in message news:: > Hi, > I recently switched from Verizon to Cavalier (in Maryland). All is > working fine until today. My daughter's phone tries to contact me for > some emergency. The school (walking distance from home) tells me that > they cannot call me and told me that they are getting my voicemail. > I called Cavalier. They told me that it is the problem with how the > school is dialing. So, I go to the school and dial our home. I'm > getting Verizon voicemail and it is asking me to enter a mailbox. > I called Cavalier again and explained the problem. They put me on hold > and told me they fixed it. I called the school half an hour later and > asked to call me at home. No calls from them ... meaning things are > still are not working. I seem to get calls from other parts ... Long > Distance and International. Cavalier doesn't seem to want to send > anybody to check it out. > Anybody knows what could be the problem? Wondering, where else people > cannot call me..:-/ > Thanks. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Please answer a few questions for > me. You said you switched *from* Verizon to Cavalier. Yet the school > calls go to *Verizon* voice mail ... and the voicemail equipment (from > *Verizon*) asks the caller to 'enter a mailbox number'? It sounds to > me like the school phone (if their phones are on Verizon) is getting > sent to a generic voicemail inbound line. Verizon voicemail cannot > detirmine who the call is for so it asks the calling party to enter a > mailbox number. When you switched to Cavalier, did you intend to > retain the Verizon voicemail (or does Verizon supply the voicemail for > Cavalier under some contract, etc?) Did you (and/or your daughter) use > the same telephone to placed the call to you that would ordinarily be > used for such? > If Voicemail does not have an account for you (either because you have > now dropped Verizon or have not properly configured your Cavalier > phone voicemail correctly) then calls to it intended for 'no accounts' > get handled like calls where Voicemail does not know who is calling > it; a generic greeting 'what mailbox do you want?' is substituted. > Another clue was that Cavalier first told you the school was not > dialing the number 'correctly'. What is the 'correct' way to dial it? > If Verizon, (or whoever is the inter exchange carrier) and Cavalier > have their tables (databases) set up correctly then it shouldn't > matter how you dial, but this leads me to wonder if (whoever extended > dial tone -- Verizon? -- to the school and you on your attempt) has > some database error. Obviously you can see there are a lot more > questions to be answered in the process of resovling this mystery. In > fact, let's get even a bit more extreme: what do you get if you dial > your Cavalier number from a next door neighbor or even dial from your > home phone? ***Make certain you use a phone subscribed to Verizon > for your tests.*** And if possible, also test using a phone which is > subscribed to Cavalier. Also try these tests before and after you > have done whatever three-digit diddle is required to turn voice mail > on and off (in other words ring through to me.) Then please write > again, and we will try to resolved it further. Do not trouble the > droids with all this, not at first. It would be good if you could tell > them exactly what is wrong before they begin working on it. PAT] Slight confusion here in what I said. Please re-read in my post "My daughter's phone" to "My daughter's school". (my daughter is only 6 yr old :). I'll try to answer/give more details now. I'm only talking about 1 problem ... calling from School phone to my home. I only have one phoneline at home. It used to be Verizon and now it is Cavalier. I kept my phone number when switiching ... my number didn't change. It seems like when I call from the school, it is getting routed to a generic Verizon voicemail. I know it is Verizon because the greeting mentions Verizon. I tried to dial Verizon voicemail from my home and enter my phone number as the mailbox, and my voice mail at Verizon is not active anymore. I have activated the Cavalier voice mail the day I got connection from cavalier and it works. I have many people call me at my home, neighbor, My Cell phone, International etc. No problems with Cavalier and their voicemail. Only problem as far as I know is calling from School. I'll try calling from School to home on wednesday and write again. School was closed on Tuesday due to bad weather. Thanks, -John [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for some explanation. Now I want you to find out what telephone company serves the school, is it Verizon or some other competitor (like you have Cavalier.) Also find out what phone exchange serves the school. If the school is on Brand X telecom, then maybe Brand X does not have their routing tables up to date. Or maybe Brand X simply brokers through Verizon. Or maybe the school is on Verizon. You said 'I have many people call me and there is no problem with Cavalier.' No, there probably isn't any problem with Cavalier. I would suggest the problem is with Verizon. When a person has voicemail and does not answer the phone or the line is busy, the call is usually forwarded to a group of trunks which take the call to voicemail, sending along with the called party the number he was trying to reach and his own number, so the recipient voicemail can examine it and say he goes to box whatever. Maybe when your number was ported using LNP (local number portability) over to Cavalier, whoever did that work forgot to change the 'forward to voicemail' feature so that the call would go to Cavalier Voice Mail instead of Verizon Voice mail. So Verizon winds up getting the voicemail call but they no longer have an account for you. But you said 'friends from all over town call me and reach me' (and I assume your genuine voicemail). Find out for me which of your friends is on the same exchange as the school. What exchanges are they using in common? I think what you will find out is that anyone **on the same exchange as the school ** gets the very same results because there is something wrong in the translation tables at the (Verizon-based) exchange the school is on. In other words, a dozen phone subscribers on that exchange calling a dozen Cavalier subscribers would wind up getting the wrong voicemail (if the dozen recipients of Cavalier had voicemail and were called. It does not matter how many of your friends call you and get through. People on the same exchange as the school most likely are not getting through. I as reminded of a time several years ago when Chicago area (read that as Illinois Bell) customers could not get through to a given exchange in Milwaukee. It existed, it was populated, but Illinois Bell handed off their default calls to AT&T (which had bad tables!). If you called it as 1010+whatever carrier+the ten digit number you got through okay. But 1+ failed, cause IBT was handing the traffic to AT&T. I feel certain you are going to find something similar here in your case. Verizon (which after all, is where things are really at; Cavalier only has some two bit thing going on) has a translation problem somewhere. But more details please. We are starting to get close. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #55 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 4 13:51:09 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i14Ip9R05413; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 13:51:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 13:51:09 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402041851.i14Ip9R05413@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 #56 TELECOM Digest Wed, 4 Feb 2004 13:51:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 56 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson U.S. Cellular Reports Fourth Quarter Results (Monty Solomon) Terra Lycos and Network Associates Team Up to Provide Online (Solomon) Very Black 'Little Black Books' (Monty Solomon) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (McWebber) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Joey Lindstrom) Re: 450-434 Prefix? (Joey Lindstrom) Re: SIP IP PHones (BMN) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. (Justin Time) Re: Switch Verizon to Cavalier, Can't Get Through Some Places (K Abrams) Re: MTV Blames Janet Jackson for Super Bowl Incident (Roger) Re: MTV Blames Janet Jackson for Super Bowl Incident (S Falke) Re: Jackson, Timberlake Apologize for Flash (Joey Lindstrom) 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: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 08:04:47 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Cellular Reports Fourth Quarter Results CHICAGO, Feb. 4 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- United States Cellular Corporation (Amex: USM) reported service revenues of $620.6 million for the fourth quarter of 2003, up 8% from $575.4 million in the comparable period a year ago. The company recorded operating income of $24.3 million during the quarter, a decrease of $13.2 million, or 35%, from the fourth quarter of 2002. Operating expenses include a $22.3 million loss, primarily related to the assets to be sold to AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. (NYSE:AWE) ("AT&T Wireless") pursuant to the transaction announced in November 2003. The company recorded a net tax benefit in the quarter of $0.5 million, primarily due to the benefits of net operating losses, including losses related to the sale of the South Texas markets. Net income and basic earnings per share were $20.6 million and $.24, respectively compared to $14.6 million and $.17, respectively, in the comparable period one year ago. In the fourth quarter of 2002, the company recorded $16.5 million of pre-tax losses ($15.9 million net of $0.6 million of taxes) related to the writedown in value of certain investments. The company's operating results include operations, through July 31, 2003, of the markets that were part of an exchange of assets with AT&T Wireless that occurred in August 2003. The company's operating results include, and will continue to include through the transaction closing date, the operations of the markets that will be sold to AT&T Wireless pursuant to the transaction announced in November 2003. Fourth Quarter Highlights * Customer units totaled 4,409,000, a 7% increase from 4,103,000 customers one year earlier. * Net customer unit activations from distribution channels totaled 141,000 during the quarter, compared to 160,000 activations for the same quarter of 2002. Fourth quarter 2003 activity reflects the writeoff of 16,000 prepaid customers and 10,000 postpay customers based on a review of certain accounts. The 10,000 postpay customer writeoffs are included in the fourth quarter postpay churn calculation. * For the quarter, the company recorded postpay churn of 1.4%, which is favorable to industry averages and which is the company's lowest quarterly postpay churn rate since it began tracking the measure. * Average monthly retail service revenue per customer increased 3% year- over-year in the quarter to $39.68, compared to $38.69 in the same period a year ago. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40418206 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:58:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Terra Lycos and Network Associates(R) Team Up to Provide Online Terra Lycos and Network Associates(R) Team Up to Provide Online Security Protection for Consumers Terra Lycos Users to Benefit from McAfee(R) VirusScan(R) and McAfee(R) Personal Firewall Plus Services SANTA CLARA, Calif. and MADRID, Spain, Feb. 4 /PRNewswire/ -- Network Associates, Inc. (NYSE:NET), the leading provider of intrusion prevention solutions and Terra Lycos (Nasdaq: TRLY; MC:TRR), the largest Internet access provider in Spain and Latin America, today announced an agreement to deliver Network Associates McAfee(R) VirusScan(R) and McAfee(R) Personal Firewall Plus protection to Terra Lycos' worldwide customer base. The services will be available in Spain and will roll out to Latin America and the U.S. later this year. After downloading the McAfee Security software, Terra Lycos customers will benefit from fully automatic and easy to use anti-virus and firewall protection. The agreement enables Terra Lycos customers to subscribe to Network Associates McAfee VirusScan and McAfee Personal Firewall Plus online services via the new Security Center on the Terra Lycos website, or as an add-on feature packaged with customers' existing access accounts. The monthly online subscription service enables products to be delivered directly to the desktop, giving the customer convenience and peace of mind that their PC will be protected through regular automatic updates. McAfee Security anti-virus and firewall protection will help to ensure Terra Lycos customers a secure Internet access even as new threats arise. After downloading the software, Terra Lycos customers will enjoy protection against attacks from hackers and online threats such as the recent "My Doom" virus which has been classified as the most virulent virus ever. Blaster and Love Bug are other viruses which have wreaked havoc amongst consumers, with the Love Bug infecting more than 40 million computers worldwide and resulting in billions of dollars in clean up costs. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40418433 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 23:40:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Very Black 'Little Black Books' Roger Clarke Abstract Technology and human ingenuity continue to pose new privacy challenges. During 2003, a new dot.com fashion arose from an odd amalgam of Rolodex address-books, e-communities and dating. Users of these services store personal data on a central server, which can be accessed by other people, and, potentially at least, exploited by the service-operator. There are privacy concerns, of a kind that has been analysed many times before. The new dimension that these services bring is that they entice users to disclose personal data about their friends, business contacts or acquaintances. That is a disturbing feature, and it requires careful analysis. http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/DV/ContactPITs.html ------------------------------ From: McWebber Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 01:14:59 -0500 TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to a message sent by Hank Karl in message news:telecom23.55.11@telecom-digest.org: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Since you mentioned Dell Support, let's > The people in the back seat reach out, grab the clerk and pull him > into the car and speed away. The clerk is shown now sitting in the > back seat, yelling frantically at the people saying, "Let me go! What > do you want from me?". The car driver turns around and says to the > folks in the back seat, "do not tell anyone about this." I thought he said, "Don't tell your mom about this." McWebber No email replies read If someone tells you to forward an email to all your friends please forget that I'm your friend. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe so. You know there about ten or so different edited versions of most advertising messages on television. For example, the Advil commercial. One verion has a man limping up the sidewalk greeting his wife telling her the doctor has prescribed Advil. The other version has a woman and her husband getting out of bed in the morning; she is very stiff and sore, and tells her husband the doctor has prescribed the same thing, an Advil tablet before bedtime. At that point however the message takes a turn: In one version of both, the other partner looks shocked and says, but we have always taken Brand X (by name); the other partner dismisses that with, 'Yes, I know, but the doctor says ...' the other version of the very same commercial edits out that reference to Brand X and very smoothly continues telling the good things about Advil. I do not know if they were trying to save five seconds (times how many stations) on their advertising bill, or if the lawyers for Brand X got on their case. Same man and woman in each case. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 23:30:25 -0700 From: Joey Lindstrom Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Organization: Telus Sucks! Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Tuesday, February 3, 2004, 10:54:19 PM, TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Since you mentioned Dell Support, > let's chat about them for a minute. Has anyone seen that very funny > commmercial on television where a car load of people pull up to a > Radio Shack store just at closing time? The clerk is walking out, > and locking the door of the store when he sees this car full of > people looking at him and giggling. The clerk approaches the car > questioningly, and asks the people, "May I help you?" I've never seen a big-box Radio Shack store up here in Canada, do they have them south of the border? The store in the commercial is not a Radio Shack, but a "generic" big-box computer/electronics store. Think about it: had Dell used the Radio Shack trademark in this spot, they'd have been sued faster than Ruben Studdard through the front door at Krispy Kreme's when the Hot Light goes on. I don't recall anybody giggling at that point in the commercial, either. Speaking of commercials, why are we so hung up about this Janet Jackson thing? Why has nobody mentioned, or taken offense to, the Bud Lite "horse fart" commercial during the Super Bowl? For those that missed it, a guy and a girl are riding behind a horse, and he gives her a candle, then turns away for a moment, and during that moment, the horse lifts its tail, lets out a blast, and the resulting flame scorches his girlfriend. To me, that's FAR worse than Janet's boob. Who knew LaToya would turn out to be the "normal" one in that family? Joey Lindstrom Come see http://td-extra.interocitor.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I guess so, if you feel that exposing yourself on national TV is 'normal' behavior. Although I personally feel Michael is innocent in this latest affair, victimized by a very noisy mother, I also think he is just as goofy as she is. I do not watch much television, and certainly not the Super Bowl. Thanks for reminding me why not. I did not see either the horse incident or the instance of LaToya Jackson's indecent exposure, but I certainly am reading a lot about it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 23:15:19 -0700 From: Joey Lindstrom Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Organization: Telus Sucks! Subject: Re: 450-434 Prefix? Tuesday, February 3, 2004, 10:54:19 PM, Dave Garland wrote: >> One of the calls appearing on a just-received AT&T bill says it was >> from "CANADA USA" > Oops. That wasn't supposed to be used until after the invasion had > begun. :) No, that can't be right, otherwise it would have said "USA, Canada". ;-) Don't make us come down there and burn down the White House again... :-) Joey Lindstrom Come see http://td-extra.interocitor.net ------------------------------ From: BMN Subject: Re: SIP IP PHones Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 05:12:37 -0500 Organization: Bell Sympatico Hard Phones: 3com? Aastra 480i SIP - coming Q2 '04 Expected $250 USD Arrayvox: SIP, MGCP, H.323 - $179 - $189 USD BCM - SIP, MGCP, H.323: HP180, HP300 D-Link - SIP phone, 1 line display (Russian site) farfon IAX Device coming Q104 Expected $100 USD Grandstream Budgetone - Approx $65 USD Cisco Phones - Approx $150 to $400 USD Clipcomm Phones SIP and H.323. incl PSTN jack and small NAT/router - Approx. $165 USD Inter-fone Innovaphone? - H.323 and ISDN website (cache) IPDialog Phones SIP - Approx $200 USD Microsoft Windows Messenger: SIP udp/tcp, for Windows XP, free Mitel Phones Ortena SIP Phones - Approx $100 - $120 Pingtel Phones Planet Phones H.323 incl PSTN jack - Approx 166 ? Euro (excl. VAT) Polycom Phones - Approx $250 - $450 USD QTelNet Phones Sayson Phones - makes some of the Aastra phones Siemens Phones OptiPoint 400 - Approx. 275 British pounds Snom Phones Linux based, with GSM codec - Approx $199 to $299 USD Suncomm Phones OEM of the Welltech and Planet handsets - Approx $120 USD SwissVoice H.323 or MGCP (SIP announced) - Approx. $149 USD / 140 ? Euro SysConfig ipDialog SipTone - see IPDialog above Telebau Phones H.323 with optional S0 gateway(s) (ISDN BRI) Telstrat IP Phone i2732? SCCP - Approx. $420 USD Virbiage Phones: SIP and IAX, includes also "open" codecs Welltech Phones LAN phone 301: SIP (no display); H.323 (incl. POTS): $100 USD Zultys phones 'ZIP 2': $100, 'ZIP 4x4': $350 (with SRTP/AES encryption) World Phone USB Plug & Play, h.323 protocol, dial up (as low as 8Kbs) to Broadband, operates behind routers and NAT, full duplex. $29.95/month-unlimited calling. Taken from www.voip-info.org, they also have lists of softphones and WLAN phones. Cheers, Brett George Muenz wrote in message news:telecom23.55.10@telecom-digest.org: > Hi: We are looking to implement the Asterisk System. Looking at a few > handset vendors as well. > Would apprecaite any feedback or comments on these as well as if you > know any vendors who can supply this cheap, or resources where they > can be searched. > Handsets > Polycom SoundPoint IP 600 SIP > Zultys ZIP 4x4 > Snom Snom200 VoIP phone > ipDialog SipTone Ethernet > Thanks, > George Muenz ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading away in U.S. Date: 4 Feb 2004 06:33:07 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Phil McKerracher wrote in message news:: > Joseph wrote in message > news:telecom23.54.5@telecom-digest.org: >> ... Color phones are many >> times useless outside as the screen gets washed out in bright light >> where a regular monochrome handset you can still see what's in the >> display... > Unless the screen is "transreflective" as on the O2 xda, which I > have found surprisingly good, even in bright sunlight (Australian > summer). >> ... Polyphonic ringtones may sound somewhat cool, but if you can't >> hear them in a noisy environment they are also useless... >> True, but a well chosen one (e.g. spanning a range of frequencies) >> can actually be more audible than a monophonic one. They also >> avoid confusion about whose phone is ringing. >> Believe it or not some people want a mobile phone that they can >> actually make and receive calls on ... easily. Again, I've found >> it very convenient to have all my Outlook contacts in the xda, >> dialable with a single tap on the number. >> It's going to be many years if never that cell phones supplant >> personal computers as a way to communicate data. Hmm. Again, my >> xda is very useful for sending and receiving e-mail on the move. I >> have used it recently to e-mail diagnostic oscilloscope traces from >> a lab, to retrieve a streetmap of my current location from a car >> and to find a timetable for buses from Heathrow. It's MUCH more >> convenient to carry than a laptop, and the battery lasts all day. >> It hasn't "supplanted" my PC because I prefer to use that when >> I'm at > home, but I wouldn't be without it when I'm on the >> move. That's not to say it's perfect - it crashes regularly for a >> start - but I think the principle is good. The "gimmicks" of a >> camera and other new features in cell phones aren't used by the >> vast majority of cell phone users. The devices are becoming so >> complicated that many business people don't have time to fool with >> them. They want something they can pick up, store numbers into and >> then use the device to make calls with. They don't want to have to >> jump through hoops and remember to put the device into a cradle to >> sync it with their e-mail, calendar or other functions on the >> computer - and contrary to popular opinion, most sales people would >> rather write things in an day timer type of journal rather than >> rely on an electronic device. You can put more write more >> information on a page than you can enter into a PDA in the same >> amount of time. By the time you dig through your carry case to pull out the keyboard, unfold it, attach the PDA -- and then find the device won't balance on your knees, the meeting is over and you have no notes. Your fancy $500 PDA with built-in phone, is now as useful as a brick. And who wants to hold one of those things up to your ear and try to make a phone call? My Nokia 8260 still runs fine and does everything I need it to do, and my portfolio with notepad takes all the notes I need along with holding much more information than any PDA. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: Ken Abrams Subject: Re: Switch Verizon to Cavalier, Can't Get Through From Some Places Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:50:48 GMT TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to John : > Or maybe the school is on Verizon. You said 'I have many people > call me and there is no problem with Cavalier.' No, there probably > isn't any problem with Cavalier. I would suggest the problem is with > Verizon. My bet is: The school's phone works out of the same switch as John's home phone. Calls placed from that switch are the only ones that fail. Because: Calls from any other switch are routed based upon a query to a common data base. They seem to work. Calls from within the home switch will NOT query the common database unless the number record in that switch says to make that query. It appears that the number record in his home Verizon switch was not updated properly. ------------------------------ From: electroknot@yahoo.com (roger) Subject: Re: MTV Blames Janet Jackson for Super Bowl Incident Date: 4 Feb 2004 09:06:43 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Janet shouldn't even be at the stupid bowl. And, stupid bowl sucked this year. Two teams no one cares about ... http://www.twelvefifteen.com ------------------------------ From: s falke Subject: Re: MTV Blames Janet Jackson for Super Bowl Incident Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 18:27:17 GMT > NEW YORK, Feb 3 (Reuters) - Singer Janet Jackson masterminded the > Super Bowl halftime stunt that left her right breast exposed and > prompted a federal probe into television indecency, the head of MTV > said on Tuesday. MTV taking a prudish stance? Imagine that. It was cheap duct tape. --s falke ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 23:09:53 -0700 From: Joey Lindstrom Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Organization: Telus Sucks! Subject: Re: Jackson, Timberlake Apologize for Flash Tuesday, February 3, 2004, 10:54:19 PM, Monty wrote: > NEW YORK (AP) -- CBS, MTV, the NFL, Janet Jackson and Justin > Timberlake all say they're sorry _ but none of that is deterring the > federal government from looking into the Super Bowl's too-revealing > halftime show. And she wore that throwing star on her nipple because it's comfy. :-) Joey Lindstrom Come see http://td-extra.interocitor.net ------------------------------ 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 #56 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 4 19:10:20 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i150AKn07914; Wed, 4 Feb 2004 19:10:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 19:10:20 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402050010.i150AKn07914@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 #57 TELECOM Digest Wed, 4 Feb 2004 19:10:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 57 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Akamai Reports Fourth Quarter 2003 & Full-Year 2003 Financial (Solomon) TiVo & Nielsen Media Research Agree to Market DVR Usage (Monty Solomon) Computer, TV, Stereo? (Monty Solomon) Microsoft Security Bulletins (Monty Solomon) IVR System Information Request (Brett Nelson) Re: Using PIX 501 With Vonage VOIP (Charles Hizark) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (McWebber) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Daniel W. Johnson) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. (noname) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. (Phil McKerracher) Re: Jackson, Timberlake Apologize for Flash (J Kelly) Re: What If ...? was Re: Verizon Violates DNC List (noname) Real Time ANI Service Needed on Toll Free Lines (Virtual Lab Rat) Re: SCO Options, was Re: Mydoom vs. SCO (Phil Earnhardt) "David Nelson" in a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Article (Carl Moore) Last Laugh! Re: Some *Good News* About Norvergence! (Chris Jones) 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: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 18:03:23 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Akamai Reports Fourth Quarter 2003 and Full-Year 2003 Financial CAMBRIDGE, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 4, 2004--Akamai Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:AKAM): -- Record fourth quarter revenue of $45.2 million, up 8% quarter-over-quarter, and up 28% year-over-year -- Annual revenue grew to $161.3 million, up 11% year-over-year -- GAAP net loss narrowed to $0.02 per share -- First ever normalized net income(a) of $1.5 million, or $0.01 per share Akamai Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:AKAM), the global leader in distributed computing solutions and services, today reported financial results for the fourth quarter and full-year ended December 31, 2003. Revenue for the fourth quarter 2003 was $45.2 million, an 8.1 percent increase over third quarter revenue of $41.8 million, and a 27.7 percent increase over fourth quarter 2002 revenue of $35.4 million. Total revenue for 2003 was $161.3 million. Net loss, in accordance with United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), for the fourth quarter 2003 was $2.1 million, or $0.02 per share, compared to a net loss for the third quarter 2003 of $3.9 million, or $0.03 per share, and compared to a net loss of $55.6 million, or $0.48 per share, in the fourth quarter of 2002. Included in the fourth quarter 2003 net loss is $2.1 million of expenses associated with the retirement of debt. For the first time in its history, the Company achieved positive earnings per share of $0.01 on a normalized basis(a), generating $1.5 million positive net income for the fourth quarter, compared to a normalized net loss(a) for the prior quarter of $0.03 per share, or $3.5 million, and compared to First Call's consensus estimate for the fourth quarter of a normalized net loss of $0.01 per share. ((a)See Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures below for definitions.) Akamai ended the year with $208.4 million in cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, marketable securities and restricted marketable securities, including $95.8 million in net debt proceeds and redemptions, an increase from $99.0 million at the end of the third quarter. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40430314 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 18:02:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo and Nielsen Media Research Agree to Market DVR Usage SAN JOSE, Calif., Feb. 4 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Nielsen Media Research, the global leader in television measurement services, and TiVo (Nasdaq: TIVO), the pioneer in digital video recording (DVR) services, have signed an agreement to deliver information on DVR usage to the television industry. This new service, which will be marketed by Nielsen Media Research, will aid advertisers and television executives seeking to understand the opportunities and effects of growing DVR usage. Consistent with their dedication to industry privacy standards, TiVo and Nielsen will collect data on television viewing patterns and trends by creating an Opt-In panel of TiVo's standalone subscribers. This fully consensual panel will provide key information for the purposes of analyzing, processing and marketing DVR usage data to the television industry. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40430118 ------------------------------ From: Monty Solomon Subject: Computer? TV? Stereo? Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:00:00 EST By WALTER S. MOSSBERG EVERYONE KNOWS that personal computers come in a variety of styles and types-desktops, laptops, tablet PCs and so forth. But gradually, over the past year, a new major subtype has elbowed its way onto the family tree: the Windows Media Center PC. A Media Center PC is a high-end, well-equipped Windows PC that has a TV tuner built in and that uses a special version of Microsoft's Windows XP operating system called the Media Center Edition. It can be used on a desk or lap, just like any Windows computer. But it comes with a remote control and is meant to be operated, at least some of the time, from across the room. In this mode, you can use a Media Center PC to watch and record television, play your digital music files, view photos and video clips, and play DVDs. When Microsoft first envisioned a Media Center PC a couple of years ago, it was seen as a niche product for dorm rooms and teenagers' bedrooms. The theory was that computers would likely be placed in these rooms anyway, so they might as well contain functions that would eliminate the need to equip these rooms with TV sets, VCRs, DVD players and audio systems. But the machines proved popular with consumers, and in many more settings than teenagers' rooms. So this winter lots of PC makers are offering Media Center PCs, in both desktop and laptop versions. Some of these models are designed to look like flat-panel TVs or even stereo components, in hopes consumers will place them in the family room instead of the home office. As with so many other products, Microsoft didn't invent the idea of a Media Center computer but is merely refining the work of pioneers. Years ago Apple Computer sold a sleek, black Macintosh model called the Mac TV, with a built-in TV tuner and an elegant remote control the size of a credit card. And various Windows PC makers have also tried PCs with built-in TVs and remotes. Especially notable in this regard was Packard Bell, once the king of low-priced retail PCs. http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/report-200401.html ------------------------------ From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Security Bulletins Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 16:00:00 CST Security Bulletins http://www.microsoft.com/security/security_bulletins/ Read About the New Security Bulletin Process http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/revsbwp.asp Technical Bulletins http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/?url=/technet/security/current.asp?frame=true Learn How to Spot a Bogus Security Bulletin http://www.microsoft.com/security/antivirus/authenticate_mail.asp [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As a general rule of thumb, Microsoft Security things (and other updates/improvements to their software) do not come in email. They don't write to people in general about it. You get them by going to the Microsoft Windows Update site. At your computer, go to a blank, fresh browser screen and type in the address of record for Microsoft Updates. That's the only safe way to do it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: BMN Subject: IVR System Information Request Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 18:26:31 -0500 Organization: Bell Sympatico Looking for feedback on www.locusdialog.com speech-enabled auto attendant and call routing solutions. Hearing about any experiences with this product or similar products, good or bad or otherwise would be appreciated. Regards, Brett Nelson ------------------------------ From: hizark21@yahoo.com (Charles Hizark) Subject: Re: Using PIX 501 With Vonage VoIP Date: 4 Feb 2004 15:28:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Chainsman wrote in message news:: > Hi, I use Vonage VoIP with my home telephone system in a NATted and > firewalled network and it works fine. If you order Vonage now, the > current device has a simple firewall and NAT function so you can use > it like a gateway. The most important reason to do this is that your > firewall will probably not pass-through the Quality-of-Service (QoS) > tagged packets. If you use the Vonage device between your gateway and > your cable/DSL modem then the QoS tags are used and, probably more > importantly, the VoIP network activity gets the highest priority over > your networks' internally-generated traffic. > The layout that gives VoIP the highest priority (via QoS over the > cable modem network and priority over all your internal network's > traffic): network --> gateway/router --> Vonage device --> cable modem Cable companies use DOCIS 2.0 (Data over cable interface specification). DoCIS 2.0 is a form of broadband ATM. This allows flow control or hard QOS. Hard QOS is garunteed bandwidth delivery. > I have used it in both modes and if you are doing online games you > will probably not like the firewall and NAT function but if you depend > on the Vonage for your primary phone line (I do not) you will want it > as the last device before the modem. > It should be noted that Cisco was not interested in adding the > NAT/Firewall feature to their VoIP box so that's why Vonage is only > using the Motorola box now. ------------------------------ From: McWebber Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 16:06:24 -0500 McWebber wrote in message news:telecom23.56.4@telecom-digest.org: > tablet before bedtime. At that point however the message takes a turn: > In one version of both, the other partner looks shocked and says, but > we have always taken Brand X (by name); the other partner dismisses > that with, 'Yes, I know, but the doctor says ...' the other version of > the very same commercial edits out that reference to Brand X and very > smoothly continues telling the good things about Advil. I do not know > if they were trying to save five seconds (times how many stations) on > their advertising bill, or if the lawyers for Brand X got on their > case. Same man and woman in each case. PAT] IIRC, the old Advertising Code had some rules about comparative advertising and brand names and some stations may still have such rules so as not to piss off the other company. McWebber "Richter points to the lack of legal action against his company as proof that he's operating appropriately." Information Week, November 10, 2003 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe so, but I have seen both versions of the commercial on the same station (TV Land, which is about the only thing I watch on the idiot box other than occassional PBS shows on Channel 11. Mostly I listen to radio, especially while working. PAT] ------------------------------ From: panoptes@iquest.net (Daniel W. Johnson) Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: 4 Feb 2004 14:59:05 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com TELECOM Digest Editor added in message news:: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I guess so, if you feel that exposing > yourself on national TV is 'normal' behavior. Although I personally > feel Michael is innocent in this latest affair, victimized by a very > noisy mother, I also think he is just as goofy as she is. I do not > watch much television, and certainly not the Super Bowl. Thanks for > reminding me why not. I did not see either the horse incident or the > instance of LaToya Jackson's indecent exposure, but I certainly am > reading a lot about it. PAT] I haven't read anything about indecent exposure on the part of LaToya, just the incident with her younger sister Janet on the Super Bowl halftime show. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My bad ... I should have said 'Janet' instead of 'LaToya'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: noname Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:00:24 GMT In article , a_user2000@yahoo.com says: > By the time you dig through your carry case to pull out the keyboard, > unfold it, attach the PDA -- and then find the device won't balance on > your knees, the meeting is over and you have no notes. Your fancy > $500 PDA with built-in phone, is now as useful as a brick. And who > wants to hold one of those things up to your ear and try to make a > phone call? > My Nokia 8260 still runs fine and does everything I need it to do, and > my portfolio with notepad takes all the notes I need along with > holding much more information than any PDA. If they really want the things to be used in meetings for notes, etc. why not build a decent voice recognition system in that can not only detect and parse speech, but identify speaker. That would make a useful tool. Buttons are the rule of the day. It's what happens when we give the engineers free reign without considering the human element. I'm surprised none of the manufacturers have figured that out yet. ------------------------------ From: Phil McKerracher Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 22:25:58 GMT Organization: blueyonder (post doesn't reflect views of blueyonder) Justin Time wrote in message news:telecom23.56.8@telecom-digest.org: [Some quoting omitted, part of it erroneously attributed to me] > By the time you dig through your carry case to pull out the keyboard, > unfold it, attach the PDA -- and then find the device won't balance on > your knees, the meeting is over and you have no notes. Your fancy > $500 PDA with built-in phone, is now as useful as a brick ... That's why no keyboard is actually available for mine. You either write on the screen as you would on paper, or record a voice memo (useful if only one hand is free). You can also take a picture with the camera ones. I've taken a picture of a train timetable and an information board with a digital camera to save transcribing the bits I want, for example. > ... And who wants to hold one of those things up to your ear and > try to make a phone call? I don't find this a problem at all, the palm size is comfortable. > My Nokia 8260 still runs fine and does everything I need it to do, and > my portfolio with notepad takes all the notes I need along with > holding much more information than any PDA. > Rodgers Platt Surely you don't really mean the "holding much more information" bit? I currently have a couple of e-books in my xda, taking up much less physical space than paper would. They can also be read in a dark bedroom or plane without disturbing other people. Paper notes are much harder to back up, search or share. I don't see any advantage at all, except that there's no battery to go flat. Phil McKerracher www.mckerracher.org ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Jackson, Timberlake Apologize for Flash Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 13:03:16 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy-nospam-.com On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:22:30 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > Federal Communications Commission chief Michael Powell on Monday > promised an investigation into whether CBS violated decency laws, with > potential fines of up to $27,500. If applied to each CBS station, the > fine could reach into the millions. Does anyone else wonder why they keep mentioning that affiliates may be fined? How in the hell did some little CBS affiliate in West Undershirt, Iowa have anything to do with it? They just pass through what the CBS network feeds them, they had *NO IDEA* they should be watching this in case they needed to censor it. As far as they knew it was simply a football game. The affiliates do not normally censor what the network is sending them in less they have reason to believe ahead of time that something offensive to their local audience is about to be broadcast. ------------------------------ From: noname Subject: Re: What If ...? Was Re: Verizon Violates DNC List Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:04:25 GMT In article , george@coventry.m5p.com says: > TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to a message: >> Even though officially the Bell System has been dead for many years, >> the droids continue to act like Ma Bell was still around, as much as >> they are permitted, don't they? I think those people act like >> divestiture was merely a stumbling-block, a minor inconvenience in >> their path. PAT] > Verizon, of course, would have been an impossibility pre-divestiture, > and even at the beginning of 1999, who would have dreamed of a merger > between the largest independent telco with a big chunk of the old Bell > System? As I was pondering Verizon's history this morning, it occurred > to me to wonder what was on Judge Greene's mind when he repartitioned > the old Bell System into the seven Baby Bells. What would have hap- > pened if he had simply spun off the existing Bell operating companies > with the nominal corporate structure which existed at the time? Surely > some of us would still be dealing with New England Telephone, or Paci- > fic Northwest Bell, etc. Would anything the size of Bell Atlantic have > merged together by this point, to be merged in its turn with GTE? New England Telephone and New York Telephone were the first to group together as Nynex. I don't think that Judge Greene envisioned the arguments about economies of scale that would be put forth by the companies. Nor did he think about diseconomies of scale as is so the case with Verizon absorbing GTE. When you think about it, Bell Atlantic probably was in the best financial position to start all this. They pretty much had the prime areas that weren't all that expensive to service and they had some plum government contracts. ------------------------------ From: me@virtuallabrat.com (Virtual Lab Rat - No Spam Please) Subject: Real time ANI service needed on toll free lines Date: 4 Feb 2004 13:18:13 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I currently use kall8.com and telcan.net for toll free service. I don't need the ability to change the ring to number in real time, and I don't need many of the other value added features these services offer. The only value added feature I need is real time ANI or near real time ANI that I can access thorugh the web or that is passed through as caller ID. At one time I used a service called IPHONE, I think they resold Worldcom service. I paid 4 cents per minute at straight 6 sec increments. They passed the ANI through to Caller ID. Even if the caller had blocked their caller ID info, I could see it. I am looking for a similar service at a similar price. Would appriciate any suggestions. ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: SCO Options, was Re: Mydoom vs. SCO Date: 4 Feb 2004 13:41:00 -0800 Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://newsguy.com] In article , Kenneth P. Stox says: >> "The assault on SCO is expected to last until 12 February. >> Until then, SCO has said it will use the alternative >> domain name www.thescogroup.com." > Strange. www.sco.com resolves to 216.250.128.12, and www.thescogroup.com > resolves to 216.250.128.21. Now then, if I was someone with more than > one interconnected neuron, and I was expecting a DOS attack, wouldn't I > try to locate the other server on another network? Naahhhhhh! That may have been the prior address of www.sco.com. At this instant, www.sco.com doesn't resolve to any IP address; SCO removed that name from the name servers. I presume they did this action early enough so that the name would be flushed from the caches of any normally-operating name servers -- before the attacks started. Comments on neuron interconnectivity aside, SCO's strategy of dealing with the threat appears to be working: responsiveness on requests to www.thescogroup.com is prompt. --phil ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 15:21:12 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: "David Nelson" in a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Article On Jan. 18 or so, subject newspaper in western Pennsylvania had the story of an arrest in auction scam. I take it many of you heard of the scenario of the seller (of car or animal or other item) being sent a cashier's or certified check (probably by a 3rd party) for a few thousand dollars more than what the seller asked for, with the seller being asked to wire the difference to the buyer. (The scam scenario is that that check will be found to be counterfeit, with the scammers hoping that the money to be wired by the seller will be gone by then.) Anyway, there is a note of a scammer sometimes using the name of David Nelson online. David Nelson?!? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sigh ... David Nelson always was the black sheep in the family, wasn't he? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Chris Jones Subject: Last Laugh! Re: Some *Good News* About Norvergence! Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 16:41:05 -0500 In response to Brett's (BMN ) response to Pat, I just have to say, isn't that America, to you and me? Norvergence is out there following in the footsteps of PT Barnum with the Feds sniffing around their heels to see if any illicit money might turn up, and you want to point fingers? You want to name names? There's more than enough gravy to sink this boat, so all aboard! Down with naysayers, up with profiteers, and it's everyone on the bandwagon for hiself! Women and children first! Forward, upward, outtasight! Excelsior ad whooosh! ------------------------------ 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 #57 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 5 14:06:11 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i15J6Bp13412; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 14:06:11 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 14:06:11 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402051906.i15J6Bp13412@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 #58 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Feb 2004 14:06:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 58 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson "My Advice to Social Networking Services" (Monty Solomon) AT&T Wireless & T-Mobile USA Sign Airport Wi-Fi Roaming (Monty Solomon) Three Blind Phreaks (Monty Solomon) Connecting 4-Wire (Line-in and Line-out) to a Headset Jack (Newsgroups) The NUG-IT Magazine for Telecom Professionals (Pokey) Unused 800 Number - Ending in 1000 - Can I Rent it Out? (Chris Barr) You Switched -TO- Cavalier? (Carl Moore) Re: Switch Verizon to Cavalier, Can't Get Through Some Places (John) Re: Jackson, Timberlake Apologize for Flash (Clark W. Griswold, Jr.) Re: MTV Blames Janet Jackson for Super Bowl Incident (Laurie Laws) Re: What If ...? Was Re: Verizon Violates DNC List (jbl) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Herb Stein) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Ken Alper) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. (email@crazyhat.net) Call for Papers: ICWIN 2004 (Wireless Networks) (Mishra, Aishvarya) 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: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 22:02:17 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: "My Advice to Social Networking Services" Christopher Allen I have now had CEOs of three different social networks send me emails asking me to compare Orkut to their service. I've not had a chance to dig deeply into good answers for each specific one, but I did have some general advice that I wanted to offer given my recent experiences with Orkut.com, and my evaluation and followup on various social networking services in December. http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2004/02/my_advice_to_so.html Confirmed Email Privacy Hole at Orkut Christopher Allen Another Orkut user and I have confirmed a privacy hole in Orkut whenever you send a message to someone via Orkut. http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2004/02/confirmed_email.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 09:25:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Wireless and T-Mobile USA Sign Airport Wi-Fi Roaming Agreement Covers Wi-Fi at Denver International, Philadelphia International and San Francisco International Airports BELLEVUE, Wash. and REDMOND, Wash., Feb. 5 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Driving expanded Wi-Fi (802.11b) service coverage at the nation's airports, T-Mobile USA, Inc. and AT&T Wireless (NYSE:AWE) today announced a reciprocal Wi-Fi roaming agreement for Denver International (DIA), Philadelphia International (PHL) and San Francisco International (SFO) airports. Today's announcement marks the first roaming agreement between AT&T Wireless and T-Mobile for Wi-Fi service. As a result of this roaming agreement, T-Mobile HotSpot subscribers can soon add DIA and PHL to the list of hotspot locations available to them to stay connected to the Internet, access their corporate networks, or check e-mail via a Wi-Fi enabled laptop or PDA. For AT&T Wireless Wi-Fi customers, the roaming agreement means they will be able to use their Wi-Fi device throughout the public areas of SFO. The companies' respective customers will be able to roam using their existing user ID and password. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40441795 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 22:33:27 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Three Blind Phreaks Issue 12.02 - February 2004 Three Blind Phreaks How the phone-phreaking Badir brothers ran rings around Israel's telcos for six scam-filled years. By Michael Kaplan Inside the chintz-filled living room of the Badir family's neat and modest home, a feast of freshly roasted chicken, saffron rice, and seasoned vegetable stew perfumes the air. Friends and relatives pour through the front door to congratulate 27-year-old Munther "Ramy" Badir. He's just been released from prison after serving 47 months for computer-related crimes. Outside, Islamic prayers resonate from speakers on a truck moving slowly down the dusty streets of Kafr Kassem. Everyone in this Israeli village -- populated mostly by Arabs -- appears ecstatic to have Ramy back. But he does not see their smiles. Ramy, along with two of his three brothers, has been blind since birth due to a genetic defect. He and his sightless brothers have devoted their lives to proving they can out-think, out-program, and out-hack anyone with vision. (Their sighted brother, Ashraf, is a baker with no tech leanings.) They've been remarkably successful. Ramy says dryly, "A computer that is safe and protected is a computer stacked in a warehouse and unplugged." Israeli authorities agree. The 44 charges leveled against Ramy, Muzher, and Shadde Badir in 1999 included telecommunications fraud, theft of computer data, and impersonation of a police officer. The brothers' six-year spree of hacking into phone systems and hijacking telephone time ended when they were convicted of stealing credit card numbers and breaking into the Israeli army radio station's telephone system to set up an illicit phone company. Unwitting customers - mostly Palestinians on the West Bank and Gaza Strip - paid the fake telco for long distance calls that were billed to the radio station. A lawyer close to the case said that the Badirs' scams pulled in more than $2 million. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.02/phreaks.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 01:11:06 +0000 (GMT) From: Newsgroups Subject: Connecting 4-Wire (Line-in and Line-out) to a headset jack Organization: Optimum Online I bought a USRobotics ConferenceLink Speakerphone from Heartland America for 30 bucks. Originally 400 or so. That's the good news. What they didn't tell me was that it is designed to work with PBX's (obsolete ones at that) and it _won't_ work with analog POTS lines. I'm a techie, so rather than send it back like any rational person, I am determined to make it work. It comes with the connector for the PBX (worthless), but because it's USRobotics, it also comes with a connector to two mini-jacks that are line-in and line-out to a computer sound card. I tried it with my speakerphone-enabled modem card and it works. The qualilty is not good, however, because of interference inside my home-made computer box (my guess). Then I got this bright idea. I have a great Sony handset that has a headset jack. In the end what I want is the speakerphone to connect into the headset jack of the Sony handset. To make that work, I need to bridge between the 4 wire (line-in and line-out) jacks to a headset jack. RadioSnack doesn't have anything built for it (I've tried). I'm willing to cut wires and have the appropriate jacks to do it, but I'm confused about what to attach to what. There are two wires each going to the line-in and line-out jacks from the USRobotics ConferenceLink. It looks like there are two (maybe three?) going to the headset. Can someone tell me how to connect this up? Thanks in advance for your help! ------------------------------ From: Pokey Subject: The NUG-IT Magazine for Telecom Professionals Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 21:00:25 -0500 The latest copy of The NUG-IT Magazine is available on-line. If you are involved in, or wish to be involved in, IT, Telecom, or Call Center operations then 'The NUG-IT Magazine' is for you. It contains 'Golden NUG-ITs of Information - from Traditional to IP Telephony'. To download current and past issues, or to subscribe: http://magazine.TelecomCafe.org Subscription automatically enrolls you in our Reader Rewards Program, and you will be notified by email of new issues. www.nug-it.org We do not sell or rent our list. If you are interested in advertising or writing for The NUG-IT Magazine, please contact us: http://www.nug-it.org/contact ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 11:13:25 -0500 From: Chris Barr Reply-To: c-barr@comcast.net Subject: Unused 800 Number - Ending in 1000 - Can I Rent it Out? We currently have an 800 number that won't be in active use for probably 2 years. It's an attractive number, ending in 1000. Can this be leased or rented out to another company? In advance, thanks for any feedback. Chris Barr ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:19:29 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: You Switched -TO- Cavalier? Some time ago (starting in July 2002 or so) I told the story of having to have my lines taken back by Verizon after Cavalier withdrew from the part of Maryland where I live (I am in the North East exchange in Cecil County, and had subscribed to Conectiv local calling, later taken over by Cavalier, because it offered local service to northern Delaware, where some of my phone traffic goes). But in going from Verizon to Conectiv/Cavalier and back to Verizon, my phone numbers did not change. Where in Maryland is your Cavalier service? ------------------------------ From: jvj1@yahoo.com (John) Subject: Re: Switch Verizon to Cavalier, Can't Get Through From Some Places Date: 4 Feb 2004 22:17:08 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Just called from school to my home. Now the calls are getting through ... Voice mail is also working. I'm sure the school and home is same exchange, it is only few blocks away. Thanks for replying. -John Ken Abrams wrote in message news:: > TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to John : >> Or maybe the school is on Verizon. You said 'I have many people >> call me and there is no problem with Cavalier.' No, there probably >> isn't any problem with Cavalier. I would suggest the problem is with >> Verizon. > My bet is: > The school's phone works out of the same switch as John's home phone. > Calls placed from that switch are the only ones that fail. > Because: > Calls from any other switch are routed based upon a query to a common > data base. They seem to work. > Calls from within the home switch will NOT query the common database > unless the number record in that switch says to make that query. It > appears that the number record in his home Verizon switch was not > updated properly. ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <73115.1041@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Jackson, Timberlake Apologize for Flash Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:16:41 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com J Kelly wrote: > Does anyone else wonder why they keep mentioning that affiliates may > be fined? How in the hell did some little CBS affiliate in West > Undershirt, Iowa have anything to do with it? They just pass through > what the CBS network feeds them, they had *NO IDEA* they should be > watching this in case they needed to censor it. As far as they knew > it was simply a football game. Because the affiliate is the one who holds the license for use of the public airways and agrees to abide by the rules for that particular chuck of public spectrum. Most of the FCC authority over the network relates to Owned and Operated stations -- that is, stations the network runs directly. >The affiliates do not normally censor what the network is sending >them unless they have reason to believe ahead of time that something >offensive to their local audience is about to be broadcast. Isn't that interesting ... You've just summed up the problem that most people have with J&J's little stunt. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 21:51:55 -0500 From: Laurie Laws Subject: Re: MTV Blames Janet Jackson for Super Bowl Incident roger wrote: > Janet shouldn't even be at the stupid bowl. > And, stupid bowl sucked this year. Two teams no one cares about ... Try again. The Nielsen numbers were 44.2/Rating 63/Share. It was one of the best games ever for the Super Bowl, suspenseful right up to the last few seconds. Hardly something 'no one cares about'. In New England, the share was even higher. ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: What If ...? was Re: Verizon Violates DNC List Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 20:19:39 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , noname wrote: > New England Telephone and New York Telephone were the first to group > together as Nynex. That's not quite how it worked. After the reorg in 1984, the 22 (or so) Bell Operating Companies were grouped under the seven regional holding companies. Nynex was the regional company for New York Tel and New England Tel; Bell Atlantic had the various C&Ps, NJ Bell, etc.; Pacific Telesis had Pac Bell and some others; Ameritech had Illinois Bell, Michigan Bell and a few others, and so on. It was later that Nynex decided to absorb NYT and NET into a single operating company, and similar things went on elsewhere. Then some of the big mergers started (e.g. SBC borging PacTel and Ameritech, for instance; Qwest buying USWest, etc.) /JBL ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 21:36:24 -0600 Daniel W. Johnson wrote in message news:telecom23.57.8@telecom-digest.org: > TELECOM Digest Editor added in message > news:: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I guess so, if you feel that exposing >> yourself on national TV is 'normal' behavior. Although I personally >> feel Michael is innocent in this latest affair, victimized by a very >> noisy mother, I also think he is just as goofy as she is. I do not >> watch much television, and certainly not the Super Bowl. Thanks for >> reminding me why not. I did not see either the horse incident or the >> instance of LaToya Jackson's indecent exposure, but I certainly am >> reading a lot about it. PAT] > I haven't read anything about indecent exposure on the part of LaToya, > just the incident with her younger sister Janet on the Super Bowl > halftime show. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My bad ... I should have said 'Janet' > instead of 'LaToya'. PAT] LaToya was in Playboy/Penthouse/Hustler/ or one of them a few years ago. Of course, the reader of the magazine found the spread anything but indecent. :-) Herb Stein herb@herbstein.com ------------------------------ From: ken@nac.net (Ken Alper) Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: 5 Feb 2004 10:31:29 -0800 dold@FakedXCall.usenet.us.com wrote in message news:: > I noticed that I have received some telemarketer calls that show an > 800 number on caller ID, with the name of the survey or marketing > firm. I am VERY interested in any data like this. My firm has been trying to do exactly this -- send an 800 number along with our name -- and we've had absolutely no success doing so. If you can send along to me any of the number/name combinations, I might be able to get in touch with their telecom people and figure out how they're doing it. --Ken ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 00:55:14 -0700 From: email@crazyhat.net In message <> Joseph did ramble: > Believe it or not some people want a mobile phone that they can > actually make and receive calls on.... easily. It's going to be many > years if never that cell phones supplant personal computers as a way > to communicate data. Here here. Personally, all I really want out of a cellphone is to make calls, receive calls, possibly a phonebook (names, numbers, and nothing else), call timers, and a bluetooth interface. Everything else should be handled on one of the several other electronic devices I carry around with me, including the full phonebook, web browsing, email, text messaging, photos, and whatever other fetish is popular this week. ------------------------------ From: amishra@ilstu.edu (Mishra, Aishvarya) Subject: Call for Papers: ICWIN 2004 (Wireless Networks) Date: 4 Feb 2004 15:57:45 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com CALL FOR PAPERS The 2004 International Multiconference in Computer Science and Computer Engineering (18 Joint Int'l Conferences) Monte Carlo Resort, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA June 21-24, 2004 Dear Colleagues: You are invited to submit a draft paper (see instructions below). All accepted papers will be published in the respective conference proceedings. The International Multiconference in Computer Science and Computer Engineering is a major annual research event. It assembles a spectrum of affiliated research conferences into a coordinated research meeting held in a common place at a common time. This model facilitates communication among researchers in different fields of computer science and computer engineering. The last Multiconference attracted over 1,650 computer science and engineering researchers from 78 countries. We expect to have over 2,000 attendees for this set of conference. One of the events of the 2004 conference (18 conferences) is: 2004 International Conference on Wireless Networks (ICWN'04) All areas of wireless are welcomed. In particular, we are looking for papers in the areas of security and routing of AD-HOC networks. (a link to other conference's URL can be found at http://www.world-academy-of-science.org) Please regard this announcement as General Guidelines. You are requested to send your submission to session chair at the contact address which appears below. CONFERENCES CONTACT: Mishra, Aishvary Illinois State University Tel (O): +1 309 438 8338 Fax (O): +1 309 438 5113 Tel (R): +1 309 862 3768 Mail: amishra@ilstu.edu E-mail for paper submissions: ICWIN@lnotes.acs.ilstu.edu SUBMISSION OF PAPERS: Prospective authors are invited to submit three copies of their draft paper (about 5 pages - single space, font size of 10 to 12) to Aishvary, Mishra by the due date (who will be forwarding the papers to respective conference chairs/committees). E-mail submissions in MS document or PDF formats are preferable (Fax submissions are also acceptable.) The length of the Camera-Ready papers (if accepted) will be limited to 7 (IEEE style) pages. Papers must not have been previously published or currently submitted for publication elsewhere. The first page of the draft paper should include: title of the paper, name, affiliation, postal address, E-mail address, telephone number,& fax number for each author. The first page should also include the name of the author who will be presenting the paper (if accepted) and a maximum of 5 keywords. IMPORTANT DATES: Feb. 21, 2004: Draft papers (about 5 pages) due Mar. 22, 2004: Notification of acceptance Apr. 21, 2004: Camera-ready papers & Pre-registration due. Jun. 21-24, 2004: 2004 Int'l Multiconference in CS & CE ------------------------------ 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 #58 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 6 13:13:04 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i16ID4W19899; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:13:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:13:04 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402061813.i16ID4W19899@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #59 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:13:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 59 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson US FCC to Begin Weighing Internet-Telephony Rules (Monty Solomon) Mac, AOL PC Users Allowed Video Chats (Monty Solomon) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Nick Landsberg) Get Out Those Postage Stamps: No Internet Voting For Military (Burstein) GSM Gateway in the UK (Benm) Re: Unused 800 Number - Ending in 1000 - Can I Rent it Out? (Al Gillis) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading away in U.S. (Rob) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. (Justin Time) New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject (M. Quinn) A Few Messages Mangled, Sorry (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 22:00:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: US FCC to Begin Weighing Internet-Telephony Rules WASHINGTON, Feb 5 (Reuters) - The Federal Communications Commission said on Thursday it plans to begin determining what regulations, if any, should apply to telephone calls that travel over the Internet. The FCC said it will discuss a formal inquiry into the fast-growing technology at its regularly scheduled meeting next week. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40456873 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 22:04:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mac, AOL PC Users Allowed Video Chats SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) -- Apple Computer Inc. released a new version of its iChat software Thursday so Macintosh users can now do video chats with America Online subscribers who have Windows-based PCs. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40450261 ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:30:52 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Ken Alper wrote: > dold@FakedXCall.usenet.us.com wrote in message > news:: >> I noticed that I have received some telemarketer calls that show an >> 800 number on caller ID, with the name of the survey or marketing >> firm. > I am VERY interested in any data like this. My firm has been trying to > do exactly this -- send an 800 number along with our name -- and we've > had absolutely no success doing so. If you can send along to me any of > the number/name combinations, I might be able to get in touch with > their telecom people and figure out how they're doing it. > --Ken Caller Name is implemented as a separate service from Caller-ID, although some providers may package them together. Caller ID (number), I'm pretty sure, is still delivered as in-band signalling by the originating switch. If the called party does not subscribe to CID, the terminating switch suppresses it. (This requires a database dip to see if the called party subscribes to caller ID. The database may be local to the terminating switch or may be a network database, depending on implementation.) Caller Name (CNAM) on the other hand, requires a database lookup in a "network" (big) database. If your number in the database does not have an asociated name, no name will show up, even if the called party subscribes to the service. If the CNAM service is unbundled from CID, and the called party does not subscribe to it, it will not be delivered, even if your company name is in the database. "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Get Out Those Postage Stamps. No Internet Voting For the Military Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 01:51:52 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC "The Pentagon has decided to scrap plans for an on-line Internet voting system for U.S. military personnel and Americans living abroad. The system had come under fire from experts who said it could be vulnerable to computer attacks. "The decision to cancel the computer voting project was made by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. "Pentagon officials say he ordered the system scrapped because of an inability to ensure the legitimacy of the votes that would be cast." http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=215A8EF4-FC2E-46DA-8F0B218EA14649D9 _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: ben77m2000@yahoo.com (Benm) Subject: GSM Gateway in the UK Date: 6 Feb 2004 03:16:40 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Can anyone in the UK recommend a GSM Gateway and/or mobile calling plan? My business uses about 600 minutes a month on calls to mobile networks. At this moderately low level, it would take me about a year to pay off the gateway I've had quoted (250 pounds). The "any network anytime" plans from the Orange and Vodafone that I've seen aren't very impressive either. Given that about 30% of my phone bill is calls to mobile phones, there must be a better solution. ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: Unused 800 Number - Ending in 1000 - Can I Rent it Out? Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 03:52:11 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Chris Barr wrote in message news:telecom23.58.6@telecom-digest.org: > We currently have an 800 number that won't be in active use for > probably 2 years. It's an attractive number, ending in 1000. > Can this be leased or rented out to another company? > In advance, thanks for any feedback. > Chris Barr Hi Chris, You could probably have your toll-free provider change the number to which that T-F goes to (that is, point your 800 xxx-1000 to the POTS number furnished by your new "customer"). That would let your new "customer" use the number but it would still be yours. You'd get the invoice, of course, and would be responsible for paying it. And, in turn, you'd have to generate an invoice to your "customer", adding 20% or whatever for your trouble. When it comes time for that relationship to end you could have your t-f provider point the t-f number back to your POTS or DID number, where there would be an intercepting recording for a month or two, until the "customers" calls dried up and it would be safe for your business to resume using the t-f number. Good luck! Al ------------------------------ From: rob51166@yahoo.com (Rob) Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. Date: 6 Feb 2004 04:24:47 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com >> As the U.S. wireless market grows, the cell phone is evolving into a >> phone in name only as calling becomes almost secondary to a host of >> other functions. >> After years of trailing Japan and Western Europe, where cell phones >> have long had color screens, e-mail, music, video games, cameras and >> other accessories that make American cell phones look backward in >> comparison, handset makers are finally pushing a new generation of >> units on the domestic market that offer the full range of functions >> available elsewhere. > What the article fails to mention is that these gimmicks of color, > polyphonic tones, etc. are just that gimmicks. Color phones are many > times useless outside as the screen gets washed out in bright light > where a regular monochrome handset you can still see what's in the > display. Polyphonic ringtones may sound somewhat cool, but if you > can't hear them in a noisy environment they are also useless. > Believe it or not some people want a mobile phone that they can > actually make and receive calls on.... easily. It's going to be many > years if never that cell phones supplant personal computers as a way > to communicate data. Going by the way mobile phone technology here in Western Europe and over in Japan is advancing, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that mobile phones will have most, if not all, the facilities of a standard PC or laptop in the not too distant future. After all, the vast majority of mobile phones over here already have web and email access. Personally, I'd much rather carry a palm-sized unit around than have to lug (sorry, carry) a laptop with all the paraphenalia associated with it -- or even worse a briefcase with reams of paper. At least with a mobile palm-sized unit you can download directly from that straight to your PC at home or at the office without having to worry about finding a phone socket for your laptop, or the hassle of connecting to your mobile and hoping that you're able to get a decent signal. Just my 2 pence-worth! ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. Date: 6 Feb 2004 06:06:29 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Phil McKerracher wrote in message news:: > Justin Time wrote in message > news:telecom23.56.8@telecom-digest.org: > [Some quoting omitted, part of it erroneously attributed to me] >> By the time you dig through your carry case to pull out the keyboard, >> unfold it, attach the PDA -- and then find the device won't balance on >> your knees, the meeting is over and you have no notes. Your fancy >> $500 PDA with built-in phone, is now as useful as a brick ... > That's why no keyboard is actually available for mine. You either > write on the screen as you would on paper, or record a voice memo > (useful if only one hand is free). You can also take a picture with > the camera ones. I've taken a picture of a train timetable and an > information board with a digital camera to save transcribing the bits > I want, for example. >> ... And who wants to hold one of those things up to your ear and >> try to make a phone call? > I don't find this a problem at all, the palm size is comfortable. >> My Nokia 8260 still runs fine and does everything I need it to do, and >> my portfolio with notepad takes all the notes I need along with >> holding much more information than any PDA. >> Rodgers Platt > Surely you don't really mean the "holding much more information" bit? > I currently have a couple of e-books in my xda, taking up much less > physical space than paper would. They can also be read in a dark > bedroom or plane without disturbing other people. > Paper notes are much harder to back up, search or share. I don't see > any advantage at all, except that there's no battery to go flat. > Phil McKerracher > www.mckerracher.org Have you ever tried to sketch out a diagram about how a system will interface with another, or when your customer comes up with an idea for a product or a modification to one you already have on a PDA -- even one that "recognizes" handwriting? Keeping notes in a diary may make them "more difficult" to share, but the support systems available are much more robust, and my day timer notebook will never die because the battery went flat. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:19:41 -0500 From: Michael Quinn Organization: Booz Allen Hamilton Subject: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject A few weeks back in the long thread on spoofed caller ID, someone mentioned a recently enacted federal law that requires telemarketers to deliver a caller ID number (whether accurate or not). Here in Nothern VA, we have been using Verizon's Anonymous Call Reject, which does not allow "out of area" numbers to even ring the phone unless the caller provides some additional information (or enters a PIN); we pay $7.50 per month or so for this. I think it was about this time that I started to notice a significant increase in telemarketing calls which now display the number and the name, although sometimes the name says "out of area" or "not available" (or even "ohio"), which of course ACR doesn't look at -- as long as they deliver a number, however inaccurate, ACR lets the call through. The net result is that our dinner and evening hours are now once again filled with ringing phones. Before this, there was a fair chance that an incoming call was from someone we wanted to hear from, so we'd pick up after looking at caller ID; now we have to deal with at least double or triple the number of calls. Has anyone else noticed this phenomenom? I guess for the small number of folks with ACR it's a step backward, even though it may be an improvement for the majority. I'm wondering what will happen if I cancel ACR -- even more calls I suppose. Regards, Mike Quinn Springfield VA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That was a very big hassle I had with SBC (Southwestern Bell Tel) when they had my phone service. They claimed (the chairman's office, yet, when I appealed) that they had met all requirements to subscribers of anonymous call blocking and last call reject 'as long as the calling party supplies some number.' No matter if it was all zeros, if the name was bogus or missing, etc. SBC still wanted the couple bucks per month for providing 'anonymous call rejection'. They claimed 'the call was not anonymous, we did give you the number and often times the name.' Yet, even though the call was not 'anonymous' by telco's definition, they still were not able to block future calls from the same 'number'. I think what you will find, Michael, is that telco makes too much money from telemarketers to abuse them too badly. Telco turns a blind eye to the way they rig their phone systems (with skimpy or non- existent details of ID) because the telemarketers would suffer from it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 12:32:57 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: A Few Messages Mangled, Sorry On Thursday evening, a few messages (maybe four or five) intended for the Digest got mangled beyond repair and totally lost, sorry. You probably got an auto-ack saying they got here. My clumsy fingers are at fault, sorry. There was a huge amount of spam that slipped through the filter as usual, with the four or five good, legitimate messages stuck in the middle of them. Unfortunatly, my favorite mail clients, ('mail' "mailx' and 'Mail') while good for years ago, are not as good as in the past, and one false move with your fingers can cause massive repercussions. Especially with the large amount of spam; one has to read very closely the subject lines as they go past, only zapping the known spam that the filters did not remove. Anyway, please resubmit them promptly for prompt action here. PAT ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #59 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 6 20:24:49 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i171OmV22035; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 20:24:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 20:24:49 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402070124.i171OmV22035@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 #60 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 Feb 2004 20:25:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 60 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Draft - Recommendation for Electronic Authentication (Monty Solomon) Nextel Testing Wireless Broadband Service; Market Trial (Monty Solomon) Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, Anonymous Call Reject (J Wineburg) Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, Anonymous Call Reject (fakeaddress) VoIP Gateway (Andrew Bell) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. (Bob Goudreau) Re: "No Internet Voting" (Robert Pierce) Question About 802.11g Wireless Router and Signal Booster (O K) Panasonic 616 Toll Restriction (Javier Gonzalez Ferreyra) 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: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 16:57:00 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DRAFT - Recommendation for Electronic Authentication http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/drafts.html DRAFT Special Publication 800-63, Recommendation for Electronic Authentication. NIST has completed the draft NIST Special Publication 800-63, Recommendation for Electronic Authentication. E-authentication is the remote authentication of individual people over a network for the purpose of electronic government and commerce. This recommendation provides technical guidance in the implementation of electronic authentication to allow an individual person to remotely authenticate his or her identity to a Federal IT system. It supplements OMB guidance, E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies that defines four levels of authentication in terms of the likely consequences of an authentication error. Special Publication 800-63 states specific technical requirements for each of the four levels of assurance in the following areas: identity proofing and registration, tokens, remote authentication mechanisms and assertion mechanisms. NIST requests comments on the draft document by March 15, 2004. http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/drafts/draft-sp800-63.pdf ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 18:49:32 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nextel Testing Wireless Broadband Service; Market Trial Nextel Testing Wireless Broadband Service; Market Trial in Raleigh-Durham, N.C. to Evaluate Flarion's FLASH-OFDM Technology, Service Offering and Market Demand - Feb 6, 2004 03:20 PM (BusinessWire) RESTON, Va.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 6, 2004-- Cisco Systems, Nortel Networks and IBM Employees to Trial Service Cisco Systems and Nortel Networks to Provide Infrastructure Support and Amdocs to Supply Customer Care and Billing Platform Nextel(R) Communications Inc. (NASDAQ:NXTL) announced today that it will trial a wireless broadband service in the Raleigh-Durham, N.C. market using Flarion Technologies' FLASH-OFDM(R) technology. The trial will begin later this month and will offer participants highly secure, high-speed, IP-based broadband access with the full mobility of wireless service. Participants in the trial will include employees from select Nextel enterprise customers, including Cisco Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ:CSCO), Nortel Networks (NYSE/TSX:NT) and IBM (NYSE:IBM). They will be able to take full advantage of average downlink speeds of up to 1.5 megabits per second (mbps) with burst rates of up to 3.0 mbps, making the service comparable to DSL and cable broadband services. The service will be up to 50 times faster than dial-up connections with the added benefit of being untethered. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40470931 ------------------------------ From: Wineburgh, Joe Subject: Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 14:05:40 -0500 You don't say if you're signed up for the national do-not-call registry. I recommend signing up if you haven't already. I signed up for the national DNCR last August and in January '04 dropped my LEC's (Sprint) version of the Anon Call Reject service. Since we dropped ACR, we got all of two calls -- and only from existing business relationships at that! (ironically Sprint and I think DirecTV) They were both just trying to sell more crap I don't need, so I asked them to put us on their (local/company's) do not call list and that was that. I believe it's been about a month since we have gotten any sales calls. One further note -- I was actually kinda pissed when Sprint also blocked calls that came in with no name (both our cell phones at the time, but knowing of your experiences I'd say it was probably a 'good thing'! YMMV #JOE ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:42:21 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ Two thoughts here: 1. The DNC list works well for me. I usually don't see more than one telemarketer every month or so. See https://www.donotcall.gov/default.aspx 2. If the telco's were interested in enforcing the DNC, they'd add a new CLASS service like malicious call trace that captures the caller ID _and_ ANI. Typing the *xx code could report these numbers to the FTC, with the time and your phone number so your complaint can be more easily traced. That is, if the phone companies really wanted to help enforce the anti-telemarketer regs. On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:19:41 -0500, Michael Quinn wrote: > A few weeks back in the long thread on spoofed caller ID, someone > mentioned a recently enacted federal law that requires telemarketers > to deliver a caller ID number (whether accurate or not). > Here in Nothern VA, we have been using Verizon's Anonymous Call > Reject, which does not allow "out of area" numbers to even ring the > phone unless the caller provides some additional information (or > enters a PIN); we pay $7.50 per month or so for this. > I think it was about this time that I started to notice a significant > increase in telemarketing calls which now display the number and the > name, although sometimes the name says "out of area" or "not > available" (or even "ohio"), which of course ACR doesn't look at -- as > long as they deliver a number, however inaccurate, ACR lets the call > through. The net result is that our dinner and evening hours are now > once again filled with ringing phones. Before this, there was a fair > chance that an incoming call was from someone we wanted to hear from, > so we'd pick up after looking at caller ID; now we have to deal with > at least double or triple the number of calls. > Has anyone else noticed this phenomenom? I guess for the small number > of folks with ACR it's a step backward, even though it may be an > improvement for the majority. I'm wondering what will happen if I > cancel ACR -- even more calls I suppose. > Regards, > Mike Quinn > Springfield VA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That was a very big hassle I had with > SBC (Southwestern Bell Tel) when they had my phone service. They > claimed (the chairman's office, yet, when I appealed) that they had > met all requirements to subscribers of anonymous call blocking and > last call reject 'as long as the calling party supplies some number.' > No matter if it was all zeros, if the name was bogus or missing, etc. > SBC still wanted the couple bucks per month for providing 'anonymous > call rejection'. They claimed 'the call was not anonymous, we did give > you the number and often times the name.' Yet, even though the call > was not 'anonymous' by telco's definition, they still were not able to > block future calls from the same 'number'. > I think what you will find, Michael, is that telco makes too much > money from telemarketers to abuse them too badly. Telco turns a blind > eye to the way they rig their phone systems (with skimpy or non- > existent details of ID) because the telemarketers would suffer from it. > PAT] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There *is* a CLASS service such as you describe. *57 does that job; dial *57 during a conversation (flash the hook, fresh dialtone, *57, then flash again to go back to the conversation) or immediatly following disconnection, and telco records the details regardless of any privacy flags (*67, etc) being set and forwards the details to police. **They will NOT tell you the details. You have to get the details from the police.** Police will generally only give you details if you agree _in writing first_ to prosecute on the results. Telco will not serve as your private detective agency, etc. Communication privacy laws prohibit telco from working with you directly. Getting the police to actually do something about the matter is a different thing. Many police believe it is a civil matter, and they are not permitted to get involved in civil matters. Police also usually have a busy schedule and phone harassment is not a big issue, especially when there is a telemarketer causing you some minor grief. Oh, and *57 is not an inexpensive CLASS service. Typically, telco gets eight to ten dollars for *each instance* of its use. The recorded message they play immediatly following the capture of the details tells you about this charge, and provides an 800 number at the 'call annoyance bureau' to be used to follow up with telco and police. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Andrew Bell Subject: VoIP Gateway Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:36:15 -0500 I need to borrow some experience from the VoIP hobbyists out there. I'm currently toying with the idea of creating an OPX (off premise extension) using VoIP. What I want to do is hang a (preferrably Linux based) PC on the office network, and plug it into an analog extension from the PBX. Then I want to go home, VPN into the network, and use some sort of softphone to get PBX dialtone. More importantly, I also want to be able to answer calls at home originating from the PBX. I know there a lots of commercial offerings to do this, but I'm hoping to get away with just the cost of an FXO card for a proof of concept right now. Has anyone here done something like this already? Andrew [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well you can now get softphone software from the Vonage people. That's one of their newer offerings, since they have expanded to have a POP in almost every area code (even here in rural s.e. Kansas!), and 800 numbers. You can also get softphone service if desired. Ask me for an e-coupon for a month of free service whenever you are ready to try it out. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:21:44 -0500 From: BobGoudreau@withheld at users request Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. [Please obcure my email address. Thank you.] Rodgers Platt wrote: > Keeping notes in a diary may make them "more difficult" to share, but > the support systems available are much more robust, and my day timer > notebook will never die because the battery went flat. On the other hand, one aspect of the paper diary support system is painfully inadequate: backup. My friend's wife painfully discovered this last year when her purse (including her daytimer) was stolen from her car and never recovered. Tens of thousands of bytes of hand-written data were lost forever. This loss finally persuaded her to emulate her husband's example and get a PDA, which can be easily (and wirelessly) synced with his office computer to provide a backup copy. Even if the device is lost or destroyed, a replacement can quickly be purchased and loaded with all the backed-up data, which will be no more than a day or two out of date. Bob Goudreau Cary, NC ------------------------------ From: Robert Pierce Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:36:46 -0500 Pat, remove my e-mail address, please. In "Get Out Those Postage Stamps: No Internet Voting For Military (Burstein)" Danny Burstein wrote: > "The Pentagon has decided to scrap plans for an on-line Internet > voting system for U.S. military personnel and Americans living > abroad. The system had come under fire from experts who said it could > be vulnerable to computer attacks. > "The decision to cancel the computer voting project was made by Deputy > Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. > "Pentagon officials say he ordered the system scrapped because of an > inability to ensure the legitimacy of the votes that would be cast." http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=215A8EF4-FC2E-46DA-8F0B218EA1464 9D9 This is _good_ news. Any regular reader of comp.risks knows that computer-based voting schemes are fraught with problems of accountability and security. Adding an internet connection only compounds the problems. During my stint in Uncle Sam's service I voted with absentee ballots many times. It was not a hardship. I, personally, would have no confidence in an unaccountable system sending voting information via the insecure internet. The military made the right decision. Rob Pierce Pat, remove my e-mail address, please. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But I think we are going to get to the point where electronic voting becomes a necessity before too long, and the military with 'absentee ballots' would provide a smaller and more easily controlled sample as the bugs are worked out of it. And I wonder also if anyone has considered at least one or two parallel votes so results can be compared for accuracy: that is, the traditional paper vote (to be the authoritative vote as needed) and an electronic vote for comparison purposes once or twice. I don't know of any large corporation back in the 1960-70's as computers were taking over every- thing which did not run in parallel for at least a month or two for just that reason. I know telco and Amoco credit card did that. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: O K From: O K Subject: Question About 802.11g Wireless Router/Signal Booster/Antenna Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 12:39:25 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications I have a question about adding a wireless antenna or signal booster to my home network. My current setup is I have a Linksys WRT54G wireless router which supports B and G infrastructure. I have a 802.11b Wireless PCI card in my PC. In my condo, I can verify that the wireless portion of the network between the wireless router and my PC are functioning. I then take my PC to another floor in my building, and I get little to no signal. I would like to add either a signal booster and/or an antenna to make my network functional. From the reading that I have done, I can't determine where the antenna needs to be installed if I go this route. Is it installed on the PCI portion of the network, or the router portion of the network. As the router TX's and RX's, is the problem with the low transmission power from the router and therefore I need a wireless antenna on the PC, or is the problem the low transmission power from the PCI card to the router upstairs? I can't figure out which hardware I need to make this functional. Please contact me directly at okorkie3@cox.net (remove the *) Thanks, Owen ------------------------------ From: javi@wizardes.com (Javier Gonzalez Ferreyra) Subject: Panasonic 616 Toll Restriction Date: 6 Feb 2004 14:48:35 -0800 Organization: http://groups.goggle.com The manual says that I've to dial * to complete the 3 digit code for toll restriction, but nothing appears on the LCD and I can not store the two digit code. How can I fix it? I can program everything else but not toll restriction which is the most improtant for me ... please help. Thanks. ------------------------------ 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 #60 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Feb 7 15:24:16 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i17KOGI27248; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 15:24:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 15:24:16 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402072024.i17KOGI27248@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 #61 TELECOM Digest Sat, 7 Feb 2004 15:24:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 61 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Comcast Has Limits For Heavy Internet Users (Wesrock@aol.com) Vonage Motorola VT1000 Box (John Schmerold) "Out of Area" Caller ID Law (Mike) Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, Anonymous Call Reject (Mary@bent) Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, Anonymous Call Reject (Dink) Re: Panasonic 616 Toll Restriction (Carl Navarro) Re: VoIP Gateway (Ron Kritzman) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Gail M. Hall) Call Centres (Rob) Re: "No Internet Voting" (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: "No Internet Voting" (Thomas A. Horsley) A How-To Guide for Hackers (Monty Solomon) TiVo-Nielsen Deal Could Aid Advertisers (Monty Solomon) IDT America Unlimited - Pros/Cons? (Zebra) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 09:36:54 EST Subject: Comcast Has Limits For Heavy Internet Users Pat, I'm surprised no one has made mention of this in Telecom Digest. Forwarded from another list. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Warning letters trouble broadband subscribers Comcast targets heavy users, but some say limits aren't clear Associated Press SAN JOSE, Calif. By all accounts, George Nussbaum demands a lot from his Internet connection. He streams video and transfers large files from his office. His family downloads movie trailers, and his stepson listens to and buys music online. Mr. Nussbaum subscribes to his cable TV provider's high-speed Internet service, which, he thought, was built for such high-bandwidth activities. Then, in November, he got a letter from the provider, Comcast Corp., ordering him to dial down his usage or face service termination. Until last summer, the service was advertised as "unlimited." But Comcast, citing its "acceptable use" policy, is cracking down on the heaviest users on the premise that their consumption could degrade their neighbors' service. A number of broadband providers are beginning to offer different tiers of service, charging high-volume users more. Some, particularly wireless providers, charge extra for heavy use. Comcast, critics say, is trying to impose limits without telling consumers that the service is limited. Looking for answers Mr. Nussbaum, who had no idea how many gigabytes he used, was willing to cut back. He called to find out by how much, but customer service had no answer. Then he asked how much he used. Again, Comcast wouldn't provide a number. Last month, Mr. Nussbaum got a second letter threatening suspension or termination, so he decided to sign up for a digital subscriber line offered by his phone company, Verizon Communications. "How am I supposed to know what my limits are?" said Mr. Nussbaum, an engineer from Plaistow, N.H. "It was actually kind of ridiculous." 'Changing the rules' "They have the right to control their service and offer different services to different people," said David Willis, an analyst at the Meta Group. "The problem is you can't keep changing the rules all the time." Most broadband companies have vague policies, but Comcast's appear to be the most aggressively enforced. It provides no tools for monitoring bandwidth and does not give any specific guidance. Comcast says the people who receive the warning letters typically consume 100 times more than the average user. "The total number of customers who have had their service disconnected is well below one one-hundredth of 1 percent of our overall Internet customer base," said spokeswoman Dana Ryan, reading from a prepared statement. But the nation's largest cable company refused to reveal the average consumption among its 4.8 million high-speed Internet subscribers. Ms. Ryan also would not say how many received warnings or exactly how many have had their accounts suspended or terminated. Excessive use is a problem for Comcast and other providers because they must predict bandwidth use and buy the capacity. If too much is consumed, it can bog down the local network and also affect profit margins. *** 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, Associated Press Syndicate. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 22:20:23 -0600 From: John Schmerold Subject: Vonage Motorola VT1000 Box The 1+ dialing is a Vonage deal killer for me. I tried a couple of dialers behind the Cisco boxes Vonage used to use -- they didn't work. Anyone know if there is a dialer compatible with the VT1000 to automatically insert the 1 needed with Vonage? ------------------------------ From: littleboyblu87@yahoo.com (Mike) Subject: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law Date: 6 Feb 2004 22:39:43 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I registered on that Do Not Call list back when it first came out. When it went into affect we stopped receiving all those annoying telemarketing phone calls. But ever since that new law came out that requires telemarketers to display info on the caller id, we've been getting about 3 "out of area" calls everyday at the same times they used to call. Does anyone know what that's all about? It's really annoying. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It goes to show that the telemarketers are keeping up with the times. Telemarketers are not going to be easily thwarted. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mary@bentmetal.biz Subject: Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 05:35:43 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Your feature sounds more like Privacy Manager than Anonymous Call Rejection. Michael Quinn wrote: > A few weeks back in the long thread on spoofed caller ID, someone > mentioned a recently enacted federal law that requires telemarketers > to deliver a caller ID number (whether accurate or not). > Here in Nothern VA, we have been using Verizon's Anonymous Call > Reject, which does not allow "out of area" numbers to even ring the > phone unless the caller provides some additional information (or > enters a PIN); we pay $7.50 per month or so for this. > I think it was about this time that I started to notice a significant > increase in telemarketing calls which now display the number and the > name, although sometimes the name says "out of area" or "not > available" (or even "ohio"), which of course ACR doesn't look at -- as > long as they deliver a number, however inaccurate, ACR lets the call > through. The net result is that our dinner and evening hours are now > once again filled with ringing phones. Before this, there was a fair > chance that an incoming call was from someone we wanted to hear from, > so we'd pick up after looking at caller ID; now we have to deal with > at least double or triple the number of calls. > Has anyone else noticed this phenomenom? I guess for the small number > of folks with ACR it's a step backward, even though it may be an > improvement for the majority. I'm wondering what will happen if I > cancel ACR -- even more calls I suppose. > Regards, > Mike Quinn > Springfield VA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That was a very big hassle I had with > SBC (Southwestern Bell Tel) when they had my phone service. They > claimed (the chairman's office, yet, when I appealed) that they had > met all requirements to subscribers of anonymous call blocking and > last call reject 'as long as the calling party supplies some number.' > No matter if it was all zeros, if the name was bogus or missing, etc. > SBC still wanted the couple bucks per month for providing 'anonymous > call rejection'. They claimed 'the call was not anonymous, we did give > you the number and often times the name.' Yet, even though the call > was not 'anonymous' by telco's definition, they still were not able to > block future calls from the same 'number'. > I think what you will find, Michael, is that telco makes too much > money from telemarketers to abuse them too badly. Telco turns a blind > eye to the way they rig their phone systems (with skimpy or non- > existent details of ID) because the telemarketers would suffer from it. > PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dink Subject: Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 18:23:22 -0600 Organization: Frijoles Refritos On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:19:41 -0500, Michael Quinn wrote: > A few weeks back in the long thread on spoofed caller ID, someone > mentioned a recently enacted federal law that requires telemarketers > to deliver a caller ID number (whether accurate or not). > Here in Nothern VA, we have been using Verizon's Anonymous Call > Reject, which does not allow "out of area" numbers to even ring the > phone unless the caller provides some additional information (or > enters a PIN); we pay $7.50 per month or so for this. > I think it was about this time that I started to notice a significant > increase in telemarketing calls which now display the number and the > name, although sometimes the name says "out of area" or "not > available" (or even "ohio"), which of course ACR doesn't look at -- as > long as they deliver a number, however inaccurate, ACR lets the call > through. The net result is that our dinner and evening hours are now > once again filled with ringing phones. Before this, there was a fair > chance that an incoming call was from someone we wanted to hear from, > so we'd pick up after looking at caller ID; now we have to deal with > at least double or triple the number of calls. > Has anyone else noticed this phenomenom? I guess for the small number > of folks with ACR it's a step backward, even though it may be an > improvement for the majority. I'm wondering what will happen if I > cancel ACR -- even more calls I suppose. > Regards, > Mike Quinn > Springfield VA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That was a very big hassle I had with > SBC (Southwestern Bell Tel) when they had my phone service. They > claimed (the chairman's office, yet, when I appealed) that they had > met all requirements to subscribers of anonymous call blocking and > last call reject 'as long as the calling party supplies some number.' > No matter if it was all zeros, if the name was bogus or missing, etc. > SBC still wanted the couple bucks per month for providing 'anonymous > call rejection'. They claimed 'the call was not anonymous, we did give > you the number and often times the name.' Yet, even though the call > was not 'anonymous' by telco's definition, they still were not able to > block future calls from the same 'number'. > I think what you will find, Michael, is that telco makes too much > money from telemarketers to abuse them too badly. Telco turns a blind > eye to the way they rig their phone systems (with skimpy or non- > existent details of ID) because the telemarketers would suffer from it. > PAT] From a posting I made in another newsgroup on Jan. 29th: Subject: US: Telemarketers Unmasked From: Dink Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 05:58:10 -0600 From today, telemarketer calls are required to display information on caller ID displays. Such calls previously showed on Caller ID as "out of area." Now the name displayed by Caller ID must be either the company trying to make a sale or the firm making the call. The display must also include a phone number that consumers can call during regular business hours to ask the company to place their number on the company's internal do not call list. Dink ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Panasonic 616 Toll Restriction Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 21:34:38 -0500 Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America On 6 Feb 2004 14:48:35 -0800, javi@wizardes.com (Javier Gonzalez Ferreyra) wrote: > The manual says that I've to dial * to complete the 3 digit code for > toll restriction, but nothing appears on the LCD and I can not store > the two digit code. How can I fix it? I can program everything else > but not toll restriction which is the most improtant for me ... please > help. On the bottom of the KSU is a silver tag. Read it. Is there a 3 in a circle on it? Was it made in Great Britain? Is it a 616-D? The software is different for each release. Carl Navarro ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 00:21:29 -0600 From: Ron Kritzman Subject: Re: VoIP Gateway Andrew Bell wrote: > I know there a lots of commercial offerings to do this, but I'm hoping > to get away with just the cost of an FXO card for a proof of concept > right now. > Has anyone here done something like this already? Have you looked into Asterisk? Its an Open Source, Linux based PBX with VOIP capability built right in. Ron ------------------------------ From: Gail M. Hall Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 04:25:29 -0500 Reply-To: gmhall@apk.net On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 21:36:24 -0600, in comp.dcom.telecom message , Herb Stein wrote: > Daniel W. Johnson wrote in message > news:telecom23.57.8@telecom-digest.org: >> TELECOM Digest Editor added in message >> news:: >>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I guess so, if you feel that exposing >>> yourself on national TV is 'normal' behavior. What I don't understand is the part of the "exposure" that really bothered me, and that is the appearance of grabbing the girl's clothes off of her. Grabbing and groping against her will is just a lower form of imposition and the type of thinking that leads to rape. This sort of thing glorifies abusing other people. As for the appropriateness or not, there are times and places for different activities. Forcing adult type material during GP times is inconsiderate and crude. This is just another form of "in-your-face" stuff that telemarketers and spammers do. They are going to force you to see it whether or not you want to. If a person *wants* to see that stuff, they should be able to go to the so-called adult channels and see it. But don't intrude on general TV channels during prime time when our kids are likely to see it. Don't teach our kids that grabbing a girls clothes off her is OK or funny! >> I haven't read anything about indecent exposure on the part of LaToya, >> just the incident with her younger sister Janet on the Super Bowl >> halftime show. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My bad ... I should have said 'Janet' >> instead of 'LaToya'. PAT] > LaToya was in Playboy/Penthouse/Hustler/ or one of them a few years > ago. Of course, the reader of the magazine found the spread anything > but indecent. :-) > Herb Stein > herb@herbstein.com Apparently the one whose pictures were published in the magazine chose to expose herself in an appropriate place -- in a magazine that specializes in that sort of thing. People who don't want to see that can choose not to buy the magazines. People who are watching a football game with their kids probably don't want to see that kind of thing. Also, it's more likely that the magazine pictures show her posing in an "alluring" position, VOLUNTARILY, not being shown as being forced against her will. I didn't see the pictures, so I am just guessing about that. At any rate, they are not showing this on national TV on a program that is not labeled as R or X. BTW, all the repeats of the Justin and Janet scene on all the news shows demonstrates how hypicritical so many people in this country are. If it's all that bad, they shouldn't be showing it over and over and over and over and ... Gail in NE Ohio USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: According to the radio news today, a lady in California (I think) has filed a class action lawsuit on this incident. She named as the members of the Class 'anyone who watched the Stupid Bowl and saw the incident'. I wonder how much will be asked in damages for each member of the Class for the offense done to their eyes? The same radio news said that the network is also rather 'livid' about the incident and was quoted as saying "if the FCC sticks it to us with a fine, we most assuredly will sue Jackson to recover the amount of the fine imposed on us." And apparently at least one of the major advertisers on the Stupid Bowl is now stalling on paying their advertising bill, on the premise they did not intend to sponsor an 'X-rated production.' I think we will hear more about this affair for a long time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rob51166@yahoo.com (Rob) Subject: Call Centres Date: 7 Feb 2004 03:03:52 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Does anyone know what the situation is in the US/Canada as far as call centres being transferred abroad is like? It's *BIG* news over here at the moment, with many companies, such as insurance companies, telco's (including BT), some 118 Directory Assistance companies, National Rail Enquiries, and AOL, opening up call centres in India, primarily Kolkutt and Mumbai. Basically they're *MUCH* cheaper to run and operate over there than call centres here in the UK, but that's at the expense of job losses as well. At the moment they're being used as overflow for the call centres here -- but as I say, that's at the moment. BTW, the reason I know that AOL have opened a centre in India is because I had to call them a few weeks ago, only for my call to be answered (eventually) by a guy with a very strong Indian accent -- you don't hear Indian accents in Waterford, Ireland, where AOL have their main European office! TIA! Rob ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 09:05:59 EST Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" In a message dated Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:36:46 -0500 TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Robert Pierce's message: > I don't know of any large corporation back in the 1960-70's as > computers were taking over everything which did not run in > parallel for at least a month or two for just that reason. I know > telco and Amoco credit card did that. PAT] This does not seem to be typical of government, state, local, etc. In Oklahoma there have been at least three cases in the last few years where this apparently not even considered and the new system was supposed to run straight out of the box. One was a combined system for state government, which took six weeks or so to get where it would even issue pay checks to state employees ... another was the Oklahoma City school district which did similarly and employee pay checks were delayed for a number of days, and payments to vendors for many weeks, to the extent that some vendors cut them off, and another case involving Oklahoma County payrolls. Probably much of the other data on those systems, some of which might be quite important for continuing operations, would be similarly screwed up. This is probably the norm for most states all over the country. Didn't the IRS or SSA have a similar screwup that delayed tax refunds or SSA payments for several days? From my experience with Southwestern Bell, and its insistence on always running parallel systems, sometimes for months, before being satisfied the new system is working right and switching over to it for real, the first one (state payrolls and other information) of those struck me as feckless. But then the others came along and it would appear governmental agencies, at least, don't take such things seriously. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Even if the software worked perfectly out of the box -- not impossible, but unlikely if the software is custom built as much of it is -- there is still the hassle of getting the database correctly built the first time around. Does anyone here besides me remember when VISA (when it was known as BankAmericard and was the 'local' credit card program of Bank of America in San Francisco) decided to put it all on computers (yes, there was a time when Visa -- as it is known now -- was totally manual) and make it a national system of credit cards through various banks? Around 1960 or so, BankAmericard went national but they kept that trade name for a few more years before becoming Visa. Ooooh, did all the banks get hit with **severe** fraud as a result! First National Bank of Chicago alone got hit with about 30 million dollars in fraud over a five or six year period. The way the banks built their databases for BankAmericard cards was to just take every account in their bank and put them on the database. Then they dumped all those little plastic cards in the postal mail, including accounts opened for tiny babies at the bank, trust fund and escrow accounts, estates of dead people, etc. I suppose about a third of the cards never reached their rightful owners, and maybe half of the remainder were innaprop- riatly issued to dead people with estates, babies and litle children, etc. Really, such an approach is the only sensible way to build a national database (of voters, for instance or credit card account holders). Bottom line is what they go by. I guess they felt it would cost less money to (in effect) throw all the plastics in the air, and weed out the deadbeats and fraud as it happened than to go to the expense of running bureaus on everyone who applied, if they ever did. But when Bank of America and then the national association they started made an attempt to build a national database of customers it wound up costing them plenty. Ditto with Sears, when they started 'Discover Card', it was not without a lot of frustration and expense in constructing the database. Sears had to eat about forty million in fraud before the Discover card was totally up and running. And with the latest movement to totally computerize the process of voting, I suspect the same thing will happen. 'Experts' will decide how far (and with how much expense) they want to go to 'purify' the results. No one ever said there would never be fraud in an election; only that the goal was to keep a reasonable ratio between fraud and administrative costs. You can always put FBI and similar in charge of punishing fraud as it is caught. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 15:19:17 GMT > But I think we are going to get to the point where electronic voting > becomes a necessity before too long, What could possibly be necessary about it? You know all that spam you get in your electronic mailbox? You know how you *don't* have a freightcar full of advertising circulars and come-ons in your postal mail box every day? That's because electrons can be cheaply and easily arranged into unlimited patterns at almost no expense. Paper,' printing, and postage, on the other hand requires time, energy, and money to manipulate. All electronic voting will do is make manipulating elections as cheap and easy as sending spam. No thanks. (I'm still fighting a hopeless campaign to get Palm Beach County to sell the stupid touch-screen machines they just bought to Iraq or someplace and buy scanners instead where real voters fill out real ballots which can be touched and looked at, and would at least put someone to a great deal more effort to fake than numbers that exist only in a computer that the same people who designed butterfly ballots tell us are foolproof :-). ==>> The *Best* political site ==>> email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Responding to 'What could possibly be necessary about (electronic voting)'? Well, please take the advice of someone who has grown up in an *entirely non-computerized* world to an almost entirely computerized one. There is very little you can do *without computers* that can't be done better *with computers*, including detecting fraud and other crimes. Please accept this rephrasing of your question: What could possibly be better about paper ballots which take a long time to tabulate and confirm? Did you know that the election held on the first Tuesday after the second Monday in November will only have projected results the next day? It only becomes *official* a month or so later when it has been certified by (in Chicago at least) the Board of Election Commissioners. That is after they have weeded out tons of fraud, illegible ballots, recounted the ballots at least once or twice, etc. How could computers possibly do worse? The fact that a little bit of *new style fraud* enters the picture in the process of purifying and expediting the results otherwise shouldn't matter. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 22:17:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A How-To Guide for Hackers By Michelle Delio Already bored with all the presents you got for the holidays? Hack them into new-and-improved presents. Got piles of now-outdated gifts from past festive occasions carefully stashed away because you might need the parts someday? Hack them, too. Don't know how to hack or need some inspiration? Get yourself a copy of Hardware Hacking: Have Fun While Voiding Your Warranty. It has 576 pages of detailed instructions that will show you how to re-engineer almost every inanimate object in your home or office. http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,62089,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 23:05:56 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo-Nielsen Deal Could Aid Advertisers By Sam Diaz, Knight Ridder, 2/6/2004 TiVo and Nielsen Media Research, the television ratings company, announced a deal Wednesday in which TiVo will provide a breakdown of how its customers are using their digital video recorders. That means Nielsen will find out whether viewers are watching "American Idol" live or watching it a day later and, more importantly, which commercials they're skipping and which were watched a second time. http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/2004/02/06/tivo_nielsen_deal_could_aid_advertisers/ ------------------------------ From: Zebra Subject: IDT America Unlimited - Pros/Cons? Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 12:18:35 -0500 IDT America Unlimited offers the following for $39.95 ($40) a month: Unlimited Local - Unlimited Regional - Unlimited Long Distance - Popular Calling Features - Caller ID - Call Waiting with Name - 3-Way Calling - Speed Dial (8 Numbers) http://www.idt.net/products/unlimited/ Has anyone tried this service? Can you share your experiences? Is this company reliable? Do your calls go through? Is it a nightmare? AT&T wants $55 for the basically same offering, and Verzion wants $60. Before I take the plunge, I would love to get some feedback -- searching the newsgroups has not found anything pro or con on this offering. Thanks in advance from NY. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Our local telco here in Independence, KS called 'Prairie Stream Communications' offers basically the same package for $29.95 per month. The main difference is instead of 'unlimited regional' and 'unlimited long distance' they have those two merged into 'long distance'. In addition to unlimited local, Prairie Stream allows 100 minutes (an hour plus 20 minutes) of 'long distance' in the package. Additional minutes are two cents each. Does IDT allow you to port or keep your local number? Is this the same IDT that used to do TV commercials saying long distance is only five cents per minute if you dialed their 1010 code? PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #61 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Feb 8 18:26:17 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i18NQHS05909; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 18:26:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 18:26:17 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402082326.i18NQHS05909@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 #62 TELECOM Digest Sun, 8 Feb 2004 17:48:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 62 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The Virus Underground (Monty Solomon) Re: Question About 802.11g Wireless Router/Signal Booster/Ant (Sutton) Telephone Service Surcharges (jared) Building a Voice-Driven Application (Alex Smith) Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, Anonymous Call Reject (fakeaddress) Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, Anonymous Call Reject (M Quinn) Re: "No Internet Voting" (noname) Re: "No Internet Voting" (Dave Close) Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law (Steve Michelson) Re: Call Centres (CCIE8122) Re: Comcast Has Limits For Heavy Internet Users (Kim Brennan) Re: Faked CallerID Info? (Steven J Sobol) Ameritech Historical Picture Book Available (Jim Haynes) 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: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 10:05:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Virus Underground By CLIVE THOMPSON This is how easy it has become. Mario stubs out his cigarette and sits down at the desk in his bedroom. He pops into his laptop the CD of Iron Maiden's "Number of the Beast," his latest favorite album. "I really like it," he says, "My girlfriend bought it for me." He gestures to the 15-year-old girl with straight dark hair lounging on his neatly made bed, and she throws back a shy smile. Mario, 16, is a secondary-school student in a small town in the foothills of southern Austria. (He didn't want me to use his last name.) His shiny shoulder-length hair covers half his face and his sleepy green eyes, making him look like a very young, languid Mick Jagger. On his wall he has an enormous poster of Anna Kournikova -- which, he admits sheepishly, his girlfriend is not thrilled about. Downstairs, his mother is cleaning up after dinner. She isn't thrilled these days, either. But what bothers her isn't Mario's poster. It's his hobby. When Mario is bored -- and out here in the countryside, surrounded by soaring snowcapped mountains and little else, he's bored a lot -- he likes to sit at his laptop and create computer viruses and worms. Online, he goes by the name Second Part to Hell, and he has written more than 150 examples of what computer experts call 'malware': tiny programs that exist solely to self-replicate, infecting computers hooked up to the Internet. Sometimes these programs cause damage, and sometimes they don't. Mario says he prefers to create viruses that don't intentionally wreck data, because simple destruction is too easy. "Anyone can rewrite a hard drive with one or two lines of code," he says, "It makes no sense. It's really lame." Besides which, it's mean, he says, and he likes to be friendly. But still -- just to see if he could do it -- a year ago he created a rather dangerous tool: a program that autogenerates viruses. It's called a Batch Trojan Generator, and anyone can download it freely from Mario's Web site. With a few simple mouse clicks, you can use the tool to create your own malicious ''Trojan horse.'' Like its ancient namesake, a Trojan virus arrives in someone's e-mail looking like a gift, a JPEG picture or a video, for example, but actually bearing dangerous cargo. Mario starts up the tool to show me how it works. A little box appears on his laptop screen, politely asking me to name my Trojan. I call it the ''Clive'' virus. Then it asks me what I'd like the virus to do. Shall the Trojan Horse format drive C:? Yes, I click. Shall the Trojan Horse overwrite every file? Yes. It asks me if I'd like to have the virus activate the next time the computer is restarted, and I say yes again. Then it's done. The generator spits out the virus onto Mario's hard drive, a tiny 3k file. Mario's generator also displays a stern notice warning that spreading your creation is illegal. The generator, he says, is just for educational purposes, a way to help curious programmers learn how Trojans work. But of course I could ignore that advice. I could give this virus an enticing name, like ''britney--spears--wedding--clip.mpeg,'' to fool people into thinking it's a video. If I were to e-mail it to a victim, and if he clicked on it -- and didn't have up-to-date antivirus software, which many people don't -- then disaster would strike his computer. The virus would activate. It would quietly reach into the victim's Microsoft Windows operating system and insert new commands telling the computer to erase its own hard drive. The next time the victim started up his computer, the machine would find those new commands, assume they were part of the normal Windows operating system and guilelessly follow them. Poof: everything on his hard drive would vanish -- e-mail, pictures, documents, games. I've never contemplated writing a virus before. Even if I had, I wouldn't have known how to do it. But thanks to a teenager in Austria, it took me less than a minute to master the art. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/08/magazine/08WORMS.html *** 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, New York Times Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Colin Sutton Subject: Re: Question About 802.11g Wireless Router/Signal Booster/Antenna Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 22:46:02 +1100 The problem may be the *building*. Try putting an external antenna on the router, outside the window. Do you then get reception on the PC? If you put the PC by the window? Out the window? (don't drop it! :-) Regards, Colin O K wrote in message news:telecom23.60.8@telecom-digest.org: > I have a question about adding a wireless antenna or signal booster to my > home network. > My current setup is I have a Linksys WRT54G wireless router which > supports B and G infrastructure. I have a 802.11b Wireless PCI card > in my PC. In my condo, I can verify that the wireless portion of the > network between the wireless router and my PC are functioning. I then > take my PC to another floor in my building, and I get little to no > signal. I would like to add either a signal booster and/or an antenna > to make my network functional. > From the reading that I have done, I can't determine where the > antenna needs to be installed if I go this route. Is it installed on > the PCI portion of the network, or the router portion of the network. > As the router TX's and RX's, is the problem with the low transmission > power from the router and therefore I need a wireless antenna on the > PC, or is the problem the low transmission power from the PCI card to > the router upstairs? I can't figure out which hardware I need to make > this functional. > Please contact me directly at okorkie3@cox.net (remove the *) > Thanks, > Owen ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 14:49:16 -0700 From: jared.NospaM@netspace.net.au (jared) Subject: Telephone Service Surcharges Thought c.d.t readers might find this list of surcharges fascinating. Company X overlooked my local government's 911 surcharge and just-because-its-a-source-of-revenue tax that add another few dollars. The upshot is that a thirty-something dollar nominal cost becomes fifty-something dollars. COLORADO Federal Excise Tax 3% Tax mandated by the federal government imposed on all telecommunication services. Federal Universal Service Fund 8.7%. FUSF is assessed on your interstate and international charges not including taxes. This includes a portion of the monthly product fee that is allocated to interstate services for regulatory purposes. [This] is consistent with the FUSF rate of other large long distance carriers. This surcharge is assessed on any monthly long distance plan fees/ minimums, Interstate and International Usage and the Network Access Charge. Network Access Surcharge Primary Line - (EUCL) $6.50 Monthly charge assessed on each line within the household. This charge compensates for the Local Telephone Company's cost of installation and maintenance of the components that link your home to the telephone network. Network Access Surcharge Secondary Line - (EUCL) $7.00 (when applicable) Monthly charge assessed on each line within the household. This charge compensates for the Local Telephone Company's cost of installation and maintenance of the components that link your home to the telephone network. Carrier Cost Recovery Charge (CCRC)* 1.4% A monthly surcharge in order to recover costs the Company incurs with regard to Telecommunications Relay Service, national number portability, and federal regulatory fees. The surcharge is assessed on long distance (Dial-1, Card, P800 and SB T800) state-to-state and international charges. Local 911 $0.00 - $0.70 per line This fee provides the local governing body with a source of revenue for payment of the total costs of establishing or upgrading, operating and maintaining an emergency telephone system. State and Local Taxes 2.900% This is a state sales tax on the consumption of telecommunications services. State and Local Taxes 0% - 5% This is a local sales tax on the consumption of telecommunications services. State and Local Taxes 0% - 0.8% This is a special sales tax to pay for regional transportation projects, scientific and cultural projects, and sports stadium projects. Federal, State and Local Surcharges $1.12 This is a surcharge of the City of Denver telecommunications business tax on telephone and telegraph companies. High Cost Fund (Colorado) 2.300% The Colorado High Cost Fund is used to ensure the availability of affordable basic telephone service in areas where costs to provide service are high. Telecommunications Relay Service $0.10 A surcharge to fund the relay center that assists the hearing and speech impaired with communicating to other telephone providers. Local Number Portability (LNP) $0.43 Covers the cost of providing residential customers with the ability to retain, at the same location, their existing local telephone numbers when switching from one local provider to another. ------------------------------ From: asmith42@hotmail.com (Alex Smith) Subject: Building a Voice-Driven Application Date: 7 Feb 2004 16:11:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hello all, I am venturing into the telephony world and even though I have briefly dealt with CTI and H.323, I am still a newbie. I'd like to build an application that would allow me to buy apples from several grocery stores. (This is a hypothetical but representative example, please bear with me). I want to place a telephone call to a number, enter my pin, navigate through some voice prompts that will allow me to select a particular grocery store, then select a variety of apples and enter the amount of apples (weight) I'd like to buy using the phone keypad. Finally I would also like to leave voice instructions for the grocer on how to pack my apples (paper or plastic). The app would "look me up" using my pin number and store the packing instructions as a soundbyte along with the other order parameters in a database. From a high-level architectural perspective, what hardware and software components would make up my stack? For the sake of the example, assume small volume (personal use). I am looking for high-level architecture rather than product names even though Open Source/GNU/etc suggestions are welcome. My limited understanding tells me I need a CTI server. Do I need a PBX? Other components? If I want to parse the voice instructions (i.e. speech recognition) in order to extract "paper" or "plastic", how doable is that? Any URLs or books that go from slow to complex with architectural examples are appreciated. Alex Smith Insight LLC ------------------------------ From: fakeaddress@fakedomain.com Subject: Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 12:26:36 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:42:21 -0500, wrote: > Two thoughts here: > 1. The DNC list works well for me. I usually don't see more than > one telemarketer every month or so. See > https://www.donotcall.gov/default.aspx > 2. If the telco's were interested in enforcing the DNC, they'd add a > new CLASS service like malicious call trace that captures the caller > ID _and_ ANI. Typing the *xx code could report these numbers to the > FTC, with the time and your phone number so your complaint can be more > easily traced. That is, if the phone companies really wanted to help > enforce the anti-telemarketer regs. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There *is* a CLASS service such as you > describe. *57 does that job; dial *57 during a conversation (flash the > hook, fresh dialtone, *57, then flash again to go back to the > conversation) or immediatly following disconnection, and telco records > the details regardless of any privacy flags (*67, etc) being set and > forwards the details to police. **They will NOT tell you the details. > You have to get the details from the police.** Police will generally > only give you details if you agree _in writing first_ to prosecute on > the results. Telco will not serve as your private detective agency, > etc. Communication privacy laws prohibit telco from working with you > directly. Getting the police to actually do something about the matter > is a different thing. Many police believe it is a civil matter, and > they are not permitted to get involved in civil matters. Police also > usually have a busy schedule and phone harassment is not a big issue, > especially when there is a telemarketer causing you some minor grief. > Oh, and *57 is not an inexpensive CLASS service. Typically, telco gets > eight to ten dollars for *each instance* of its use. The recorded > message they play immediatly following the capture of the details > tells you about this charge, and provides an 800 number at the 'call > annoyance bureau' to be used to follow up with telco and police. PAT] I had thought that *57 cost one dollar a use, but found you are right, a couple of SBCs tariffs that charge $7 and $8 per successful use. I thought a buck was too much, and the headache of getting the local LEA involved was not worth the effort, even if they did anything. That's why I think we need a similar service that sends the data to the FTC/FCCs enforcement division (to get around the privacy aspects). If its cheap (i.e. free) and easy to send the data, people will do it. The FTC/FCC do not call list website seems to have been done by someone with at least a clue as to what they are doing, so I bet they could set up a system to automatically record all the data that was sent in, and sort it by number of calls from each ANI and each CID, so they could address the most prolific violators first. Also, you need both ANI and CID. I don't know if *57 gives both. You need ANI because CID can be faked; you need CID because a company may use many telemarketers, each with their own line (and ANI). ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 15:38:29 -0500 From: Michael Quinn Organization: Booz Allen Hamilton Subject: Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject Oops -- I checked my Verizon bill. The service is called "Call Intercept" and is $5 per month plus the $7.50 per month caller ID. Anonymous Call Rejection is part of the basic overpriced local service. Sorry for the confusion. Mike Mary@bentmetal.biz responded to my post on Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject: > Your feature sounds more like Privacy Manager than Anonymous Call > Rejection. ------------------------------ From: noname Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 21:43:29 GMT In article , Wesrock@aol.com says: > In a message dated Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:36:46 -0500 TELECOM Digest > Editor noted in response to Robert Pierce's message: >> I don't know of any large corporation back in the 1960-70's as >> computers were taking over everything which did not run in >> parallel for at least a month or two for just that reason. I know >> telco and Amoco credit card did that. PAT] > This does not seem to be typical of government, state, local, > etc. In Oklahoma there have been at least three cases in the last few > years where this apparently not even considered and the new system was > supposed to run straight out of the box. One was a combined system > for state government, which took six weeks or so to get where it would > even issue pay checks to state employees ... another was the Oklahoma > City school district which did similarly and employee pay checks were > delayed for a number of days, and payments to vendors for many weeks, > to the extent that some vendors cut them off, and another case > involving Oklahoma County payrolls. Indeed. State of Rhode Island went with a canned solution for their G/L system which had previously been running on an IBM mainframe. The new one ran via Citrix metaframe using Oracle on the back end. Of course the problem was that the pukes in purchasing got a system that was great for purchasing but sucked as a G/L package. So at one point we tried to pay things using non-existent codes -- and had to fudge. That does wonders for the G/L. Then of course getting checks cut to vendors was a major headache as was reporting. Every quarter we'd get a crappy Access database of all the revenue and expenditures for every state agency. I re-worked it so I just brought the table into the version I'd modified that could issue reports for ONLY our agency code and could do summaries, etc. Theirs couldn't. Took more than a year to work things out on that system. Wisely, they didn't migrate payroll because they knew what would have happened. ------------------------------ From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close) Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" Date: 8 Feb 2004 12:30:03 -0800 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is very little you can do > *without computers* that can't be done better *with computers*, > including detecting fraud and other crimes. Money manipulators have been counting the stuff for centuries. One thing accountants figured out a long time ago is that, just as with the US Constitution, a system of checks and balances makes the whole thing work more reliably. No reputable fund manager would tolerate a system which could not be audited. But just as with the "new economy" bubble, some folks think that voting electronically does not need to be subject to the same old rules. Los Angeles County has been counting ballots with computers for about 35 years, so using computers as part of the process is certainly not new. But those ballots have been punched cards and they can be counted manually in case of any doubt about the computer counting. The problem with the proposed military system and many other net voting schemes is that there is no auditability. No one, not even a computer, can detect and prove a fraud without that ability. Voting via the Net may happen, but many of us won't support it until there is a method for conducting an audit. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA +1 714 434 7359 dave@compata.com dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu "Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you." - Pericles [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But what I said was about the same thing: Run the new system in parallel with the old system *at least* for one cycle using the usual audit procedures on the paper system to validate the computer system. And if turning the whole thing loose on the general public is too difficult at first, then overseas military would make a good subset to practice on. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steve Michelson Subject: Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 02:08:41 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net I wonder whether you live in a state where they are having primary elections. The Do Not Call list does not apply to political pollsters, charities, and companies with whom you had an existing relationship. Perhaps you are getting calls from political pollsters? Mike wrote in message news:telecom23.61.3@telecom-digest.org: > I registered on that Do Not Call list back when it first came out. > When it went into affect we stopped receiving all those annoying > telemarketing phone calls. But ever since that new law came out that > requires telemarketers to display info on the caller id, we've been > getting about 3 "out of area" calls everyday at the same times they > used to call. > Does anyone know what that's all about? It's really annoying. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It goes to show that the telemarketers > are keeping up with the times. Telemarketers are not going to be > easily thwarted. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: CCIE8122 Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 21:27:56 -0700 Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/ Subject: Re: Call Centres > Does anyone know what the situation is in the US/Canada as far as call > centres being transferred abroad is like? > It's *BIG* news over here at the moment, with many companies, such as > insurance companies, telco's (including BT), some 118 Directory > Assistance companies, National Rail Enquiries, and AOL, opening up > call centres in India, primarily Kolkutt and Mumbai. Basically > they're *MUCH* cheaper to run and operate over there than call centres > here in the UK, but that's at the expense of job losses as well. At > the moment they're being used as overflow for the call centres here > -- but as I say, that's at the moment. > BTW, the reason I know that AOL have opened a centre in India is > because I had to call them a few weeks ago, only for my call to be > answered (eventually) by a guy with a very strong Indian accent -- you > don't hear Indian accents in Waterford, Ireland, where AOL have their > main European office! > TIA! > Rob Same in US. I sell MCI/AT&T/Qwest/GX services, including IPL, to a major call center company in the US (they do call center for UPS, United Healthcare, Metlife, AT&T, and several other Fortune 500 cos). May even be the same company that does AOL. Anyway this company has IPL to Mexico, Ghana, India (Bangalore and Mumbai), with call centers in all those locations. According to them the next major areas are Beijing, and Philippines. Other major companies like Cisco do a similar sort of thing -- Cisco TAC does sort of a "follow the sun," doing TOD routing between call centers in US, India, Sydney, among others. kr [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One reason they like locating in the Philippines (well, two reasons, actually) is the neutrality of the language (mostly decent English) and the low costs involved in the payroll; the people work for very low wages, and employers are not subject to all the various worker comp, insurance, and taxes they are here in the USA. Work for people who need jobs, and less grief for the employers. A 'win-win' situation for all (smile) except the USA customers/consumers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kimbrennan@aol.comfrtz.com (KimBrennan) Date: 08 Feb 2004 05:28:36 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Comcast Has Limits For Heavy Internet Users Of course, DirecPC has "fair use" limits too (and for far more reason as satellite bandwidth is much more limited, and must more expensive to upgrade.) However ... This begs the question of what they (Comcast et al) are doing. ISP means (or is SUPPOSED to mean) Internet Service Provider. Unfortunately far too many of these silly people think that means ONLY http, and they restrict it so that ONLY http can be served. But INTERNET service implies FTP and Mail and telnet and a whole slew of other capabilities. If they want to "restrict" users to an equal playfield (though the usage patterns may not justify that anyway) then each user should have the EXACT same limits. It's called dial up. Bah. "I'm sorry, all my money is tied up in currency." W.C.Fields [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And how often do you ever see an ISP who will give you a shell if you ask for one. They're deathly afraid of what havoc you might cause if you had a shell account. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Faked CallerID Info? Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 15:18:21 -0600 Gail M. Hall wrote: > What I don't understand is the part of the "exposure" that really > bothered me, and that is the appearance of grabbing the girl's clothes > off of her. Grabbing and groping against her will is just a lower > form of imposition and the type of thinking that leads to rape. > This sort of thing glorifies abusing other people. Hey Gail! If you've read any of Janet's interviews ... in many of them she admits to being very, well, sexual. Which is fine, and she hasn't attempted to market sexuality like Madonna has. But it still bothers me that someone with the magnitude of talent that Janet Jackson has ... *or* Madonna ... or Christina Aguilera, who has an AMAZING voice ... it bugs me that any of those three extremely talented ladies feels the need to do some of the things they've done. They all have the goods they need to succeed (and NO, I'm not talking about body parts, get your mind out of the gutter!) and don't have to act like total skanks in order to get people's attention. I'm afraid that Janet, however, is going down that road. Christina started down that road a while ago, and Madonna, unfortunately, *paved* that road. :( (And during the years when she was more interested in shocking people than making music, her music suffered.) Back on topic here -- the Janet/Justin thing, the streaker advertising the online casino -- telemarketers -- spammers -- the idiot standing in the used car lot screaming at you - they're all employing the same marketing ploy: "get in their faces, annoy them and maybe they'll pay attention." (As you so rightly pointed out.) Know why? BECAUSE WE LET THEM. (And because they think they have the God-given right to do it, in the case of the telemarketers who insist they do nothing wrong.) Need I say more? JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you, Doctor Sobol, for that very interesting message -- I'll call it the Sunday evening sermon for this week. You raise some very good points. That's one reason why I hope the television sets which are able to detect the presence of a comm- ercial message (when one comes on, it stops recording until the message is finished, then resumes its recording) are very successful in their sales. We need more such vigorous resistence by the public. To all readers: stop by our 'literature table' on your way out of this issue of the Digest tonight, and place your order for a very good pictorial history book now available on Illinois Bell/Ameritech. I hope you will decide to order a personal copy. See the final message in this issue today. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Ameritech historical picture book available Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 17:01:53 GMT (this came to me via the greenkeys mailing list) The SBC Archives and History Center is pleased to offer the book entitled, Snapshots in Time: A Photographic History of Ameritech. This 192-page soft-cover book chronicles the evolution of telecommunications in the SBC Midwest (former Ameritech) five-state region through select historical images. It offers more than 225 captioned photos of switchboard operators, crews with their vehicles and technicians testing central office equipment. The book begins with an 1876 portrait of Alexander Graham Bell and ends in 1999, on the eve of the SBC/Ameritech merger. The cost for each book is $25.00, plus $4.95 for shipping. To order, fill out the form below. If you have questions, please call Bill Caughlin at (210) 524-6192. Or send him an e-mail at wc2942@sbc.com --------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER FORM FOR Snapshots in Time: A Photographic History of Ameritech NAME __________________________________________________ BUSINESS UNIT ________________________________________ ADDRESS _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ CITY _________________________ STATE _____ ZIP __________ PHONE NUMBER (______)_________________________ I would like to order _______ copy(ies) each at $25.00, plus $4.95 shipping, for a total of _____________. No cash, please. Make your check or money order payable to SBC Services, Inc. and send it to: SBC Archives and History Center 7990 IH-10 West Floor 1 San Antonio, Texas 78230 jhaynes at alumni dot uark dot edu ------------------------------ 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 #62 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 9 14:03:21 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i19J3K811775; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 14:03:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 14:03:21 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402091903.i19J3K811775@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 #63 TELECOM Digest Mon, 9 Feb 2004 14:03:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 63 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #419, February 9, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) Book Review: "Web Site Privacy With P3P", Lindskog/Lindskog (Rob Slade) Re: Comcast Has Limits For Heavy Internet Users (Clarence Dold) Re: Comcast Has Limits For Heavy Internet Users (Rich Greenberg) Re: Call Centres (Rob) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. (Justin Time) 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, 09 Feb 2004 09:50:17 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #419, February 9, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 419: February 9, 2004 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** ALLSTREAM: www.allstream.com ** BELL CANADA: www.bell.ca ** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: www.cisco.com/ca ** CYGCOM INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES: www.cygcom.com ** GROUP TELECOM: www.360.net ** JUNIPER NETWORKS: www.juniper.net ** PRIMUS CANADA: www.primustel.ca ** SPRINT CANADA: www.sprint.ca ** TELUS: www.telus.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Sault PUC to Offer Internet Over Power Lines ** Bell to Own 100% of Bell West ** Shaw Registers to Offer Phone Service ** Cybersurf, Shaw Spar Over Internet Access ** Wireless Auction Starts Today ** Call-Net vs Royal Bank and Bell ** Bell Offers Global IP Networking ** Telecom Ottawa Tests Wi-Fi Service ** CRTC Deregulates Telus Quebec's WAN Services ** TeraGo to Offer Wholesale Broadband ** Ottawa Optical Startup Raises $10 Million ** Milliard to Head Ottawa VoIP Developer ** CATA Seeks Nominations for Innovation Award ** Financial Results Allstream BCE Cisco MTS Rogers Wireless Telesat ** Contact Centre Leadership Program Launched ** Charter Offer for Telemanagement Online ============================================================ SAULT PUC TO OFFER INTERNET OVER POWER LINES: PUC Telecom, owned by the City of Sault Ste. Marie, has begun technical trials of Broadband over Power Line technology developed by Massachusetts-based Amperion Inc. It hopes to begin market trials, perhaps involving thousands of homes, "in a matter of weeks." BELL TO OWN 100% OF BELL WEST: As expected, MTS has decided to exercise its option to require Bell Canada to buy the Manitoba telco's 40% stake in Bell West, for approximately $645 million. Bell says it will pay the purchase price, due in 180 days, out of general corporate funds. SHAW REGISTERS TO OFFER PHONE SERVICE: On January 22, Shaw Telecom Inc. notified the CRTC that it intends to meet all the regulatory obligations of a Competitive Local Exchange Carrier, and plans to begin offering service in Calgary. It provided no dates or details. CYBERSURF, SHAW SPAR OVER INTERNET ACCESS: Calgary-based ISP Cybersurf has told the CRTC that Shaw Cablesystems has refused to provide its retail higher-speed Internet service to Cybersurf for resale, as the Commission ordered in Telecom Decision 2003-87 (see Telecom Update #414). Shaw counters that it is now ready to provide Third Party Internet Access in Vancouver and Calgary, so the resale arrangement is superseded. www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2004/8622/c122_200400656.htm WIRELESS AUCTION STARTS TODAY: The auction for Canadian spectrum in the 2.5 and 3.5 GHz bands starts on February 9, with 22 qualified bidders. Information on bidders and licences is available on Industry Canada's website, which will also provide round-by-round summaries of bidding. http://agora.ic.gc.ca/AuctionGCLF_BTS/mainmenu.cfm CALL-NET VS ROYAL BANK AND BELL: Call-Net has asked the CRTC to block a mass transfer to Bell Canada of Sprint long distance customers served under a "Talk and Save" program available to Royal Bank Visa users. RBC wants to switch them to Bell, but Sprint says that requires explicit authorization from each individual customer. www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2004/8622/c25_200400812.htm BELL OFFERS GLOBAL IP NETWORKING: Bell Canada has launched Global Internet Protocol Suite, which extends its enterprise IP networks to 50 countries, using Infonet's international IP network. TELECOM OTTAWA TESTS WI-FI SERVICE: Telecom Ottawa has begun a three-month trial of wireless technology developed by a Ottawa-based BelAir Networks. The utility-owned carrier will provide free Wi-Fi Internet access at Ottawa City Hall and the Nepean Sportsplex through April. CRTC DEREGULATES TELUS QUEBEC'S WAN SERVICES: CRTC Telecom Decision 2004-7 forbears from regulating Telus Quebec's wide area network services, on similar terms to other major incumbents' WAN services. The Commission retains the power to protect customer confidentiality and to prevent discrimination against other service providers or customers. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/dt2004-7.htm TERAGO TO OFFER WHOLESALE BROADBAND: TeraGo Networks has begun offering wireless broadband at wholesale rates to Internet providers, resellers, and sales agents. OTTAWA OPTICAL STARTUP RAISES $10 MILLION: Metconnex, an Ottawa-based supplier of optical components, has raised $10.6 million from an international investors group led by St. Paul Venture Capital and Skypoint Capital. MILLIARD TO HEAD OTTAWA VoIP DEVELOPER: Natural Convergence, an Ottawa-based developer of broadband communications software for VoIP, has named Daniel Milliard as CEO. Milliard was formerly CEO of Group Telecom. CATA SEEKS NOMINATIONS FOR INNOVATION AWARD: The Canadian Advanced Technology Alliance will present the "19th Annual Canadian Innovation Awards" in Ottawa April 27. Nomination deadline is March 5; for more information go to www.cata.ca/Media_and_Events/Awards/ FINANCIAL RESULTS: ** Allstream reports fourth-quarter sales of $301.9 million, 2.4% less than during the same period last year. Net income was $17.1 million, down 29% from the previous quarter. ** BCE reports fourth-quarter revenue of $4.9 billion and net income of $400 million. Bell Canada's revenue from continuing operations was down 1.8% from last year: long distance and data sales fell 5%, while local and access sales were unchanged and those of wireless rose 16%. ** Cisco had net income of US$1.3 billion in the quarter ended January 24, up from $1.1 billion the previous quarter. Sales rose 5.8% on the quarter to $5.4 billion. Cisco predicted that sales growth would slow in the next quarter to 1%-3%. ** Manitoba Telecom's fourth quarter revenues were $211 million, level with those of a year earlier; net income rose 5.7% to $12.8 million. Wireless sales were up 16%; long distance sales fell 13%. As of February 2, MTS had connected 10,000 customers for TV over DSL. ** Rogers Wireless reports fourth quarter revenue of $625 million, 19% more than in the same period last year. Net income was $1.35 million, compared to a $39 million loss. Revenue per subscriber rose 2.4%. Data service revenue made up 4% of sales, double the rate of a year ago. Rogers added a net 166,200 postpaid subscribers in the quarter. ** Telesat Canada, a BCE subsidiary, had net earnings of $11.5 million, down 35% from the previous year. Sales increased 5% to $99 million. CONTACT CENTRE LEADERSHIP PROGRAM LAUNCHED: Angus Dortmans Associates is now scheduling client-site presentations of a new seminar, presented by Henry Dortmans. Topics include: Setting strategies and tactics; Producing effective reports; Understanding technology and tools; Managing financials; Establishing credibility. ** For information on bringing this important two-day program to your team, call 1-800-263-4415 ext. 300 or go to www.angustel.ca/ada/adccs.html. CHARTER OFFER FOR TELEMANAGEMENT ONLINE: Time is running out. Act now to take advantage of special Charter Subscriber rates for Telemanagement and Telemanagement Online. Download full details (including 107 reasons to subscribe now!) today. ** Subscribe now and start your subscription with the current issue, featuring in-depth reports on implementing and using wireless data for business applications in 2004, and Part One of our exclusive series on new IP Telephony systems for branch offices. www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub-online.html ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2003 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 08:18:38 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Web Site Privacy with P3P", Lindskog/Lindskog BKWSPP3P.RVW 20031019 "Web Site Privacy with P3P", Helena Lindskog/Stefan Lindskog, 2003, 0-471-21677-1, U$40.00/C$61.95/UK#27.95 %A Helena Lindskog %A Stefan Lindskog %C 5353 Dundas Street West, 4th Floor, Etobicoke, ON M9B 6H8 %D 2003 %G 0-471-21677-1 %I John Wiley & Sons, Inc. %O U$40.00/C$61.95/UK#27.95 416-236-4433 fax: 416-236-4448 % http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471216771/robsladesinterne http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471216771/robsladesinte-21 %O http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471216771/robsladesin03-20 %P 244 p. %T "Web Site Privacy with P3P" Chapter one is a brief but reasonable introduction to privacy. Internet security gets the same level of treatment in chapter two. The World Wide Web is explained in chapter three. Privacy and the net are examined in chapter four. All of this acts as background by the time we get to chapter five, which explains the Platform for Privacy Preferences, or P3P. Chapter six describes how to enhance your Web site's privacy. The creation of a privacy policy is reviewed in chapter seven. Chapter eight lists such a policy in English, and then nine provides a detailed structure of how the policy is established using P3P. Special consideration for cookies is outlined in chapter ten. Chapter eleven examines P3P tools. P3P and mobile networking, as well as XML source code for policies, is given in chapter twelve. A serviceable guide, with no major problems, but no stellar qualities, either. copyright Robert M. Slade, 2003 BKWSPP3P.RVW 20031019 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca rslade@sun.soci.niu.edu May you live all the days of your life. - Jonathan Swift http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: dold@ComcastXHa.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Comcast Has Limits For Heavy Internet Users Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 22:59:46 +0000 (UTC) Organization: a2i network KimBrennan wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And how often do you ever see an ISP > who will give you a shell if you ask for one. They're deathly afraid > of what havoc you might cause if you had a shell account. PAT] I only read mail and usenet news from a shell account ... cuts down on the virus/worms and anything that I can't read is probably SPAM anyway. http://www.rahul.net/guest is what I use, at the moment connected via cablemodem to an ISP that I never use, except for connectivity. A google search for "shell account" turns up lots of potential sites. http://www.sonic.net is another company in my area that is well respected and offers dialup-dsl-wireless and shell accounts. KimBrennan wrote: > This begs the question of what they (Comcast et al) are doing. ISP > means (or is SUPPOSED to mean) Internet Service > Provider. Unfortunately far too many of these silly people think that > means ONLY http, and they restrict it so that ONLY http can be served. > But INTERNET service implies FTP and Mail and telnet and a whole slew > of other capabilities. I think streaming video is generally delivered via http, or at least as a result of web browsing. To me, FTP implies two way. I don't just download stuff. The cable and DSL already have limits on the speed of uploads. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Comcast Has Limits For Heavy Internet Users Date: 8 Feb 2004 19:52:45 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , KimBrennan wrote: [...] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And how often do you ever see an ISP > who will give you a shell if you ask for one. They're deathly afraid > of what havoc you might cause if you had a shell account. PAT] There are several. IMHO the one I use is the best run one (Panix). And my HO was confirmed by some extensive discussion in an internal newsgroup started by someone asking for suggestions for backup shell providers. Thier policy is you can do nearly anything you want as long as its legal and doesn't disturb the service for other users. Example: They don't officially support the "screen" utility, but if you know unix well enough to d/l and compile your own copy, feel free to use it. Another frequent poster to CDT works there. He can chime in if he wishes. Rich Greenberg Work: Rich.Greenberg atsign worldspan.com + 1 770 563 6656 N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign panix.com + 1 770 321 6507 Eastern time zone. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT), Red & Shasta(Husky,(RIP)) Owner:Chinook-L Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/ Asst Owner:Sibernet-L ------------------------------ From: rob51166@yahoo.com (Rob) Subject: Re: Call Centres Date: 9 Feb 2004 04:33:20 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com CCIE8122 wrote in message news:: >> Does anyone know what the situation is in the US/Canada as far as call >> centres being transferred abroad is like? >> It's *BIG* news over here at the moment, with many companies, such as >> insurance companies, telco's (including BT), some 118 Directory >> Assistance companies, National Rail Enquiries, and AOL, opening up >> call centres in India, primarily Kolkutt and Mumbai. Basically >> they're *MUCH* cheaper to run and operate over there than call centres >> here in the UK, but that's at the expense of job losses as well. At >> the moment they're being used as overflow for the call centres here >> -- but as I say, that's at the moment. >> BTW, the reason I know that AOL have opened a centre in India is >> because I had to call them a few weeks ago, only for my call to be >> answered (eventually) by a guy with a very strong Indian accent -- you >> don't hear Indian accents in Waterford, Ireland, where AOL have their >> main European office! >> TIA! >> Rob > Same in US. > I sell MCI/AT&T/Qwest/GX services, including IPL, to a major call > center company in the US (they do call center for UPS, United > Healthcare, Metlife, AT&T, and several other Fortune 500 cos). May > even be the same company that does AOL. > Anyway this company has IPL to Mexico, Ghana, India (Bangalore and > Mumbai), with call centers in all those locations. According to them > the next major areas are Beijing, and Philippines. > Other major companies like Cisco do a similar sort of thing -- Cisco > TAC does sort of a "follow the sun," doing TOD routing between call > centers in US, India, Sydney, among others. > kr > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One reason they like locating in the > Philippines (well, two reasons, actually) is the neutrality of the > language (mostly decent English) and the low costs involved in the > payroll; the people work for very low wages, and employers are > not subject to all the various worker comp, insurance, and taxes > they are here in the USA. Work for people who need jobs, and less > grief for the employers. A 'win-win' situation for all (smile) except > the USA customers/consumers. PAT] Yeah, it's very much the same over here. Most major banks, such as Barclays, Abbey, HSBC, Lloyds TSB have transferred call centres over to India (my bank, NatWest, hasn't, thankfully), as well as many insurance companies such as Sun Alliance, Prudential, Axa. Because English is spoken fluently by the literate in India, as well as the wages being an nth of what they are over here in the UK and Europe, and the lack of employee rights are just a few of the reasons British companies chose to go there en masse. Some British companies have also moved call centres to South Africa, where there's no language problem whatsoever. China I'm not so sure about, but I wouldn't put it past any major British company to move call centres etc, to the Philipines in the not too distant future. Oh BTW, British jobs are also going to Europe, as well. My mother worked at Hoover Europe Headquarters in the neighbouring valley and her department (export) was transferred to Italy. I've put it down to the fact that, as Italy's in the Eurozone, it's cheaper for them to export from there to other countries which use the Pound than to export from here, where the Pound is stronger, and therefore the goods are more expensive for sale to Euroland. ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. Date: 9 Feb 2004 06:45:16 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com BobGoudreau@withheld at users request wrote in message news:: > [Please obcure my email address. Thank you.] > Rodgers Platt wrote: >> Keeping notes in a diary may make them "more difficult" to share, but >> the support systems available are much more robust, and my day timer >> notebook will never die because the battery went flat. > On the other hand, one aspect of the paper diary support system is > painfully inadequate: backup. My friend's wife painfully discovered > this last year when her purse (including her daytimer) was stolen from > her car and never recovered. Tens of thousands of bytes of > hand-written data were lost forever. This loss finally persuaded her > to emulate her husband's example and get a PDA, which can be easily > (and wirelessly) synced with his office computer to provide a backup > copy. Even if the device is lost or destroyed, a replacement can > quickly be purchased and loaded with all the backed-up data, which > will be no more than a day or two out of date. We are beating a dead horse, but if the person having the PDA never performs a backup or transfer -- when was the last time you backed up the contents of your PC's hard disk -- the data is still lost. PDAs and computers still do not have the ability to take hand drawn graphics as input, notes or other items that may be shared. Every office I visit has at least a copier or fax machine that would allow a sheet of notes or sketches to be copied and shared if need be. Most of the time, and this goes for all you advocating the use of PDAs as well, the notes I take at a meeting are for my use and are not shared. When was the last time you sent someone a copy of your meeting notes? The notes I take are virtually meaningless to someone else as they don't think, or remember, things the way I do. With notes in a daytimer, I have a record of what happened, and when. Not only the date, but the time. If someone wants a copy of my notes, I can scan and e-mail or fax them a copy -- complete with drawings. Rodgers For keeping records of appointments, phone lists and expense records, a PDA is difficult to beat. I can sync the PDA with my PC and have it keep records and even download expense information to a program for tracking purposes. Paper, for this purpose, is a little more difficult I know and recognize. Each has its use and there are some things for which the "old" way still excels. ------------------------------ 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 #63 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 9 15:00:12 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i19K0Cb12350; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 15:00:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 15:00:12 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402092000.i19K0Cb12350@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 #64 TELECOM Digest Mon, 9 Feb 2004 15:00:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 64 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The Pornography Industry vs. Digital Pirates (Monty Solomon) Social Networks: Will Users Pay to Get Friends? (Monty Solomon) Shorten TV Season? Rules Shifting at Networks (Monty Solomon) Recording the VCR's Swan Song (Monty Solomon) For Better HDTV Displays, It's All About the Chip (Monty Solomon) Yours Not So Truly, J. Goodspam (Monty Solomon) Thorny Issues Await FCC. as It Takes Up Internet Phones (Monty Solomon) Will the Election be Hacked? (Monty Solomon) Online Search Engines Help Lift Cover of Privacy (Monty Solomon) Re: Building a Voice-Driven Application (Nick Landsberg) Re: "No Internet Voting" (Nick Landsberg) Re: Telephone Service Surcharges (John Levine) Bluegiga Integrates Wireless Bluetooth, GSM Technologies (PressRelease) 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: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 22:17:37 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Pornography Industry vs. Digital Pirates By JOHN SCHWARTZ THOUSANDS of Web sites are putting Playboy magazine's pictures on the Internet -- free. And Randy Nicolau, the president of Playboy.com, is loving it. "It's direct marketing at its finest," he said. Let the music industry sue those who share files, and let Hollywood push for tough laws and regulations to curb movie copying. Playboy, like many companies that provide access to virtual flesh and naughtiness, is turning online freeloaders into subscribers by giving away pictures to other sites that, in turn, drive visitors right back to Playboy.com. When Mr. Nicolau is asked whether he thinks that the entertainment industry is making a mistake by taking a different approach, he replies: "I haven't spent much time thinking about it. It's like asking Henry Ford, 'What were the buggy-whip guys doing wrong?' " The copyright rumble is playing out a little differently in the red-light districts of cyberspace. That neighborhood is increasingly difficult to confine, what with a fetishwear-clad Janet Jackson flashing a Super Bowl audience of millions, and Paris Hilton making her own version of a "Girls Gone Wild" video. Professional peddlers say they are hard pressed to compete. Still, the business of being bad is very good, especially for the biggest players. Though the industry has felt a financial squeeze during the economic slowdown, it nonetheless has sales of as much as $2 billion each year, said Tom Hymes, the editor of AVNOnline, a business magazine for the industry. And the pornography industry, which has always been among the first to exploit new technologies, including the VCR, the World Wide Web and online payment systems, is finding novel ways to deal with the threat of online piracy as well. The mainstream entertainment industry, some experts say, would do well to pay attention. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/08/business/yourmoney/08porn.html *** 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, New York Times Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 22:27:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Social Networks: Will Users Pay to Get Friends? Social Networks: Will Users Pay to Get Friends? By BOB TEDESCHI The idea behind "social networking" Web sites like Friendster, Tribe.net and LinkedIn is almost the opposite of the old Groucho Marx joke: they attract people who want to join a club eager to have them. But as the popularity of such sites has taken off, the big question for investors in new technologies is whether social networking sites can ever make a lot of money by connecting friends of friends in mini-networks of trust, whether for dating, business or maintaining acquaintances. For many, the buzz over social networking sounds a lot like vintage Internet hyperbole from the late 1990's. "I'm having a real problem finding a business model here," said Nate Elliott, an analyst with Jupiter Research. "It feels like the early days of the Internet, with sites like Globe.com saying they'll aggregate tens of millions of users, then find a way to monetize them. That's not the way to run a business." The creators of such services strenuously disagree, arguing that in contrast to the hundreds of dot-coms that bombed, they have clear plans for generating revenue. But those plans could be short-circuited by Internet giants like Yahoo and Google, as well as by established players in the online jobs and dating categories, whose turf most social networking sites seek to occupy. Indeed, as the more popular dating and jobs sites like Match.com and Monster.com quickly add networking features of their own, sites like Friendster face the challenge of how to differentiate themselves - beyond boasting that they are, for now, free. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/09/technology/09ecom.html *** 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, New York Times Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 23:30:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Shorten TV Season? Rules Shifting at Networks By BILL CARTER February 8, 2004 When NBC recently invited Donald J. Trump to move into its most exclusive neighborhood on Thursday night, the network's competitors immediately recognized the momentousness of the programming maneuver. For the sake of finding the best location for Mr. Trump's new reality series, "The Apprentice," NBC broke with a two-decade tradition of offering its four best comedies in a row on Thursday night, the night of "Friends" and "Cheers" and "Seinfeld," the night that has generated the most advertising revenue by far for any network. Now that "The Apprentice" has become the most successful new show of the season, NBC executives have announced that they plan to bring it -- as well as Mr. Trump -- back in the same 9 p.m. time slot in the fall. NBC's decision to overturn its "must see" comedy strategy for a reality show is only the latest sign that the playbook that has governed prime-time programming since the days of radio is in the midst of its most substantial revision. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/08/business/media/08TUBE.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 00:16:59 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Recording the VCR's Swan Song By DAVID POGUE PREDICTING the future of technology is a fool's game. Still, every now and then, you recognize that a product is so obviously superior to what came before it, the writing is on the wall in block letters big enough for Mr. Magoo to read. The graphic elegance of the first Macintosh spelled the demise of DOS, the crisp sound and compact size of the CD unmistakably suggested the vinyl record's decline, and the convenience of the digital camera set off a tailspin in film sales that continues today. Don't look now, but another machine you probably own is on its way out: the VCR. Its disruptive successor is the cheap set-top DVD recorder. Now, the phrase "cheap set-top DVD recorder" may strike you as two oxymorons in one. First of all, in this era of flat screens that are only two inches thick, the last place you'd set a set-top box is on the top of the set. (Nominations are welcome for a better term that distinguishes these TV-room DVD recorders from the ones that you attach to a computer.) Second, there's that bit about "cheap." Everybody knows that set-top DVD recorders are expensive. The best ones include a hard drive for TiVo-like flexibility but cost $600 and up. DVD-only models start at $400 or so. Logic and pundits have long maintained that the VCR's funeral rites won't begin in earnest until DVD-recorder prices fall below $300 -- and now they have, led by Gateway's AR-230 and a few rivals from lesser-known companies. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/05/technology/circuits/05stat.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 00:17:46 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: For Better HDTV Displays, It's All About the Chip By ERIC A. TAUB BACK in the dark ages of high-definition television -- about four years ago -- HDTV pictures suffered in quality. The problem was not with the technical standard, but with some of the digital television sets that were sold. "The weakest link in the HDTV chain was the display," recalled Joe Flaherty, a CBS senior vice president for technology who was one of the people responsible for instituting digital high-definition TV. "It was like Mark Twain's comment that Wagner's music is better than it sounds." The biggest sets at the time, supersize rear-projection monstrosities priced around $10,000, used conventional cathode-ray-tube technology to create images. As a result, the high-definition pictures were not very sharp and had some problems common to big-screen TV's in general: inaccurate color registration and pronounced "hot spots" that limited where viewers could sit and see the picture. Today, consumers have a much wider and better choice of display technologies in HDTV models, some of which are priced considerably lower than those available a few years ago. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/05/technology/circuits/05howw.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 00:22:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Yours Not So Truly, J. Goodspam By LISA NAPOLI PURPOSES L. XYLOPHONIST sounds like my kind of man. Unique. Creative. Focused, with a hint of formality. There is no way to be certain that Mr. Xylophonist is, in fact, a mister. Actually, it is a pretty safe bet he is not a person at all. The fact that his name appeared in the return line of a piece of unsolicited e-mail almost assures that he is not. Mr. Xylophonist wrote trying to sell some pamphlet about maximizing profits on eBay. Or maybe that was what Beiderbecke P. Sawhorse was pitching. It was definitely not the one from Marylou Bowling; she wrote to tell about "Government Free Cash Grant Programs." Then again, that might have been from Elfrieda Billman. As for Usefully T. Medicaids and Boggs Darrin, they both wrote about cheap drug sales, no prescription needed. (Of course.) Alongside those missives from friends and that drudgery from the office is a cast of e-mail characters with fantastic names promising all manner of stuff for sale. Frequently the promises are bogus; virtually all of the names are, too. Though it seems impossible to imagine the unwanted e-mail known as spam as anything but a nuisance, there is something creative about these return addresses -- even if they are being used for untoward purposes. On Web bulletin boards, they are sometimes draw admiring observations. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/05/technology/circuits/05name.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 00:26:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Thorny Issues Await F.C.C. as It Takes Up Internet Phones By STEPHEN LABATON WASHINGTON, Feb. 8 - The effort to write the rules for Internet telephone service begins this week, and whether it succeeds may ultimately come down to a matter of money. On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission is set to consider approving a notice of proposed rulemaking, the first step in a lengthy process of writing regulations for Internet-based phone services. The commission is also set to issue a final decision on a petition by one of the new Internet phone companies, Pulver.com, which has asked the commission to rule that it does not need to pay interconnection access fees to phone companies for any calls made and received between computers through Internet connections. http://nytimes.com/2004/02/09/technology/09rules.html The Issues Before the F.C.C. By THE NEW YORK TIMES February 9, 2004 The Federal Communications Commission plans this week to begin considering rules for new Internet telephone systems, a process that could have a lasting economic impact on the telephone, cable and computer industries. Here are some of the major issues that new rules would need to address and some of the related industry petitions pending at the F.C.C. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/09/technology/09rules-side.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 01:14:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Will The Election be Hacked? A Salon special report reveals how new voting machines could result in a rigged presidential race -- and we'd never know. By Farhad Manjoo Feb. 9, 2004 | A few weeks after Election Night 2002, Roxanne Jekot, a computer programmer who lives in Cumming, Ga., began fearing demons lingering in the state's voting machines. The midterm election had been a historic one: Georgia became the first state to use electronic touch-screen voting machines in every one of its precincts. The 51-year-old Jekot, who has a grandmotherly bearing but describes herself as a "typical computer geek," was initially excited about the new system. "I thought it was the coolest thing we could have done," she says. But the election also brought sweeping victories for Republicans, including, most stunningly, one for Sonny Perdue, who defeated Roy Barnes, the incumbent Democrat, to become Georgia's first Republican governor in 135 years, while Rep. Saxby Chambliss upset Vietnam veteran Sen. Max Cleland. The convergence of these two developments -- the introduction of new voting machines and the surprising GOP wins -- began to eat away at Roxanne Jekot. Like many of her fellow angry Democrats on the Internet discussion forums she frequented, she had a hard time believing the Republicans won legitimately. Instead, Jekot began searching for her explanation in the source code used in the new voting machines. What she found alarmed her. http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/02/09/voting_machines/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:40:43 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Online Search Engines Help Lift Cover of Privacy By Yuki Noguchi Washington Post Staff Writer Sitting at his laptop, Chris O'Ferrell types a few words into the Google search engine and up pops a link to what appears to be a military document listing suspected Taliban and al Qaeda members, date of birth, place of birth, passport numbers and national identification numbers. Another search yields a spreadsheet of names and credit card numbers. "All search engines will get you this," O'Ferrell said, pointing to files of spoils he has found on the Internet: Medical records, bank account numbers, students' grades, and the docking locations of 804 U.S. Navy ships, submarines and destroyers. And it is all legal, using the world's most powerful Internet search engine. Cybersecurity experts say an increasing number of private or putatively secret documents are online in out-of-the-way corners of computers all over the globe, leaving the government, individuals, and companies vulnerable to security breaches. At some Web sites and various message groups, techno-hobbyists are even offering instructions on how to find sensitive documents using a relatively simple search. Though it does not technically trespass, the practice is sometimes called "Google hacking." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24053-2004Feb8.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And it is all perfectly legal, as it should be. As we used to say to the movie studios and music producers who would put their stuff on the public web then whine and cry when people would link to them, **do not put your stuff on the public internet if you do not want it to be seen.** Remember how a big issue several years ago was whether or not someone had the 'right' to link to another site? Hollywood wanted all the advantages of putting their crap out on the sidewalk or in the front yard for people to see, but then complained when 'the wrong people' (in their estimation) took what was on display, etc. All anyone has to do is make a web page or a directory unviewable, or fix it so you have to go through *their* front door and pay their admission fee, etc. But no, it was easier to whine and cry about it and throw their weight around with the government authorities trying to stop it from happening. Should there be any government 'secrets'? Personally, I do not think so; after all the government is *supposed to* represent you and me. But if there has to be secrets, then if you or I can go to a public library and look up the very same thing (albiet many hours later), then I think it is particularly obnoxious to hide the very same information from the great know-it-all, the computer. Just my opinion. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: Building a Voice-Driven Application Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:41:43 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Alex Smith wrote: > Hello all, > I am venturing into the telephony world and even though I have briefly > dealt with CTI and H.323, I am still a newbie. I'd like to build an > application that would allow me to buy apples from several grocery > stores. (This is a hypothetical but representative example, please > bear with me). I want to place a telephone call to a number, enter my > pin, navigate through some voice prompts that will allow me to select > a particular grocery store, then select a variety of apples and enter > the amount of apples (weight) I'd like to buy using the phone keypad. > Finally I would also like to leave voice instructions for the grocer > on how to pack my apples (paper or plastic). The app would "look me > up" using my pin number and store the packing instructions as a > soundbyte along with the other order parameters in a database. > From a high-level architectural perspective, what hardware and > software components would make up my stack? For the sake of the > example, assume small volume (personal use). I am looking for > high-level architecture rather than product names even though Open > Source/GNU/etc suggestions are welcome. > My limited understanding tells me I need a CTI server. Do I need a > PBX? Other components? If I want to parse the voice instructions (i.e. > speech recognition) in order to extract "paper" or "plastic", how > doable is that? > Any URLs or books that go from slow to complex with architectural > examples are appreciated. > Insight LLC Well, I'm only familiar with the "high-end" market for this type of thing, and then only because I had to troubleshoot performance problems on one such product. There are products out there which can do both speech recognition (ASR) and also text-to-speech (TTS). The two products I can recall off the top of the head are Speechworks and Nuance, but these software products are generally sold to resellers who put them on a particular computer or board and then sell it to you. (There are other products on the market which I don't recall, so please, don't take this as an endorsement of either of these two products.) You have to provide a "grammar" to these beasts if you have esoteric things you want to interpret, but grammars for things like numbers, dates, etc. are usually built in. A simple grammar to parse something like "paper" or "plastic" is almost trivial to write, unless you want to handle regional dialects or other languages at the same time. There is also a technology (language?) called Voice-XML with which you can write scripts which parse either the voice utterance or the DTMF the user entered and take (if-then-else) actions based on that. There are several vendors which use this now, but most of their customers are large service providers who want to charge $$$ for accessing you horoscope or something like that. ("Please speak your zodiac sign") Given your example of "apples", you would then have to script the VXML to do something like: "Please speak or say 1 for Granny Smith apples, speak or say 2 for Macintosh apples..." or alternatively ask for the name of the particular apples they were interested in, in which case you would have to program the words "Granny Smith" and "Macintosh" into the ASR grammar. I suggest doing a search on VXML or Voice XML on the web. The VXML stuff can run on either Windows or Linux (or other Unix variants, it's Java-based), and the speech recognition and sythesis software also can run on Windows or Linux. These machines/boards have to be hooked into something which can do call-control (like a PBX). (Note that if you have a small universe of possibilities you can probably get away with just playing recordings rather than speech synthesis, and you probably do not need VXML.) Also note, that the speech recognition facilities, no matter what the hype, are limited. If your application is something like: "Speak the name of a company and we will provide you the current market quote", then you can expect the speech recognition to grind away for a not-insignificant time trying to match your utterance to the name of a traded company. Hope this gives you a start. "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:59:00 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Dave Close wrote: > The problem with the proposed military system and many other net > voting schemes is that there is no auditability. No one, not even a > computer, can detect and prove a fraud without that ability. Voting > via the Net may happen, but many of us won't support it until there is > a method for conducting an audit. > > Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA +1 714 434 7359 > dave@compata.com dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu > "Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't > mean politics won't take an interest in you." - Pericles > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But what I said was about the same > thing: Run the new system in parallel with the old system *at least* > for one cycle using the usual audit procedures on the paper system > to validate the computer system. And if turning the whole thing loose > on the general public is too difficult at first, then overseas > military would make a good subset to practice on. PAT] Audit trails are important in many things, both computer related and not computer related. The telephone companies, for example, want to know which technician changed the settings on their switch in case the switch takes a Phase 5. Banking institutions also need simlar information to reconcile possible accounting discrepancies. Unfortunately, audit trails and voter privacy may be at opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to computer voting. Is it enough to know that Patrick Townsend cast a vote in order to ensure the accuracy of the tally? Probably not. If this is the case, then Patrick's actual vote must be recorded. But then Patrick loses his anonymity! Once Patrick loses his anonymity, then all sorts of *BAD THINGS* may happen when (not if) someone finds out the way Patrick voted. (I'm probably preaching to the choir here.) As to running the systmes in parallel, well, if someone was determined to undermine the system (hack it), and knew that it would be running in parallel for some length of time, then they would not hack it until the the parallel running was suspended, would they not? Security, accuracy, and convenience may well be at the extreme points of a triangle and the resultant solution will be to compromise all three (a little, hopefully), in order to come up with a workable system. "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But there are already people who know if you voted, and to the extent that they need to know, how you voted. What do you feel government agencies like the Board of Election Commissioners (to use the Chicago name) are for, if not to try and govern and manage elections and have some honesty behind them? Aside from being sworn to absolute secrecy (even to the extent of no office gossiping) with *severe* penalties for violating that trust (losing their job and their source of monthly welfare would be a total disaster for most of them, to say nothing about *maybe* going to jail); most public servants -- or do you pronounce it serpents? -- find elections and the results to be a terrible bore. They've got their jobs and could really care less what you think of the higher ups you voted for. Nah, I would not worry that a handful of public servants knew how I voted if their job duties required it. And if the *Chicago Democratic machine* runs a relatively honest Board of Election Commissioners (not talking now about individual judges or the candidates, etc) then almost anywhere does. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 9 Feb 2004 01:20:18 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Telephone Service Surcharges Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA In article you write: > Thought c.d.t readers might find this list of surcharges fascinating. There are indeed a lot of taxes asssessed on phone service but the doublespeak is quite fascinating: > Network Access Surcharge Primary Line - (EUCL) $6.50 > Monthly charge assessed on each line within the household. This charge > compensates for the Local Telephone Company's cost of installation and > maintenance of the components that link your home to the telephone > network. > Network Access Surcharge Secondary Line - (EUCL) $7.00 (when applicable) > Monthly charge assessed on each line within the household. This charge > compensates for the Local Telephone Company's cost of installation and > maintenance of the components that link your home to the telephone > network. English translation: this is the part of the local bill that's regulated by the federal FCC rather than the state PUC. We (the phone company) keep it all. > Carrier Cost Recovery Charge (CCRC)* 1.4% > A monthly surcharge in order to recover costs the Company incurs with > regard to Telecommunications Relay Service, national number > portability, and federal regulatory fees. The surcharge is assessed on > long distance (Dial-1, Card, P800 and SB T800) state-to-state and > international charges. English translation: We don't like paying taxes, and TDD sounds kind of virtuous, so we're going to pretend that paying this charge is your responsibility rather than ours. We (the phone company) keep it all. > Local Number Portability (LNP) $0.43 > Covers the cost of providing residential customers with the ability to > retain, at the same location, their existing local telephone numbers > when switching from one local provider to another. English tranlation: We phone companies moaned and groaned so much when the FCC mandated LNP that they let us add a line to the bill that looks like a tax but isn't and has only the most tenuous relationship to the actual cost of upgrading the network for LNP. We (the phone company) keep it all. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies" Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "A book is a sneeze." - E.B. White, on the writing of Charlotte's Web ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 13:52:46 +0400 From: Editor Subject: Bluegiga Integrates Wireless Bluetooth and GSM Technologies PRESS RELEASE NETWORK http://www.pressreleasenetwork.com Integration of GSM and Bluetooth technologies in M2M systems increases flexibility and decreases costs of data communications Espoo, Finland - Feb 9, 2004 (PRN): Bluegiga Technologies, a provider of wireless local area networks and M2M communications systems based on Bluetooth technology, today announced a design reference confirming the support of Bluegiga's embeddable WRAP THOR Bluetooth module for Nokia 12 GSM module. Bluegiga WRAP THOR and Nokia 12 form the first reference design in the market to enable the developers of machine-to-machine (M2M) systems to extend their GSM-based remote management systems with cost-efficient wireless Bluetooth functionalities. With Bluetooth technology, remotely monitored M2M systems are controllable and configurable over Bluetooth links, using either smart phones like Nokia 6600 based on Symbian Series 60 platform or laptop PCs. Routing the entire data traffic of a monitored site via Bluetooth links into a single device with an uplink to the GSM network helps to minimize the costs of remote operation. "The design reference is perfectly in line with our strategy to develop comprehensive communication solutions based on wireless Bluetooth technology," said Tom Nordman, General Manager, Bluegiga Technologies. "Nowadays autonomous information systems seldom require on-site monitoring. The integration of Bluegiga and Nokia products introduces a smooth and cost-efficient solution for remote M2M monitoring." Targeted to device manufacturers and application developers, the design reference includes three separate components; a Bluegiga WRAP THOR Bluetooth module, Bluetooth Java Application Programming Interfaces for the Nokia 12 GSM module, and hardware reference designs. The Bluegiga WRAP THOR is a robust, configurable Bluetooth module optimized for embedded applications. It enables device manufacturers (OEMs) to easily add a secure and robust wireless communication element in both new and existing applications. The Nokia 12 is a compact and intelligent GSM module for M2M applications and other wireless solutions. A Nokia M2M Platform compatible product, the Nokia 12 GSM module can also act as a cellular modem or be remotely controlled via text messaging. With support for Java's technology, location services and offering a wide range of data bearers, the Nokia 12 GSM module makes application development more cost effective and faster. Hardware reference designs are available from http://www.bluegiga.com. About Bluegiga Technologies Bluegiga Technologies provides wireless local area networks and M2M communications systems based on Bluetooth technology. Bluegiga WRAP Access Servers integrate Bluetooth-enabled devices as part of a corporate network. Bluegiga WRAP THOR Bluetooth modules are robust, lightweight and flexibly embeddable. Software configurable for versatile integration, Bluegiga products are ideally suited in enterprise proximity access, telemetry, remote monitoring and cable replacement applications. Founded in 2000, Bluegiga is based in Espoo, Finland and privately held. Bluegiga products are globally available via a network of qualified distributors, original design manufacturers and system integrators. For further information, please visit http://www.bluegiga.com. Java and all Java-based marks are trademarks or registered trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc. Bluetooth is a registered Trademark of Bluetooth SIG, Inc. For more information, contact: Bluegiga Company Contact Mr. Tom Nordman, General Manager Tel: +358 9 4124 0450 Email: tom.nordman@bluegiga.com Website: http://www.bluegiga.com Bluegiga Agency Contact Mr. Ile Knnen, Netprofile Finland Tel: +358 9 6812 080 Email: ile@netprofile.fi Editor & CEO Press Release Network editor@pressreleasenetwork.com http://www.pressreleasenetwork.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: 620-330-6774 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 #64 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 9 22:51:01 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1A3p1N14961; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 22:51:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 22:51:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402100351.i1A3p1N14961@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 #65 TELECOM Digest Mon, 9 Feb 2004 22:51:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 65 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Nigerians Certainly Getting Agressive! (TELECOM Digest Editor) Broadband in the Sky (Monty Solomon) A Cameraphone That Turns Heads (Monty Solomon) Help on Centigram, Baypoint Innovations, Mitel NuPoint (Centigramparts) Record Two Telephone Lines to One PC (Ryan Ochoa) Re: Recording the VCR's Swan Song (Carl Navarro) Re: Building a Voice Driven Application (Charles B. Wilber) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. (Bob Goudreau) Re: Comcast Has Limits For Heavy Internet Users (Paul Vader) Re: "No Internet Voting" (Paul Vader) Re: "No Internet Voting" (Nick Landsberg) Order New Book: Photographic History of Ameritech (SBCSI) 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, 9 Feb 2004 17:41:04 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Nigerians Certainly Getting Agressive! Over the past two weeks I have received at least a dozen phone calls from Nigeria -- of all places! -- from someone claiming to be a top banking official in that country asking if I wanted to open an account in a US bank for him. Quite often the calls arrived when I was asleep (roughly 3 AM to 8 AM) and sleepily I answered my phone and without even listening, told the caller to try back at a more civilized hour. Twice I did not catch the phone soon enough and it rolled over to voicemail. Once I was talking to someone and let it just go to voicemail. The person never left any voicemail messages. Once I was coming out of Marvins with several sacks of groceries and told the caller to try me again later. Each time he was calling from Nigeria. Each time he sounded like a typical telemarketer, that is began with saying 'hello Mr. Townson, how are you today' or once I was 'Patrick' rather than 'Mr. Townson'. But he never would volunteer who he was until (each time) I rather sharply asked who he was and what he wanted, then he would pause, think about it and give me the 'bank officer' routine. You see, they are not allowed to open any accounts in foreign countries, and need help to do that, which is where I was to come into the picture and be of help. At least a dozen attempts over a week or two! Now you know he is not paying for all those calls, every one of them is most likely fraud. Even today, I was a little bit peeved with the interupption to my work when he called, so I did not think clearly. But if he calls again, which I hope he does, I'll play his game with him. I'll provide him with a bogus social security number, a good post office box address (of my own) and invite him to send his money order or cashiers check or whatever for negotiation on this end. I've mentioned it to the manager at our bank here, she said if such a thing arrives to just give it to her, she will try to get us something out of it. I never thought those Nigerians would actually resort to using the phone to find new suckers however, certainly not at the rate of several international phone calls over two weeks. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 22:04:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Broadband In The Sky Ten O'Clock Tech Arik Hesseldahl, 02.06.04, 10:00 AM ET NEW YORK - There's only so much a business traveler can accomplish with a notebook computer that is not connected to the Internet. Airlines like JetBlue (nasdaq: JBLU - news - people ) can bring you in-flight satellite TV service, but aircraft manufacturer Boeing (nyse: BA - news - people ) is trying to figure how to bring in-flight Internet access via satellite. Some business travelers see their travel time as a gift; others see it as an obstacle to productivity. A good deal of the design attributes of many notebook PCs from vendors like IBM (nyse: IBM - news - people ), Gateway (nyse: GTW - news - people ) and Dell (nasdaq: DELL - news - people ), as well as Intel's (nasdaq: INTC - news - people ) Centrino chip platform, aim to maximize the hours of use out of a notebook computer while on a long flight. Beginning in April, a unit of Boeing called Connexion by Boeing will launch a service that brings broadband Internet access aboard certain flights with airlines like Lufthansa, Japan Airlines, British Airways (nyse: BAB - news - people ) and others. http://www.forbes.com/personaltech/2004/02/06/cx_ah_0206tentech.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 22:09:32 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A Camera Phone That Turns Heads Ten O'Clock Tech Arik Hesseldahl, 02.09.04, 10:00 AM ET NEW YORK - When we saw the LG Electronics VX-6000 used in an advertisement on a giant video screen in New York's Times Square, we figured it was time to try it out. For the most part, the camera-phone craze has been a Global System for Mobile Communications affair. The best phones with integrated digital cameras come from companies like Nokia (nyse: NOK - news - people ) and Sony Ericsson, the joint venture of Sony (nyse: SNE - news - people ) and Ericsson (nasdaq: ERICY - news - people ) and are aimed at carriers who use the GSM standard, which dominates Europe. GSM carriers in the U.S. include AT&T Wireless (nyse: AWE - news - people ), T-Mobile, a unit of Deutsch Telekon (nyse: DT - news - people ), and Cingular Wireless, a joint venture of SBC Communications (nyse: SBC - news - people ) and BellSouth (nyse: BLS - news - people ). But the dominant network standard in the U.S. is Code Division Multiple Access. And the two main CDMA carriers in the U.S. are Sprint PCS (nyse: PCS - news - people ) and Verizon Wireless, a joint venture between Verizon (nyse: VZ - news - people ) and Vodafone (nyse: VOD - news - people ). And, generally speaking, camera phones on CDMA networks have been a little less impressive than those on the GSM networks. While they may work about as well as their GSM competitors, they haven't done so with the sleek fashion-phone cachet. LG Electronics, the South Korean manufacturing giant, has changed that with the VX6000, which is available from Verizon Wireless. It's a clamshell shaped phone that weighs less than four ounces. It looks cool, and it's easy to use. http://www.forbes.com/personaltech/2004/02/09/cx_ah_0209tentech.html ------------------------------ From: rlawrence@promemoinc.com (Centigramparts.com) Subject: Help on Centigram, Baypoint Innovations & Mitel NuPoint Messenger? Date: 9 Feb 2004 17:13:45 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com My name is Ron Lawrence and my company is ProMemo, Inc ... ProMemo, Inc. has been working on Centigram Voicemail equipment for over 21 years now. We continue to stock parts for all Legacy systems like Power Supplies, Hard Drives, CPU's and Line Cards. We also have Software too, in case you are missing a certain diskette or require an extra cost feature. So whether you are a Service Bureau or CPE, we will continue to stock the equipment you need for your NEW and Legacy Voicemail systems. Take a peek at our Interactive web-site www.promemoinc.com or www.centigramparts.com or www.baypointinnovations.com and you will see just how focused we are to the Centigram platform. Also, in one week, we will be adding the Technical Documentation Manual for you to access, and at no extra charge ... check-it out. ProMemo, Inc. email: rlawrence@promemoinc.com web: www.promemoinc.com web: www.centigramparts.com web: www.baypointinnovations.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Welcome to the Digest readership, Mr. Lawrence. Are there any newsgroups for voicemail equipment and/or software? Although this Digest is not usually used for commercial messages as such, many of our readers either operate or administer voicemail systems, so I thought maybe your message might be a way for them to update their list of contacts, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rochoa@allcovered.com (Ryan Ochoa) Subject: Record Two Telephone Lines to One PC Date: 9 Feb 2004 11:53:47 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I'm looking for a device or instructions on how to record ALL telephone conversations from a jack with TWO telephone numbers to my PC. I would like to have an all in one device, but I could use two modems if neccessary. Any help is much appreciated. ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Recording the VCR's Swan Song Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 21:24:39 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 00:16:59 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > Second, there's that bit about "cheap." Everybody knows that set-top > DVD recorders are expensive. The best ones include a hard drive for > TiVo-like flexibility but cost $600 and up. DVD-only models start at > $400 or so. Logic and pundits have long maintained that the VCR's > funeral rites won't begin in earnest until DVD-recorder prices fall > below $300 -- and now they have, led by Gateway's AR-230 and a few > rivals from lesser-known companies. I came close to biting on the latest Wal~Mart offering, the Apex 9000 for about $269. The reviews are horrible. WM also has a "Cyber-home" unit for $248. At some point in time, we'll just need the VCR to play existing tapes into the DVD recorder one time for copying :-) Carl Navarro ------------------------------ Date: 09 Feb 2004 16:02:51 EST From: Charles.B.Wilber@Dartmouth.EDU (Charles B. Wilber) Subject: Re: Building a Voice Driven Application Nick, Did you possibly mean to write "press or say" instead of "speak or say?" I don't see the difference between "speaking" and "saying" something. Charlie Wilber Dartmouth College Nick Landsberg wrote: > "Please speak or say 1 for Granny Smith apples, speak or say 2 for > Macintosh apples..." or alternatively ask for the name of the > particular apples they were interested in, in which case you would > have to program the words "Granny Smith" and "Macintosh" into the ASR > grammar". ------------------------------ Reply-To: BobGoudreau@not-your.biz From: BobGoudreau@not-your.biz We are beating a dead horse, but if the person having the PDA never > performs a backup or transfer -- when was the last time you backed up > the contents of your PC's hard disk -- the data is still lost. > Every office I visit has at least a copier or fax machine that > would allow a sheet of notes or sketches to be copied and shared if > need be. But I'm willing to bet that far more PDA users than Daytimer users actually do back up their data. It's pretty easy for me to back up my Palm Pilot (which is also my phone) by slipping it into its charging cradle, pressing the "sync" button and waiting 30 seconds -- so easy that I do it almost daily. In fact, anyone who wants to have a shared appointment book (say, between their phone or PDA and MS Outlook on their PC) will be happy to do this regularly. In comparison, flipping through a daytimer to find all the pages that have changed since the last backup and then photocopying them is quite a chore. Bob Goudreau Cary, NC [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dear Bob, I hope obscuring your address by putting you in the '.biz' domain (?) was sufficient. PAT] ------------------------------ From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader) Subject: Re: Comcast Has Limits For Heavy Internet Users Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 22:35:30 -0000 Organization: Inline Software Creations > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And how often do you ever see an ISP > who will give you a shell if you ask for one. They're deathly afraid > of what havoc you might cause if you had a shell account. PAT] In point of fact there are lots of services selling (and in at least one case, giving away) shell accounts. But why does it matter anyway? On real operating systems, your own computer's shell can do all the same things a shell account used to do, and even better because you can compile your own command line programs. * * PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something like corkscrews. ------------------------------ From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader) Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 22:37:57 -0000 Organization: Inline Software Creations > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But there are already people who know > if you voted, and to the extent that they need to know, how you > voted. What do you feel government agencies like the Board of Election What? Unless you're not talking about national elections, nobody should be able to determine how you voted. Do you let your election judge shoulder surf while you're voting or something? * -- * PV something like badgers -- something like lizards -- and something like corkscrews. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No I do not allow the judge of election to shoulder surf. Anyway, its not their business. Judges of election and precinct captains and others of that ilk have no business knowing anything about *how* you voted; only that you did (you signed the register when you went in or did not sign it. Either you have officially voted -- per the register -- or you have not yet voted. The judges of election (ordinarily two of one party and one of the other party, or one each of three parties) have the jobs of examining your identification (to qualify your residence, etc for voting); prohibiting electioneering (the illegal practice of campaigning for candidates or parties within a certain distance of the polling place; usually fifty or one hundred feet, including the distribution of literature in the same distance); giving instruction on voting (on request of the voter only) and giving assistance in voting with a second or third judge of the opposite party present, again, on request of the voter. For example, I go to vote and ask the judges of election "how do I use this machine?" That is called 'instruction' and any judge can instruct me in using the voting apparatus. Other judges present, along with the polling place observers, will hear the judge instructing me. If the judge's instructions include 'pull lever four for straight Democratic ticket' for example, the Republican judge or the polling place observers might protest. If I state that I am handicapped, and need help in voting, then *two judges* -- one of each party -- will escort me to the voting booth. They will stand beside me while one of the two explains the apparatus and asks me about my choices. If I say I wish to vote straight Republican for example, then the *Democratic* judge will say to the Republican judge, 'Mr. Townson wishes to vote straight Republican' and as the three of us observe, the Democratic judge will pull the lever/push the button, etc if I am physically unable to do so because of my physical handicap. If you say you don't know anything about politics, don't care, etc then the judge will say 'just pull one of the levers.' They will pressure you to get off the pot, so to speak and say something so they can observe each other doing what they heard you say. That's all the judges of election do: maintain an orderly process, advise as requested and help as requested. Precinct captains are not supposed to be there at all; no loitering allowed at the polling place. And the youthful, idealistic poll watchers (who do get to hang around all day, and are appointed by the minority candidates) won't hesitate to speak up and say 'objection, judge' if one or more of the judges of election say or do something improper. When one of the observers or another judge call an objection, all ears perk up and everyone starts watching and listening closely. And whenever there is a request for 'help in voting' (as opposed for example to a request for 'instruction') then the judge who deals first with the request for help must say in a relatively loud and conspicuous voice 'voter needs help' or maybe one of the poll watchers will say it for him. Then like before, everyone stops, looks and listens. Most voters do not need any help, the curtain has to go closed before the machine will operate, and all votes (except the rare 'assisted in voting') are done in private. Before the election begins, an employee of the Board has to go around to each polling place, remove the locks from the machines, cast a 'sample vote' for each candidate to assure each machine is functioning properly, etc. Sample votes are later deducted from the total votes. An aquaintence of mine in Chicago who is employed by the Board of Election Commissioners said to me, "The people objecting the most to computerized voting do not realize how easy by comparison it is to rig the old mechanical machines, if that's your thing, if you don't object to a stay in Joliet Penitentiary for a couple years. While the computerized systems *are* more sophisticated and difficult to tamper with short of being a 'computer hacker' (his term), yes, it can be done, but not to the extent the old mechanical systems were diddled with. So who would know about your vote short of shoulder surfing? Well all the absentee ballots have to be imput into the machinery also, even the electromechanical apparatus if not the computerized stuff. Many folks can 'cheat' with your vote if that's their thing; most are just droids working at their jobs and don't care either way. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 01:14:37 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet I originally wrote: [much snipped] > Is it enough to know that Patrick Townsend cast a vote in order to > ensure the accuracy of the tally? Probably not. If this is the case, > then Patrick's actual vote must be recorded. But then Patrick loses > his anonymity! Once Patrick loses his anonymity, then all sorts of > *BAD THINGS* may happen when (not if) someone finds out the way > Patrick voted. (I'm probably preaching to the choir here.) > As to running the systmes in parallel, well, if someone was determined > to undermine the system (hack it), and knew that it would be running > in parallel for some length of time, then they would not hack it until > the the parallel running was suspended, would they not? > > Security, accuracy, and convenience may well be at the extreme points > of a triangle and the resultant solution will be to compromise all > three (a little, hopefully), in order to come up with a workable > system. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But there are already people who know > if you voted, and to the extent that they need to know, how you > voted. What do you feel government agencies like the Board of Election > Commissioners (to use the Chicago name) are for, if not to try and > govern and manage elections and have some honesty behind them? Aside > from being sworn to absolute secrecy (even to the extent of no office > gossiping) with *severe* penalties for violating that trust (losing > their job and their source of monthly welfare would be a total > disaster for most of them, to say nothing about *maybe* going to > jail); most public servants -- or do you pronounce it serpents? -- > find elections and the results to be a terrible bore. They've got > their jobs and could really care less what you think of the higher ups > you voted for. Nah, I would not worry that a handful of public > servants knew how I voted if their job duties required it. And if the > *Chicago Democratic machine* runs a relatively honest Board of > Election Commissioners (not talking now about individual judges or the > candidates, etc) then almost anywhere does. PAT] Patrick, you may have missed my point. It is one thing to have the board of elections folks know how you voted, it is quite another thing, in my mind, to have any random "hacker" know how you voted. Maybe I'm too paranoid, but my parents escaped from a communist country where your ballot was "inspected" before being cast. I consider the concept of "secret ballot" as one of the great strengths of true democratic systems because of that. How would YOU feel if your local sherrif made a call on you and said "I notice you didn't vote for me, Pat. I'm disappointed in you."? Or if the union steward mentioned that you didn't vote for candidate the union had endorsed? Or your employer did the same thing, if you were non-union? As far as I am concerned, the current level of so-called security in these computerized voting systems is sorely lacking. In a paper system, one can (however painfully) take the anonymous ballots and retally them. There is a "paper trail" which does not reveal the voter's identity but can be used to verify the accuracy of the count. Certainly, one can claim to be a person whose name you got from a gravestone in the local cemetary and cast a false ballot (Definition of Chicago voting: "Vote early and often!") With computerized systems, there are many more places where fraud can be introduced, including the hacker who changes the totals in a disk file without leaving any trail of his/her actions. To avoid this, there should be a way of independently recreating the tally. How? If the system keeps a trail of how everyone voted, then that same hacker could copy that set of files to his/her machine and decipher that information and you may well be into the scenarios I mentioned above. "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Probably everyone's background detirmines how they come down on this issue. Your parents coming from a communist country had every reason to be concerned. But remember, people in Chicago, with the 'vote early and often' mentality also have good reasons to be leary of the old combination paper and electromechanical system and the mounds of fraud that go on with that. I was a polling place observer in Chicago for several years, beginning back in the 1960's when one of the poll-watchers' jobs was to make certain that black and other minority people were allowed to vote. The judges of election were forever playing games, and precinct captains (invariably Democratic) were always driving chartered busses to the polling places full of old (white) people from the nursing homes and *escorting them into the little booths to 'help them' cast the right votes, etc.* You could object all you wanted to as a polling place watcher, they did not care; when the precinct captain sassed at you and said he was going to stand there anyway, and glare at you, maybe you got some help from the Republican judge -- if there was a Republican judge there -- they were in such short supply many times the Board had to recruit excess Democratic judges from precincts where there were too many and deputize them to be a *Republican* judge in that one instance for that one day only. And in the 1960's they would not even let a poll watcher in to observe if he seemed to be in sympathy with Martin Luther King, especially after the Democrats had their riot at the 1968 convention. I and many others got gassed and beaten up by the Chicago Police in that sordid affair. Maybe that tear gas is what affected my brain desease so badly now, eh? So, for about 40 years I kept praying and hoping for a day when computers would be used to decide all elections in an impartial way. Now you see where I am coming from, and I see where you are at also. The Board of Election Commissioners in Chicago at least never hesitates these days to fire any employee who screws around with the election or violates their trust, etc. Sadly, it was not always that way. PAT] ------------------------------ From: CAUGHLIN, WILLIAM D (SBCSI) Subject: New Book: Photographic History of Ameritech Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 10:54:10 -0600 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A repeat of an earlier message from a previous issue, in case you missed seeing it earlier. I don't mean to be a bore on this. PAT] Dear Pat: I would be delighted to send you a copy of the book that I co-authored in 1999. It is nearly 4-1/2 years old, but has never been reviewed. I am copying Ilana Pergam (now at the Leo Burnett Archives in Chicago), who was a co-author, too. Sincerely, Bill William D. Caughlin Corporate Archivist SBC Communications Inc. Archives and History Center 7990 IH-10 West, Floor 1 San Antonio, Texas 78230 Tel: (210) 524-6192 Fax: (210) 321-5577 E-mail: wc2942@sbc.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See the coupon in issue 64 to order this book from the publisher, SBC Services, Inc. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #65 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 10 16:46:57 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1ALkvZ01644; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:46:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:46:57 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402102146.i1ALkvZ01644@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 #66 TELECOM Digest Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:47:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 66 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: NEC and Centigram Help From www.ProMemoInc.com (Centigramparts.com) Re: Building a Voice-Driven Application (Lynn) Re: Building a Voice Driven Application (Nick Landsberg) VoIP Behind D-Link DI-614+ (Brent) Int Journal of Info Technology & Decision Making - Vol 2 No 4 (YH Khoo) Wireline Switch and IS-41 (Mehul) Re: "No Internet Voting" (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: "No Internet Voting" (Dave Anderson) Last Laugh! Re: IDT America Unlimited - Pros/Cons? (Gary Breuckman) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rlawrence@promemoinc.com (Centigramparts.com) Subject: Re: NEC and Centigram Help From www.ProMemoInc.com Date: 9 Feb 2004 17:40:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One of our newer contributors here in the Digest has sent along a rather lengthy file which is a configur- ation for voicemail equipment. It is quite long, but might be very useful to some people. PAT] tvargas@networld.com (Tvargas) wrote in message news:: > Has anyone ever integrated a NEC 2000 IVS system to a Centigram Model > 70 Voicemail system? If so, how was your template configured? Regarding your Centigram Model 70 system and the NEC 2000 IVS. I understand you are curious to see how the template was configured. I can help ... We have experience integrating to EVERY PBX with EVERY LEVEL of Centigram Equipment. We have over 21 years behind us and we're ready for another 21 years ahead. We even stock parts for ALL the Centigram systems ever made since 1983. So if you need a power supply or hard drive, or even just a single software diskette (even in 5 1/4"), we can help. ALSO, in one week, we will have the complete technical manual Release 7.0 available for viewing and downloading, at no extra charge to you. www.centigramparts.com www.baypointinnovations.com www.promemoinc.com THIS IS QUITE LONG and I would be happy to email it directly to you or anyone, just let me know... >>> www.promemoinc.com <<< >>> www.centigramparts.com <<< >>> www.baypointinnovations.com <<< SYSTEM CONFIGURATION Mon Feb 9 14:29:44 2004 VOICEMEMO SYSTEM CONFIGURATION Group #1: "NEC 2400" Module 1: Lines 9:0 9:1 9:2 9:3 9:4 9:5 9:6 9:7 9:8 9:9 9:10 9:11 9:12 9:13 9:14 9:15 9:16 9:17 9:18 9:19 9:20 9:21 9:22 9:23 12:0 12:1 12:2 12:3 12:4 12:5 12:6 12:7 12:8 12:9 12:10 12:11 12:12 12:13 12:14 12:15 12:16 12:17 12:18 12:19 12:20 12:21 12:22 12:23 Fax Conn: Fax Group 1 (4 channels serving 48 lines) Voice Recognition Conn: Module 2: Lines 9:0 9:1 9:2 9:3 9:4 9:5 9:6 9:7 9:8 9:9 9:10 9:11 9:12 9:13 9:14 9:15 9:16 9:17 9:18 9:19 9:20 9:21 9:22 9:23 12:0 12:1 12:2 12:3 12:4 12:5 12:6 12:7 12:8 12:9 12:10 12:11 12:12 12:13 12:14 12:15 12:16 12:17 12:18 12:19 12:20 12:21 12:22 12:23 Fax Conn: Fax Group 2 (4 channels serving 48 lines) Voice Recognition Conn: Module 3: Lines 9:0 9:1 9:2 9:3 9:4 9:5 9:6 9:7 9:8 9:9 9:10 9:11 9:12 9:13 9:14 9:15 9:16 9:17 9:18 9:19 9:20 9:21 9:22 9:23 12:0 12:1 12:2 12:3 12:4 12:5 12:6 12:7 12:8 12:9 12:10 12:11 12:12 12:13 12:14 12:15 12:16 12:17 12:18 12:19 12:20 12:21 12:22 12:23 Fax Conn: Voice Recognition Conn: Application = [NEC 2400] Call Agent Interface Dial plan = [1,5,A,5,5,V,5,5,5] Star Prefix Dplan, Dial By Name = [3] Administrator mbox # = [99998] General Greeting mbox # = [] Attendant mbox # = [99999] Transfer Call Box # = [] Wait Prompt = [Y] Caller multiple messages enabled = [Y] KEY_0 for attendant transfer during greeting = [Y] Disconnect string = [] Pre-company name string = [] Pre-mailbox greeting string = [] Passcode Length Min = [4], Max = [10], Language = [English] "6" Key Operator Transfer Dial String = [] "6" Key Operator Transfer pre-Dial String = [] Start of day = [08:00 AM], End of day = [05:00 PM], Days of Week = [DDDDDNN] Passcode trip count = [5], Passcode trip period = [24] Dial-by-name: Last First = [Y], Match Threshold = [3], Exact = [Y] Suppress Number = [N], Single Digit Access = [N] Delay Before Answer = [50] E-mail Transfer String = [] Allow Dial an Extension for callers = [Y], users = [Y] Analog Networking: Call Setup timeout = [6] International Access Code = [], Country code = [] Area/City code = [], 1plus dialing = [] Area/City code is dialed with Local Telephone Number = [N] Telephone number = [], Loop-back Test Mailbox = [] Name Greet Quality = [18], Message Quality = [18] Serial Port $cti1 Attendant's extension = [] Pre DN or attendant xfer string = [S+] NEC 2400 STATIONS : [0025296(1:09:00), 0025297(1:09:01), 0025298(1:09:02), 0025299(1:09:03)] [0025300(1:09:04), 0025301(1:09:05), 0025302(1:09:06), 0025303(1:09:07)] [0025304(1:09:08), 0025305(1:09:09), 0025306(1:09:10), 0025307(1:09:11)] [0025308(1:09:12), 0025309(1:09:13), 0025310(1:09:14), 0025311(1:09:15)] [0025312(1:09:16), 0025313(1:09:17), 0025314(1:09:18), 0025315(1:09:19)] [0025316(1:09:20), 0025317(1:09:21), 0025318(1:09:22), 0025319(1:09:23)] [0025320(1:12:00), 0025321(1:12:01), 0025322(1:12:02), 0025323(1:12:03)] [0025324(1:12:04), 0025325(1:12:05), 0025326(1:12:06), 0025327(1:12:07)] [0025328(1:12:08), 0025329(1:12:09), 0025330(1:12:10), 0025331(1:12:11)] [0025332(1:12:12), 0025333(1:12:13), 0025334(1:12:14), 0025335(1:12:15)] [0025336(1:12:16), 0025337(1:12:17), 0025338(1:12:18), 0025339(1:12:19)] [0025340(1:12:20), 0025341(1:12:21), 0025342(1:12:22), 0025343(1:12:23)] [0025248(2:09:00), 0025249(2:09:01), 0025250(2:09:02), 0025251(2:09:03)] [0025252(2:09:04), 0025253(2:09:05), 0025254(2:09:06), 0025255(2:09:07)] [0025256(2:09:08), 0025257(2:09:09), 0025258(2:09:10), 0025259(2:09:11)] [0025260(2:09:12), 0025261(2:09:13), 0025262(2:09:14), 0025263(2:09:15)] [0025264(2:09:16), 0025265(2:09:17), 0025266(2:09:18), 0025267(2:09:19)] [0025268(2:09:20), 0025269(2:09:21), 0025270(2:09:22), 0025271(2:09:23)] [0025272(2:12:00), 0025273(2:12:01), 0025274(2:12:02), 0025275(2:12:03)] [0025276(2:12:04), 0025277(2:12:05), 0025278(2:12:06), 0025279(2:12:07)] [0025280(2:12:08), 0025281(2:12:09), 0025282(2:12:10), 0025283(2:12:11)] [0025284(2:12:12), 0025285(2:12:13), 0025286(2:12:14), 0025287(2:12:15)] [0025288(2:12:16), 0025289(2:12:17), 0025290(2:12:18), 0025291(2:12:19)] [0025292(2:12:20), 0025293(2:12:21), 0025294(2:12:22), 0025295(2:12:23)] [0075005(3:09:00), 0025200(3:09:01), 0025201(3:09:02), 0025202(3:09:03)] [0025203(3:09:04), 0025204(3:09:05), 0025205(3:09:06), 0025206(3:09:07)] [0025207(3:09:08), 0025208(3:09:09), 0025209(3:09:10), 0025210(3:09:11)] [0025211(3:09:12), 0025212(3:09:13), 0025213(3:09:14), 0025214(3:09:15)] [0025216(3:09:16), 0025217(3:09:17), 0025218(3:09:18), 0025219(3:09:19)] [0025220(3:09:20), 0025221(3:09:21), 0025222(3:09:22), 0025223(3:09:23)] [0025224(3:12:00), 0025225(3:12:01), 0025226(3:12:02), 0025227(3:12:03)] [0025228(3:12:04), 0025229(3:12:05), 0025230(3:12:06), 0025231(3:12:07)] [0025232(3:12:08), 0025233(3:12:09), 0025234(3:12:10), 0025235(3:12:11)] [0025236(3:12:12), 0025237(3:12:13), 0025238(3:12:14), 0025239(3:12:15)] [0025240(3:12:16), 0025241(3:12:17), 0025242(3:12:18), 0025243(3:12:19)] [0025244(3:12:20), 0025245(3:12:21), 0025246(3:12:22), 0025247(3:12:23)] NAME: NEC2400 DESCRIPTION: Template for NEC-2400 Feature-2 ETI with XON/XOFF Installation Date: Tue Feb 2 10:56:34 1999 Last Modify Date: Mon Apr 19 11:16:10 1999 T1: "/B0!J", , Next: 2 3 4 Comment: Packet header T2: "0" X2 p5 " ", , Next: 5 6 7 8 9 10 Comment: VM message T3: X11 "39" X19, S, Next: Comment: XON, suspend sending MWI, ignore the reset of the packet T4: X11 "66" X19, T, Next: Comment: XOFF, resume sending MWI, ignore the reset of the packet T5: "40", zV3, Next: 11 12 13 Comment: Ring No Answer call T6: "41", zV4, Next: 11 12 13 Comment: Busy No Answer call T7: "42", zV2, Next: 11 12 13 Comment: All call T8: "43", zV1, Next: 12 13 17 Comment: Direct call T9: "44", zV5, Next: 11 12 13 Comment: Attendant call T10: "45", zV5, Next: 11 12 13 Comment: Outsider call T11: "0" X2 s5 " ", , Next: 14 15 16 Comment: Get calling ext. T12: "2" X2 X6, , Next: 14 15 16 Comment: Calling ext. is a trunk, ignore ext. T13: "1" X8, , Next: 14 15 16 Comment: Calling ext. is an attendant, ignore it T14: "0" X2 d5 " /C", Z, Next: Comment: Get called ext. T15: "1" X8 "/C", Z, Next: Comment: Called ext. is an attendant, ignore ext. T16: "2" X8 "/C", Z, Next: Comment: Called ext. is a trunk, ignore ext. T17: "0" X2 d5 " ", , Next: 15 16 18 Comment: Get calling ext. for direct call T18: "0" X2 s5 " /C", Z, Next: Comment: Get called ext. for direct call MWI ON: "/B0!B2" m5 " 01/C" MWI OFF: "/B0!B6" m5 " 01/C" Link Alive: Extra 1: P " " Extra 2: Group #2: "OUTCALL PAGING by www.promemoinc.com" Module 1: Lines 13:0 13:1 13:2 Fax Conn: Voice Recognition Conn: Application = [PAGER DIALER] Dial plan = [3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3] Administrator mbox # = [998] General Greeting mbox # = [] Attendant mbox # = [999] Wait Prompt = [Y] Caller multiple messages enabled = [Y] KEY_0 for attendant transfer during greeting = [N] Disconnect string = [] Pre-company name string = [] Pre-mailbox greeting string = [] Passcode Length Min = [4], Max = [10], Language = [English] "6" Key Operator Transfer Dial String = [] "6" Key Operator Transfer pre-Dial String = [] Start of day = [08:00 AM], End of day = [05:00 PM], Days of Week = [DDDDDNN] Passcode trip count = [5], Passcode trip period = [24] Dial-by-name: Last First = [Y], Match Threshold = [3], Exact = [Y] Suppress Number = [N], Single Digit Access = [N] Delay Before Answer = [50] E-mail Transfer String = [] Allow Dial an Extension for callers = [N], users = [N] Analog Networking: Call Setup timeout = [6] International Access Code = [], Country code = [] Area/City code = [], 1plus dialing = [] Area/City code is dialed with Local Telephone Number = [N] Telephone number = [], Loop-back Test Mailbox = [] Name Greet Quality = [], Message Quality = [] Attendant's extension = [0] Pre DN or attendant xfer string = [S+] Supports pager systems: [0] = "PROMEMOINC.COM PAGING" [1] = [2] = [3] = [4] = [5] = [6] = [7] = [8] = [9] = [10] = [11] = [12] = [13] = [14] = [15] = Group #3: "CALL AGENT" --No lines assigned Application = [NEC 2400] Call Agent Interface Dial plan = [3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3] Administrator mbox # = [998] General Greeting mbox # = [] Attendant mbox # = [999] Transfer Call Box # = [] Wait Prompt = [Y] Caller multiple messages enabled = [Y] KEY_0 for attendant transfer during greeting = [N] Disconnect string = [] Pre-company name string = [] Pre-mailbox greeting string = [] Passcode Length Min = [4], Max = [10], Language = [English] "6" Key Operator Transfer Dial String = [] "6" Key Operator Transfer pre-Dial String = [] Start of day = [08:00 AM], End of day = [05:00 PM], Days of Week = [DDDDDNN] Passcode trip count = [5], Passcode trip period = [24] Dial-by-name: Last First = [Y], Match Threshold = [3], Exact = [Y] Suppress Number = [N], Single Digit Access = [N] Delay Before Answer = [50] E-mail Transfer String = [] Allow Dial an Extension for callers = [N], users = [N] Analog Networking: Call Setup timeout = [6] International Access Code = [], Country code = [] Area/City code = [], 1plus dialing = [] Area/City code is dialed with Local Telephone Number = [N] Telephone number = [], Loop-back Test Mailbox = [] Name Greet Quality = [], Message Quality = [] No serial port selected, Application Disabled Attendant's extension = [0] Pre DN or attendant xfer string = [S+] NAME: NEC2400 DESCRIPTION: Template for NEC-2400 Feature-2 ETI with XON/XOFF Installation Date: Tue Feb 2 10:56:34 1999 Last Modify Date: Mon Apr 19 11:16:10 1999 T1: "/B0!J", , Next: 2 3 4 Comment: Packet header T2: "0" X2 p5 " ", , Next: 5 6 7 8 9 10 Comment: VM message T3: X11 "39" X19, S, Next: Comment: XON, suspend sending MWI, ignore the reset of the packet T4: X11 "66" X19, T, Next: Comment: XOFF, resume sending MWI, ignore the reset of the packet T5: "40", zV3, Next: 11 12 13 Comment: Ring No Answer call T6: "41", zV4, Next: 11 12 13 Comment: Busy No Answer call T7: "42", zV2, Next: 11 12 13 Comment: All call T8: "43", zV1, Next: 12 13 17 Comment: Direct call T9: "44", zV5, Next: 11 12 13 Comment: Attendant call T10: "45", zV5, Next: 11 12 13 Comment: Outsider call T11: "0" X2 s5 " ", , Next: 14 15 16 Comment: Get calling ext. T12: "2" X2 X6, , Next: 14 15 16 Comment: Calling ext. is a trunk, ignore ext. T13: "1" X8, , Next: 14 15 16 Comment: Calling ext. is an attendant, ignore it T14: "0" X2 d5 " /C", Z, Next: Comment: Get called ext. T15: "1" X8 "/C", Z, Next: Comment: Called ext. is an attendant, ignore ext. T16: "2" X8 "/C", Z, Next: Comment: Called ext. is a trunk, ignore ext. T17: "0" X2 d5 " ", , Next: 15 16 18 Comment: Get calling ext. for direct call T18: "0" X2 s5 " /C", Z, Next: Comment: Get called ext. for direct call MWI ON: "/B0!B2" m5 " 01/C" MWI OFF: "/B0!B6" m5 " 01/C" Link Alive: Extra 1: P " " Extra 2: Group #4: "TEST T1" --No lines assigned Application = [VOICEMEMO FROM PROMEMO] Dial plan = [3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3] Administrator mbox # = [998] General Greeting mbox # = [] Attendant mbox # = [999] Wait Prompt = [Y] Caller multiple messages enabled = [Y] KEY_0 for attendant transfer during greeting = [N] Disconnect string = [] Pre-company name string = [] Pre-mailbox greeting string = [] Passcode Length Min = [4], Max = [10], Language = [English] "6" Key Operator Transfer Dial String = [] "6" Key Operator Transfer pre-Dial String = [] Start of day = [08:00 AM], End of day = [05:00 PM], Days of Week = [DDDDDNN] Passcode trip count = [5], Passcode trip period = [24] Dial-by-name: Last First = [Y], Match Threshold = [3], Exact = [Y] Suppress Number = [N], Single Digit Access = [N] Delay Before Answer = [50] E-mail Transfer String = [] Allow Dial an Extension for callers = [N], users = [N] Analog Networking: Call Setup timeout = [6] International Access Code = [], Country code = [] Area/City code = [], 1plus dialing = [] Area/City code is dialed with Local Telephone Number = [N] Telephone number = [], Loop-back Test Mailbox = [] Name Greet Quality = [], Message Quality = [] Attendant's extension = [0] Pre DN or attendant xfer string = [S+] Group #99: www.promemoinc.com www.baypointinnovations.com www.centigramparts.com End of Group Info Pager Systems: Pager System [0], Pager Name = "ProMemoInc PAGING" Access code = [T], Hold time = [20] SO Tag string = [CSOIO-I] SO Release = [VM6.00] SOIO Continuous Integration = DISABLED TCP/IP System Wide Host Configuration ------------------------------------- Domain name: www.promemoinc.com H C M S o a o l N s r d o e t d e t t IP Address Host Name Port Irq Vendor --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 1 P 0 3 XXX.XXX.X.X vmc640 0280 10 ALTA #1 Host Card Gateway Address Subnet Mask Broadcast Address --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 1 XXX.XXX.X.X XXX.XXX.XXX.X SERIAL CARD TABLE host card port name card type owner intr addr 1 1 $cti1 DigiBoard Xe NEC 2400 N/A 320 1 1 $cti2 DigiBoard Xe EMPTY N/A 320 1 1 $cti3 DigiBoard Xe EMPTY N/A 320 1 1 $cti4 DigiBoard Xe EMPTY N/A 320 2 1 $cti1 DigiBoard Xe EMPTY N/A 320 2 1 $cti2 DigiBoard Xe EMPTY N/A 320 The following optional features are enabled: NEC NEAX 2400 Receptionist MESA Forms FaxMemo Call Detail Recorder Continuous System Operation Unified TCP/IP Call Agent Disk Redundancy Zip Drive Prompt Language Configuration: English This was on a Model 640 with 6.0D software, using a T1 Card. We have EVERYTHING for EVERY MODEL, WITH AN UNHEARD OF 18 MONTH WARRANTY ON REFURBISHED PARTS OR SYSTEMS. My name is RonL. ------------------------------ From: Lynn Subject: Re: Building a Voice-Driven Application Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 01:29:12 GMT This question may be off topic but ... I've been getting strange calls (sometimes in the middle of the night) from a number that requires the caller to enter a pin. Which carriers provide these types of phone numbers? The number is 646-539-9007. Thank you for your attention. Alex Smith wrote in message news:telecom23.62.4@telecom-digest.org: > Hello all, > I am venturing into the telephony world and even though I have briefly > dealt with CTI and H.323, I am still a newbie. I'd like to build an > application that would allow me to buy apples from several grocery > stores. (This is a hypothetical but representative example, please > bear with me). I want to place a telephone call to a number, enter my > pin, navigate through some voice prompts that will allow me to select > a particular grocery store, then select a variety of apples and enter > the amount of apples (weight) I'd like to buy using the phone keypad. > Finally I would also like to leave voice instructions for the grocer > on how to pack my apples (paper or plastic). The app would "look me > up" using my pin number and store the packing instructions as a > soundbyte along with the other order parameters in a database. > From a high-level architectural perspective, what hardware and > software components would make up my stack? For the sake of the > example, assume small volume (personal use). I am looking for > high-level architecture rather than product names even though Open > Source/GNU/etc suggestions are welcome. > My limited understanding tells me I need a CTI server. Do I need a > PBX? Other components? If I want to parse the voice instructions (i.e. > speech recognition) in order to extract "paper" or "plastic", how > doable is that? > Any URLs or books that go from slow to complex with architectural > examples are appreciated. > Alex Smith > Insight LLC ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: Building a Voice Driven Application Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:10:56 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Charles B. Wilber wrote: > Nick, > Did you possibly mean to write "press or say" instead of "speak or > say?" I don't see the difference between "speaking" and "saying" > something. > Charlie Wilber > Dartmouth College > Nick Landsberg wrote: >> "Please speak or say 1 for Granny Smith apples, speak or say 2 for >> Macintosh apples..." or alternatively ask for the name of the >> particular apples they were interested in, in which case you would >> have to program the words "Granny Smith" and "Macintosh" into the ASR >> grammar". Yes, I meant to say that. ::chagrin:: "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: qubit@mail.com (Brent) Subject: VoIP Behind D-Link DI-614+ Date: 9 Feb 2004 18:14:15 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am trying to use Xten Lite with the FreeWorld Dialup service. I cannot get the D-Link configured properly to let communications to occur between the FWD server and the Softphone. Has anyone managed to configure the D-Link DI-614+ router to allow a SIP based VoIP phone to function with the outside Internet? Please let me know what settings were used, such as port forwarding, range forwarding, etc. Thanks. -Br- ------------------------------ From: announce@wspc.com.sg (YH Khoo) Subject: Int Journal of Info Technology & Decision Making - Vol 2 No 4 Date: 9 Feb 2004 22:05:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making Vol. 2, No. 4 (December 2003) View table-of-contents and abstracts at http://www.worldscinet.com/ijitdm.html Contents: Telecommunications Theories, Management, Development, Practices, And Applications In Information Technology: Issues And Analysis Bahador Ghahramani And Zixiang Tan Didero 3G A Strategic Network Planning Tool For 3G Mobile Networks Klaus D. Hackbarth and J. Antonio Portilla A Hybrid Bayesian Network-Based Multi-Agent System And A Distributed Systems Architecture For The Drug Crime Knowledge Management Parag C. Pendharkar and Rahul Bhaskar The Evolution Of Strategies And Organizational Competencies In The Telecommunications Industry Afonso Fleury And Maria Teresza Fleury A Grasp Heuristic For Solving An Extended Capacitated Concentrator Location Problem Bernard T. Han and V. T. Raja Bandwidth Allocation In Multicast Trees With Qos Constraints M. Kodialam and V. Venkateswaran Bandwidth Allocation In A Wireless Broadcast System Aslihan Celik, Steve Nahmias And Rhonda Righter Leveraging IP For Business Success P. K. Eswaran, S. Prakash, David D. Ferguson and Kathleen Naasz Safety-Critical Wide Area Network Performance Evaluation Tuncay Bayrak and Martha R. Grabowski A Low-Cost Embedded System For Internet Based Power Measurement M. Yeary, J. Sweeney, B. Swan and C. Culp A Comparison Of Asynchronous Transfer Mode (Atm) And High Speed Ethernet: The Network Design Implications To A Business Organization Dennis Guster, Changsoo Sohn, Paul Safonov And David Robinson A Telecommunication's Lean Management Information System For The Utility Industry Bahador Ghahramani Acknowledgement To Reviewers Subject Index Author Index Volume 2 (2003) For more information, go to http://www.worldscinet.com/ijitdm.html ------------------------------ From: msraval@rediffmail.com (Mehul) Subject: Wireline Switch and IS-41 Date: 10 Feb 2004 02:44:25 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Why cannot landline switches be intelligent enough to use IS-41? In such a scenario, Wireline switch will be able to terminate the call to mobile subscriber by directly giving the call to correct MSC. I request to comment you all on this issue. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 23:41:30 -0500 From: Fred R. Goldstein Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" Pat, Nobody who supports a paper trail in voting machines (voter verified) wants the ballots to be personally identifiable. The ideal machine would print the ballot, allow the voter to see (but not take) it, and then, presuming the voter did not see a discrepancy, put it into a box. No name or anything on the ballot, just a small printout in a ballot box. The box would be opened in case of recount. Brazil used some of these machines. http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,61654-2,00.html?tw=wn_story_page_next1 Some of these machines had the printers, though others didn't; the machines were cheap (no touch screen held down the cost) though printers added to the cost. Certainly it can be done. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 15:40:33 EST From: Dave Anderson Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" Dave Close wrote: > The problem with the proposed military system and many other net > voting schemes is that there is no auditability. No one, not even a > computer, can detect and prove a fraud without that ability. Voting > via the Net may happen, but many of us won't support it until there is > a method for conducting an audit. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But what I said was about the same > thing: Run the new system in parallel with the old system *at least* > for one cycle using the usual audit procedures on the paper system > to validate the computer system. And if turning the whole thing loose > on the general public is too difficult at first, then overseas > military would make a good subset to practice on. PAT] Running a new system in parallel with the old one doesn't address the basic problem, which is that it is intrinsicly impossible to reliably detect manipulation of an election (let alone determine the correct result) unless one can refer to a copy of each vote which was verified by the voter and has not been tampered with. Obviously, it's not likely that this can be done perfectly in practice -- but it's not hard to do it well enough to make it extremely likely that significant fraud will be caught and the correct result determined. But you have to design in auditability from the very beginning, which is what so many of the electronic voting schemes do not do (in fact, many of them design in prevention of auditing). An example of how to do this right, as far as I can tell, is the new voting system (installed less than a year ago) where I live: the ballot is a piece of paper with spaces to mark to indicate votes which the voter fills out and then inserts face-down into a ballot box which includes a scanner. The election officials verify that each registered voter votes at most once, but they never see the actual votes. The voter has verified that the paper ballot correctly indicates his vote, since he filled it out (well, if it's not a "butterfly" ballot). The scanner counts the votes as the ballots are inserted, and so provides the "instant gratification" that so many people demand, but the original paper ballot is preserved and can be examined if there is a recount. Dave Anderson [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They do something like that here in our town. People in this 'ward' of the city of Independence go to vote at the 900 East Poplar Street Building. (a senior citizen center in half of the building; the local nursery school/Head Start program in the other half.) We do not have any problems of electioneering there; the politicians stay away. The judge of election has us sign the register book; the printout is checked against our name and address then we are given a large ballot and a 'special pencil' to use. We have to CAREFULLY shade the boxes for each desired candidate, taking care not to mark the ballot otherwise or outside the designated marking area for each candidate. When finished, we slip our ballot into a sort of metal container which hides what we have marked, and give it to another judge who stands next to the scanning machine. She takes a quick (all of two seconds) look to make sure the boxes were shaded in correctly and puts the ballot in upside down into this thing, which grabs it by the edge of the paper and gobbles it and apparently reads the special marks we made and prints a little piece of paper which says 'thank you for voting, examine this closely for errors, etc' with the time and date, and the polling place location. It looks sort of like the little reciept you get from an ATM machine after your cash comes out, but no screen to look at. The judge lady there tells you to take the paper and when you do she puts a little sticker with a message on it saying 'proud to live in Independence and be a voter' with an American flag design on it (our town's logo) on your shirt or jacket. Some kind of sticky thing which you wear. Then you take your 'receipt' and are asked to leave the area. Of course we do not have nearly the volume of voters found in a major metropolis, but it seems to work fine here. We have to return the 'special pencils' before we leave. (They appear to be thick things with soft, black lead which color in the various boxes nicely, and we are told NOT to use our own pens or pencils. We vote for federal, state and local matters, four council members, we confirm the continued employment of the city manager, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Last Laugh! Re: IDT America Unlimited - Pros/Cons? Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 22:43:55 -0600 Organization: Puma's Lair - catbox.com In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Zebra saying: >> IDT America Unlimited offers the following for $39.95 ($40) a month: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Our local telco here in Independence, KS > called 'Prairie Stream Communications' offers basically the same package > for $29.95 per month. The main difference is instead of 'unlimited > regional' and 'unlimited long distance' they have those two merged into > 'long distance'. In addition to unlimited local, Prairie Stream allows > 100 minutes (an hour plus 20 minutes) of 'long distance' in the package. > Additional minutes are two cents each. Does IDT allow you to port or > keep your local number? Is this the same IDT that used to do TV > commercials saying long distance is only five cents per minute if you > dialed their 1010 code? PAT] So Pat, how many minutes does Prairie Stream give you in an hour?? -- Gary [TELECOM Digest Editor Note: Glaring at Gary indignantly, for his impertinence: Oh, the number of minutes in a Prairie Stream hour ... Well, they go by the telecom digest Universal Coordinated Standard ... 80 minutes per hour, and they then throw in another 20 minutes. A clock for people whose lives have been lived in slow motion since they through God's Grace (or maybe God's Damnation as I feel most days) were 'spared' from a brain aneurysm, to 'live' another day, if you call what I do these days 'living'. My brain acted out once again, please excuse me for trying to think and calculate for myself. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #66 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 10 20:28:27 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1B1SRl02974; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:28:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:28:27 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402110128.i1B1SRl02974@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 #67 TELECOM Digest Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:28:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 67 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson TiVo Wins Patent Infringement Suit (Monty Solomon) PalmSource Develops New Handheld Strategy (Monty Solomon) Verizon / Samsung SCH-a610 Digital Camera Phone (Monty Solomon) 'Mydoom' Creators Start Up 'Doomjuice' (Monty Solomon) Microsoft Warns of Widespread Windows Flaw (Monty Solomon) Satellite, Cable Operators Get Ready to Raise Rates (Monty Solomon) Disney to Speed Digital Content Delivery (Monty Solomon) Usage and Maintenance Usage in Nortel and Motorola Switches (Bush) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. (Justin Time) Computer Phone Conferencing, Give me a Dial Tone! (Chas) Nokia Cellphones Vulnerable to SNARF Attack via Bluetooth (John Bartley) Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law (J Kelly) Voicemail Notify Signal Has Disappeared? (+1 3 0 3 5 4 3 2 3 1 1) Re: "No Internet Voting" (Thomas A. Horsley) Mrs. Stevens Had to go to the Hospital (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:57:22 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Wins Patent Infringement Dispute SAN JOSE, Feb. 10 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo (Nasdaq: TIVO), the pioneer in digital video recording (DVR) services, today announced it has obtained a favorable summary judgment ruling in the case filed against the Company in 2001 by Pause Technology LLC. United States District Judge Patti Saris of the District of Massachusetts has ruled that TiVo does not infringe Pause's patent, and accordingly has ordered that judgment be entered in favor of TiVo. TiVo plans to file a motion seeking an Order declaring this an "exceptional case," and requiring Pause to pay all of TiVo's attorneys' fees and costs. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:30:37 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: PalmSource Develops New Handheld Strategy By MAY WONG AP Technology Writer SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) -- PalmSource Inc., a maker of operating systems for handheld computers, is shifting gears as the market for so-called smartphones grows and the one for simpler personal digital assistants shrinks. The company's new strategy, to focus more on devices that handle both voice and data communications _ as rivals Nokia Corp. and Microsoft Corp. have already done _ was being unveiled at its developer conference here Tuesday. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40498348 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:41:19 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Verizon / Samsung SCH-a610 Digital Camera Phone The SCH-a610 From Samsung Offers Unique Design and Flash Photography BEDMINSTER, N.J. and DALLAS, Feb. 10 /PRNewswire/ -- Verizon Wireless, operator of the nation's largest and most reliable wireless network, and Samsung Telecommunications America (Samsung), a wireless leader known for its award-winning product designs and advanced technology, today introduced the SCH-a610, an innovative digital camera phone featuring Verizon Wireless' Get It Now(R) service and Samsung's patented rotating screen design. Available exclusively from Verizon Wireless, the SCH-a610 brings consumers a total digital solution for voice, data and advanced imaging with an emphasis on performance and design. Picture Messaging service through Get It Now from Verizon Wireless makes taking and sending photos with the SCH-a610 as easy as 1-2-3; simply shoot the photo, enter a Verizon Wireless number or e-mail address, and send. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40502630 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:11:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 'Mydoom' Creators Start Up 'Doomjuice' By MATTI HUUHTANEN Associated Press Writer HELSINKI, Finland (AP) -- Finnish computer security experts warned Tuesday of a new worm, known as "Doomjuice," that is expected to attack computers infected by "Mydoom," despite the fact it's programmed to stop spreading later this week. The virus, first detected by F-Secure on Monday night, has so far infected at least 30,000 computers worldwide since it was activated Sunday, said the company's director of antivirus research, Mikko Hypponen. Like Mydoom.A and Mydoom.B, the new worm is designed to strike Microsoft Corp.'s Windows operating systems and is programmed to launch a worldwide attack on the web site of SCO, one of the largest UNIX vendors in the world. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40507941 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:43:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Warns of Widespread Windows Flaw By Robert Lemos Staff Writer, CNET News.com Microsoft has a message for Windows users: Patch your computers quickly. On Tuesday, the software giant released a fix for a networking flaw that affects every computer running Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP or Windows Server 2003. If left unpatched, the security hole could allow a worm to spread quickly throughout the Internet, causing an incident similar to the MSBlast attack last summer. http://news.com.com/2100-7355-5156647.html What You Should Know About the Windows Security Updates for February 2004 http://www.microsoft.com/security/security_bulletins/20040210_windows.asp Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-007 ASN.1 Vulnerability Could Allow Code Execution (828028) http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS04-007.asp Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-006 Vulnerability in the Windows Internet Naming Service (WINS) Could Allow Code Execution (830352) http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS04-006.asp Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-004 Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer (832894) http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS04-004.asp [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Always take much caution when clicking on any email link you see discussing Microsoft bug fixes, even this one. Far better and safer to bring up a fresh browser window and enter the address for updates directly at Microsoft. But this upate is very important. Please go get it ASAP. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:02:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Satellite, Cable Operators Get Ready to Raise Rates By Michael McCarthy, USA TODAY NEW YORK - So much for predictions Rupert Murdoch and News Corp. (NWS) would start a cable/satellite TV industry price war after taking over DirecTV, the top U.S. satellite service at 12 million subscribers. The service plans to boost average rates by more than 3% starting March 1 -- an increase "tied to the increasing escalation of programming costs," says Steve Cox, executive vice president of sales, distribution and customer acquisition. The new prices will range from $36.99 a month for basic service with 125 channels to $90.99 for the "premier" package with 210 channels and free TiVo service. The increase is the fourth in 10 years, but the last, 3.3%, came in March. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2004-02-09-directv_x.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:18:53 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Disney to Speed Digital Content Delivery By GARY GENTILE AP Business Writer LOS ANGELES (AP) -- The Walt Disney Co. and Microsoft Corp. agreed to work together to speed the availability of Disney movies, TV shows and other digital content on cell phones, personal digital assistants and a new generation of portable media players. The two companies said Monday they have signed a multiyear agreement for Disney to license Microsoft's Windows Media digital rights management technology, which protects digital content from being illegally copied or played. Financial terms were not disclosed. Disney already licenses its movies for Internet rentals over the third-party Movielink service, which uses technology from Microsoft and RealNetworks Inc., to protect movies and process payments. Disney uses a proprietary technology to protect movies sent to consumers in their homes over its MovieBeam service. The non-exclusive deal with Microsoft is part of Disney's wider effort to make movies, television shows and other content available to consumers in digital format, including on a home network and in the next generation of high-definition DVDs. Disney also wants its programs available for use on personal media players, a new generation of devices set to hit the market later this year and next. The players allow people to store movies, personal photos, music and other digital content on portable devices. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40488372 ------------------------------ From: dakshing64@yahoo.com (Bush will disarm all workers next) Subject: Usage and Maintenance Usage in Nortel and Motorola Switches Date: 10 Feb 2004 16:14:48 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I was assigned a project to figure out the actual usage of a circuit. I know that it is measured in CCS or erlangs. In Lucent 5E's log every 30 minutes several usage numbers are given ITUSG, OTUSG, etc. Could someone clarify what these are? Also I am looking for a relationship between maitenance usage and usage for Nortel and Motorola switches. Many thanks, Dakshin ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. Date: 10 Feb 2004 08:04:19 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com BobGoudreau@not-your.biz ... > [Please obscure my email address. Thank you.] > Rodgers Platt wrote: >> We are beating a dead horse, but if the person having the PDA never >> performs a backup or transfer -- when was the last time you backed up >> the contents of your PC's hard disk -- the data is still lost. >> Every office I visit has at least a copier or fax machine that >> would allow a sheet of notes or sketches to be copied and shared if >> need be. > But I'm willing to bet that far more PDA users than Daytimer users > actually do back up their data. It's pretty easy for me to back up my > Palm Pilot (which is also my phone) by slipping it into its charging > cradle, pressing the "sync" button and waiting 30 seconds -- so easy > that I do it almost daily. In fact, anyone who wants to have a shared > appointment book (say, between their phone or PDA and MS Outlook on > their PC) will be happy to do this regularly. > In comparison, flipping through a daytimer to find all the pages that > have changed since the last backup and then photocopying them is quite > a chore. > Bob Goudreau > Cary, NC > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dear Bob, I hope obscuring your address > by putting you in the '.biz' domain (?) was sufficient. PAT] I didn't say you didn't back up your PDA. I asked when was the last time you did a backup of the device that you sync your PDA with. Having a backup of the data on your PDA doesn't do any good if that source crashes -- the same as loosing a daytimer or at least the pages that haven't been filed. Rodgers ------------------------------ From: xarush@omelas.com (Chas) Subject: Computer Phone Conferencing, Give Me a Dial Tone! Date: 10 Feb 2004 09:26:53 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I want a simple system that will allow me to call into a "box" and out on another line. For example, I have a high speed link that allows me to put a Vonage like phone in a remote locale. I want to call into that phone which is hooked into the box and then hear a dial tone and dial out on a "local" phone. The way I envisage it is to have small computer, a dialogic card with a conference ability and some simple software. If you know of the type of software/hardware that would support this ability please respond. Maybe there is another solution I am open to any suggestions. Regards, xarush [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A ready made out-of-the-box solution might be to use a 'WATS extender' or a a call-diverter type box. You plug the Vonage in one side of it, and your new telephone line into the other side of it, and of course program it for security with a password. Sort of like a 'patch' used by ham operators. Then when you dial into the one number and enter your password, bingo, you get a dial tone from the Vonage. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 09:37:59 PST From: John Bartley or K7AAY@ARRL.NET Subject: Nokia Cellphones Vulnerable to SNARF Attack via Bluetooth AL Digital http://www.aldigital.co.uk/ announced Nokia 6310, 8910 and 8910i mobiles were found to be at greatest risk to having their data copied without the owner's consent with a crack attack over Bluetooth. The security papers (links, below) suggest keeping some other models of Bluetooth-capable mobiles 'invisible' to other devices may prevent data within the phone from being copied with a 'SNARF attack.' At worst, ony the data within the phone itself could be abducted, so if you don't keep data in it, and instead keep data within a PDA or notebook, the risk to you is low. Yeah, welcome to the 21st century. However, the authors apparantly got the brush from Sony-Ericsson, Nokia and the Bluetooth standards body when they raised the issue, so further attention seems merited. http://www.commsdesign.com/showArticle.jhtml?artic leID=17601809 http://www.bluestumbler.org/ The latter URL has a number of references and leads to web pages for the cracking software cited, and it looks like AL Digital may have done their homework. John E. Bartley, III K7AAY telcom admin, PDX, USA - Views mine. celdata (dot) cjb (dot) net - Handheld Cellular Data FAQ *This post is quad-ROT13 encrypted. Reading it violates the DMCA.* One Ringtone to rule them all, one Carrier to find them, One Phone to bring them all and to the Service Contract bind them. ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:15:19 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy-nospam-.com On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 02:08:41 GMT, Steve Michelson wrote: > I wonder whether you live in a state where they are having primary > elections. The Do Not Call list does not apply to political pollsters, > charities, and companies with whom you had an existing > relationship. Perhaps you are getting calls from political pollsters? Tell me about it, we were getting several a day right before the Iowa caucuses. I told each one I vote for the candidate that outlaws ALL junk calls, especially the most vile type, those being the politcial type. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:55:29 -0700 From: Paul Migliorelli (+1 3 0 3 5 4 3 2 3 1 1) Subject: Voicemail Notify Signal Has Disappeared? Hi all. I'm a Qwest Wireless user, currently with a Kyocera 2135. Voicemail is set to notify new messages. Normally you would get the beep, or vibrate, or whatever. Over the last long while, there hasn't been any notify. I'm curious if this could be a result of the physical phone being full of text messages? I'm a blind user, and thus have ***no access to the text functions of the phone. I gather that by some default setup of service, you are able to email messages to phone numbers?? Maybe it's fulla spam now and I never know this?? Is there some menu choice where you can set suppress text messages, or can you tell qwest to suppress them?? I remember when I originally got service, it was default setup for browsing which it took long time to convince them to take it off and not charge $14.95. I'd just never thought that text messages were thrown in. Some of us are thinking maybe if the phone is cleared out, the notify will return?? Thanks as always. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:16:56 GMT > The scanner counts the votes as the ballots are inserted, and so > provides the "instant gratification" that so many people demand, but > the original paper ballot is preserved and can be examined if there > is a recount. Right! Exactly what I've been going on about. Here we have a paper record filled out by the voter. Scanners are just vastly superior to the stupid touch screen machines which operate entirely on the "trust me" principle. Probably even more important in practical terms -- even if the scanner breaks, people can continue to cast ballots, they just have to do without the instant feedback (a pencil is the only bit of technology that needs to be working for voters to cast ballots with scanners -- a finicky $4000 piece of equipment has to be working to cast a ballot with a touch screen). Now they want to add printers to the touch screen systems here in Palm Beach County, but no one has answered the question I'd like answered: "What the heck do you do if, on election day, the printers start telling everyone they voted differently than they actually did?". Now you are trying to run an election with machines that are obviously non-functional. I suppose that's marginally better than not knowing they are broken, but you still can't actuallly hold a valid election. You might as well just forget the printers and continue to operate on the "trust me" principle. By almost every practical measure, even the old punch card systems were better than the touch screens. >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:34:01 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Mrs. Stevens Had to go to Hospital My dear friend, a female cat whose name is Mrs. Stevens, or Missy for short, has had some trouble recently. Last Friday was 'open house' day at the Independence Animal Hospital and since they were giving greatly discounted health exams and ten percent off any other procedures done, I took Missy out there. Her health is generally pretty good, but her claws had to be trimmed. (She expresses her interest in me by jumping on my bed and latching into me with her claws otherwise.) I do *not* declaw my cats since it has the effect of leaving them defenseless when roaming around in my yard (dogs, other cats, squirrels, etc). But she had been scratching her ear quite a bit lately which is a sign of something. The doctor found an 'ear plug' (something like ear wax or similar) in her one ear. A big nasty black thing when doctor showed it to me on the scope they use for those exams, etc. Neither I nor Doctor know how she got it, but he said to bring her back today (Tuesday) to get it removed. Missy was not about to allow anyone to get inside her ear, so Doctor decided they (he and his staff) would anestisize her and do it that way. She stayed in the animal hospital all last night and had the surgery done this morning. She was crying when I left her off yesterday night (a pitiful wail is more like it) and started doing the same thing when I went back this afternoon to get her. Now, Tuesday evening she is back home, but sort of wobbly from the after affects of the anesthesia. She always sits where she can keep her eye on me except when she goes out in the yard. I moved her bed here into the computer room where she can sleep it off but keep her eye on me when she is awake. Normally she sleeps in a chair here in the computer area (when I am in here) but the poor thing is so wobbly she tried to get in her chair tonight and fell over. Doctor said to not give her any food tonight and only *take* her a small bowl of water when she wanted it. I hope she is feeling better by tomorrow. PAT ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #67 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 11 14:30:59 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1BJUx608745; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:30:59 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:30:59 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402111930.i1BJUx608745@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 #68 TELECOM Digest Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:31:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 68 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Yahoo! and Sprint Announce Launch of Enhanced Yahoo! Msgr (M. Solomon) Policy Post 10.03: Security Holes at DMVs Nationwide Highlight (Solomon) Lycos Emerges as Web's Central Location for Connecting People (Solomon) Lycos U.S. Enters Multi-Year Comprehensive Media Sales (Monty Solomon) Comcast Proposes to Buy Walt Disney (Monty Solomon) Comcast Corporation Makes Proposal to Merge With Walt Disney (M Solomon) Media Alert: Comcast to Host Press Conference to Detail Merger (Solomon) TiVo Watchers Uneasy After Post-Super Bowl Reports (Monty Solomon) U.S. Copyright Office Sets Webcaster Royalty Rates (Monty Solomon) Yahoo Rolls Out New Messenger Service With Sprint (Monty Solomon) Re: "No Internet Voting" (Nick Landsberg) Hands Free Use With Motorola V60C Closed (Greg Smolin) Re: Computer Phone Conferencing, Give Me a Dial Tone! (Pete Romfh) Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. (Bob Goudreau) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Monty Solomon Subject: Yahoo! and Sprint Announce Launch of Enhanced Yahoo! Messenger Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:32:29 -0500 SUNNYVALE, Calif. & OVERLAND PARK, Kan.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 11, 2004-- New Downloadable Application Built Specifically for the Mobile Environment Allows PCS Vision Customers to View Who's Online, Send Messages and Conduct Multiple Conversations Directly from Their Phone Yahoo! Inc. (Nasdaq:YHOO), a leading global Internet company, and Sprint (NYSE:FON, PCS), which operates the largest all-digital, all-PCS nationwide wireless network in the United States, today announced customers nationwide can now access an enhanced Yahoo!(R) Messenger for Mobile ( http://mobile.yahoo.com/messenger/sprint ), a downloadable full-color, graphical version of Yahoo! Messenger, on PCS Vision phones. The new service is built specifically for the mobile environment and demonstrates the companies' continuing commitment to innovation and meeting consumer demand for engaging mobile services. The new Java-based Yahoo! Messenger for Mobile provides a PC-like experience for the mobile phone that allows consumers to have unlimited instant messaging with everyone on their friends list. The service allows consumers with PCS Vision phones to sign into Yahoo! Messenger from their phone and continue to communicate with their friends online. Upon purchase the application is downloaded to the consumer's handset and can be accessed directly through the phone. Users can see who else is online, send and receive instant messages and have multiple conversations at once simply by switching between IM sessions. The service is available for $2.99 a month, and consumers will be charged on their monthly Sprint bill upon purchase. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40526072 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:25:39 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Policy Post 10.03: Security Holes at DMVs Nationwide Highlight CDT POLICY POST Volume 10, Number 3, February 3, 2004 A Briefing On Public Policy Issues Affecting Civil Liberties Online from The Center For Democracy and Technology (1) Security Holes at DMVs Feed ID Theft, Offer Lessons for National ID Card Debate (2) Driver's License Facing Wider Uses, including Online Authentication (3) Lax Security and Insider Abuse at the Local Level Pose National Challenges http://www.cdt.org/publications/pp_10.03.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:28:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Lycos Emerges as Web's Central Location for Connecting People New Strategy Helps People Create and Recreate Relationships WALTHAM, Mass., Feb. 11 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Terra Lycos (Nasdaq: TRLY and Madrid Exchange: TRR), the global Internet Group, today announced the creation of the first Internet network specifically constructed to enable people to create and recreate relationships with the people who most enrich their lives. With the change, to be rolled out in a series of steps over the coming months, the new Lycos is poised to be a leader in the emerging personal connectivity category, the Internet arena that connects people around areas of passion including family, friends, career and more. Lycos will transition from a generic portal business to a tight network of interconnected vertical sites focused on personal connections. The transition will include an internal restructuring, as well as changes to the company's media sales operations. The new Lycos aims to be a leader in subscription services that connect people, facilitating one of the most valuable Internet activities. Later this month, the Lycos.com homepage will be relaunched to become a hub for personal connections, giving users a single starting place to manage their Internet experience as a way to connect with others. Lycos Search will anchor the new Lycos homepage, with convenient navigation between and among the varied Connections sites. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40527697 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:29:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Lycos U.S. Enters Multi-Year Comprehensive Media Sales Lycos U.S. Enters Multi-Year Comprehensive Media Sales and Technology Agreement with 24/7 Real Media - Feb 11, 2004 09:01 AM (PR Newswire) 24/7 Real Media to Provide Media Sales, Ad Serving, Analytics and Behavioral Targeting Technology as Lycos Embarks on Strategy Centered on Creating and Re-creating Relationships Online Agreement Makes the 24/7 Web Alliance the 4th Largest Media Entity on the Internet(1) WALTHAM, Mass, and NEW YORK, Feb. 11 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Terra Lycos (Nasdaq: TRLY and Madrid Exchange: TRR), the global Internet group, and 24/7 Real Media, Inc. (Nasdaq: TFSM), a pioneer in interactive marketing and technology, today announced the signing of a multi-year strategic agreement for 24/7 Real Media to provide media sales, ad serving and analytics technology and services for Lycos U.S. Web properties. As part of the agreement, the 24/7 Real Media sales force will represent the U.S. properties of Lycos, Inc., for all display advertising. The Lycos properties, which attract 50 million U.S. monthly unique users(2), will enter the 24/7 Web Alliance, which will then be the 4th largest Media Entity on the Internet(1) with more than 66 million monthly unique users. The 24/7 Web Alliance is the Company's suite of Web advertising solutions comprised of branded Web sites, vertical content channels and a direct marketing network of more than 700 Web sites. Lycos U.S. operates a network of highly branded Web sites which include: Quote.com, Tripod.com, Angelfire.com, HotBot.com, Matchmaker.com, and Wired News (Wired.com). In a separate announcement, Lycos today introduced a new strategy that will focus on Lycos becoming the leading Web site for creating and re-creating relationships online. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40527722 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:30:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Comcast Proposes to Buy Walt Disney By SKIP WOLLENBERG AP Business Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- In a surprise move, cable TV giant Comcast Corp. proposed early Wednesday to buy Walt Disney Co., the iconic media and entertainment powerhouse that owns the ABC and ESPN television networks, movie studios and theme parks, for stock valued at about $54 billion. The nation's biggest cable systems operator said it would also assume $11.9 billion in Disney debt. Comcast's stunning proposal was made even as Disney boss Michael Eisner is fending off criticism from former board members Roy E. Disney, the nephew of Disney founder Walt Disney, and Stanley E. Gold about his performance and lack of a succession plan as Disney's chief executive. Comcast said Eisner declined earlier this week to discuss a possible merger. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40527980 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:34:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Comcast Corporation Makes Proposal to Merge With The Walt Disney Offer Values Disney at $66 Billion Strategic Combination Would Create One of the World's Premier Entertainment and Communications Companies NEW YORK, Feb. 11 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Comcast Corporation (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) today announced that it has made a proposal to The Walt Disney Company (NYSE:DIS) to merge the two companies in a tax-free transaction. The combination would create one of the world's leading entertainment and communications companies with an unparalleled distribution platform and an extraordinary portfolio of content assets. The new company would have a presence in all of the nation's top 25 markets, and would propel broadband forward, expanding current services and inspiring new ones. Terms of the proposed transaction are as follows: * Comcast would issue 0.78 of a share of Comcast Class A voting common stock for each Disney share. * Disney shareholders would receive a premium of over $5 billion, based on yesterday's closing prices, plus full participation in the combination benefits. * Comcast's proposal values Disney at $66 billion (which includes assumption of $11.9 billion of Disney's net debt), offering a multiple of approximately 14x Disney's 2004 estimated EBITDA. * Disney shareholders would own 42% of the combined company. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40525030 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:38:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Media Alert: Comcast to Host Press Conference to Detail Merger PHILADELPHIA, Feb. 11 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Comcast (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) announces the following press conference: What: Comcast has initiated discussions to merge Comcast and The Walt Disney Company in a combination that would create one of the world's premier entertainment and communications companies. Who: Brian Roberts, President and CEO, Comcast Corporation Steve Burke, President, Comcast Cable When: February 11, 2004 @ 11:00 a.m. ET Where: St. Regis Hotel St. Regis Roof, 20th Floor Two East 55th Street New York, NY 10022 If you are unable to attend the meeting you can access the event via webcast or teleconference. To participate in the webcast, visit www.cmcsa.com or www.cmcsk.com . Those parties interested in participating via telephone should dial (800) 865-4460 for U.S. callers and (973) 935-8505 for international callers. A telephone replay will begin immediately following the call and will be available until February 18, 2004 at midnight Eastern Time (ET). To access the rebroadcast, please dial (877) 519-4471 for U.S. callers and (973) 341-3080 for international callers, enter passcode 4509745. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40525236 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:21:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Watchers Uneasy After Post-Super Bowl Reports By Ben Charny Staff Writer, CNET News.com Janet Jackson's Super Bowl flash dance was shocking in more ways than one: Some TiVo users say the event brought home the realization that their beloved digital video recorders are watching them, too. On Monday, TiVo said the exposure of Jackson's breast during her halftime performance was the most-watched moment to date on its device, which, when combined with the TiVo subscription service, lets viewers pause and "rewind" live television broadcasts, among other features. TiVo said users had watched the skin-baring incident nearly three times more than any other moment during the Super Bowl broadcast, sparking headlines that dramatically publicized the power of the company's longstanding data-gathering practices. http://news.com.com/2100-1041-5154219.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:31:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Copyright Office Sets Webcaster Royalty Rates By Sue Zeidler LOS ANGELES, Feb 10 (Reuters) - The U.S. Copyright Office has published long-awaited royalty rates for Web music broadcasts, ending a year-long process marked by legal and financial wrangling, the group named to handle the royalties said on Tuesday. Regulations published on Feb. 6 essentially rubber-stamped a resolution reached last April between online music broadcasters and the Recording Industry Association of America, the industry trade group for big record labels like Time Warner Inc.'s (NYSE:TWX) Warner Music and Vivendi Universal's (NYSE:V) Universal Music. In addition to setting rates for the 2003-2004 license period, the Copyright Office also named SoundExchange -- a former RIAA arm spun off as a separate non-profit group in September 2003 -- as the sole designated agent to collect and distribute royalties from Webcasters and new online subscription services. The recording industry and Webcasters finally agreed on a proposed 0.0762 cents per performance or 1.17 cents per aggregate hour tuned in for free, advertising-supported services. Webcasters had opposed other rates suggested by the RIAA, saying they would put them out of business. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40519503 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:30:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Yahoo Rolls Out New Messenger Service With Sprint - Feb 11, 2004 08:18 AM (Reuters) qSAN FRANCISCO, Feb 11 (Reuters) - Internet services company Yahoo Inc. (NASDAQ:YHOO) on Wednesday launched an enhanced version of its instant messenger service to run on PCS Vision mobile telephones from partner Sprint Corp. (NYSE:FON). The new mobile service, which is a downloadable Java-based application, allows Yahoo messenger users to see who else is online, send and receive messages and carry on multiple conversations at once, among other things. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40526679 ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 02:34:13 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Thomas A. Horsley wrote: > Probably even more important in practical terms -- even if the scanner > breaks, people can continue to cast ballots, they just have to do > without the instant feedback (a pencil is the only bit of technology > that needs to be working for voters to cast ballots with scanners -- a > finicky $4000 piece of equipment has to be working to cast a ballot > with a touch screen). This reminds me of the story of NASA way back when. They purportedly spent thousands if not millions in R&D money to develop a ball-point pen which would work in space (Null-gravity, free-fall, whatever you want to call it ... weightlessness). The Russians supplied their cosmonauts with a pencil. "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: gsmolin@suscom.net (Greg Smolin) Subject: Hands Free Use With Motorola V60C Closed Date: 10 Feb 2004 20:58:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Is it possible to use the Motorola V60C with the phone closed with a hands free device -- or must the phone be open to talk? ------------------------------ From: Pete Romfh Subject: Re: Computer Phone Conferencing, Give Me a Dial Tone! Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:20:24 -0600 Organization: Not Organized Chas wrote: > I want a simple system that will allow me to call into a "box" and > out on another line. > For example, I have a high speed link that allows me to put a Vonage > like phone in a remote locale. I want to call into that phone which > is hooked into the box and then hear a dial tone and dial out on a > "local" phone. > The way I envisage it is to have small computer, a dialogic card > with a conference ability and some simple software. > If you know of the type of software/hardware that would support this > ability please respond. Maybe there is another solution I am open to > any suggestions. > Regards, > xarush > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A ready made out-of-the- box solution > might be to use a 'WATS extender' or a a call-diverter type box. You > plug the Vonage in one side of it, and your new telephone line into > the other side of it, and of course program it for security with a > password. Sort of like a 'patch' used by ham operators. Then when > you dial into the one number and enter your password, bingo, you get > a dial tone from the Vonage. PAT] Take a look at http://www.pcphoneline.com/ They have a VoIP Gateway (FXO/FXS Port Converter) that will do what you're wanting. It's under $50 and lots easier than "Rolling your own". Pete Romfh, Telecom Geek & Amateur Gourmet. promfh at Texas dot net ------------------------------ From: BobGoudreau@not-your.biz Subject: Re: Plain Old Cell Phones Fading Away in U.S. Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 13:22:18 -0500 [Patrick, please continue to obscure my email address. Your "@not-your.biz" method for doing this works wonderfully. Thank you.] Rodgers Platt wrote: > I didn't say you didn't back up your PDA. I asked when was the last > time you did a backup of the device that you sync your PDA with. > Having a backup of the data on your PDA doesn't do any good if that > source crashes -- the same as loosing [sic] a daytimer or at least the > pages that haven't been filed. But these scenarios are not the same. The typical (i.e., not backed up) Daytimer user is doomed by the loss or destruction of just one object (the Daytimer), as my friend's wife so painfully found out when her purse was stolen. I, OTOH, won't lose data unless *two* unrelated things are simultaneously lost or destroyed: my Palm phone *and* the computer to which I sync it. The Daytimer analogy to that double-failure scenario would be having you lose your Daytimer *and* also losing your putative repository of photocopy backups. In fact, it would take far more than a double failure to destroy my Palm phone's data, because I don't actually back it up to my work PC -- I back it up *through* my work PC (which runs Outlook) to a Microsoft Exchange server located in a data center 700 miles away, which itself gets backed up regularly and professionally. But even for PDA users without such a safety net, it would still take two separate losses to totally destroy their data. Bob Goudreau Cary, NC mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.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: 620-330-6774 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 #68 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 12 00:24:16 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1C5OFM11680; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:24:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:24:16 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402120524.i1C5OFM11680@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 #69 TELECOM Digest Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:24:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 69 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson eBay Scam Uses iPods as Bait (Monty Solomon) CDT Calls for Legislation Creating Federal Privacy Officers (M. Solomon) CDT Files Complaint With FTC in "Browser Hijacking" Case (Monty Solomon) MS-Disney Deal 'Heralds Format War' (Monty Solomon) Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax (Monty Solomon) EPIC Alert 11.03 (Monty Solomon) Can't Get First Two Digits of Inband String (Matt Darnell) Norvergence Still at it ... (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: "No Internet Voting" (Mark Atwood) NetZero Commercials on Television (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Hands Free Use With Motorola V60C Closed (SELLCOM Tech support) 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: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:52:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: eBay Scam Uses iPods as Bait By Leander Kahney A search for "iPod" on eBay yields a couple thousand listings for the digital music player and accessories, but beware: Hundreds of the listings are inducements to join pyramid-style scams. Ebay is swamped with new "matrix" schemes, which appear to be legitimate buyers clubs but are in fact variations on classic pyramid scams, which are outlawed around the world. In most cases, eBay shoppers are offered hot products like an iPod, a game console or a cell phone at an incredible discount, say for $40 or $25. The eager bargain hunter is told not to bid on the item, but is directed instead to sites like My3Mobile ,The Phone Matrix or Goraks.com , which offer iPods or cell phones as free gifts when products like CDs or eBooks are purchased. The catch is that buyers only get their free iPod after more people sign up. When making a purchase, the buyer's name is added to a list. As new members join, names are shuffled up the list. When they reach the top, the iPod is dispatched. To speed up the process, buyers are often encouraged to recruit new members to join the scheme. And that's where all the eBay posts come from: Victims are using eBay to recruit new members. http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,62226,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:01:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CDT Calls for Legislation Creating Federal Privacy Officers Citing the model of the Privacy Officer established by statute in the Department of Homeland Security, CDT is urging Congress to create similar positions at other federal agencies as a means of addressing privacy concerns associated with government information practices in the digital age. February 10, 2004 CDT Testimony: "Privacy in the Hands of the Government: The Privacy Officer for the Department of Homeland Security", Feb. 10, 2004 http://www.cdt.org/testimony/20040210dempsey.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:06:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CDT Files Complaint with FTC in "Browser Hijacking" Case The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) today filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) against Mailwiper Inc., Seismic Entertainment Media and/or their affiliates engaged in deceptive and unfair marketing practices by changing computer users' Web homepages without their consent and then trying to convince these users that they needed the Mailwiper program called "Spy Wiper" software to protect their computer. CDT has heard from several consumers who have spent hours trying to fix their computer and some who even bought Spy Wiper to no avail. CDT asked consumers to provide information about their experiences with spyware via a Web site. CDT received hundreds of messages about different companies. Several of these messages were about Spy Wiper and their activities led CDT to investigate further. February 11, 2004 CDT's Complaint with the FTC against Mailwiper and Seismic Entertainment Media [pdf] Feb. 10, 2004: http://www.cdt.org/privacy/20040210cdt.pdf CDT Report "Ghosts in Our Machines: Background and Policy Proposals on the 'Spyware' Problem" [pdf] November 2003: http://www.cdt.org/privacy/031100spyware.pdf Join CDT's Campaign Against "Spyware": http://www.cdt.org/action/spyware/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:10:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: MS-Disney Deal 'Heralds Format War' By Macworld staff Industry insiders believe the Microsoft-Disney alliance, which will see the two companies develop digital media content and delivery systems together, indicates that a new format war is under way. Jupiter Research analyst Joe Wilcox told The New York Post: "Apple has traction in Hollywood. Its computers are used to make a lot of movies. But Apple needs to go a step further in the digital distribution of video." Wilcox notes that Microsoft plans to introduce handheld devices later this year that will let users fetch and play movies on the go. "If the only way to download Disney movies is on a Microsoft-powered digital player, a consumer might buy music that would play on the same device. It might finally give Microsoft a leg up on Apple's iPod," he said. http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=7886 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:21:07 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax By Kevin Poulsen, SecurityFocus A small and diverse band of hobbyists steeped in the obscure languages of embedded systems has released its own custom firmware for a popular brand of cable modem, along with a technique for loading it -- a development that's already made life easier for uncappers and service squatters, and threatens to topple long-held assumptions about the privacy of cable modem communications. The program, called Sigma, was released in its final version last month, and has reportedly been downloaded 350 to 400 times a day ever since. It's designed to be flashed into the non-volatile memory of certain models of Motorola's Surfboard line, where it runs in parallel with the device's normal functionality. It gives users almost complete control of their cable modem -- a privilege previously reserved for the service provider. The project is the work of a gang of coders called TCNiSO. With about ten active members worldwide, the group is supported by contributions from the uncapping community -- speed-hungry Internet users who rely on TCNiSO's research and free hackware to surmount the bandwidth caps imposed by service providers, usually in violation of their service agreement, if not the law. To them, Sigma is a delight, because it makes it simple to change the modem's configuration file -- the key to uncapping, and, on some systems, to getting free anonymous service using "unregistered" modems. "I've known TCNiSO for two years now and I've done a lot of things with their techniques," wrote a Canadian uncapper in an e-mail interview. "Sigma is the greatest one I've seen." http://www.securityfocus.com/news/7977 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 21:52:23 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EPIC Alert 11.03 ======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 11.03 February 11, 2004 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_11.03.html ====================================================================== Table of Contents ====================================================================== [1] EPIC FOIA Docs Show Acxiom Was Considered as TIA Data Source [2] Pentagon Cancels Internet Voting Project [3] FBI Asks FCC to Delay Discussion of Internet Phone Rules [4] DHS Deputy Secretary Questioned About Passenger Profiling [5] EPIC and PI Open Nominations for Brandeis, Big Brother Awards [6] News in Brief [7] EPIC Bookstore: Protecting America's Health [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_11.03.html ------------------------------ From: mdarnell@servpac.com (Matt Darnell) Subject: Can't Get First Two Digits of Inband String Date: 11 Feb 2004 19:35:32 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Aloha, We are having touble receiving the first 2 digits of a string of digits being sent by our PBX. The digits are sent immediatly after we go offhook. I.E. The PBX sends "###333" (we verified with a digit grabber) we will only see "#333". This is 100% consistant. I have included our C test program, I think the DTMF receivers are not being activated soon enough after on hook. After reading the docs, the dx_getdig simply gets the digits out of the buffer, it doesn't turn the DTMF receivers on or off. Aloha, Matt Darnell ******* while(1) { printf("Opening " DEVICE "\n"); if ((chdev = dx_open(DEVICE, 0)) == -1) { printf("Failed to open device!! : %d\n", errno); switch(errno) { case EINVAL : printf("\tInvalid device " DEVICE "\n"); break; case EBADF : printf("\tInvalid file descriptor\n"); break; case EINTR : printf("\tEAn interrupt was caught\n"); break; case EIO : printf("\tLinux Streams error\n"); break; default : printf("\tUnknown error\n"); } exit(-1); } dx_sethook(chdev, DX_ONHOOK, EV_SYNC); dx_clrtpt(tpt,3); tpt[0].tp_type = IO_CONT; tpt[0].tp_termno = DX_MAXDTMF; /* Maximum number of digits */ tpt[0].tp_length = 4; /* terminate on 4 digits */ tpt[0].tp_flags = TF_MAXDTMF; /* terminate if already in buf. */ tpt[1].tp_type = IO_CONT; tpt[1].tp_termno = DX_LCOFF; /* LC off termination */ tpt[1].tp_length = 3; /* Use 30 ms (10 ms resolution */ tpt[1].tp_flags = TF_LCOFF|TF_10MS; /* level triggered, clear history, 10 ms resolution */ tpt[2].tp_type = IO_EOT; tpt[2].tp_termno = DX_MAXTIME; /* Function Time */ tpt[2].tp_length = 100; /* 10 seconds (100 ms resolution */ tpt[2].tp_flags = TF_MAXTIME; /* Edge-triggered */ tpt[2].tp_flags = TF_MAXTIME; /* Edge-triggered */ /* clear previously entered digits */ if (dx_clrdigbuf(chdev) == -1) { printf("Unable to clear digit buffer\n"); exit(-1); } printf("Gonna wait for ring!!\n"); if (-1 == (dx_wtring(chdev, 1, DX_OFFHOOK, -1))) { printf("dx_wtring returned error\n"); ATDV_ERRMSGP(errno); exit(-1); } printf("Gonna get digs\n"); if ((numdigs = dx_getdig(chdev, tpt, &digp, EV_SYNC)) == -1) { printf("dx_getdig returned error\n"); exit(-1); } printf("dx_getdig got %d digits", numdigs); for (cnt=0; cnt < numdigs; cnt++) { printf("\n\tDigit received = %c digit type = %d", digp.dg_value[cnt], digp.dg_type[cnt]); } printf("\nClosing " DEVICE "\n"); dx_close(chdev); } [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For a short term solution, can't you force feed two more digits in the front of the string which do not matter to the PBX as filler so that when it starts 'seeing' the digits it is where you want things to be? Or, do you have any way to get the PBX to stall long enough to get the equipment opened? Maybe in your script above a couple of NOPS (non-operations) will stall sufficiently. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:54:43 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Norvergence Still at it ... I *thought* Norvergence was going to leave me alone. Silly me for thinking, I know ... Now just today, I got still another letter from an attorney (new to me) named Federico Acosta, in Tustin, CA who purports to represent David Rodriquez, the defendant in the Norvergence vrs. Rodriquez case. Attorney Acosta, just like attorney Kyle Kulzer of Norvergence, is making demand that derogatory messages about Norvergence be removed from our web site. Despite the fact that Michael D. Sullivan in Washington, DC is representing me in the case, attorney Acosta chose to write directly to me. I do not know if that was his own idea, or if perhaps Norvergence and their attorney simply chose to cut Sullivan out of the picture and put the pressure directly on me instead. *Once again* I told this latest attorney NO! to his demands, and suggested he take furher demands etc to Mr. Sullivan. I faxed the latest correspondence over to Mike Sullivan tonight. PAT ------------------------------ Subject: Re: "No Internet Voting" From: Mark Atwood Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy! Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 22:13:49 GMT Nick Landsberg writes: > This reminds me of the story of NASA way back when. They purportedly > spent thousands if not millions in R&D money to develop a ball-point > pen which would work in space (Null-gravity, free-fall, whatever you > want to call it ... weightlessness). > The Russians supplied their cosmonauts with a pencil. http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp | Claim: NASA spent millions of dollars developing an "astronaut pen" | which would work in outer space while the Soviets solved the same | problem by simply using pencils. | | Status: False. | | Origins: The Write stuff lesson of this anecdote is a valid one, that | we sometimes expend a great deal of time, effort, and money to create | a "high-tech" solution to a problem, when a perfectly good, cheap, and | simple solution is right before our eyes. The anecdote offered above | isn't a real example of this syndrome, however. Fisher did ultimately | develop a pressurized pen for use by NASA astronauts (now known as the | famous "Fisher Space Pen"), but both American and Soviet space | missions initially used pencils, NASA did not seek out Fisher and ask | them to develop a "space pen," Fisher did not charge NASA for the cost | of developing the pen, and the Fisher pen was eventually used by both | American and Soviet astronauts. | | Here's how Fisher themselves described it: NASA never asked Paul | C. Fisher to produce a pen. When the astronauts began to fly, like the | Russians, they used pencils, but the leads sometimes broke and became | a hazard by floating in the [capsule's] atmosphere where there was no | gravity. They could float into an eye or nose or cause a short in an | electrical device. In addition, both the lead and the wood of the | pencil could burn rapidly in the pure oxygen atmosphere. Paul Fisher | realized the astronauts needed a safer and more dependable writing | instrument, so in July 1965 he developed the pressurized ball pen, | with its ink enclosed in a sealed, pressurized ink cartridge. Fisher | sent the first samples to Dr. Robert Gilruth, Director of the Houston | Space Center. The pens were all metal except for the ink, which had a | flash point above 200°C. The sample Space Pens were thoroughly tested | by NASA. They passed all the tests and have been used ever since on | all manned space flights, American and Russian. All research and | developement costs were paid by Paul Fisher. No development costs have | ever been charged to the government. | | Because of the fire in Apollo 1, in which three Astronauts died, NASA | required a writing instrument that would not burn in a 100% oxygen | atmosphere. It also had to work in the extreme conditions of outer | space: | | 1. In a vacuum. | 2. With no gravity. | 3. In hot temperatures of +150°C in sunlight and also in the cold | shadows of space where the temperatures drop to -120°C | | (NASA tested the pressurized Space Pens at -50°C, but because of the | residential [sic] heat in the pen it also writes for many minutes in | the cold shadows.) | | Fisher spent over one million dollars in trying to perfect the ball | point pen before he made his first successful pressurized pens in | 1965. Samples were immediately sent to Dr. Robert Gilruth, Manager of | the Houston Space Center, where they were thoroughly tested and | approved for use in Space in September 1965. In December 1967 he sold | 400 Fisher Space Pens to NASA for $2.95 each. | | Lead pencils were used on all Mercury and Gemini space flights and all | Russian space flights prior to 1968. Fisher Space Pens are more | dependable than lead pencils and cannot create the hazard of a broken | piece of lead floating through the gravity-less atmosphere. Mark Atwood | When you do things right, mra@pobox.com | people won't be sure you've done anything at all. http://www.pobox.com/~mra ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:37:45 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: NetZero Commercials on Television Lately I have seen commercials on television for an ISP known as 'NetZero'which invite me to take the 'Netzero Challenge'. According to those people, you can 'surf the net at up to five times faster than regular dialup', and they sell it for $14.95 per month. Does anyone know what they are doing? The various 56-K dialups around town are all brokering through TerraWorld under various names, but I wonder what NetZero does that makes them 'up to five times faster than regular dialup'. Any ideas? PAT ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Hands Free Use With Motorola V60C Closed Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:53:01 -0500 Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com gsmolin@suscom.net (Greg Smolin) posted on that vast internet thingie: > Is it possible to use the Motorola V60C with the phone closed with a > hands free device -- or must the phone be open to talk? My V60 works closed with a hands free headset plugged in. Unplug the headset to disconnect the call. Steve at SELLCOM http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Siemens, AT&T, Panasonic, Motorola Vtech 5.8Ghz; TMC ET4000 4line Epic phone, OnHoldPlus, Talkswitch, Watchguard! Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. Minisplitter log splitter If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ 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 #69 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 12 15:22:01 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1CKM1E16333; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:22:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:22:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402122022.i1CKM1E16333@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 #70 TELECOM Digest Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:22:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 70 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Officials Say Mob Stole $200 Million Using Phone Bills (Monty Solomon) KODAK Mobile Service Coming to Verizon Wireless Get It Now (M. Solomon) EchoStar, SIRIUS Join Forces With RadioShack To Form Satellite (Solomon) Re: Can't Get First Two Digits of Inband String (Justin Time) Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject (jmayson) Partner Mail VS Release 3; Messages Cut Off (Chuck Herndon) Rack Mount Cellular Phone (Ken Neely) Re: The Virus Underground (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: NetZero Commercials on Television (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: NetZero Commercials on Television (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: NetZero Commercials on Television (Danny Burstein) Re: NetZero Commercials on Television (Steven J Sobol) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 03:11:31 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Officials Say Mob Stole $200 Million Using Phone Bills By WILLIAM K. RASHBAUM Forget gambling, loan-sharking and labor racketeering. New York organized crime figures bilked millions of unsuspecting consumers out of more than $200 million over five years by piggybacking bogus charges on their telephone bills, federal authorities said yesterday. The scheme, involving a network of companies stretching from Midtown Manhattan to Overland Park, Kan., marked what federal authorities believe was the first time organized crime figures have been charged with using the billing fraud known as "cramming" to fill mob coffers. The nationwide scheme was sophisticated, officials said, but the idea was simple: Callers responding to advertisements for free samples of services like psychic phone lines, telephone dating services and adult chat lines were unknowingly charged up to $40 a month on their phone bills for services they never requested and never used. It worked because many telephone-related services are now paid through local phone companies' monthly bills, with the companies passing on the payments to the service providers. The organized crime figures used a company that consolidated billings for service providers, allowing them to bill through local phone companies and collect their fees, fees with innocent-sounding titles like "voice mail services" hidden deep within the phone bills, unnoticed by all but the most dogged consumer. Frauds involving cramming -- the common term for larding a telephone bill with unauthorized charges -- have been around for years, but the mob's scheme was particularly audacious, the authorities said. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/11/nyregion/11MOB.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 08:34:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: KODAK Mobile Service Coming to Verizon Wireless Get It Now Verizon Wireless and Kodak Forge Strategic Relationship; KODAK Mobile Service Coming to Verizon Wireless Get It Now Customers - Feb 12, 2004 08:01 AM (BusinessWire) ROCHESTER, N.Y. & BEDMINSTER, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 12, 2004--Eastman Kodak Company and Verizon Wireless, the nation's largest wireless service provider, today announced that KODAK Mobile Service will be available to Verizon Wireless' Get It Now(R) customers. With KODAK Mobile Service -- offered through Kodak's Ofoto subsidiary - Verizon Wireless customers will be able to view, share, organize, and store their digital photos in one trusted place. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40552557 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 08:38:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EchoStar, SIRIUS Join Forces With RadioShack To Form Satellite EchoStar, SIRIUS Join Forces With RadioShack To Form Satellite Entertainment Alliance - Feb 12, 2004 08:03 AM (PR Newswire) - RadioShack to Offer SIRIUS Satellite Radio in 7,000 Neighborhood Stores - DISH Network Announced as RadioShack's Exclusive Satellite TV Brand - Multi-Year Agreements Include Comprehensive Marketing, Advertising And Promotional Activities - SIRIUS' Commercial-Free Music to be Added to DISH Network Satellite TV Service NEW YORK, ENGLEWOOD, Colo., and FORT WORTH, Texas, Feb. 12 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- RadioShack Corporation (NYSE:RSH), EchoStar Communications Corporation (Nasdaq: DISH) and SIRIUS Satellite Radio (Nasdaq: SIRI) today announced the formation of a satellite entertainment alliance that positions EchoStar's DISH Network and SIRIUS as the only satellite entertainment brands offered at RadioShack. DISH Network also announced it will make SIRIUS music programming available to the majority of its 9-million customers. The three-way alliance allows RadioShack to offer DISH Network -- a service offering already available at RadioShack -- and SIRIUS Satellite Radio, providing customers with one-stop shopping for their satellite entertainment needs. This satellite entertainment alliance will substantially increase both DISH Network's and SIRIUS' sales presence throughout the country and is expected to open up new markets for both satellite broadcasters as they tap into RadioShack's ubiquitous distribution network and knowledgeable sales associates. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40552683 ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Can't Get First Two Digits of Inband String Date: 12 Feb 2004 05:56:15 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com mdarnell@servpac.com (Matt Darnell) wrote in message news:: > Aloha, > We are having touble receiving the first 2 digits of a string of > digits being sent by our PBX. The digits are sent immediatly after we > go offhook. > I.E. The PBX sends "###333" (we verified with a digit grabber) we will > only see "#333". This is 100% consistant. > I have included our C test program, I think the DTMF receivers are not > being activated soon enough after on hook. > After reading the docs, the dx_getdig simply gets the digits out of > the buffer, it doesn't turn the DTMF receivers on or off. > Aloha, > Matt Darnell > ******* > while(1) > { > printf("Opening " DEVICE "\n"); > if ((chdev = dx_open(DEVICE, 0)) == -1) { > printf("Failed to open device!! : %d\n", errno); > switch(errno) > { > case EINVAL : printf("\tInvalid device " DEVICE "\n"); > break; > case EBADF : printf("\tInvalid file descriptor\n"); > break; > case EINTR : printf("\tEAn interrupt was caught\n"); > break; > case EIO : printf("\tLinux Streams error\n"); > break; > default : printf("\tUnknown error\n"); > } exit(-1); > } > dx_sethook(chdev, DX_ONHOOK, EV_SYNC); > dx_clrtpt(tpt,3); > tpt[0].tp_type = IO_CONT; > tpt[0].tp_termno = DX_MAXDTMF; /* Maximum number of digits */ > tpt[0].tp_length = 4; /* terminate on 4 digits */ > tpt[0].tp_flags = TF_MAXDTMF; /* terminate if already in buf. */ > tpt[1].tp_type = IO_CONT; > tpt[1].tp_termno = DX_LCOFF; /* LC off termination */ > tpt[1].tp_length = 3; /* Use 30 ms (10 ms resolution */ > tpt[1].tp_flags = TF_LCOFF|TF_10MS; /* level triggered, clear history, > 10 ms resolution */ > tpt[2].tp_type = IO_EOT; > tpt[2].tp_termno = DX_MAXTIME; /* Function Time */ > tpt[2].tp_length = 100; /* 10 seconds (100 ms resolution */ > tpt[2].tp_flags = TF_MAXTIME; /* Edge-triggered */ > tpt[2].tp_flags = TF_MAXTIME; /* Edge-triggered */ > /* clear previously entered digits */ > if (dx_clrdigbuf(chdev) == -1) { > printf("Unable to clear digit buffer\n"); > exit(-1); > } > printf("Gonna wait for ring!!\n"); > if (-1 == (dx_wtring(chdev, 1, DX_OFFHOOK, -1))) > { > printf("dx_wtring returned error\n"); > ATDV_ERRMSGP(errno); > exit(-1); > } > printf("Gonna get digs\n"); > if ((numdigs = dx_getdig(chdev, tpt, &digp, EV_SYNC)) == -1) { > printf("dx_getdig returned error\n"); > exit(-1); > } > printf("dx_getdig got %d digits", numdigs); > for (cnt=0; cnt < numdigs; cnt++) { > printf("\n\tDigit received = %c digit type = %d", > digp.dg_value[cnt], digp.dg_type[cnt]); > } > printf("\nClosing " DEVICE "\n"); > dx_close(chdev); > } > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For a short term solution, can't you > force feed two more digits in the front of the string which do not > matter to the PBX as filler so that when it starts 'seeing' the digits > it is where you want things to be? Or, do you have any way to get the > PBX to stall long enough to get the equipment opened? Maybe in your > script above a couple of NOPS (non-operations) will stall sufficiently. > PAT] I don't see any delay in here to allow the switch to set up and assign the DTMF receivers to the digit string. Most PBX systems I have worked on do things in milliseconds, while programs operate at 10 to 100 times that speed. The reason you don't see the first digits is because the processor in the PBX, operating at a slow speed just can't set up to handle the digits as quickly as the programmer expects them. Try putting a delay statement into your program that will delay 2-5 ms, it will probably then pass all the digits with no errors. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: jmayson@nyx.net Subject: Re: New Telemarketer Law, Caller ID, and Anonymous Call Reject Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:52:47 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com > once again filled with ringing phones. Before this, there was a fair > chance that an incoming call was from someone we wanted to hear from, > so we'd pick up after looking at caller ID; now we have to deal with > at least double or triple the number of calls. > Has anyone else noticed this phenomenom? I guess for the small number > of folks with ACR it's a step backward, even though it may be an > improvement for the majority. I'm wondering what will happen if I > cancel ACR -- even more calls I suppose. We have a similar service through SBC and I'm reporting 1 to 2 telemarketers a day without exaggeration. I guess I'll find out if the state and national DNC lists have teeth. John Mayson Austin, Texas, USA ------------------------------ From: chuck@monarchcomputer.com (Chuck Herndon) Subject: Partner Mail VS Release 3; messages cut off Date: 12 Feb 2004 08:10:44 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I have been having this problem for a few years and it seems that the problem is getting worse. Messages that people are leaving on this system will be cut off during playback. If you try repeatedly to retrieve the message you might be able to get the whole message. I have deleted all of the unused mailboxes on the system and checked the ones in use to make sure that they are not full. This system is only used by a small number of people now, about 6 of which 5 have voicemail. Has anyone else had this experience? Perhaps our voicemail card needs to be replaced with a new one? Any feedback would be appreciated. ------------------------------ From: kenneth.neely@sce.com (Ken Neely) Subject: Rack Mount Cellular Phone Date: 12 Feb 2004 09:03:20 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com My client needs to acquire a number of rack mount cellular (1xrtt - Verizon) phones for emergency ops use. Are any quality devices of this type available ? kenneth.neely@sce.com ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 12:28:18 -0500 Organization: Bell Sympatico > If I were to e-mail it to a victim, and if he clicked on it -- and > didn't have up-to-date antivirus software, which many people don't > -- It wouldn't matter if he did have up-to-date antivirus software because, unless the virus you've just created (or, in this case, generated) looks almost exactly like a previously discovered virus, no virus update has yet been made which will recognize it. This is exactly what's wrong with antivirus software. My favorite analogy: what if security guards could only recognize criminals whose faces matched those in a book (updated regularly) of known felons? How effective would they be if (a) they had to stop every person entering a bank or store in order to compare them to the faces in the book, and (b) they would still let through people carrying rifles because they had not yet been identified as a known felon? Yet that's exactly how antivirus software works and, as long as the antivirus companies make money charging you a subscription fee to update that book of known felons, I see no financial incentive for these companies to try develop technologies that would recognize files that have code in them to format drives or send themselves out via e-mail. It's far too easy to declare that such technology would be too difficult to develop or wouldn't work well. But the current technology doesn't work very well, either ... so what are we paying for? Geoffrey Welsh Always looking for a good condition original 'chicklet keyboard' Commodore PET [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Some anti-virus software -- I am thinking specifically of Grisoft -- have a totally free version for individual users, and their updates -- about every ten days to two weeks are totally free also. You can give them donations via PayPal if you wish. It scans all incoming email and attachments on a continuing basis, and it inspects your entire hard drive once every 24 hours. I was turned on to Grisoft by my Canadian friend, and it is a very useful utility, at no charge. Companies, or people who otherwise make money using their computer are asked to pay for the program. I have it installed on all three of my computers, to run at 5 AM daily. I wouldn't be without it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:58:24 -0600 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelectronics.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: Re: NetZero Commercials on Television TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > Lately I have seen commercials on television for an ISP known as > 'NetZero'which invite me to take the 'Netzero Challenge'. According > to those people, you can 'surf the net at up to five times faster > than regular dialup', and they sell it for $14.95 per month. Does > anyone know what they are doing? Netzero sets up a proxy that has a big fat pipe to the internet. Your dialup connection goes through their proxy. The proxy makes web pages load faster by doing some on-the-fly HTML optimization, but mainly by recompressing graphics so the image files are smaller. Doing a side-by-side comparison between two identical PCs loading the same web page, one through NetZero and one through a "normal" ISP you will immediately notice two things: First, the NetZero page loads a LOT faster. Second, the slower page looks a LOT better. If you aren't particularly concerned with the graphics quality, NetZero's acceleration will be helpful for browsing. But if appearance is important (porn) or you do a lot of file transfers (p2p) you won't like it. Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com "If we imagined he could _find_ the car, we could pretend it might be fixed." - Calvin ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: NetZero Commercials on Television Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 06:28:51 GMT In article , ptownson@telecom- digest.org says: > Lately I have seen commercials on television for an ISP known as > 'NetZero'which invite me to take the 'Netzero Challenge'. According > to those people, you can 'surf the net at up to five times faster > than regular dialup', and they sell it for $14.95 per month. Does > anyone know what they are doing? The various 56-K dialups around > town are all brokering through TerraWorld under various names, but > I wonder what NetZero does that makes them 'up to five times faster > than regular dialup'. Any ideas? > PAT Most likely they provide some combination of a download accelerator, which prefetches pages linked from the page you're reading, and caching of degraded graphics, for faster browsing speed. In other words, they can indeed make it possible to surf the net faster than using a normal browser and ISP, at the cost of poorer quality graphics. (One could also speed the web browsing experience by turning off graphics or using a text-only browser, but this would also result in a pretty boring looking page.) The one thing they can't do is make your actual downloads faster. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Re: NetZero Commercials on Television Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 06:46:23 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In TELECOM Digest Editor writes: > Lately I have seen commercials on television for an ISP known as > 'NetZero'which invite me to take the 'Netzero Challenge'. According > to those people, you can 'surf the net at up to five times faster > than regular dialup', and they sell it for $14.95 per month. Does > anyone know what they are doing? The various 56-K dialups around > town are all brokering through TerraWorld under various names, but > I wonder what NetZero does that makes them 'up to five times faster > than regular dialup'. Any ideas? First, they do NOT add any additional capacity to the phone/modem connection. The actual data transfer rate isn't any faster. So there will NOT be any speed improvement (and their fine print admits it) when moving files (term used loosely -- they can be anything from video clips to mp3s to programs, etc.) across. What their system does is, broadly, two things: a) it'll downgrade images on a web page, making them much smaller (bytewise) and moving them across faster. So that 250k jpg you're downloading from NASA's Mars collection will be replaced by a, perhaps, 50k one. Faster d/l, but lossy. b) It also pre-caches all the secondary (and more ...) pieces of a web page. For example, when you pull up a story from your local newspaper's home page, there may be five, ten, or more ... other places it sends your browser so as to fill out the various advertising spots. The wait time for all of these requests is annoyingly long, and even more so if they have to get done sequentially. The "speed up" involves the intermediate server grabbing all of these bits and pieces (or even replacing them, but let's not get into that ...) so as to feed them as one quick stream to you. So yes, you will see some improvement with many web pages. Obviously the tv promos are giving you the best possible spin on it, but there is a bit of truth behind it. On the other hand, you're getting the tradeoff of lower quality images. (You can often, but not always, re-click onto the degraded one so as to order up the full quality version) And, again, this will do (almost) nothing for file transfers. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: NetZero Commercials on Television Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 01:00:34 -0600 TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > Lately I have seen commercials on television for an ISP known as > 'NetZero'which invite me to take the 'Netzero Challenge'. According > to those people, you can 'surf the net at up to five times faster > than regular dialup', and they sell it for $14.95 per month. Does > anyone know what they are doing? The various 56-K dialups around > town are all brokering through TerraWorld under various names, but > I wonder what NetZero does that makes them 'up to five times faster > than regular dialup'. Any ideas? Probably some caching/proxy setup, that's all. Earthlink is offering something similar these days. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ 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 #70 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 13 14:57:54 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1DJvrH23521; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:57:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:57:54 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402131957.i1DJvrH23521@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 #71 TELECOM Digest Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:58:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 71 Inside This Issue: Happy Valentines Day, Guys! Intel Scientists Make World's Fastest Silicon Photonics Device (Solomon) FCC: 'Pure' VoIP Not a Phone Service (Monty Solomon) Lycos U.S. Changes ... Everything (Monty Solomon) Re: NetZero Commercials on Television (Phil Earnhardt) Re: NetZero Commercials on Television (Hudson Leighton) Re: The Virus Underground (Barry Margolin) Re: Hands Free Use With Motorola V60C Closed (Joseph) Re: Building a Voice-Driven Application (dnhunt) Advice Needed For Modem Disconnecting Problem (L. Hao) Re: Norvergence Still at it ... (Henry Cabot Henhouse III) Using Account Codes on a Mitel SX2000L Running LW3.0 (Chris) Blame General Electric for Blackout Says First Enercy (Daeron) Universal Email/SMS Cell Phone Gateway Beta Test (John Bartley) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:41:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Intel Scientists Create World's Fastest Silicon Photonics Device Silicon Could Bring High-bandwidth Fiber Optic Connections to PCs SANTA CLARA, Calif., Feb. 12, 2004 -- Scientists from Intel Corporation have achieved a major advance using silicon manufacturing processes to create a novel "transistor-like" device that can encode data onto a light beam. The ability to build a fast photonic (fiber optic) modulator from standard silicon could lead to very low-cost, high-bandwidth fiber optic connections among PCs, servers and other electronic devices, and eventually inside computers as well. As reported in today's issue of the journal Nature, Intel researchers split a beam of light into two separate beams as it passed through silicon, and then used a novel transistor-like device to hit one beam with an electric charge, inducing a "phase shift." When the two beams of light are re-combined the phase shift induced between the two arms makes the light exiting the chip go on and off at over one gigahertz (one billion bits of data per second), 50 times faster than previously produced on silicon. This on and off pattern of light can be translated into the 1's and 0's needed to transmit data. http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20040212tech.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:48:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC: 'Pure' VoIP Not a Phone Service By Declan McCullagh and Ben Charny Staff Writer, CNET News.com Handing a partial victory to Internet phone providers, federal regulators said Thursday that voice communications flowing entirely over the Internet are not subject to traditional government regulations. The Federal Communications Commission, in a split decision, approved a request from voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) provider Pulver.com to be immune from the hefty stack of government rules, taxes and requirements that applied to 20th-century telephone networks. http://news.com.com/2100-7352-5158105.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 23:00:28 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Lycos U.S. Changes ... Everything By Rebecca Lieb In two dramatic announcements this week, Lycos U.S. said it will shed its portal strategy to become a vast social network; the company also inked a 5-year deal with 24/7 Real Media to outsource display ad sales, ad serving and analytics for its Internet properties. http://www.internetnews.com/IAR/article.php/3311971 Lycos to Drop Search Image, Goes Social Networking Lycos has decided to throw in the Search Engine/Portal towell and dip into the realm of Social Networking, according to sources. Instead of trying to play catchup with Google, MSN, and Yahoo while trying to carve out a unique identity for the Lycos.com site, they've decided to go the way of Friendster, Meetup.com and Google's Orkut (been invited yet? if not email me). http://www.searchenginejournal.com/index.php?p=274 Lycos Restructures, Cuts U.S. Staff By Stefanie Olsen Staff Writer, CNET News.com Web portal Lycos laid off about 20 percent of its U.S. staff Wednesday, as it restructured its business. As previously reported, the company began advertising space for lease at its Mountain View, Calif., office last week, a sign of imminent cutbacks. Lycos, a division of Spanish Internet conglomerate Terra Lycos, will streamline its business to focus on subscription services, such as its personals site Matchmaker. The company, based in Waltham, Mass., will outsource U.S. advertising sales to 24/7 Real Media, it said. http://news.com.com/2100-1038-5157640.html ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: NetZero Commercials on Television Date: 12 Feb 2004 12:47:35 -0800 Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://newsguy.com] In article , TELECOM Digest Editor says: > Lately I have seen commercials on television for an ISP known as > 'NetZero'which invite me to take the 'Netzero Challenge'. According > to those people, you can 'surf the net at up to five times faster > than regular dialup', and they sell it for $14.95 per month. Does > anyone know what they are doing? I posted an article about this on 1/29 to the Telecom digest. NetZero, AOL, and Earthlink are all offering "premium" services where the client software is performing some combination of caching and data compression with the ISP to provide "high performance" service. An article comparing the services and prices is at: http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2003Aug/gee20030820021395.htm The article describes a benchmark AOL comissioned with VeriTest. The benchmark shows AOL with the fastest service. A copy of the report is available at: http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/aol/aol9.pdf I really like the AOL advertisements that premiered in the Super Bowl. However, if I were to buy one of these services, I'd get NetZero's service. You could always try their regular service at $9.95 a month and then upgrade to see if the performance boost was worth it. --phil ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: NetZero Commercials on Television Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 21:41:05 -0600 Organization: MRRP In article , Danny Burstein wrote: > In TELECOM Digest Editor > writes: >> Lately I have seen commercials on television for an ISP known as >> 'NetZero'which invite me to take the 'Netzero Challenge'. > a) it'll downgrade images on a web page, making > them much smaller (bytewise) and moving them > across faster. So that 250k jpg you're downloading > from NASA's Mars collection will be replaced by > a, perhaps, 50k one. Faster d/l, but lossy. > b) It also pre-caches all the secondary (and more ...) > pieces of a web page. For example, when you pull > up a story from your local newspaper's home page, > there may be five, ten, or more ... other places > it sends your browser so as to fill out the various > advertising spots. The wait time for all of these requests > is annoyingly long, and even more so if they have to get > done sequentially. And of course if you are using a pay site that charges you a per page fee you get to pay for pages you never visited. Same thing with a site that limits the number of pages you can access per day, viist the home page and bang you have used all your access for that day. -Hudson http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Organization: Looking for work Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:51:54 -0500 In article , Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Some anti-virus software -- I am > thinking specifically of Grisoft -- have a totally free version for > individual users, and their updates -- about every ten days to two > weeks are totally free also. How does that address the point that Geoffrey was making, which is that AV software won't recognize a virus that it hasn't specifically been taught about? I recall the early AV software that I used in MacOS worked very differently. Rather than looking for virus signatures in files, it intercepted system calls and recognized unusual behavior. For instance, most programs don't need to modify the "System" file (the MacOS operating system itself); if an unrecognized application tried to do this, the AV software would alert the user. He could then reject or permit the operation (perhaps he's downloading OS patches), and optionally add the program to a list of authorized applications. Unfortunately, this type of monitoring doesn't really work in the case of things like email worms. As applications have become more complex and integrated, it's common for many different applications to access the address book and/or send out mail, so these alerts would be much more common from normal activities. And there are also many more unsophisticated users, who wouldn't really know how to respond to the alerts. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I know that Grisoft addresses one of his points: You do not have subscribe (as in pay for) various modifications. Every day or three it goes off looking for any updates to what it does, comes back, installs them, etc . Also, regards system files, everytime on of my three computers is booted, Grisoft goes through those files looking also. It happens very fast, but when I boot up I see a message announcing the Grisoft copyright, and a string of file names dashes past on the screen as they examined. It may cause the bootup process an extra 10 seconds or so of time when doing it. It also examines everything coming in from the net, email and files. I also use Zone Alarm (another free software product) which is forever asking me for permission to allow some program or another to 'access the internet'. I have my copies of Zone Alarm instructed that its 'trusted zone' is 192.168.1.100 through 192.168.1.103 and that its 'trusted server' is 192.168.1.1, or in other words the Linksys router and the the four ports on the back of it. And of course the Windows 2000 AND Windows 98 machines are told to deny any/all requests they see coming through the Linksys asking for files or to install files, etc. Its not perfect by any means, but I do not leave any ports or sockets open unless absolutely required, and then just for the job at hand, and I adjust those as needed using the admin function on the Linksys firewall router. I use ssh and *ssh only* to connect here with massis. My general answer to guys who do not know how to respond to alerts (and that includes myself, sometimes) is to deny the request. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Hands Free Use With Motorola V60C Closed Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 17:39:31 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On 10 Feb 2004 20:58:31 -0800, gsmolin@suscom.net (Greg Smolin) wrote: > Is it possible to use the Motorola V60C with the phone closed with a > hands free device -- or must the phone be open to talk? Are the send/end keys inside the flip? If yes, then it would appear that you have to keep the flip open to be able to talk. If no you probably don't need to have it open. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: dnhunt Subject: Re: Building a Voice-Driven Application Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:21:20 -0500 Organization: Mid-South Consulting Engineers, Inc. Alex, I was an advisor and later on the Board of Directors of a company that built a platform similar to what you want. It would recognize who you are and offer specific menus based on your interests, etc. Everything was voice activated using Nuance voice recognition software. We still have the application and servers working in our building with another start-up company that is using it for a different application. If you are looking for a "personal" type application, you probably shouldn't use Nuance. There are less expensive, but also less reliable, voice recognition software programs. The key to any of the systems is the database that is behind it. We spent hundreds of thousands of dollars developing the platform and databases. With some work, it could probably be modified for other applications without reinventing the wheel. Let me know if you are interested in learning more because I only know enough about the technology to be dangerous. I would have to get you in touch with the people who designed it and have gone on to other opportunities. David N. Hunt, Executive Vice President - Business Development Mid-South Consulting Engineers, Inc. 3901 Rose Lake Drive, Charlotte, NC 28217 dnhunt@msceng.com, Tel: 704/357-0004, Fax: 704/357-0025 asmith42@hotmail.com (Alex Smith) inquired about Building a Voice-Driven Application on 7 Feb 2004 16:11:34: > Hello all, > I am venturing into the telephony world and even though I have briefly > dealt with CTI and H.323, I am still a newbie. I'd like to build an > application that would allow me to buy apples from several grocery > stores. (This is a hypothetical but representative example, please > bear with me). I want to place a telephone call to a number, enter my > pin, navigate through some voice prompts that will allow me to select > a particular grocery store, then select a variety of apples and enter > the amount of apples (weight) I'd like to buy using the phone keypad. > Finally I would also like to leave voice instructions for the grocer > on how to pack my apples (paper or plastic). The app would "look me > up" using my pin number and store the packing instructions as a > soundbyte along with the other order parameters in a database. > From a high-level architectural perspective, what hardware and > software components would make up my stack? For the sake of the > example, assume small volume (personal use). I am looking for > high-level architecture rather than product names even though Open > Source/GNU/etc suggestions are welcome. > My limited understanding tells me I need a CTI server. Do I need a > PBX? Other components? If I want to parse the voice instructions (i.e. > speech recognition) in order to extract "paper" or "plastic", how > doable is that? > Any URLs or books that go from slow to complex with architectural > examples are appreciated. > Alex Smith > Insight LLC ------------------------------ From: L. Hao Subject: Advice Needed For Modem Disconnecting Problem Organization: Comcast Online Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 08:09:56 GMT Hi, I am in the middle of integrating a third party vendor's modem server into our product, which functions as a modem server. The server modem's codec software runs in a TI C5409 DSP. And the server runs NT4.0. We are experiencing disconnecting problems. After we connect a USR V.90 client modem to the server modem and start downloading files from internet to the client machine, we would get disconnect shortly after the starting of the downloading. And we found the reason for the disconnect was in the server side. And it was due to a DTR CLEAR IOCTL call issued from user mode level to the modem driver. The driver then turns around and disconnect the server modem in the DSP. Can anyone with experience let me know how to approach this problem? Not an expert in the modem arena, I am at lost in tracing down this DTR CLR. What I want to do is to find out why the DTR CLEAR is issued and who issues it. I have a hunch that it was triggered by something that the modem sent, but our vendor insisted that they are doing everything right. So please help me! Thanks in advance. Lee ------------------------------ From: Henry Cabot Henhouse III Subject: Re: Norvergence Still at it ... Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 05:19:19 -0800 It's a shame that a company that claims to offer such a good service has to threaten to sue to try and keep the truth from being published. My experience with Norvergence has been limited to telling the annoying Norvergence telemarketing person to place us on the do not call list, having him argue with me, then him calling back repeatedly until I finally threatened to file a complaint with the local PD for harassment. The Los Angeles Times telemarketing drones are annoying but they respect the request to not be called ... Norvergence seems to be a hundred times worse and so much more annoying ... I assume that soon, they'll be goosestepping door to door at 6am and hanging out on street corners flogging off copies of the latest issue of "Watchgence" (or Norvergtower?) magazine. Just my humble opinion and a parody boot :) And don' sue me... I'm broke. TELECOM Digest Editor wrote in message news:telecom23.69.8@telecom-digest.org: > I *thought* Norvergence was going to leave me alone. Silly me for > thinking, I know ... Now just today, I got still another letter > from an attorney (new to me) named Federico Acosta, in Tustin, CA > who purports to represent David Rodriquez, the defendant in the > Norvergence vrs. Rodriquez case. Attorney Acosta, just like attorney > Kyle Kulzer of Norvergence, is making demand that derogatory > messages about Norvergence be removed from our web site. Despite the > fact that Michael D. Sullivan in Washington, DC is representing me > in the case, attorney Acosta chose to write directly to me. I do > not know if that was his own idea, or if perhaps Norvergence and > their attorney simply chose to cut Sullivan out of the picture and > put the pressure directly on me instead. *Once again* I told this > latest attorney NO! to his demands, and suggested he take furher > demands etc to Mr. Sullivan. I faxed the latest correspondence over > to Mike Sullivan tonight. > PAT ------------------------------ From: chris.ewen@abnamro.com (Chris) Subject: Using Account Codes on a Mitel SX2000L Running LW3.0 Date: 13 Feb 2004 08:01:07 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I'm having problems implementing account codes and hoping someone out there has used them successfully on the SX2000L. I would like to use them to allow end users to make international calls. At the moment, we are manually entering in international numbers in ARS, then removing them after the user is done. I have attempted to setup account codes using Mitel's EDOC's with no success. Doing so required everyone that wanted to dial long-distance to enter in an account code. Any help or advice would be appreciated. ------------------------------ From: doug_mentohl@yahoo.co.uk (Daeron) Subject: Blame General Electric for BlackOut says FirstEnergy Date: 13 Feb 2004 10:42:37 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Software Bug Contributed to Blackout Kevin Poulsen Feb 11 2004 A previously-unknown software flaw in a widely-deployed General Electric energy management system contributed to the devastating scope of the August 14th northeastern U.S. blackout, industry officials revealed this week. [Unknown as it didn't exist until it was needed as a scapegoat in order to distract from the real reason. Sounds to me like FirstEnergy trying to deflect blame onto GE.] The bug in GE Energy's XA/21 system was discovered in an intensive code audit conducted by GE and a contractor in the weeks following the blackout, according to FirstEnergy Corp., the Ohio utility where investigators say the blackout began. 'It had never evidenced itself until that day," said spokesman Ralph DiNicola. "This fault was so deeply embedded, it took them weeks of poring through millions of lines of code and data to find it.' Who is this contractor ? What code are they referring to here ? How were the tests conducted ? Did they include any other systems that were involved in the BlackOut ? How many of the SCADA units running on FirstEnergy were Microsoft Windows ? "FirstEnergy was aware the alarm system was broken, said company spokesman Ralph DiNicola. A functioning backup alarm at the Midwest Independent System Operator, a nonprofit power pool that oversees the region's electrical grid, was in place," DiNicola said. http://www.nipc.gov/dailyreports/2003/August/DHS_IAIP_Daily_2003-08-18.pdf The flaw was responsible for the alarm system failure at FirstEnergy's Akron, Ohio control center that was noted in a November report from the U.S.-Canadian task force investigating the blackout. The report blamed the then-unexplained computer failure for retarding FirstEnergy's ability to respond to events that lead to the outage, when quick action might have limited the blackout's spread. Power system operators rely heavily on audible and on-screen alarms, plus alarm logs, to reveal any significant changes in their system's conditions," the report noted. FirstEnergy's operators "were working under a significant handicap without these tools. However, they were in further jeopardy because they did not know that they were operating without alarms, so that they did not realize that system conditions were changing. TRANSCRIPTS of telephone conversations ... include explicit mention of some unknown 'computer problems' at FirstEnergy, the Ohio utility thought to have triggered the regional power failures, in those preceding hours. Early on, a controller at the Midwest Independent System Operator asked his counterpart at FirstEnergy why it hadn't reacted to a transmission line outage. The utility's technician replied: "We have no clue. Our computer is giving us fits, too. We don't even know the status of some of the stuff around us." "I called you guys like 10 minutes ago, and I thought you were figuring out what was going on there." "Well, we're trying to. Our computer is not happy. It's not cooperating either." The cascading blackout eventually cut off electricity to 50 million people in eight states and Canada. The blackout occurred at a time when the Blaster computer worm was wreaking havoc across the Internet. The timing triggered some speculation that the virus may have played a role in the outage -- a theory that gained credence after SecurityFocus reported that two systems at a nuclear power plant operated by FirstEnergy had been impacted by the Slammer worm earlier in the year. "On January 25, 2003, Davis-Besse nuclear power plant was infected with the MS SQL Server 2000 worm. The infection caused data overload in the site network, resulting in the inability of the computers to communicate with each other." http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/gen-comm/info-notices/2003/in200314.pdf Instead, the XA/21 bug was triggered by a unique combination of events and alarm conditions on the equipment it was monitoring, DiNicola said. When a backup server kicked-in, it also failed, unable to handle the accumulation of unprocessed events that had queued up since the main system's failure. Because the system failed silently, FirstEnergy's operators were unaware for over an hour that they were looking at outdated information on the status of their portion of the power grid, according to the November report. What were these 'unique combination of events and alarm conditions' ? This is Poulson in an earlier article about the earlier systems crash at a Nuclear Plant. "In that article, Poulsen offers a detailed description of how another Microsoft worm, Slammer, crashed two Unix-based control systems at the Davis-Besse nuclear power plant in Northern Ohio also operated by FirstEnergy. Poulsen reported that FirstEnergy engineers had bridged the nuclear plant's control network with FirstEnergy's corporate network -- a practice that is increasingly common among utility companies, according to industry and security experts." http://www.newsforge.com/software/03/09/09/1526221.shtml?tid=78 What number of SCADA units on this system were running Windows ? What effect on the total monitoring system would a Windows SCADA system being contaminated with a virus. "The root cause of the outage was linked to .. trees .. FirstEnergy says .. its role in the outage is overstated in the interim report" [shuffle .. shuffle] from http://www.securityfocus.com/news/8016 Retrospective ass covering is all. I guess General Electric can't afford as much protection on Capitol Hill as MICROS~1. Get those cheque books out guys. It's election year!!! "Specifically, key personnel may not have been aware of the need to take preventive measures at critical times, because an alarm system was malfunctioning." "The existence of both internal and external links from SCADA systems to other systems introduced vulnerabilities." https://reports.energy.gov/BlackoutReport-5.pdf Reliable, Field-Proven & Adaptable The XA/21 transmission management system controls generation and the high voltage transmission network for optimal generation and transmission of power. One of the industry's most advanced EMS/SCADA systems, the XA/21 system combines advanced open systems architecture with full graphics, power system application, historical information storage and retrieval and relational database technology. With well over one million hours of online operation, the XA/21 system has improved utilities' bottom lines by helping to: Enhance operational efficiency http://www.gepower.com/prod_serv/products/scada_software/en/xa21.htm note: 'Enhance operational efficiency'. That's management speak for it takes less people to operate. What is SCADA: http://www.hackfaq.org/data_networks-23.shtml quote from Bill Gates, Feb 14 1998 " ... It would help me immensely to have a survey showing that 90 percent of developers believe that putting the browser into the OS makes sense. ... Ideally, we would have a survey like this done before I appear at the Senate on March 3rd." http://www.internetwk.com/news0199/news011599-3.htm Bill Gates Feb 2004 ... what he might have said :-D 'It would help me immensely to have a survey showing that the blackout was caused by Unix ... Ideally, we would have a survey like this done before I appear at the RSA Conference in Feb' ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:45:44 PST From: John Bartley or K7AAY@ARRL.NET Subject: Universal Email-to-SMS Gateway for NANP Cellular Systems, Beta Test Email a short message to NpaNnxXxxx@teleflip.com and it appears as an SMS on user's cellphone. Npa = Area Code NnxXxxx = phone number One test today took five minutes to get a message through. Only 188 characters in test message received, including sending e-mail address and subject line. Remainder of message was discarded en route and did not arrive as a subsequent SMS message. Said to work for any cellphone on North Amewrican Numbering Plan (US, Canada, Carribbean, Guam). Again, it's Beta, but possibly useful. http://www.teleflip.com/teleflip/index.jsp John Bartley K7AAY http://celdata.cjb.net Handheld's Cellular Data FAQ "Politics is the business of getting power and privilege without possessing merit." - P. J. O'Rourke ------------------------------ 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 #71 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Feb 14 14:17:36 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1EJHax01514; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 14:17:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 14:17:36 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402141917.i1EJHax01514@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 #72 TELECOM Digest Sat, 14 Feb 2004 14:17:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 72 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson F.C.C. Begins Rewriting Rules on Delivery of the Internet (M Solomon) How Broadcasters Want to Silence Satellite Radio (Monty Solomon) These Phone Calls Aren't Phone Calls (Monty Solomon) The Plot to Stop the Internet Telephone Revolution (Monty Solomon) Lost Liberties / Outlawing Dissent (Monty Solomon) Lost Liberties / A Thousand J. Edgar Hoovers (Monty Solomon) Acxiom is Watching You (Monty Solomon) Qwest vs. Other Companies (Dave Garland) Re: Building a Voice-Driven Application (Chris Kantarjiev) Re: NetZero Commercials on Television (ellis@no.spam) Re: Blame General Electric for BlackOut says FirstEnergy (Steven Sobol) Re: The Virus Underground (Dave Garland) Re: Telephone Service Surcharges (Michael Chance) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Monty Solomon Subject: F.C.C. Begins Rewriting Rules on Delivery of the Internet Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 03:34:19 -0500 By STEPHEN LABATON WASHINGTON, Feb. 12 - The Federal Communications Commission began writing new rules today that officials and industry experts said would profoundly alter both the way the Internet is delivered and used in homes and businesses. In one set of proceedings, the commission began writing regulations to enable computer users to gain access to the Internet through electric power lines. Consumers will be able to plug their modems directly into the wall sockets just as they do with any garden variety appliance. Officials said the new rules, which are to be completed in the coming months, would enable utilities to offer an alternative to the cable and phone companies and provide an enormous possible benefit to rural communities that are served by the power grid but not by broadband providers. In a second set of proceedings, commissioners began considering what rules ought to apply to companies offering Internet space and software to enable computer users to send and receive telephone calls. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/12/technology/12CND-NET.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 15:33:59 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: How Broadcasters Want to Silence Satellite Radio All Politics is Local: How Broadcasters Want to Silence Satellite Radio by Radley Balko Most of the torrent of opposition to the FCC's modest proposal to loosen media ownership restrictions last year stemmed from fears that they'd lead to information flow and entertainment programming falling into the hands of just a few behemoth media conglomerates. In a recent issue of Reason magazine, Ben Compaine rather thoroughly elucidated why those fears are unfounded. Still, if it's diversity media consumers want, they should be thrilled with the onset and recent success of satellite radio. The industry's two players -- XM and Sirius -- offer a wide range of programming, hundreds of channels between them that brush up against every conceivable musical niche, as well as news, talk, sports, comedy, children's programming, and even radio installments of cable programming from providers such as E! and VH1. At just $10 or so a month, satellite radio for many has been a welcome alternative to the rather dry, Top Forty-driven monotony of FM radio. Of course, any time a new competitor comes along with a new business model offering consumers new choices, the old guard gets its dander up, and inevitably turns to the federal government to protect its turf, and preserve market share. In this case, the old guard is one of the oldest, the National Association of Broadcasters. NAB is a dinosaur of the lobbying industry, both in its size and its age. And NAB isn't at all happy that radio listeners would rather pay for subscription radio than continue to endure the pap broadcast by its members. http://www.cato.org/tech/tk/040120-tk.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:22:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: These Phone Calls Aren't Phone Calls By Alex Salkever The FCC's Feb. 12 ruling that computer-to-computer calls are exempt from telecom regs is the first blow in a new battle for the Bells. If a phone call is sent digitally over the Internet, is it still a phone call? Or is it a voice e-mail? That question has loomed over the telecom sector for more than a year, as the industry awaited a ruling from the Federal Communications Commission. At issue: new technologies that allow cheap, easy phone calls over existing broadband Net connections. On Feb. 12, the FCC replied with an initial answer that should make the Baby Bells very nervous -- a voice call delivered digitally over the public Internet is the same as an e-mail, as far as the regulators are concerned. The decision came at the behest of Jeff Pulver, the founder of FreeWorldDialup, who had petitioned the FCC for a ruling that would allow him to run his free-of-charge voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) network without facing standard regulations that cover old-school telecoms. Pulver's case was special: His network allows only users who dial directly from one Net connection to another, bypassing completely the public phone networks. More controversial are calls that originate on the Internet and then move through public phone networks. That's the service now being offered by Vonage, Net2Phone, AT&T ( T), and numerous cable companies. That's a real threat to the Bells' services, since it allows customers to connect to anyone who has a phone. http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2004/tc20040213_1268_tc024.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 15:12:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Plot to Stop the Internet Telephone Revolution by Adam Thierer and Clyde Wayne Crews Jr. Much has been written over the past few months about the revolutionary potential of Internet telephony, or voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) service. VoIP would let consumers make phone calls through an Internet connection, largely bypassing traditional circuit-switched wireline telephone networks. In time, some think it might come to completely replace older phone networks. In just a few short years, VoIP has gone from wishful thinking to marketplace reality as numerous companies now plan to deploy such services. This has also led many industry watchers to speak of VoIP as a veritable deregulatory deus ex machina that potentially offers a sudden and unexpected way to escape from the past century's regulatory morass. http://www.cato.org/tech/tk/040209-tk.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 03:27:17 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Lost Liberties / Outlawing dissent Spying on peace meetings, cracking down on protesters, keeping secret files on innocent people -- how Bush's war on terror has become a war on freedom. By Michelle Goldberg Feb. 11, 2004 | The undercover cop introduced herself to the activists from the Colorado Coalition Against the War in Iraq as Chris Hoffman, but her real name was Chris Hurley. Last March, she arrived at a nonviolence training session in Denver, along with another undercover officer, Brad Wanchisen, whom she introduced as her boyfriend. The session, held at the Escuela Tlatelolco, a Denver private school, was organized to prepare activists for a sit-in at the Buckley Air National Guard Base the next day, March 15. Hurley said she wanted to participate. She said she was willing to get arrested for the cause of peace. In fact, she did get arrested. She was just never charged. The activists she protested with wouldn't find out why for months. Chris Hurley was just one of many cops all over the country who went undercover to spy on antiwar protesters last year. Nonviolent antiwar groups in Fresno, Calif., Grand Rapids, Mich., and Albuquerque, N.M., have all been infiltrated or surveilled by undercover police officers. Shortly after the Buckley protest, the Boulder group was infiltrated a second time, by another pair of police posing as an activist couple. Meanwhile, protesters arrested at antiwar demonstrations in New York last spring were extensively questioned about their political associations, and their answers were entered into databases. And last week, a federal prosecutor in Des Moines, Iowa, obtained a subpoena demanding that Drake University turn over records from an antiwar conference called "Stop the Occupation! Bring the Iowa Guard Home!" that the school's chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, a civil libertarian legal group, hosted on Nov. 15 of last year, the day before a protest at the Iowa National Guard headquarters. Among the information the government sought was the names of the leaders of the Drake University Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, its records dating back to January of 2002, and the names of everyone who attended the "Stop the Occupation!" conference. Four antiwar activists also received subpoenas in the investigation. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/02/11/cointelpro/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's really nothing new. Back in the sixties and seventies, Chicago Police had an active 'red squad' whose job it was (besides gassing and beating up war protestors and others) was to spy and infiltrate churches and other peaceable gatherings of citizens. I wonder why Salon thinks this is somehow a new story. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 03:29:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Lost Liberties / A thousand J. Edgar Hoovers Lost Liberties A thousand J. Edgar Hoovers State and local police are taking it upon themselves to investigate antiwar activists -- and in the computer age, the threat to our civil liberties is even greater than it was in Hoover's day. Editor's note: This is the second of a two-part series. Read Part 1. By Michelle Goldberg Feb. 12, 2004 | Political spying has many costs. One is that it poisons communities, putting dissidents in the social position of criminals, co-conspirators or untrustworthy elements. Jennifer Albright, a 30-year-old lawyer in Albuquerque, N.M., believes such spying cost her her job with the Bernalillo County district attorney's office. On Tuesday, March 25, two days after marching in a permitted demonstration against the war, Albright, then an assistant district attorney, was called into her boss's office and put on leave. The reason? Local police said she had identified undercover agents in the crowd at the protest, which she denies. Three days later, Albright was fired. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/02/12/dissent_two/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Again, this is supposed to be something new? Of course computers have made the job of police (spying, gassing, and general brutality) much easier. J. Edgar Hoover would be so proud of how far his people have been able to get, spy-wise, in this age of computers. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 03:31:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Acxiom is Watching You Whenever you book a flight, this data-mining colossus will be turning over its files to John Ashcroft. Why did Wesley Clark lobby for what could become the biggest snooping operation of all time? By Farhad Manjoo Feb. 10, 2004 | On Saturday, Jan. 5, 2002, a 15-year-old boy named Charles Bishop stole a single-engine Cessna airplane from the St. Petersburg International Airport in Florida and crashed it into an office building in Tampa. The boy, who was probably mentally disturbed, died; no one else was hurt. Still, in the tense months after the 9/11 attacks, Charles Bishop's flight was one of the dozens of small, strange events that set the public imagination reeling over the horrors surrounding airplanes, and cable news shows went into overdrive to cover it. The next day on CNN, Wesley Clark, the retired Army general who was at the time the network's military analyst, was asked about "the situation in Tampa.... The fact that a teenager was able to steal this plane and crash it into a building -- what does that say about the general state of aviation security?" "We've been worried about general aviation security for some time," Clark said. "The aircraft need to be secured, the airfields need to be secured, and obviously we're going to also have to go through and do a better job of screening who could fly aircraft, who the private pilots are, who owns these aircraft. So it's going to be another major effort." That answer -- that pilots ought to face more-rigorous screening -- seemed logical enough; but according to some critics, Wesley Clark might have had an ulterior motive in calling for more background checks in aviation. What Clark, who is now campaigning for the Democratic presidential nomination, did not tell the CNN audience was that, months before the interview, he had been hired as a board member and lobbyist for Acxiom, an Arkansas company that manages data collected by large businesses on millions of Americans. Weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, the company developed a computerized system that would perform instant identity checks on airline passengers. http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/02/10/acxiom/ ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Qwest vs. Other Companies Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 10:28:00 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information The following post is from another group, but may be of interest to TELECOM Digest readers. It's a response from an ISP tech guy to griping about telco service in a Qwest area. Since I don't have permission to repost, I've sanitized it a tad to anonymize the author. ------------------------------ As much as people gripe about Qwest, there are far far worse telco's out there in the world. Since we deal with just about all of them (either on a daily basis, because they are a given ILEC of an area served [by us], which are Qwest, Frontier & Sprint), or have dealt with them in the past. The ones that spring to mind right away that are much much worse to deal with than Qwest are #3 Sprint #2 McLeod USA #1 MCI At MCI, it feels like you talk to a brick wall, and it sure seems like its company policy to just ignore you, keep on billing you for services after you've cancelled (well past the 6-month mark is an *average*), and have CSR's that couldn't tell you what a phone is, even though they are talking to you on one. The Sprint CSR's usually don't even know if they offer a service or not, and there's no supervisors to check with to see. I think for a while there, they started cold calling up random potential customers, and offering the weirdest things like DSL service for somebody in downtown [city], even though they only service a few areas around [far-out suburbs]. They'd even get some people to sign up, only to call back in a couple months to explain that they really couldn't offer service there. I'd put Frontier and some of the CLEC's in the area in the upper edge above Qwest in terms of ease to deal with. Sure, there's some bad reps at Qwest, and their internal communication is pretty lacking sometimes, but there's also some pretty good reps in there too. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:08:41 PST From: Chris Kantarjiev Subject: Re: Building a Voice-Driven Application I think that before you dive into architecting and owning a lot of hardware, you should consider building at least a prototype of your application in Voice XML and doing a trial hosting with a voice ASP such as Voxeo. They already own all the hardware and maintain a phone network. When I was working with them, they made their system available for free to developers, and had very good (and responsive) technical support. Check them out - www.voxeo.com. (Just a happy past customer.) chris ------------------------------ From: ellis@no.spam Subject: Re: NetZero Commercials on Television Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 20:31:40 -0000 Organization: S.P.C.A.A. In article , Danny Burstein wrote: > a) it'll downgrade images on a web page, making > them much smaller (bytewise) and moving them > across faster. So that 250k jpg you're downloading > from NASA's Mars collection will be replaced by > a, perhaps, 50k one. Faster d/l, but lossy. Is there a way for a web author to tell them not to do that? I really don't like the idea of Netzero messing with my images. http://www.spinics.net/photo/ ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Blame General Electric for BlackOut says FirstEnergy Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 15:23:57 -0600 Daeron wrote: > Poulsen reported that FirstEnergy engineers had bridged the nuclear > plant's control network with FirstEnergy's corporate network -- a > practice that is increasingly common among utility companies, > according to industry and security experts." I used to live about ten miles from the Perry nuke plant in North Perry Village, the other Ohio nuclear plant owned by FirstEnergy. I no longer live there, but my family still lives in the Cleveland area, within easy driving distance of Perry. Ironically, when I moved on June 29th of last year, I was *in* Akron. My brother-in-law and mother-in-law flew into town to help us move and were staying in Akron because it was cheaper to fly into Akron than into Cleveland. I was within a couple minutes walking distance of FirstEnergy. Perhaps I should have gone over to their headquarters and kicked a couple CxO's in the head. What is wrong with these people? > "The root cause of the outage was linked to .. trees .. FirstEnergy > says .. its role in the outage is overstated in the interim report" Uh-huh. > Retrospective ass covering is all. I guess General Electric can't > afford as much protection on Capitol Hill as MICROS~1. Get those > cheque books out guys. It's election year!!! Yeah ... well ... does the bug even exist, or is FirstEnergy lying? Before we blame GE or even Microslop, I'd love to see an audit of FirstEnergy's network. Not gonna happen, of course, but it would be interesting reading. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 15:02:17 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when Barry Margolin wrote: > How does that address the point that Geoffrey was making, which is > that AV software won't recognize a virus that it hasn't specifically > been taught about? Some AV software does. It watches or scans for "virus-like" characteristics. F-Prot is one such, but I think not the only. Some AV software also can store state info about files (checksums, whatever) and warn if it changes. Of course, if the software has been taught about the virus (updates are usually available within a day or so) identification is more positive. Most software firewalls will raise a flag if a program tries to access the 'net without permission, or if a program that has permission has been modified since permission was given. I use Kerio, but ZA and I think the others are similar. That *should* stop an email worm that has its own SMTP engine. > Unfortunately, this type of monitoring doesn't really work in the case > of things like email worms. As applications have become more complex > and integrated, it's common for many different applications to access > the address book and/or send out mail, so these alerts would be much > more common from normal activities. Any software that goes through my Windows Address Book is going to come up pretty dry, as I don't use it. And don't use MS mail programs, either. > And there are also many more unsophisticated users, who wouldn't really > know how to respond to the alerts. That is indeed a problem. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When I woke up this morning and stopped in the computer room on my way to my first cup of coffee and cigarette for the day, there was the Windows 98 sitting there patiently waiting for me with a message from Zone Alarm stating that 'program X wants to access internet. Will you permit this? From sometime around 4 AM. It was some kind of spyware thing trying to 'call home'. Of course I went in and bashed the whole thing on the spot. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael Chance Subject: Re: Telephone Service Surcharges Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 12:44:16 GMT In article , jared.NospaM@netspace.net.au says: > Federal Excise Tax 3% > Tax mandated by the federal government imposed on all > telecommunication services. Isn't this the original telephone tax, which was enacted as a "luxury tax" in about 1898 to help finance the Spanish-American War? And wasn't there an effort a couple of years ago to phase out this tax? Michael Chance [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought the 'telephone luxury tax' started about 1917 during the First War as a way to provide for the soldiers. They won't be getting rid of it anytime soon, however. Even though our president lied about the need to be in Iraq, (WMD and all that malarkey) and he then declared officially that the hostilities ended back in May of last year, we still have had any number of young guys getting killed on a daily basis, and about five thousand new guys shipped out for Iraq from North Carolina last week. Didn't someone around here shake his finger at you and pronounce from his deseased brain that by the time we finally get out of Iraq it would make VietNam look like a summer church camp for little kids? If readers could have only been around Chicago during the week of August, 1968 when the Democrats had their riotous (not an exageration!) convention in Chicago and the police followed up with a riot of their own and went totally out of control with their gas and their clubs. Cell phones had not yet been invented, and you could walk around for blocks downtown looking for a single payphone to use which had not been vandalized beyond any use at all. **Iraq is shaping up the same way** I am sad to say. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #72 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Feb 15 17:03:01 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1FM31L09521; Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:03:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:03:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402152203.i1FM31L09521@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 #73 TELECOM Digest Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:03:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 73 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Offspring of Spam and Telemarketing (Monty Solomon) New Lawsuit Targets DVD Copying (Monty Solomon) State's New Technology Gathers Info to Find Tax Cheats (Monty Solomon) Amazon Glitch Unmasks War of Reviewers (Monty Solomon) Verizon May Hang up on Plan to Sell Phone Number (Stan) A Suspicious Netscape Icon on my DeskTop (Kan Yabumoto) Cell Phone Numbering Arrangements (Rob) Re: Lost Liberties/Thousand J. Edgar Hoovers/Outlaw Dissent (McWebber) Re: Norvergence Still at it ... (Richard Ramirez) Re: Acxiom is Watching You (Teritor) Re: Telephone Service Surcharges (Michael Chance) My New Blog (Weblog) (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:57:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Offspring of Spam and Telemarketing Firms using prizes and discounts to get customers to request text-message ads By Sasha Talcott, Globe Correspondent, 2/14/2004 Jessica Yang had just walked out of work when her cellphone beeped. "Rainy day special," the text message read, urging the 26-year-old research analyst to stop by the Paris Creperie in Brookline for a discount on crepes and other items. "It was like, 'Great, I don't have to cook dinner tonight,' " Yang said. She promptly ordered her favorite: ham and egg crepe. With spam clogging e-mail boxes, telemarketers calling at all hours, and mailboxes stuffed with junk mail, the cellphone has become one of the consumer's last ad-free oases. But not for long. Marketing companies are increasingly targeting the text-messaging feature of cellphones as an effective way to push customers to open their wallets. The new text-messaging ads have a twist, however. Learning from the backlash against unsolicited e-mail spam, marketers are going to great lengths to persuade customers to actually ask to receive the ads on their phones. By dangling discounts, prizes or trivia questions, the companies aim to make the ads worth a customer's while. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/02/14/offspring_of_spam_and_telemarketing/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 02:02:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New Lawsuit Targets DVD Copying By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com The DVD Copy Control Association, a Hollywood-backed technology group, filed suit against software company 321 Studios on Friday for allegedly infringing patent rights on its DVD copy protection. The suit is the fourth set of claims to be filed against 321 Studios, which markets the most popular DVD copying software commercially available. Previously, the company has been sued in both California and in New York by coalitions of Hollywood studios and by Macrovision, another copy-protection technology company. The DVD CCA recently dropped lawsuits against individuals who posted code used in the process of copying DVDs online. After that decision, the group said it would use other tactics to defend its intellectual property. http://news.com.com/2100-1025-5159279.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 02:18:53 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: State's New Technology Gathers Information to Find Tax Cheats By linking to databases, individuals can be profiled By Bruce Mohl, Globe Staff, 2/15/2004 If you get the urge to fudge a bit on your taxes this year because you think, "Who's going to notice?" think again. The state Revenue Department is watching. The agency has launched a technology offensive with the goal of pulling together stray bits of information about every Massachusetts taxpayer, searching for clues that would indicate who isn't paying the taxes they owe. State officials dismiss the notion they are playing Big Brother, but the potential is rather Orwellian. In theory, said Revenue Department Commissioner Alan LeBovidge, the state may eventually be able to track down so much information about a resident's finances that the state, rather than the individual, could complete the individual's tax return. http://www.boston.com/business/taxes/articles/2004/02/15/states_new_technology_gathers_information_to_find_tax_cheats/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 02:21:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Amazon Glitch Unmasks War of Reviewers By AMY HARMON Close observers of Amazon.com noticed something peculiar this week: the company's Canadian site had suddenly revealed the identities of thousands of people who had anonymously posted book reviews on the United States site under signatures like "a reader from New York." The weeklong glitch, which Amazon fixed after outed reviewers complained, provided a rare glimpse at how writers and readers are wielding the online reviews as a tool to promote or pan a book -- when they think no one is watching. John Rechy, author of the best-selling 1963 novel "City of Night" and winner of the PEN-USA West lifetime achievement award, is one of several prominent authors who have apparently pseudonymously written themselves five-star reviews, Amazon's highest rating. Mr. Rechy, who laughed about it when approached, sees it as a means to survival when online stars mean sales. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/14/technology/14AMAZ.html ------------------------------ From: Stan Subject: Verizon May Hang up on Plan to Sell Phone Number Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 05:45:20 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - Carolina Bidders Hot for Jenny's NYC Number Verizon may hang up on plan to sell 867-5309 By Monty Phan STAFF WRITER Newsday (Long Island) February 14, 2004 To all Manhattan women named Jenny: He's got your number. Combining the forces of '80s pop culture and offbeat Internet auctions, a Manhattan man is using eBay to try to sell 212-867-5309, the number -- sans area code -- that appears in the 1981 song "867-5309/Jenny," by one-hit wonder Tommy Tutone. The question is whether he has the right to sell a number at all. That hasn't stopped bidders so far. Thanks to some Web site postings and a mention Friday on ABC's "Good Morning America," the auction is up to $4,050. "I did not expect this kind of response," said John, the attorney selling the number, who declined to give his last name to maintain some semblance of anonymity. "I'm blown away by the fact that 'Good Morning America' found it. Publicists spend months trying to get on 'Good Morning America,' and I just put it up on eBay [Thursday]." He acquired the number a few months ago after he called it and realized no one had it. He then got the number from Verizon and has used it as a second line, hooking it up to an answering machine. As discovered by people over the past two decades who had their own area code's version of the number, he gets calls throughout the week, but "mostly on weekends, mostly from people that are drunk." Some call it for fun, others call it without realizing it was given out as a fake number. But there's a question of whether the number can even be transferred to the winner once the auction ends Feb. 22. Verizon says there's no question: It can't. Individuals do not have ownership of the numbers given to them, so the right to the number can't be sold, a Verizon spokesman said. Even if the seller agreed to drop the number, there's usually a waiting period to allow for account closure or other reasons, so the buyer wouldn't be able to pick it up right away. Nevertheless, those who lose out on the bidding, take heart: You could always get the "867-5309/Jenny" ring tone. ------------------------------ From: tech@xxcopy.com (Kan Yabumoto) Subject: A Suspicious Netscape Icon on my DeskTop Date: 14 Feb 2004 11:19:05 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I wonder if anyone had a similar experience as mine. When I booted up my XP-Pro computer this morning, I noticed a few funny things. The desktop icons are all re-arranged (for the first time in many months --- this reminded me of the Win9X experience which did this from time to time). I have quite a few icons everywhere on my screen. They are strategically arranged for optimum productivity. Then, I noticed a new icon near the center of the screen -- a familiar Netscape icon (the cute N logo on the Earth I used to like -- that was before the Netscape that we knew was demolished by Micro$oft's illegal action). I grew suspicious of the whole thing for several reasons: 1. I have a hunch that the icon re-arrangement on my desktop did not happen by accident (like in the Win9X system). It is probably a result of placing the unwelcome icon for Netscape (which is labeled "Netscape ISP Try It Now") in the middle to get my attention by some uninvited software which placed it there. 2. I run the Ad-Aware utility almost everyday to keep unwelcome guest from messing around my computer's settings. Somehow, the presence of the Netscape Icon is a proof that something defeated the Ad-Aware defense. 3. Is this (virus-like) behavior a way to get new customer? Certainly not for a self-respecting company. But, if this is by a company once owned by a crook like Steve Case, that explains. 4. Netscape is supposedly part of AOL and is apparently trying to start a new ISP business at $9.95/mon. It claims $9.95 per month for an unlimited Internet access with personal Email -- from anywhere in the country. But, AOL is still doing their business with existing customer at $23.90 (they should offer the same rate to all of their existing customers). 5. I was curious as to what is the catch. So, I proceeded to sign up (I did not give my credit card number, of course). (I have a broadband (cable) access and don't need dial up.) The contract agreement was relatively brief and does not talk much (i.e., they do not promise anything, not even the bandwidth of the connection, or list of connection numbers -- their web sites don't mention). 6. The agreement even explicitly gives them a blank check to "optimize" the users' Internet "experience". (The terms almost promise to rape your system.) 7. The fine print says I have to pay additional fee for the "Premium service" whatever that means. 8. Only a fool will proceed to get into the contract because you have to give them your credit card number and accept their terms before you know what you are getting. BTW, the Netscape icon that mysteriously appered on my Desktop is a link to the following sign-up form: https://register.isp.netscape.com/default.jsp?promo=NS_2_6_2_2003_12_6 The brief description of the service can be viewed from: http://www.getnetscape.com/index.adp?promo=NS_2_7_7_2003_10_2 But, this leads you to download a silly commercial video footage without any technical substance. The whole presentation is extremely vague. In conclusion, my point is: I'm quite disturbed by the appearance of the Netscape Icon on my computer. This is not by a no-name company. It is one of the largest companies and it blatantly disturbed my computer and placed this unwelcome icon on my desktop. Furthermore, it lures the user to a binding contract with full of foul smell ... Has anyone seen the same thing? If you have seen it, what's your take on this? Kan [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Did you ever notice how many useless icons America Online puts on your desktop behind your back whenever you do an upgrade with them, or change to their DSL instead of the dialup so many of their users are used to? Same difference. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rob51166@yahoo.com (Rob) Subject: Cell Phone Numbering Arrangments Date: 14 Feb 2004 12:51:39 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Do NANP counties use a 'standard' area-code for cellphones as opposed to the UK (cell phone numbers begin with 07XXX) or other countries, where different codes are required? Just asking! :-) Rob ------------------------------ From: McWebber Subject: Re: Lost Liberties / A Thousand J. Edgar Hoovers Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 14:06:42 -0500 Monty Solomon wrote in message news:telecom23.72.6@telecom-digest.org: > http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/02/12/dissent_two/ > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Again, this is supposed to be something > new? Of course computers have made the job of police (spying, gassing, > and general brutality) much easier. J. Edgar Hoover would be so proud > of how far his people have been able to get, spy-wise, in this age of > computers. PAT] Again, yes, it is new. The FBI had been stopped from doing that until Bush II. Monty Solomon wrote in message news:telecom23.72.5@telecom-digest.org: > http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/02/11/cointelpro/ > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's really nothing new. Back in the > sixties and seventies, Chicago Police had an active 'red squad' whose > job it was (besides gassing and beating up war protestors and others) > was to spy and infiltrate churches and other peaceable gatherings of > citizens. I wonder why Salon thinks this is somehow a new story. PAT] Because the practice was later banned due to abuses of civil liberties, until Herr rather Mr. Ashcroft came along. McWebber "Richter points to the lack of legal action against his company as proof that he's operating appropriately." Information Week, November 10, 2003 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 11:54:03 -0800 (PST) From: Richard Ramirez Subject: Re: Norvergence Still at it ... Didn't you write that it was the DEFENDANT'S lawyer (Acosta) that had demanded you to remove the derog comments? What does that have to do with Norvergence still being "at it"? -RR [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes I did say that. But I have been told that Norvergence (who started the whole problem with the discharge from employment of the defendant) has now agreed to drop their lawsuit against the defendant *on the condition* that the defendant go about the net and get the derogatory comments about Norvengence removed from the various archives and newsgroups where they appear. In other words, Norvergence (who started the whole thing) will lay off on the Defendant if *I* will cooperate in the removal of messages here. That's why Norvergence is still 'at it'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Teritor Subject: Re: Acxiom is Watching You Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 12:31:08 -0600 Organization: deamon Either post the entire article or don't post at all. I don't want to have to subscribe or watch ads to read the rest of this! On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 03:31:44 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > Whenever you book a flight, this data-mining colossus will be turning > over its files to John Ashcroft. Why did Wesley Clark lobby for what > could become the biggest snooping operation of all time? > By Farhad Manjoo > Feb. 10, 2004 | On Saturday, Jan. 5, 2002, a 15-year-old boy named > Charles Bishop stole a single-engine Cessna airplane from the St. > Petersburg International Airport in Florida and crashed it into an > office building in Tampa. The boy, who was probably mentally > disturbed, died; no one else was hurt. Still, in the tense months > after the 9/11 attacks, Charles Bishop's flight was one of the dozens > of small, strange events that set the public imagination reeling over > the horrors surrounding airplanes, and cable news shows went into > overdrive to cover it. The next day on CNN, Wesley Clark, the retired > Army general who was at the time the network's military analyst, was > asked about "the situation in Tampa.... The fact that a teenager was > able to steal this plane and crash it into a building -- what does > that say about the general state of aviation security?" > "We've been worried about general aviation security for some time," > Clark said. "The aircraft need to be secured, the airfields need to be > secured, and obviously we're going to also have to go through and do a > better job of screening who could fly aircraft, who the private pilots > are, who owns these aircraft. So it's going to be another major > effort." > That answer -- that pilots ought to face more-rigorous screening -- > seemed logical enough; but according to some critics, Wesley Clark > might have had an ulterior motive in calling for more background > checks in aviation. What Clark, who is now campaigning for the > Democratic presidential nomination, did not tell the CNN audience was > that, months before the interview, he had been hired as a board member > and lobbyist for Acxiom, an Arkansas company that manages data > collected by large businesses on millions of Americans. Weeks after > the Sept. 11 attacks, the company developed a computerized system that > would perform instant identity checks on airline passengers. > http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/02/10/acxiom/ ------------------------------ From: Michael Chance Subject: Re: Telephone Service Surcharges Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 11:12:37 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought the 'telephone luxury tax' > started about 1917 during the First War as a way to provide for the > soldiers. They won't be getting rid of it anytime soon, however. [ remainder of moderator comments deleted ] Now I'm sorry that I asked the question. If I'd know that it would have sent Pat off on an error-laden, near libelous rant against President Bush, I never would have bothered. Diseased brain or not, that was uncalled for. I'm more than willing to debate Pat on the points in which he's got his facts and assumptions wrong, but this isn't a political forum (at least I didn't think that it was), but a telecom one (which is what I thought that I was attempting to discuss). My mistake, and I apologize to the rest of the readers for inflicting this on you all. Michael Chance ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:34:49 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: My New Blog (Weblog) Michael Chance and egnil1494 both raise good points of interest in their two messages in this issue. First of all, egnil says run the entire article or don't run it; he does not like reading ads or having to subscribe (to Salon). The trouble is, when you 'borrow' articles from other sources as Monty Solomon does and I sometimes do, you can either do an excerpt or *very occassionally* run the entire article under the 'fair use' provisions of the copyright laws. Those of you who follow this Digest know I rely on a very liberal interpretation of the copyright 'fair use' provisions. The Cornell University Law School says I am within my rights to do this. I've no doubt I can do this, but when a newsgroup takes a total free ride by continually using the research/writing of others **without compensating them** it begins to get sort of brazen. Of course, I could compensate the authors also, e.g. have advertisements, sell subscriptions, etc, but that poses other problems as well. So my 'compromise' is to rely on 'fair use' (as defined by Cornell) quite often and rely on links to the actual article in other cases. Usually, I wind up accepting Monty Solomon's material as he chooses to edit it; if he sends the full article then I append the 'fair use' message at its conclusion; if he sends a link then I use the link. Ditto the other contributors here who send that kind of material. Link or full article with fair use disclaimer, as it arrives here. Or, if sometimes a reader sends a large (not) original article but does not appeal to 'fair use' at the bottom of the article, then I append that statement from my files here. So, egnil, really, I try hard -- my best -- to make good judgment calls on this. If I had an endowment -- or even made more than a half-hearted/non-existent effort to ENFORCE a subscription policy here, then I could use that money to join the syndicates that Salon, Yahoo, and others belong to and begin printing the same articles in full here, with no compunctions. Lacking that endowment (or source of funds) my compromise is to occassionally force readers to make their virgin eyes(!) see 'advertisements' now and then from Salon and the better quality web sites. Seriously, like President Carter, I lust in my heart to operate a first class site like Salon. I only wish there was money available to me to do it. So egnil, how would *you* have me do it? Now on to Michael Chance and his more serious complaint, about how bad my brain desease has gotten (!!) I AGREE. The time has come to *split* my writing/rambling into parts; one part for telecom and the other part for my increasing concerns over the downright *evil* things which are starting to return to our country, compliments of our born-again president and his band of cronies. All during the 1960-70's, I was, well, to put it politely, an 'anti-war' activist. You will see my propensities for same if you google up my *very old* messages from chinet and the old BBS lines which have survived in the archives of on the net from the late seventies/early eighties. Then in the middle 1980's, when I inherited TELECOM Digest, I promised to 'behave myself' and I periodically renew that promise or commitment from time to time but then our deranged president or his staff do something *so outrageous* or *so incredible* that I bubble over. No doubt it is my diseased brain acting up again. The way I have decided to handle that is with a web log, or 'blog' which I invite all of you to participate in if you wish. You can be anonymous or real, as you wish when posting messages in the blog at http://patricktownson-live.us.tf . And if you want to see if I am in my computer room at work, look at http://patricktownson.us.tf (where you will find a link to the blog.) Its been going for about a week or so; you might want to catch up on the older entries. And use the 'comment on this' link to add your own thoughts. Thank you, Michael, for giving me the impetus I needed to finally make it happen. 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: 620-330-6774 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 #73 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 16 03:36:36 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1G8aaG13270; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 03:36:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 03:36:36 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402160836.i1G8aaG13270@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 #74 TELECOM Digest Mon, 16 Feb 2004 03:35:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 74 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cell Phone Numbering Arrangments (email@crazyhat.net) Re: Cell Phone Numbering Arrangments (Jared) Re: Cell Phone Numbering Arrangments (Joseph) Re: Verizon May Hang up on Plan to Sell Phone Number (Nick Landsberg) Re: Verizon May Hang up on Plan to Sell Phone Number (Tony P.) Re: My New Blog (WebLog) (Steven J Sobol) Re: Acxiom is Watching You (Steven J Sobol) Telephones With Intercom Capability? (Timur Tabi) Re: State's New Technology Gathers Info to Find Tax Cheats (L. Hancock) Re: Lost Liberties / Outlawing Dissent (Lisa Hancock) Experts Warn of Microsoft 'Monoculture' (Monty Solomon) Friendster Frenzy Has Analysts Puzzled (Monty Solomon) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Cell Phone Numbering Arrangments Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 21:02:07 -0700 From: In message <> rob51166@yahoo.com (Rob) did ramble: > Do NANP counties use a 'standard' area-code for cellphones as > opposed to the UK (cell phone numbers begin with 07XXX) or other > countries, where different codes are required? There is typically a number of NXXs assigned for cellphones, but not a dedicated area code. This means that a caller typically has no way to know whether they are calling a cell phone, landline, VoIP phone, or anything else, unless they happen to know the NXXs of the area in question. It also makes full portability possible. When you're arguing with a fool, make sure he isn't doing the same thing. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 00:12:25 -0700 From: jared.NospaM@netspace.net.au (jared) Subject: Re: Cell Phone Numbering Arrangments In the USA part of the NANP at least, the FCC, the American approximation to OFTEL, banned doing so. There was cell phone area code that predated the decision, I'm not sure what happened to it. A prefix isn't needed in the USA as it's not caller-pays for calls to mobiles, instead the mobile phone owner pays for the call time. Roaming is interesting too: whether the caller pays a local or long distance rate depends on the mobile phone's area code, not where it happens to be with respect to the caller. > Do NANP counties use a 'standard' area-code for cellphones as opposed > to the UK (cell phone numbers begin with 07XXX) or other countries, where > different codes are required? > Just asking! :-) > Rob ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Cell Phone Numbering Arrangments Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 16:28:21 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On 14 Feb 2004 12:51:39 -0800, rob51166@yahoo.com (Rob) wrote: > Do NANP counties use a 'standard' area-code for cellphones as opposed > to the UK (cell phone numbers begin with 07XXX) or other countries, where > different codes are required? If you mean mobile specific area codes such as T-Mobile in the UK being 07950 no. There are mobile "prefixes" but they are treated just as any other area code and prefix e.g. 206-235-XXXX or 206-229-XXXX would be T-Mobile US prefixes in Seattle, Washington and 206-669-XXXX or 206-331-XXXX would be AT&T Wireless prefixes in Seattle, Washington. As far as the normal telephone user it wouldn't make any difference. It would make a difference if you are a subscriber of a mobile carrier and you have either reduced or free mobile-to-mobile calling. Unlike in Europe and Asia calls to mobile numbers are no more expensive than calling fixed wireline numbers. remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: Verizon May Hang up on Plan to Sell Phone Number Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 22:22:35 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Stan wrote: > Bidders Hot for Jenny's NYC Number > Verizon may hang up on plan to sell 867-5309 > By Monty Phan > STAFF WRITER > Newsday (Long Island) > February 14, 2004 > To all Manhattan women named Jenny: He's got your number. > Combining the forces of '80s pop culture and offbeat Internet > auctions, a Manhattan man is using eBay to try to sell 212-867-5309, > the number -- sans area code -- that appears in the 1981 song > "867-5309/Jenny," by one-hit wonder Tommy Tutone. > The question is whether he has the right to sell a number at all. > That hasn't stopped bidders so far. Thanks to some Web site postings > and a mention Friday on ABC's "Good Morning America," the auction is > up to $4,050. > "I did not expect this kind of response," said John, the attorney > selling the number, who declined to give his last name to maintain > some semblance of anonymity. "I'm blown away by the fact that 'Good > Morning America' found it. Publicists spend months trying to get on > 'Good Morning America,' and I just put it up on eBay [Thursday]." > He acquired the number a few months ago after he called it and > realized no one had it. He then got the number from Verizon and has > used it as a second line, hooking it up to an answering machine. As > discovered by people over the past two decades who had their own area > code's version of the number, he gets calls throughout the week, but > "mostly on weekends, mostly from people that are drunk." Some call it > for fun, others call it without realizing it was given out as a fake > number. > But there's a question of whether the number can even be transferred > to the winner once the auction ends Feb. 22. Verizon says there's no > question: It can't. Individuals do not have ownership of the numbers > given to them, so the right to the number can't be sold, a Verizon > spokesman said. Even if the seller agreed to drop the number, there's > usually a waiting period to allow for account closure or other > reasons, so the buyer wouldn't be able to pick it up right away. > Nevertheless, those who lose out on the bidding, take heart: You could > always get the "867-5309/Jenny" ring tone. Way back when, 30 or so years ago when I was with what was then New York Tel., there was a "gentleman's agreement" between the local stations and the phone company that they would not use a dummy number on a show without first notifying the phone company and asking them for a number which would always ring busy or provide some kind of pre-recorded message, e.g. "we're sorry, the call could not be completed as dialed". The NOC had a slew of unused numbers they could quickly program for this treatment and would gladly provide it in order to prevent network congestion when the show was aired. I guess this isn't possible any more what with national TV and the unlikelihood of the same number being unassigned in every area code. "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Verizon May Hang up on Plan to Sell Phone Number Organization: ATCC Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 22:59:27 GMT In article , stanncno1spam@noispam.yahoo.com says: > Bidders Hot for Jenny's NYC Number > Verizon may hang up on plan to sell 867-5309 > By Monty Phan > STAFF WRITER > Newsday (Long Island) > February 14, 2004 > To all Manhattan women named Jenny: He's got your number. > Combining the forces of '80s pop culture and offbeat Internet > auctions, a Manhattan man is using eBay to try to sell 212-867-5309, > the number -- sans area code -- that appears in the 1981 song > "867-5309/Jenny," by one-hit wonder Tommy Tutone. Interestingly enough - Gem Plumbing in Rhode Island is 401-867-5309. ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: My New Blog (Web log) Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:11:49 -0600 TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > under the 'fair use' provisions of the copyright laws. Those of you > who follow this Digest know I rely on a very liberal interpretation of > the copyright 'fair use' provisions. > The Cornell University Law School says I am within my rights to do > this. I've no doubt I can do this, but when a newsgroup takes a total > free ride by continually using the research/writing of others > **without compensating them** it begins to get sort of brazen. I agree, and for that reason I don't have a problem with Monty Solomon continuing to post just the first paragraph or two along with a link. Of course, it'd be nice if he also posted real conversations so we could all figure out that he's not a "bot" :) JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Acxiom is Watching You Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:14:18 -0600 Teritor wrote: > Either post the entire article or don't post at all. > I don't want to have to subscribe or watch ads to read the rest of > this! If you're not paying Salon for a subscription, they have every right to make their money in other ways. It takes quite a bit of money to run a magazine. Or do you think they should just post stuff for free for you, when they charge everyone else? Plus, there are copyright issues with posting the entire thing. If you don't want to follow the links you don't have to. I don't always read all of the articles that Monty posts links to. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ From: nospam_timur@tabi.org (Timur Tabi) Subject: Telephones With Intercom Capability? Date: 15 Feb 2004 16:50:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Do telephones with intercom capabilities exist? What I would like to do is replace all of the phones in my house with new phones that have an intercom capability. For example, I press the "intercom" button on my phone, and my voice is broadcast too all other phones in the house. Each phone jack in my house is wired with Cat5 cable, so I can support up to four phone lines at each jack. I would expect this "intercom phone" to use one of the extra pairs for the intercom capability. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, and in fact you can make your own intercom from a telephone pair quite easily. Radio Shack has the kind of phone you need as well as many other suppliers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff nor Lisa) Subject: Re: State's New Technology Gathers Information to Find Tax Cheats Date: 15 Feb 2004 21:43:32 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Monty Solomon wrote: > If you get the urge to fudge a bit on your taxes this year because you > think, "Who's going to notice?" think again. The state Revenue > Department is watching. The agency has launched a technology offensive > with the goal of pulling together stray bits of information about > every Massachusetts taxpayer, searching for clues that would indicate > who isn't paying the taxes they owe. This isn't anything new. Most states interface with the Federal IRS to compare notes. Most sources of income submit that data to the tax people. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff nor Lisa) Subject: Re: Lost Liberties / Outlawing dissent Date: 15 Feb 2004 21:48:27 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Monty Solomon wrote: > Feb. 11, 2004 | The undercover cop introduced herself to the activists > from the Colorado Coalition Against the War in Iraq as Chris Hoffman, > but her real name was Chris Hurley. Last March, she arrived at a > nonviolence training session in Denver... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ... She said she was willing to get arrested for the cause of > peace. In fact, she did get arrested. She was just never charged. The > activists she protested with wouldn't find out why for months. I found this post rather disturbing, but not for what you'd think. As the article makes clear, the protestors were planning to do something that was _illegal_. Thus, they were planning to commit a criminal act. That is not peaceable protest; that is crime. Activists defend their criminal activity on the grounds that their message is so important it "justifies" the crime and disruption. > Chris Hurley was just one of many cops all over the country who went > undercover to spy on antiwar protesters last year. Nonviolent antiwar > groups in Fresno, Calif., Grand Rapids, Mich., and Albuquerque, N.M., > have all been infiltrated or surveilled by undercover police > officers. Shortly after the Buckley protest, the Boulder group was > infiltrated a second time, by another pair of police posing as an > activist couple. > Meanwhile, protesters arrested at antiwar demonstrations in New York > last spring were extensively questioned about their political > associations, and their answers were entered into databases. And last > week, a federal prosecutor in Des Moines, Iowa, obtained a subpoena > demanding that Drake University turn over records from an antiwar > conference called "Stop the Occupation! Bring the Iowa Guard Home!" > that the school's chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, a civil > libertarian legal group, hosted on Nov. 15 of last year, the day > before a protest at the Iowa National Guard headquarters. Among the > information the government sought was the names of the leaders of the > Drake University Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, its records > dating back to January of 2002, and the names of everyone who > attended the "Stop the Occupation!" conference. Four antiwar > activists also received subpoenas in the investigation. > http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/02/11/cointelpro/ > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's really nothing new. Back in the > sixties and seventies, Chicago Police had an active 'red squad' whose > job it was (besides gassing and beating up war protestors and others) > was to spy and infiltrate churches and other peaceable gatherings of > citizens. I wonder why Salon thinks this is somehow a new story. PAT] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And that legal theory, of a 'greater good' has been upheld occassionally now and then in courts. If someone is in the process (or imminitly about to commit an illegal action, and no police officer is around to stop the act, then if a citizen can stop the act he should. Then it rightly becomes a matter for the courts to straighten out, but now and then the citizen intervenor has been found innocent of what he did, because of a 'greater good'. Taken in the context of what went on in this case, police did not handle it very well. In any event, the police traditionally over-react in the matter. They could announce their presence at a meeting rather than go 'undercover' and encourage people to commit the 'crimes'. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 22:40:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Experts Warn of Microsoft 'Monoculture' By JUSTIN POPE AP Business Writer CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) -- Dan Geer lost his job, but gained his audience. The very idea that got the computer security expert fired has sparked serious debate in information technology. The idea, borrowed from biology, is that Microsoft Corp. has nurtured a software "monoculture" that threatens global computer security. Geer and others believe Microsoft's software is so dangerously pervasive that a virus capable of exploiting even a single flaw in its operating systems could wreak havoc. Just this past week, Microsoft warned customers about security problems that independent experts called among the most serious yet disclosed. Network administrators could only hope users would download the latest patch. After he argued in a paper published last fall that the monoculture amplifies online threats, Geer was fired by security firm (at)stake Inc., which has had Microsoft as a major client. Geer insists there's been a silver lining to his dismissal. Once it got discussed on Slashdot.org and other online forums, the debate about Microsoft's ubiquity gained in prominence. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40607715 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 22:43:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Friendster Frrenzy Has Analysts Puzzled By Lisa Baertlein SAN FRANCISCO, Feb 15 (Reuters) - Unlike the companion-seeking hipsters that people its Web site, Friendster has had no trouble making friends -- especially among venture capitalists. But when it comes to business, surely friendship has its limits -- or does it? Analysts are scratching their heads and puzzling over how Friendster -- and the other so-called social e-networking companies that have emerged as the upstart Internet success story of the past year -- can make money. Friendster, which is known as a dating site that hooks up friends of friends, last year pulled in $13 million in venture capital -- a significant amount considering the tough climate for new venture funding. Business-oriented Spoke and LinkedIn picked up $20.5 million and $4.7 million respectively. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40606640 ------------------------------ 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 #74 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 17 04:05:08 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1H957i21354; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 04:05:08 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 04:05:08 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402170905.i1H957i21354@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 #75 TELECOM Digest Tue, 17 Feb 2004 04:05:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 75 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Exploit Based on Leaked Windows Code Released (Monty Solomon) Re: Monty Solomon Postings (was: My New Blog (Web log)) (Mark Brader) Re: Monty Solomon Postings (was: My New Blog (Web log)) (Peter Neumann) Sound Quality of Skype (BigO) Usage Numbers, Nortel/Motorola, Others vrs. Lucent (Dakshin) World-Wide Cellular Coverage (Charles B. Wilber) Re: Telephones With Intercom Capability? (SELLCOM Tech support) Re: NetZero Commercials on Television (nospam@nothere.com) Re: Lost Liberties / Outlawing Dissent (William Warren) Re: Qwest vs. Other Companies (AL) Norvergence, Frankly (BarryB) Re: Phantom DSL Reprised (Matthew Elvey) Re: Experts Warn of Microsoft 'Monoculture' (AES/newspost) Re: Telephone Service Surcharges (John McHarry) Re: My New Blog (Weblog) (pm2020bc@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil) What Happened to the Telecom IRC Chat Room? (Scott Wilson) Funchain.com Combines Social Networking With Blogging (Bagani) 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, 16 Feb 2004 13:54:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Exploit Based on Leaked Windows Code Released By Patrick Gray, SecurityFocus Exploit based on leaked Windows code released A vulnerability in Internet Explorer 5 is the first to surface from last week's source code spill. By Patrick Gray The first new security vulnerability to emerge from last week's Microsoft source code leak crossed a security mailing list over the weekend, reigniting debate over the seriousness of the leak. The vulnerability affects Internet Explorer 5 and various versions of Outlook Express. It was unearthed in code the two programs use to process bitmap image files, and affects the software on several versions of Windows, including 98, 2000 and XP. While some systems appear to be immune to the glitch, a proof-of-concept exploit that was posted to the Full Disclosure mailing list crashes Outlook Express 6 on Windows XP systems. Service Pack 1 appears to correct the vulnerability. The exploit is a carefully-constructed bitmap file that "clobbers the stack" with data when opened in a vulnerable application, according to the author of the exploit, who calls himself "GTA." By corrupting a targeted system's memory in a controlled way, an attacker could likely use the flaw to execute arbitrary code on a vulnerable machine. http://www.securityfocus.com/news/8060 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Monty Solomon Postings (was My New Blog (Web log)) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 12:28:13 EST From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) Steven Sobol writes in comp.dcom.telecom: > ... I don't have a problem with Monty Solomon continuing to post > just the first paragraph or two [of newspaper and similar articles] > along with a link. Of course, it'd be nice if he also posted real > conversations so we could all figure out that he's not a "bot" :) This is my feeling also. The one thing that does bother me when I come across Monty's postings is that they're formatted as if he was claiming to have written the excerpts he quotes. On Usenet as in real life, it is conventional to explicitly mark quoted text -- for a long passage of multiple paragraphs, usually one gives an attribution before the text *and* does some sort of indentation. In addition, one usually includes some words of one's own to make it obvious *why* one is quoting this passage, although I appreciate that that might be difficult for a person who is a bulk quoting machine. :-) To me, having text that suddenly ends and is followed by a URL just doesn't do the job. Yes, people will get used to it -- it doesn't bother *me* as much as it used to -- but they shouldn't have to. I think Monty needs to reform, or at least reformat. :-) (I'm Ccing this to the moderator of comp.risks, where Monty's postings also sometimes appear. The mystical "notsp" in the subject line is for his benefit.) Mark Brader, Toronto | "No flames were used in the creation of msb@vex.net | this message." -- Ray Depew My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 12:55:44 PST From: Peter G. Neumann Subject: Re: Monty Solomon Postings (was: My New Blog (Web log)) Good comments. I use relatively little of Monty's stuff, and often put the real author's name in the subject line. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mr. Neumann is the moderator of RISKS, a prominent journal on internet. PAT] ------------------------------ From: okleine@hotmail.com (BigO) Subject: Sound Quality of Skype Date: 16 Feb 2004 11:13:23 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I have a friend deep down in Africa whom I'm trying to contact via Skype. I have a BT Broadband line and it works very well with other people having such a connection. Unfortunately, this friend of mine has only got an analogue line. When trying to call me, he can understand me very well, but I can only hear bits and pieces of what he says. Is there a chance of reducing the quality of his mike in order to reduce the datastream and thus have probably a terribly sounding but at least understandable voice? Thanks in advance! O ------------------------------ From: dakshing64@yahoo.com (Bush will disarm all workers next) Subject: Usage Numbers (ccs/erlang) Nortel/Motorola vrs. Lucent 5E Date: 16 Feb 2004 13:31:49 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Two weeks ago, I asked a query about the usage (ccs/erlang) numbers of Nortel (DMS) and Motorola (EMX) switches vis-a-vis Lucent 5E. I'm hoping a number of telco people knowledgeable about basics are reading this news group. My apology for reminding. Is there a better way to get my query answered by posting to another group or subscribing to a mailing list? Any suggestions are most welcome. Thanks, Dakshin ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 2004 09:58:38 EST From: Charles.B.Wilber@Dartmouth.EDU (Charles B. Wilber) Subject: World-Wide Cellular Coverage What are the best answers to an administrator who asks for a cell phone that can be used "all over the world?" I am not aware of any service (GSM or otherwise) that will work reliably all over the world. I have also read that it is often best to get cell service locally when traveling to other countries, at least from a cost point of view. Are there any alternatives besides satellite phones? Do even those provide reliable world-wide coverage? All suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Please reply directly to me as well as to the listserv. Thank you. Charlie Wilber Telephone Systems Manager Dartmouth College Hanover, New Hampshire ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Telephones With Intercom Capability? Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 19:06:11 GMT nospam_timur@tabi.org (Timur Tabi) posted on that vast internet thingie: > Do telephones with intercom capabilities exist? What I would like to > do is replace all of the phones in my house with new phones that have > an intercom capability. For example, I press the "intercom" button on > my phone, and my voice is broadcast too all other phones in the house. You may wish to look at the TMC ET4000 http://www.sellcom.com/tmc.html It has the features you mention and is 4 line. Steve at SELLCOM http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Siemens, AT&T, Panasonic, Motorola Vtech 5.8Ghz; TMC ET4000 4line Epic phone, OnHoldPlus, Talkswitch, Watchguard! Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. Minisplitter log splitter If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ From: nospam@nothere.com Subject: Re: NetZero Commercials on Television Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 10:44:06 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 20:31:40 -0000, ellis@no.spam wrote: > In article , Danny Burstein > wrote: >> a) it'll downgrade images on a web page, making >> them much smaller (bytewise) and moving them >> across faster. So that 250k jpg you're downloading >> from NASA's Mars collection will be replaced by >> a, perhaps, 50k one. Faster d/l, but lossy. > Is there a way for a web author to tell them not to do that? I really > don't like the idea of Netzero messing with my images. Copyright your images, then threaten Netzero with the DMCA? ;:-) > http://www.spinics.net/photo/ ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: Lost Liberties / Outlawing Dissent Organization: Comcast Online Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 17:51:56 GMT Lisa Hancock wrote in message news:telecom23.74.10@telecom-digest.org: > Monty Solomon wrote: >> Feb. 11, 2004 | The undercover cop introduced herself to the activists >> from the Colorado Coalition Against the War in Iraq as Chris Hoffman, >> but her real name was Chris Hurley. Last March, she arrived at a >> nonviolence training session in Denver... > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> ... She said she was willing to get arrested for the cause of >> peace. In fact, she did get arrested. She was just never charged. The >> activists she protested with wouldn't find out why for months. > I found this post rather disturbing, but not for what you'd > think. > As the article makes clear, the protestors were planning to do > something that was _illegal_. Thus, they were planning to commit a > criminal act. That is not peaceable protest; that is crime. > > Activists defend their criminal activity on the grounds that their > message is so important it "justifies" the crime and disruption. Amendment III No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Amendment VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: IMO, the 'trouble' with this latest conflict in Iraq, from my perspective as a Usenet newsgroup moderator who has essentially 'opened the door for discussion' by not long ago totally disavowing any/all comments on same, is that as the conflict escalates and grows more prolonged (and do not be decieved, it *will* go on for many, many years, at least through the tenure of the present president and probably well into the term of the next occupant) is that as it goes on, the discussions get more involved, more detailed, and more off-topic for telecom. That's one reason -- maybe the main one -- for my starting the http://patricktownson-live.us.tf web log or blog page. I hope eventually -- without having to be rude about it, that most of this discussion and similar will move into that area instead. Yes, I know, its probably mostly my fault. I originally thought the diversions would be welcome, and that some of my conclusions on the war would be as obvious to everyone as they are to me, but I guess not. PAT] ------------------------------ From: deftonic2@netscape.net (AL) Subject: Re: Qwest vs. Other Companies Date: 16 Feb 2004 10:38:43 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Dave Garland wrote in message news:: > The following post is from another group, but may be of interest to > TELECOM Digest readers. It's a response from an ISP tech guy to griping > about telco service in a Qwest area. Since I don't have permission to > repost, I've sanitized it a tad to anonymize the author. > ------------------------------ > As much as people gripe about Qwest, there are far far worse telco's > out there in the world. Since we deal with just about all of them > (either on a daily basis, because they are a given ILEC of an area > served [by us], which are Qwest, Frontier & Sprint), or have dealt > with them in the past. > The ones that spring to mind right away that are much much worse to > deal with than Qwest are > #3 Sprint > #2 McLeod USA > #1 MCI > At MCI, it feels like you talk to a brick wall, and it sure seems like > its company policy to just ignore you, keep on billing you for > services after you've cancelled (well past the 6-month mark is an > *average*), and have CSR's that couldn't tell you what a phone is, > even though they are talking to you on one. > The Sprint CSR's usually don't even know if they offer a service or > not, and there's no supervisors to check with to see. I think for a > while there, they started cold calling up random potential customers, > and offering the weirdest things like DSL service for somebody in > downtown [city], even though they only service a few areas around > [far-out suburbs]. They'd even get some people to sign up, only to > call back in a couple months to explain that they really couldn't > offer service there. > I'd put Frontier and some of the CLEC's in the area in the upper edge > above Qwest in terms of ease to deal with. > Sure, there's some bad reps at Qwest, and their internal communication > is pretty lacking sometimes, but there's also some pretty good reps in > there too. If your looking for good CSR, I've found that TelCan www.telcan.net has amazing services and quality CSR reps. www.telcan.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 12:36:58 -0500 From: BarryB Subject: Norvergence, Frankly Pat feel free to post it!! Their "Proprietary" Technology: Sure the boxes are patented, but not by them, instead by Adtran. The MATRIX is an Adtran 850 RCU which is a standard T1 integrated internet access device with channel bank and router, retailing for $2,222. I have sold programmed and installed dozens of these. It does not support voip. Voice is handled by standard channel option cards. The SOHO is an Adtran 2050, retailing for $599 which is a firewall, gateway, router, and VPN appliance -- it does not access the internet or handle any voice or voip. I have programmed and installed two of them, one in my home office. In all the Norvergence installations I've seen the box is doing nothing at all. I have one here that I removed from a client -- only one end was plugged in! ------------------------------ From: Matthew Elvey Subject: Re: Phantom DSL Reprised Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 00:00:00 Nick Landsberg wrote in news:telecom23.33.8@telecom-digest.org: > Some few weeks ago, there was a discussion in this group about DSL > ... > So, it seems, the providers are hoarding the DSL circuits in my CO > so they can milk the businesses for $160 bucks a month before > offering it to residential customers (going rate about $30 per > month). High speed access through the cable company is about > $50.00 per month. > is the original poster.) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's a lot like the routine I got > from SW Bell. > But then one day by accident (I am sure it had to be by accident) > a promotional mailing and a CD to the former owner of my telephone > number. "Try our DSL along with a boatload of other goodies for > free if you will try our service for just $29 per month. They were > offering Yahoo/DSL at that low price. ... Anyway, I suggested to > them "if you can afford to give DSL for $29 per month then you > *should* give it for that, along with the free CDs, gift cards, > free installs and other goodies. You are charging me almost twice > that much, and I sent you a check for a year's service in > advance." The lady said to me, "DSL is not a tariffed offering. We > can do as we please with that, subject to technical limitations." > I guess that's right. What the market will bear and all that rot. No, it's NOT right. I've been through the regulations. They (SBC) refused to give me the rate they were offering to other customers, and I complained to the PUC, pointing out that the regulations (in CA) require that they not discriminate in their offerings, and that these regulations cover all telecom (including DSL), tarriffed or not. I got the new lower rate. I've even caught SBC lying to the PUC, in writing. They just don't let up; the next month they crammed my cellphone bill, about a month after that (this month) my POTS bill. For more details, see the list I run for PacBellDSL users: http://www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/list?list_id=pacbelldsl I think they've done the Cost (penalties of breaking law * likelihood of enforcement) << Profit (made breaking the law) calculation. Morality doesn't enter into the equation. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When I was a regular customer of SBC I cannot tell you how many times I would call the business office to get some minor adjustment or another on my bill only to get the next month's bill with an even higher balance due of new charges, etc. They would promised to give me credit for whatever, then the next month they did in fact give the credit but come up with still newer charges for things I did not want. Then one month they agreed to begin billing me the 'new, lower rate' for DSL; I waited a month for a corrected bill to show up and when it did not reflect the 'new, lower rate' for DSL their answer was the original rep had 'misunderstood'. That rate was only in effect if I allowed them to cram my cell service from Cingular Wireless on the same bill. The fact that I had and still have Cingular Wireless (easy to confirm) was not good enough. I had to have it on the same bill (which is impossible for me.) You are quite right, morality does not enter the picture with them. PAT] ------------------------------ From: AES/newspost Subject: Re: Experts Warn of Microsoft 'Monoculture' Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 13:55:50 -0800 In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > Geer and others believe Microsoft's software is so dangerously > pervasive that a virus capable of exploiting even a single flaw in its > operating systems could wreak havoc. I believe this is a highly valid concern -- but quite independently of it, I continue to be amazed that Microsoft has not faced massive class action suits based on product liability arguments. Such arguments may or may not be valid, and might or might not be successful in the courts -- I'd sure like to think they might be. But nonetheless, the amount of damage suffered by deep-pockets organizations in the course of (or, if you like "as a direct result of") using MS software has certainly been massive enough that one would think someone would be suing. ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Telephone Service Surcharges Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 20:09:52 -0500 Michael Chance wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought the 'telephone luxury tax' >> started about 1917 during the First War as a way to provide for the >> soldiers. They won't be getting rid of it anytime soon, however. > [ remainder of moderator comments deleted ] > Now I'm sorry that I asked the question. If I'd know that it would > have sent Pat off on an error-laden, near libelous rant against > President Bush, I never would have bothered. Diseased brain or not, > that was uncalled for. Well, perhaps he wasn't really elected, and perhaps he is a right wing extremist, and perhaps he did lie to the people and the Congress to get us into a war that wasn't needed and is still killing people daily, but it is going too far to accuse him of having a diseased brain. You should be ashamed. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mr. Chance was alluding to *my* diseased brain, not the resident president's. My diseased brain is no secret. Following my brain aneursym in November, 1999 the neurological damage to me was quite severe. It's quite obvious to my immediate and personal friends and caretakers who come around every day to attend to my personal hygiene, housekeeping, cooking/serving food, etc. Through God's grace (or God's damnation as I sometimes phrase it) I did not expire on my way to Stormont-Vail Medical Center in Topeka, KS and came out of my comotose state about two months later (in January 2000) as cranky and cantankerous as ever, only with much damage to my lifestyle as a result. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Feb 04 17:14:03 PDT From: pm2020bc@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil Subject: Re: telecom: My New Blog (Weblog) Fine Pat, but what was the outcome with Mrs. Stevens? Bob Canon [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For those folks who came into this late, 'Mrs. Stevens' is the latest in a series of alley cats who was worked her way into my heart over the years. She keeps me on my toes. The veternarian at the Independence Animal Hospital removed that 'ear plug' (that was his name for it; it appeared to me like a build up of ear wax) under general anesthesia a week ago. Although she was rather loopy the night after she came home from the vet, she has now gotten back to her usual sassy, demanding self. I can expect to find her in my bed each morning when I wake up. Thanks for asking. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Scott Wilson Subject: What Happened to the Telecom IRC Chat Room? Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:15:01 -0500 Good morning Patrick, I understand that you host a chat room that deals with the telecom industry. I tried to access it via search engine, but I am having trouble. Can you please send me the link? Thanks Patrick, Scott Wilson [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, we did have that. On the group web page http://telecom-digest.org I had a link to a java-based IRC. One of a million channels on that particular IRC net, the people who operated the IRC; I chose the topic 'telecommunications' and other than establishing a bot (with the help of the administrators there) which stood guard over the room all the time, just left it as an open chat room on telecom for visitors to our web site. That was in 1999 B.A. (before aneurysm). The java script got broken somehow, and the people who ran the (in general) IRC closed down, and I have not had the brain processing power available to me to restart it since I got out of the hopsital. **Would YOU -- or anyone knowlegeable about java- scripting and web page interlinks to IRC** be willing to start it up again? Truth be told, the entire web site http://telecom-digest.org is in deplorable condition the past couple years and needs substantial remodeling/rebuilding. Again, the brain processing power I *used to posess* just isn't present these days. Let me know if you would like to rebuild the entire thing from scratch, keeping the old archives first in mind. PAT] ------------------------------ From: quentin_valentino@yahoo.com (Bagani) Subject: FUNCHAIN.COM - New Service Combines Social Networking with Blogging Date: 17 Feb 2004 00:44:32 -0800 NEURACOM CORPORATION recently launched FUNCHAIN.COM, the FriendBlogs Engine. FriendBlogs are collaborative journals on the web, composed of short, frequently updated posts written by friends connected through their similar interests. Funchain.com is the latest in the growing explosion of social networking services, sparked last year by Friendster, which generated buzz and bucks from venture capital firms and other investors. Friendster received $13 million from blue-chip VC firms Benchmark Capital and Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. Spoke Software, a business-oriented social networking facility, got a total of $12 million from Doll Capital Management. Others are expected to follow as more join in the bandwagon. Neuracom Corporation's CEO, Jason Banico, hopes that the activity of FriendBlogging will create a niche in the social networking space currently dominated by rivals such as Friendster, Tribe.Net, Orkut and others. "We intend to create a compelling service that combines social networking with blogging, both hot online activities for the past two years," Banico said. Banico hopes to tap the 10 million user market for blogging, as well as the 50 million user market for social networking. The service began as a thesis project by two Asian programmers, Jaeyoun Kim and Raymond Ong, who are now partners of Neuracom Corporation. The service has since then attracted a select set of loyal users, starting from Asian friends of Kim, Ong and Banico. As for business models, Banico says that Funchain.com will support itself by advertising revenues. The service will be unveiling its premium subscriber service and its e-commerce strategy within the year. Funchain.com can be reached at WWW.FUNCHAIN.COM. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My new weblog - blog was set up under the auspices of http://livejournal.com and append to that the phrase /users/patrick_townson is where you will find me. I only chose that one because (at least) one of our readers here has a 'blog' there and it seemed like fun. I am also looking at myspace.com to see how well that one might work. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #75 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 17 15:35:00 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1HKZ0W25439; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:35:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:35:00 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402172035.i1HKZ0W25439@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 #76 TELECOM Digest Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:32:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 76 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #420, February 16, 2004 (John Riddell) Cardinal/Candella Phone Systems (Daryl R. Gibson) Re: The Virus Underground (William Robison) Re: World-Wide Cellular Coverage (Joe of Seattle) Re: A Suspicious Netscape Icon on my Desktop (jbl) SMS Security (Bright) Re: What Happened to the Telecom IRC Chat Room? (McWebber) For Sale: TMC SOHO 2-Line Phone System on Ebay (Kristi M.) Re: Telephones With Intercom Capability? (Carl Navarro) New Reports (Petter Lundkvist) SBC "Unlimited" Calling Plan Fine Print - Chicago Trib Article (Paul) Re: Rack Mount Cellular Phone (Dale Farmer) Re: Monty Solomon Postings (was: My New Blog (Web log)) (AES/newspost) Cingular to Acquire AT&T Wireless, Create Premier Carrier (M. Solomon) Cingular, SBC, BellSouth Discuss AT&T Wireless Acquisition (M. Solomon) Bagle.B Virus (Monty Solomon) ATI Delivers HDTV Reception On The PC (Monty Solomon) TiVo Gets Huge Horsepower Boost (Monty Solomon) 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: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 08:59:32 -0500 From: John Riddell Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #420, February 16, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 420: February 16, 2004 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** ALLSTREAM: www.allstream.com ** BELL CANADA: www.bell.ca ** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: www.cisco.com/ca ** CYGCOM INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES: www.cygcom.com ** GROUP TELECOM: www.360.net ** JUNIPER NETWORKS: www.juniper.net ** PRIMUS CANADA: www.primustel.ca ** SPRINT CANADA: www.sprint.ca ** TELUS: www.telus.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Rogers Reveals Telephony Plans ** Spectrum Auction Practically Over ** CRTC to Speed Competitive Dispute Resolution ** More Security Problems with Windows ** Juniper Buys Net Security Company ** Telus Wireline Down, Wireless Up ** Microcell Revenue Down, Subscribers Up ** Canadian Text Messages Double in 2003 ** Bell Refunded 98% of Party-Line Overcharges ** Wireless Broadband Launched in Yellowknife ** FCC Won't Regulate Computer-to-Computer Calls ** Citel Intros Mitel Gateway ** Mitec Raises $30 Million ** Cabletel Seeks Buyer ** CATA Creates Security Centre ** College Offers Call Centre Certification ** ITU to Hold Internet Governance Workshop ** IP Telephony for Branch Offices ============================================================ ROGERS REVEALS TELEPHONY PLANS: Rogers Communications and Rogers Cable say they will deploy "an advanced broadband IP multimedia network to support digital voice-over-cable telephone and other new voice and data services." Service will be offered to about 1.8 million households in mid-2005, and extended to most of the company's service area in 2006. ** Rogers says the deployment plan is "conditional upon supportive regulatory conditions." SPECTRUM AUCTION PRACTICALLY OVER: The 2.3/3.5 GHz spectrum auction opened last Monday and, with only minor bidding since Wednesday, looks likely to end today. The auction has raised only $11.2 million, less than a tenth of what some analysts had predicted. Nearly 60% of available licences--including several in major cities--have received no bids. ** Rogers Wireless was high bidder, paying nearly $6 million for 33 licences, including Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, and Ottawa. ** Bell Canada acquired the most licences, paying $1.5 million for 138 licences spread across the country but bypassing all the large cities except Vancouver. http://agora.ic.gc.ca/ CRTC TO SPEED COMPETITIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION: On February 10, the CRTC announced an "expedited procedure for resolving competitive issues." In disputes that involve only two parties, and hinge on the interpretation and application of Commission decisions to specific situations, the Commission will conduct a brief, accelerated public hearing, and issue a brief written decision either at the hearing or within a few days. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Circulars/2004/ct2004-2.htm MORE SECURITY PROBLEMS WITH WINDOWS: Microsoft has announced yet another critical security flaw in Windows NT, 2000, XP, and Server 2003, and in Microsoft Virtual PC for Mac. Free updates are available for downloading at www.microsoft.com. JUNIPER BUYS NET SECURITY COMPANY: Juniper Networks has agreed to acquire Netscreen Technologies, a developer of network security and access products. The all-stock deal is valued at US$4 billion. TELUS WIRELINE DOWN, WIRELESS UP: Telus Communications' 4Q 2003 revenue was down 5% from 2002, while Telus Mobility's revenues increased 17%. The company's net income for the quarter was $49.6 million compared to a loss of $139.2 million in the same period a year ago. ** Telus says it will spend $72.8 million to redeem all of its outstanding preferred shares. MICROCELL REVENUE DOWN, SUBSCRIBERS UP: Microcell Telecommunications' total revenue in 2003 was $570.8 million, down from $591.1 million in 2002, but net income was $50.5 million, compared to a net loss of $570.5 million. The company's retail customer base grew by 107,422 in the fourth quarter, compared with a loss of 30,212 in 4Q 2002. ** The company describes City Fido, launched in Vancouver as a competitor for wireline local service, as an "overwhelming success." There's a full report on City Fido's first three months in the latest issue of Telemanagement, available to online subscribers tomorrow. CANADIAN TEXT MESSAGES DOUBLE IN 2003: The Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association says that Canadians sent 350 million wireless text messages in 2003, compared to 174 million in 2002. BELL REFUNDED 98% OF PARTY-LINE OVERCHARGES: In 2002, the Public Interest Advocacy Centre informed the CRTC that Bell had been overcharging party-line customers for telephone sets (see Telecom Update #346). Bell has refunded $1.1 Million to the overcharged customers, but can't locate 2,948 inactive customers to whom $16,900 is owed. The CRTC says the remaining amount is to be put in Bell's deferral account, and no further action is necessary. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/dt2004-8.htm WIRELESS BROADBAND LAUNCHED IN YELLOWKNIFE: Internet Service Provider SSI Micro has begun offering high-speed wireless Internet access in Yellowknife, using a network operated by Inukshuk Internet, a subsidiary of Microcell. Basic residential SSI Micro Skyline service is $59.95/month. FCC WON'T REGULATE COMPUTER-TO-COMPUTER CALLS: The U.S. Federal Communications Commission has ruled that the Free World Dialup, an IP service that provides computer-to- computer voice calls, "will remain a minimally regulated competitive option for consumers." This means it won't have to pay many of the fees that apply to other telephony providers. ** The CRTC exempted computer-to-computer voice calls ("PC Voice") from paying contribution fees in 1998, in Telecom Order 98-929. (See Telecom Update #150) CITEL INTROS MITEL GATEWAY: Citel Technologies has announced a Gateway product, co-branded with Mitel, that will allow Nortel Norstar telephones to be used with a Mitel Networks 3300 IP-PBX. MITEC RAISES $30 MILLION: Mitec Telecom, a Montreal manufacturer of products for wireless telecommunications, has received $30 million in equity financing from a syndicate led by Desjardins Securities. The money will be used for debt reduction, working capital, and acquisitions. CABLETEL SEEKS BUYER: Cabletel Communications Corp, a Markham Ontario-based distributor of broadband gear for TV and telecom, says it does not have adequate working capital to meet its current obligations. It is exploring various options including selling all or part of the company. CATA CREATES SECURITY CENTRE: The Canadian Advanced Technology Alliance has created a Cyber Security Resource Centre to track and report threats to Canada's information infrastructure, including viruses, worms, trojans, and focused attacks. COLLEGE OFFERS CALL CENTRE CERTIFICATION: Toronto's Seneca College has launched a Customer Contact Centre Management program. Graduates of the four three-day workshops receive certification by the Call Centre Industry Advisory Council. ITU TO HOLD INTERNET GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP: The International Telecommunications Union will hold a Workshop on Internet Governance at the ITU headquarters in Switzerland, February 26-27. The workshop, involving ITU members and invited experts will examine legal, technological, administration, and commercial issues. IP TELEPHONY FOR BRANCH OFFICES: The March issue of Telemanagement, available to online subscribers tomorrow, includes Part 2 of our in-depth report on IP telephony systems for branch offices, plus a hands-on comparison review of six network management software packages, a report on new developments in wireless asset tracking, and proposals for speeding CRTC decision-making. ** Telemanagement Online subscribers can access this issue, and an extensive library of past issues, columns, editorials, and feature reports, at the Online Home Page. ** To subscribe, or to add online access to your existing subscription, go to the Online Subscription Page. Charter Subscriber Discounts are available for a limited time. www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub-online.html ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2004 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: Daryl R Gibson Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 11:39:00 -0700 Subject: Cardinal/Candela Phone Systems A friend of mine has purchased a small motel that is equipped with a Cardinal (some parts are Candella) phone system. The system appears to be 20 years old, and a recent power bump goofed up some of the programming; among other things, it means one of the units is now unable to call out, others try for local calls and get other rooms, etc. My question is threefold: 1. Is there anyone who specializes in this system? 2. Does anyone on this list have any experience with them? 3. Could someone recommend a suitable replacement (25-50 lines) system for future use? Thanks. Daryl ---------------------------------------------------------------- "As you ramble through life, brother, no matter what your goal, keep your eye upon the doughnut, and not upon the hole" --Dr. Murray Banks, quoting a menu ---------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.drgibson.com http://www.salesstar.com Personal Motivation and Positive Attitude ------------------------------ From: William Robison Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Organization: University of Iowa Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:04:47 GMT Pat: Are we all asking the wrong question about virus software? Why do we all keep using IE and Outlook? (kinda like hitting your thumbe with a hammer, over and over). -or- How many times do we have to be explotied before we realize there has to be a better way (and there are, certainly, many alternatives to IE/Outlook). -Willy [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very good point! When I now and then use the Linux partition (on my otherwise Windows 2000 machine) I use 'mail' to read stuff. Or I use 'ssh' to login here to massis (where I also use 'mail' as a matter of course) and none of those virus things seem to have any effect. But don't you think that if the whole world started using *nix to the extent they now use Windows the virus writers (like that snotty teenage kid discussed about here in the Digest a couple weeks ago) wouldn't shift gears and start writing things to mess with *nix like they do Windows now? I suspect the only reason some mail programs are relatively 'immune' at the present time is just a question of where to get the biggest bang for the buck where the virus writers are concerned. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: World-Wide Cellular Coverage Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 11:32:14 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On 16 Feb 2004 09:58:38 EST, Charles.B.Wilber@Dartmouth.EDU (Charles B. Wilber) wrote: > What are the best answers to an administrator who asks for a cell > phone that can be used "all over the world?" I am not aware of any > service (GSM or otherwise) that will work reliably all over the > world. I have also read that it is often best to get cell service > locally when traveling to other countries, at least from a cost point > of view. Are there any alternatives besides satellite phones? Do even > those provide reliable world-wide coverage? > All suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Please reply directly to > me as well as to the listserv. Thank you. AFAIK the only "global" solution (not very elegant) is to use a GSM "world" phone for 90% of the world. It will work in the Americas, Europe, (most of) Asia, and Oceania. It will not work in Korea or Japan. Korea uses a special kind of CDMA and Japan uses their own standard that isn't used anywhere else in the world. I understand that in Korea you can rent a CDMA2000 handset that also accepts a GSM SIM card so it's possible for you to use your home carrier in Korea. AFAIK there's no such combination handset available for Japan. So, the bottom line is that for over 90% of the world a GSM "world" phone will work for you. In a very small number of countries such as Japan and Korea you have to make other arrangements. Even GSM isn't always the right choice to make for North America as the GSM networks are not as well-developed as they are in Europe and in Asia, but if you are going to be in the major metopolitan areas or the highways connecting those areas it should work for you. The major GSM networks in the US would be T-Mobile, AT&T Wireless and cingular. With the recent news that cingular has made a bid that will probably be accepted by AT&T Wireless there's a good chance that GSM will eventually be a good choice to have for service in the US. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: A Suspicious Netscape Icon on my DeskTop Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:00:38 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , tech@xxcopy.com (Kan Yabumoto) wrote: > BTW, the Netscape icon that mysteriously appered on my Desktop is a > link to the following sign-up form: > https://register.isp.netscape.com/default.jsp?promo=NS_2_6_2_2003_12_6 > The brief description of the service can be viewed from: > http://www.getnetscape.com/index.adp?promo=NS_2_7_7_2003_10_2 These sound like "legitimate" netscape pointers, as opposed to some phisher or malware supplier. Do you have automatic netscape updating turned on? (Or might you have accidentally clicked 'yes' when it put up a box asking you if you wanted to update your netscape?[1]) /JBL [1]I have a problem with software that does this kind of thing. If I'm clicking and/or typing fast, some box will pop up, intercept my next "enter" keypress and disappear before I get a chance to realize that something is there, much less read what it says. Most such boxes are in response to something I did, so I expect them; but clock driven activities (like automatic update reminders, if you don't turn them off) are generally a complete surprise. ------------------------------ From: brightwell_151@yahoo.co.uk (Bright) Subject: SMS Security Date: 17 Feb 2004 04:44:38 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Dear All, I'm looked through various archives and I seem to have come up with a mixed bag when it comes to SMS. Some people have stated that there is no encryption on SMS messages when broadcast (and no authentication of the originating number) while others have stated that the same authentication is used as for voice (i.e. A3 to authenticate the connection and A5 to encrypt the session) Now ... I reckon there must be some form of accurate authentication to facilitate billing. Can I assume that the connection to the SMS repository is authenticated in the same way as a voice connection (A3, Comp128)? But does the data in the SMS get encrypted, and does this include the CallerID (i.e. is the CallerID seperate to whatever is used for billing). 1. I want to know how difficult it is to snoop the text in the SMS (I realise that the GSM implementation A5/1 isn't highly regarded) 2. I want to know how difficult it is to spoof an SMS (not to defraud the billing operator but to confuse or misdirect the recipient of the SMS) Can anyone point me to security papers about SMS (there are plenty about GSM in general, but SMS barely gets a mention). I am given to understand that the SMS messages aren't encrypted while stored on the service providers server and there's no way of working out whether they are encrypted in transit across the providers network (so maybe this is where the confusion about encryption has come in) Any comments gratefully received. John ------------------------------ From: McWebber Subject: Re: What Happened to the Telecom IRC Chat Room? Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 08:48:46 -0500 Scott Wilson wrote in message news:telecom23.75.16@telecom-digest.org: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: **Would YOU -- or anyone knowlegeable > about java-scripting and web page interlinks to IRC** be willing to > start it up again? ] Any Yahoo Groups site has a "Chat" link. Easy enough to start a Yahoo Group if you wanted a chat. McWebber "Richter points to the lack of legal action against his company as proof that he's operating appropriately." Information Week, November 10, 2003 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So I discovered by looking closely at the web site I helped Lisa Minter set up for telecom. But its sort of a mixed bag. Yes, you just say so, and press a few keys and there it is, but it appears to be limited to simply Yahoo Messenger subscribers, (and the Yahoo 'Chat Room' system rather than IRC as such. But it looks easier in general to use than IRC does. So anyone who wants realtime interactive telecom-related chat is invited to use it at Yahoo Groups. I do not know the URL off hand (I think you have to go in the front door of Groups, then to telecom-news.) PAT] ------------------------------ From: prairillon@prodigy.net (Kristi M.) Subject: For Sale: TMC SOHO 2-Line Phone System on Ebay Date: 17 Feb 2004 05:56:44 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Four TMC m2210 telephones with LCD displays make a great "KSU-less" full-featured system for a small office or home. TMC SOHO 2-Line Phone System Item number: 3078702090 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3078702090&ssPageName=ADME:B:LC:US:1 Thank you. --Kristi ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Telephones With Intercom Capability? Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 14:45:24 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On 15 Feb 2004 16:50:34 -0800, nospam_timur@tabi.org (Timur Tabi) wrote: > Do telephones with intercom capabilities exist? What I would like to > do is replace all of the phones in my house with new phones that have > an intercom capability. For example, I press the "intercom" button on > my phone, and my voice is broadcast too all other phones in the house. Telephone(s) with intercoms do exist. It's a function of $$$ and cabling as to what you can do. If you're talking three or four phones, you can get any of the low line count intercom/paging phones from Panasonic, Avaya, TMC, and others that require a wall wart and use common pairs to superimpose intercom over one of the phone lines. Expect to pay between $150-250 per phone. The other option, if you truly have home runs to all the locations or need larger amounts of phoes, is to search eBay for used Comdial, Panasonic, Lucent/Avaya for key systems that have modern phones. You can get a system with phones for less than $500. Carl Navarro > Each phone jack in my house is wired with Cat5 cable, so I can support > up to four phone lines at each jack. I would expect this "intercom > phone" to use one of the extra pairs for the intercom capability. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, and in fact you can make your own > intercom from a telephone pair quite easily. Radio Shack has the kind > of phone you need as well as many other suppliers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: petter.lundkvist@spintrack.com (Petter Lundkvist) Subject: New Reports Date: 17 Feb 2004 07:36:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Check Spintrack's homepage for our latest updated reports on the African IT and Telecom sector. http://www.spintrack.com/itadvice/reports_docs.htm ------------------------------ From: Paul Subject: SBC Unlimited Calling Plan Fine Print - Chicago Tribune Article Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:58:09 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Stealth phone charges rile customers By Jon Van Tribune staff reporter Looking back, Judy Leach realizes that her mistake was thinking that SBC's unlimited calling plan meant just that. "They have limits, but they don't tell you about them," the Marengo resident says.n Leach's phone line was cut off after she rang up a monthly bill of more than $2,500. She had signed up for a flat-rate long-distance plan advertised for less than $50 a month. She never saw the fine print that said Internet use was not part of the deal. Nor did she anticipate such a rule since she had been dialing her Internet service provider through SBC's local service for four years. http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0402170333feb17,1,4331943.story?coll=chi-news-hed ------------------------------ From: Dale Farmer Organization: Furry green fuzz in the back of the refrigerator Subject: Re: Rack Mount Cellular Phone Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:51:29 GMT Ken Neely wrote: > My client needs to acquire a number of rack mount cellular (1xrtt - > Verizon) phones for emergency ops use. Are any quality devices of this > type available ? > kenneth.neely@sce.com Check the burglar and fire alarm market. Cellular phones as backup alarm links are fairly common in the commercial alarm market. All the ones I've seen are anonymous beige boxes with a coax connector for the remote antenna. Mounting is usually meant to be screwed to a wall up high out of easy reach. --Dale ------------------------------ From: AES/newspost Subject: Re: Monty Solomon Postings (was: My New Blog (Web log)) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:36:39 -0800 In article , Peter G. Neumann wrote: > Good comments. I use relatively little of Monty's stuff, and > often put the real author's name in the subject line. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mr. Neumann is the moderator of RISKS, > a prominent journal on internet. PAT] I'll say again: I appreciate the Solomon postings, but would love to see them "digest-ified" into a single weekly or ??? digest, in the same manner as Peter Neuman's superb comp.risk digests (though I think an earlier reply from MS gave some reasons why he didn't want to do this). ------------------------------ From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cingular to Acquire AT&T Wireless, Create Nation's Premier Carrier Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:34:26 -0500 $41 billion deal to create number one wireless carrier, bring greater network coverage, improved service quality, new advanced data services to customers ATLANTA, Feb. 17 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Cingular Wireless LLC, a joint venture between SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) and BellSouth Corp. (NYSE:BLS), announced today an agreement to acquire AT&T Wireless (NYSE:AWE), creating the premier wireless carrier in the United States. Today, the combined company would have 46 million customers and one of the most advanced digital networks in the U.S., with spectrum in 49 states and coverage in 97 of the top 100 markets. The combined 2003 annual revenues of the two companies would have exceeded $32 billion. Under the terms of the agreement approved by the boards of directors of Cingular and AT&T Wireless, shareholders of AT&T Wireless will receive $15 cash per common share or approximately $41 billion. The acquisition, which is subject to the approvals of AT&T Wireless shareholders and federal regulatory authorities, and to other customary closing conditions, is expected to be completed as soon as late 2004. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40612728 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:38:54 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cingular, SBC and BellSouth to Discuss AT&T Wireless Acquisition Analyst Conference Call at 11:30 a.m. EST Tuesday ATLANTA, Feb. 17 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Cingular Wireless LLC and its parent companies, SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) and BellSouth Corp. (NYSE:BLS), will discuss Cingular's planned acquisition of AT&T Wireless during an analyst conference call and webcast set for 11:30 a.m. EST today. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40615325 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:00:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Bagle.B virus http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/bagle_b.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:16:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ATI Delivers HDTV Reception On The PC MARKHAM, ONTARIO-- ATI combines Consumer Electronics and PC multimedia expertise for an unrivaled solution. Crystal clear HDTV broadcasts can be enjoyed on the PC with the new HDTV WONDER(TM) announced today by ATI Technologies Inc. (TSX:ATY, NASDAQ:ATYT). North American customers will be able to tune in and watch high-definition television (HDTV) programs on the PC without having to purchase an expensive TV that could cost more than $2,000. HDTV in North America offers up to 5.5 times the pixels (dots that comprise the screen) as standard TV resolution resulting in amazing picture quality. In addition to supporting analog NTSC (National Television Standards Committee) cable, the HDTV WONDER add-in video card allows consumers to experience the new ATSC (Advanced Television Systems Committee) digital, free-to-air HDTV broadcasts without having to subscribe to cable or satellite subscription services. HDTV WONDER offers the best advanced personal video recorder (PVR) on the PC today enabling consumers to watch, pause and record both analog and HDTV programs -- powerful features beyond the capabilities of most current consumer and PC-based appliances. Additionally, HDTV WONDER leverages the PC's capabilities by offering the ability to archive content directly to DVD for personal use. HDTV WONDER complements ATI's RADEON(TM) line of video cards that deliver the industry's only full HDTV decoder and display capabilities. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200402171001_CCN_0217009n http://www.atitech.ca/companyinfo/press/2004/4732.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:23:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Gets Huge Horsepower Boost By Katie Dean TiVo and other digital video recorders will get a serious boost in horsepower later this year as manufacturers start selling DVRs that can record high-definition television programming. Several of the new, more robust high-definition DVRs will sport 250-GB hard drives -- enough room to store 30 hours of high-definition programming or about 200 hours of standard broadcast. The beefier hard drives are necessary because signals for high-definition TV, or HDTV, carry far more information per frame than standard TV. For example, one HDTV standard in the United States (1080i) calls for images that are 1,920 pixels by 1,080 pixels, refreshed 60 times a second. By comparison, standard analog TV in the United States is 500 dots by 525 dots. But while the huge storage will please consumers, another "feature" of the new generation of machines may not: Under pressure from Hollywood, the manufacturers will include copy-protection schemes that will prevent users from sharing recorded programs or playing them on other devices, like a PC. The content will be protected by two mechanisms. The first is Digital Visual Interface (or DVI), which shuttles digital signals from the DVR to the display. DVI works with High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (or HDCP), which encrypts that signal and ensures that only an authorized device can display the content. http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,61988,00.html ------------------------------ 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 #76 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 18 01:18:28 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1I6ISu28622; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 01:18:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 01:18:28 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402180618.i1I6ISu28622@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 #77 TELECOM Digest Wed, 18 Feb 2004 01:18:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 77 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Mainstream Marketing v. FTC (Monty Solomon) Ecard-Hijack Spam Analysis (Monty Solomon) The Five Sisters (Monty Solomon) Re: Cell Phone Numbering Arrangments (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Verizon May Hang up on Plan to Sell Phone Number (Herb Sutherland) My SBC Experience (was Re: Phantom DSL Reprised) (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Monty Solomon Postings (was My New Blog (Web log)) (jbl) Re: The Virus Underground (Lawrence Jones) Re: The Virus Underground (William Robison) Re: Experts Warn of Microsoft 'Monoculture' (email@crazyhat.net) Re: Cardinal/Candela Phone Systems (Carl Navarro) Re: Cingular to Acquire AT&T Wireless, Create Premier Carrier (Melon) Honesty From Earthlink (Spacey Spade) 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: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:46:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mainstream Marketing v. FTC Mational do-not-call registry Appeals court opinion http://www.ck10.uscourts.gov/opinions/03-1429.pdf http://www.ck10.uscourts.gov/opinions/03-1429.txt http://www.ck10.uscourts.gov/opinions/03-1429.wpd ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:49:42 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Ecard-Hijack Spam Analysis http://www.tjhsst.edu/~agupta/ecard-hijack/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 22:25:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Five Sisters By WILLIAM SAFIRE WASHINGTON - If one huge corporation controlled both the production and the dissemination of most of our news and entertainment, couldn't it rule the world? Can't happen here, you say; America is the land of competition that generates new technology to ensure a diversity of voices. But consider how a supine Congress and a feckless majority of the Federal Communications Commission have been failing to protect our access to a variety of news, views and entertainment. The media giant known as Viacom-CBS-MTV just showed us how it controls both content and communication of the sexiest Super Bowl. The five other big sisters that now bestride the world are (1) Murdoch-FoxTV-HarperCollins-WeeklyStandard-NewYorkPost-LondonTimes-DirecTV; (2) G.E.-NBC-Universal-Vivendi; (3) Time-Warner-CNN-AOL; (4) Disney-ABC-ESPN; and (5) the biggest cable company, Comcast. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/16/opinion/16SAFI.html ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Cell Phone Numbering Arrangments Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 03:30:56 GMT In article , jared.NospaM@netspace.net.au says: > In the USA part of the NANP at least, the FCC, the American approximation > to OFTEL, banned doing so. There was cell phone area code that predated > the decision, I'm not sure what happened to it. > A prefix isn't needed in the USA as it's not caller-pays for calls to > mobiles, instead the mobile phone owner pays for the call > time. Roaming is interesting too: whether the caller pays a local or > long distance rate depends on the mobile phone's area code, not where > it happens to be with respect to the caller. >> Do NANP counties use a 'standard' area-code for cellphones as opposed >> to the UK (cell phone numbers begin with 07XXX) or other countries, where >> different codes are required? Before the FCC banned technology-specific overlay area codes, it authorized New York to use a new overlay code (718?) for cell phones, faxes, and internal telco lines for several years. That code has since become a normal overlay code, with wireline phones in it as well as the others. Given the introduction of full number portability between wireline and wireless phones (with some exceptions, probably temporary), the genie is out of the bottle; it won't be possible to have an area code that is wireless-only or wireline-only. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ From: herbsu@netscape.net (Herb Sutherland) Subject: Re: Verizon May Hang up on Plan to Sell Phone Number Date: 17 Feb 2004 20:17:07 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com And what ever happened to Beechwood 4-5789 ??? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:34:54 -0600 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelectronics.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: My SBC Experience (was Re: Phantom DSL Reprised) Nick Landsberg wrote: >> So, it seems, the providers are hoarding the DSL circuits in my CO >> so they can milk the businesses for $160 bucks a month before >> offering it to residential customers Matthew Elvey wrote: > I've even caught SBC lying to the PUC, in writing. > They just don't let up; the next month they crammed my cellphone bill, > about a month after that (this month) my POTS bill. > Morality doesn't enter into the equation. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When I was a regular customer of SBC I > cannot tell you how many times I would call the business office to get > some minor adjustment or another on my bill only to get the next > month's bill with an even higher balance due of new charges, etc. I'm an SBC customer as well, in 630-832-xxxx (used to be Ameritech (used to be Illinois Bell)) and this has not been my experience. It was an Illinois Bell customer service rep who spent about half an hour going over available numbers with me when setting up new service at my first house -- two cool numbers (xxx-8088 and xx8-0386), no extra charge. OK, they don't do this any more (who does?). But they did then. It was an Ameritech customer service rep who told me about Alternate Answering and Busy Line Transfer (combined cost: $1.50/mo) when I called to order Call Forwarding ($18/mo or thereabouts). In my situation the cheaper alternative actually did what I wanted better than the more expensive (but popular and heavily advertised) choice. It was SBC who had my DSL up in 3 days when they promised it in a week. And when I had a bizarre intermittent problem with it, they had two trucks out for the better part of an afternoon, and again the next day, and fixed it. (It was a flaky line card in the RT -- worked about 99.9% of the time.) Illinois Bell/Ameritech/SBC has never crammed me -- and when one of my employees didn't say "NO!" loudly enough to some teleslime and I ended up with "Voicenet E-mail by phone" on my bill, it was SBC who cleared the charge and told Integretel where to stuff it. Maybe I just lead a charmed life. Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com "If we imagined he could _find_ the car, we could pretend it might be fixed." - Calvin [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I remember the very same situation years ago when I lived in Chicago and was served by Illinois Bell. An early phone number of mine RAVenswood-8-7425 was selected for me by a service rep who took some time to look though available numbers then chose that one for me explaining to me it also spelled PATRICK. In those days you ordered phone service one day, and the man came out to your house and installed it the very next day, or sometimes, if you called early enough in the morning, very late the same day. And they did repairs the same day you asked for it, or the next day. And they did not ask for a security deposit or any money in advance. Even Southwestern Bell used to have very good service, as my mother explained to me. They had a business office right here in Independence, and the lady downstairs would call up to the technician on the second floor -- where the frames were at -- to get done whatever was needed. Gordon, when you now call the business office for some matter or another, do you also get the reps in San Antonio, Texas who know nothing at all about Chicago? I really think their customer service has deteriorated a lot. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: Monty Solomon Postings (was My New Blog (Web log)) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:13:07 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote: > This is my feeling also. The one thing that does bother me when I come > across Monty's postings is that they're formatted as if he was claiming > to have written the excerpts he quotes. Interestingly, it never occurred to me that he was doing anything other than what he is doing. And I much prefer reading text without quote marks on each line, so since he's not actually quoting a posting in a response, I'd just as soon he left them off (as he does now). Perhaps a "[MEDIA]" tag in the subject line would make you happier. /JBL ------------------------------ From: lawrence.jones@ugsplm.com Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 23:13:01 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com PAT writes: > But don't you think that if the whole world started using *nix to > the extent they now use Windows the virus writers (like that snotty > teenage kid discussed about here in the Digest a couple weeks ago) > wouldn't shift gears and start writing things to mess with *nix like > they do Windows now? Of course, and we've already started to see that with Linux. But the simple fact of the matter is that Windows and it's related applications were explicitly designed to do things for you, automatically, so you don't have to know what you're doing. Unix-like systems and most of their applications, on the other hand, were designed to do exactly what you tell them and not one thing more, forcing you to know what you're doing in order to use them at all. It's far easier for a bad guy to co-opt the built-in mechanisms in Windows to do what he wants than it is to figure out how to break into a Unix system and get it to do what he want. Heck, even legitimate users have a hard time getting Unix systems to do what they want! :-) -Larry Jones It must be sad being a species with so little imagination. -- Calvin ------------------------------ From: William Robison Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Organization: University of Iowa Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 23:02:19 GMT > Pat: > Are we all asking the wrong question about virus software? > Why do we all keep using IE and Outlook? (kinda like > hitting your thumbe with a hammer, over and over). -or- > How many times do we have to be explotied before we realize > there has to be a better way (and there are, certainly, many > alternatives to IE/Outlook). > -Willy > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very good point! When I now and > then use the Linux partition (on my otherwise Windows 2000 machine) > I use 'mail' to read stuff. Or I use 'ssh' to login here to massis > (where I also use 'mail' as a matter of course) and none of those > virus things seem to have any effect. But don't you think that if > the whole world started using *nix to the extent they now use > Windows the virus writers (like that snotty teenage kid discussed > about here in the Digest a couple weeks ago) wouldn't shift gears > and start writing things to mess with *nix like they do Windows > now? I suspect the only reason some mail programs are relatively > 'immune' at the present time is just a question of where to get > the biggest bang for the buck where the virus writers are > concerned. PAT] Pat: I'm sure the virus writers will shift to the most prevalent platform, when that shifts from Windows, but I suspect the job of making a virus becomes much more difficult. We went through a similar phase of attacks in the days of DECnet (in the space physics community, 20 years ago); when the network started to get hooked up to more machines, we bagan to see attacks on 'open' resources (I can't remember when the first major 'attack' occurred, but it was the fault of poor administrative planning, pure and simple). At least in those days, we seemd to have enough sense to shut the openings down and stop operating in such a casual manner. In the Windows world, however, we seem to go through the hammer-to- thumb scenario over and over (and over and over). Perhaps we should realize that the problem lies with the software, such as IE and Outlook, rather than with the hackers (who keep sending the auto- execute virus over and over again), and simply stop using it. Rather like driving down the Interstate with bald tires that you keep taking into the garage to get patches put on the most recent holes ... Regards -Willy ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Experts Warn of Microsoft 'Monoculture' Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:29:26 -0700 From: In message <> AES/newspost did ramble: > Such arguments may or may not be valid, and might or might not be > successful in the courts -- I'd sure like to think they might be. But > nonetheless, the amount of damage suffered by deep-pockets > organizations in the course of (or, if you like "as a direct result > of") using MS software has certainly been massive enough that one > would think someone would be suing. Yeah, we'd all get a $5 coupon for our next purchase of a Microsoft service pack (which they'd start charging for to cover the cost of the lawsuit) A cheap shot is a terrible thing to waste. ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Cardinal/Candela Phone Systems Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 18:44:26 -0500 Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 11:39:00 -0700, Daryl R Gibson wrote: > A friend of mine has purchased a small motel that is equipped with a > Cardinal (some parts are Candella) phone system. The system appears to > be 20 years old, and a recent power bump goofed up some of the > programming; among other things, it means one of the units is now unable > to call out, others try for local calls and get other rooms, etc. > My question is threefold: > 1. Is there anyone who specializes in this system? > 2. Does anyone on this list have any experience with them? > 3. Could someone recommend a suitable replacement (25-50 lines) > system for future use? 1. I used to carry it, but I sold all my stuff to ESI. 2. Yes, I actually might still have a manual but it's pretty intuitive. 3. Easiest is a Mitel SX-200. In a cabinet at that line size you'd be in the $2500 range. Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: Melon Subject: Re: Cingular to Acquire AT&T Wireless, Nation's Premier Carrier Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 18:22:57 -0600 Organization: Cox Communications Monty Solomon wrote: > $41 billion deal to create number one wireless carrier, bring greater > network coverage, improved service quality, new advanced data services > to customers > ATLANTA, Feb. 17 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Cingular Wireless LLC, a > joint venture between SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) and BellSouth > Corp. (NYSE:BLS), announced today an agreement to acquire AT&T > Wireless (NYSE:AWE), creating the premier wireless carrier in the > United States. Today, the combined company would have 46 million > customers and one of the most advanced digital networks in the U.S., > with spectrum in 49 states and coverage in 97 of the top 100 > markets. The combined 2003 annual revenues of the two companies would > have exceeded $32 billion. > Under the terms of the agreement approved by the boards of directors > of Cingular and AT&T Wireless, shareholders of AT&T Wireless will > receive $15 cash per common share or approximately $41 billion. The > acquisition, which is subject to the approvals of AT&T Wireless > shareholders and federal regulatory authorities, and to other > customary closing conditions, is expected to be completed as soon as > late 2004. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40612728 Now will the FCC approve it? ------------------------------ From: spaceygum@hotpop.com (Spacey Spade) Subject: Honesty from Earthlink Date: 17 Feb 2004 16:24:53 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I was getting spam from Earthlink even though I had "opted out". By the way, AFAIK, I recommend Earthlink. Below a transcription of chat tech support: Welcome to Earthlink LiveChat. Your chat session will begin shortly. Tired of Spam? With Earthlink's free spamBlocker you can customize your settings to eliminate all of your unwanted email! 'name_protected' says: Thank you for contacting EarthLink LiveChat, how may I help you today? myemail@addy.com:I am getting advertising email from earthlink, even though I have settings off in "my account" myemail@addy.com:The email starts like this: myemail@addy.com:Share and store all your pictures online for FREE with theEarthLink Photo Center, powered by Snapfish.Now you can share your pictures, get digital camera prints,process your film, and order inexpensive, high-quality name_protected:Let me know if you want me to opt out your email address from the advertising list. myemail@addy.com:I want to be opted out ... I have everything unchecked at the earthlink control console or whatever you call it. name_protected:Let me know the password of your primary account for verification. myemail@addy.com:************ name_protected:Thank you for the information. name_protected:Kindly hold on. I will opt out your email address. myemail@addy.com:This is what I see: myemail@addy.com:Email: Opted Out Opt In Telephone: Opted Out Opt In U.S. Postal Mail: Opted Out Opt In In order to improve our services, EarthLink may purchase general demographic information about our members. Let us know if we may include general information about you. Information Gathering: Opted Out Opt In name_protected:Kindly hold on. myemail@addy.com:k name_protected:I have opted out your email address. name_protected:From now onwards you will not receive these emails. myemail@addy.com:what did you do different than what I did? myemail@addy.com:How could I have opted myself out? myemail@addy.com:I'm not letting you off easy ;) name_protected:I have separate Tool to opt out your email address. myemail@addy.com:So people get spam unless they contact tech support? name_protected:This will completely opt out your email address from mailing list. myemail@addy.com:Should I publish this about Earthlink? name_protected:You can enable Spam Blocker to highest level of protection in Webmail. myemail@addy.com:I'd like to know if this is a bug or intentional name_protected:Then you will receive only those emails whose addresses are listed in your Webmail address book. name_protected:It is not a bug. myemail@addy.com:Please don't try and play stupid. myemail@addy.com:You know what I am getting at ... no form responses please, myemail@addy.com:I had opted out already. Why did I need to contact you to not receive Earthlink spam? name_protected:I see that you were not able to opt opt properly from the opt out option given to you. name_protected:This is the reason I have reset it from an advanced tool. myemail@addy.com:Shall I upload an image of the opt out window, configured as I have it myemail@addy.com:I believe I have it configured properly ... it is plain as day. name_protected:Okay, Let me know the steps you have followed to opt out. name_protected:This will help me. myemail@addy.com:http://home.earthlink.net/~storageplace/opted_out.jpg myemail@addy.com:This is how I had it before you did anything to it. name_protected:Yes, I see that you have done the steps correctly You have to go to my account page and opt out of the emails. myemail@addy.com:Ok ... so is this a bug or intentional? name_protected:I saw that you are still receiving the emails. This is the reason I had to reset your account again. myemail@addy.com:So is it a bug? name_protected:It looks like a temporary glitch at server end. name_protected:So I had to reset it again. name_protected:I am sure this will help you. myemail@addy.com:Thank you for some respectful level of honesty. myemail@addy.com:goodbye name_protected:You're welcome and thank you for using EarthLink LiveChat. Should you need further assistance, please feel free to contact us again. name_protected:Bye. Good Night. ------------------------------ 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 #77 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 18 15:00:15 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1IK0Fp04176; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:00:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:00:15 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402182000.i1IK0Fp04176@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 #78 TELECOM Digest Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:00:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 78 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Long Distance Wrong Numbers From Everywhere (David Kirkpatrick) Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (Phil Earnhardt) Social Engineering, was: Re: Honesty from Earthlink (Danny Burstein) Re: Cardinal/Candela Phone Systems (Robert Johnson) Re: What Happened to the Telecom IRC Chat Room? (McWebber) Re: The Virus Underground (Mark Crispin) Code for MSBlast Variant Posted on Line (Monty Solomon) Rural Areas and the Internet (Monty Solomon) Cable and Internet Loom Large in Fragmented Political News (M Solomon) Re: Phantom DSL Reprised (Hank Karl) Re: Experts Warn of Microsoft 'Monoculture' (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: The Virus Underground (Geoffrey Welsh) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Kirkpatrick Subject: Long Distance Wrong Numbers From Everywhere Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 07:11:32 -0800 Dear Patrick, For about three weeks now we've been receiving (wrong number) long distance calls from Florida, New York, Vermont, California, Ohio and Massachusetts. When questioned, the few callers that remained on the line reported they received a message either on their voice mail or on their answering machine asking them to phone: 1-866-829-8229. This is apparently one of A T & T's numbers in the states, and it's rerouting to our Vancouver number. Have you and/or your staff heard of anything like this before? Our local provider is sorting this out; have been on the case for 4-5 days now, but the A T & T number info we've only had for about 18 hours now. With appreciation, David Kirkpatrick davidcan@axion.net 604-913-2000 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried 866-829-8229 myself just now and got (what I assume) was your answering machine. What I think has happened is that the place in charge of assigning and routing toll free 800 numbers -- they are referred to in the telecom business as 'RespOrgs' (or the Responsible Organizations) has somehow incorrectly assigned your number as the recipient of these calls you are getting. Your local service provider can do nothing for you except possibly act in your behalf in locating the resporg and asking them to stop the mis-routing. If that toll-free number is what I think it is, it should be ringing to the collection department at AT&T; they want to get the caller to pay their AT&T phone bills. My clue here is the caller who leaves the message for the recipient does not discuss the nature of the call or the reason for it. Laws here in the USA (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) forbid the 'publication' or discussion of an alleged debt with any third party. They cannot tell 'just anyone' who answers -- or an answering machine -- what the company wants them to do, namely pay their bills. Rather than get into a discussion of all that, which will only confuse the issue, just ask your local telco (or preferably, an 800 toll-free specialist) to find out who is the resporg on that number 866-829-8229 and route it someplace other than your number. I'll bet anything that there is one digit off (probably in the area code) which a data entry operator mistakenly entered. Aternate solution #1: Want a toll free (and literally *free* for you) number from the USA to ring at your premises for your convenience. Start giving out that number to your freinds, family, etc. Try to ignore the hardships of the wrong number callers looking for AT&T. Alternate guerilla solution #2: When you are there to receive the calls, tell the caller that 'AT&T has decided to forgive them of their indebtedness entirely provided they sign up with some other carrier in the future. (?)(!). I think if the master solution does not work rather quickly (and it is the most honorable) then alternates 1 or 2 should work rather soon. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 22:52:35 -0700 Organization: Kaos OnLine Coalition Today's Denver Post had an article about Qwest and Comcast. The main part of the article was about Comcast's restrictions on Qwest advertising -- and Qwest's complaining about those restrictions to no avail. The end of the story changed topics: Qwest announced they would begin to offer DSL service on a line that doesn't have regular phone service: "Also Monday, Notebaert said Qwest will be launching later this month a separate DSL service, which he dubbed --'naked DSL.' Before, customers had to subscribe to Qwest's telephone service to get DSL. The move is partly an acknowledgment that more customers are abandoning their landline and using only a cellular phone. The separate DSL service will go for $33 a month at a speed of 1.5 megabits per second - about the same speed as a cable modem." I've been unable to find any details on this service: if the $33 includes an ISP, if you are really getting "unlimited" services on the 1.5Mbps pipe, etc. In any case, I applaud Qwest for finally providing these services. There's simply no reason for many households to have landline service; by offering "naked DSL", Qwest can provide an alternative to cable modems in those homes. BTW: as of now, the name nakeddsl.com is still available. --phil [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That was the big hassle I had with SBC: whether to retain them for phone service in order to keep the DSL, or ditch them and lose the DSL. They were counting heavily on the former. In my case, they lost. Had they been willing to go half-way with me I would have still switched to Prairie Stream for good quality, inexpensive phone service, but retained DSL. Since SBC kept insisting *all or nothing* I said okay, nothing. Now I have Cable One for internet with a decent size pipe and Prairie Stream for phone. SBC is nowhere to be found in this household. I would bet you the success of the Qwest experiment will be watched closely by all the (old) Bell System telcos, and soon they will all be offering the same deal. That's how the telcos do things: one comes up with a bright idea, they all get in line and start marching the same way. We've seen that time and again. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Social Engineering, was Re: Honesty from Earthlink Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 08:04:54 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In spaceygum@hotpop.com (Spacey Spade) writes: > I was getting spam from Earthlink even though I had "opted out". By > the way, AFAIK, I recommend Earthlink. Below a transcription of chat > tech support: [ snip ] > name_protected:Let me know the password of your primary account for > verification. > myemail@addy.com:************ Did the original poster really, really, send the account password to a stranger? _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Cardinal/Candela Phone Systems From: Robert Johnson Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 23:50:46 -0800 You might wanna try Panasonic, a Panasonic KT-XD1232 with two cabinets could handle it ... but only ... if when you refer to 25-50 lines being the extensions. I dont know any small hotel/motel that would have that many lines comming into it. Robert Johnson Carl Navarro wrote about Re: Cardinal/Candela Phone Systems on Tue, 17 Feb 2004 18:44:26 -0500: > On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 11:39:00 -0700, Daryl R Gibson > wrote: >> A friend of mine has purchased a small motel that is equipped with a >> Cardinal (some parts are Candella) phone system. The system appears >> to be 20 years old, and a recent power bump goofed up some of the >> programming; among other things, it means one of the units is now >> unable to call out, others try for local calls and get other rooms, >> etc. >> My question is threefold: >> 1. Is there anyone who specializes in this system? >> 2. Does anyone on this list have any experience with them? >> 3. Could someone recommend a suitable replacement (25-50 lines) >> system for future use? > 1. I used to carry it, but I sold all my stuff to ESI. > 2. Yes, I actually might still have a manual but it's pretty > intuitive. > 3. Easiest is a Mitel SX-200. In a cabinet at that line size you'd > be in the $2500 range. > Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: McWebber Subject: Re: What Happened to the Telecom IRC Chat Room? Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:48:50 -0500 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So I discovered by looking closely at > the web site I helped Lisa Minter set up for telecom. But its sort of > a mixed bag. Yes, you just say so, and press a few keys and there it > is, but it appears to be limited to simply Yahoo Messenger subscribers, > (and the Yahoo 'Chat Room' system rather than IRC as such. But it looks > easier in general to use than IRC does. So anyone who wants realtime > interactive telecom-related chat is invited to use it at Yahoo Groups. > I do not know the URL off hand (I think you have to go in the front > door of Groups, then to telecom-news.) PAT] Wow, that was hard: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/telecom-news/ The Chat section is members only. I'm not sure if that can be changed. McWebber "Richter points to the lack of legal action against his company as proof that he's operating appropriately." Information Week, November 10, 2003 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Try appending the word /chat to the end of the URL above, as in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/telecom-news/chat and see how that works. But you are right, I do not think it will work unless you are a 'member' of Yahoo Groups and that group in particular. And that parameter cannot be changed, at least at my level or Lisa Minter's level. Its a good temporary work around, but I still want to see a good java-based (I assume) chat program tied into the http://telecom-digest.org web site directly to avoid membership requirements, etc. Maybe someone who really knows/is experienced in IRC -- Internet Relay Chat -- and Java could repair what is there now and make it work again (hint! hint! to the Madison, WI reader who 'colorized' the /latest-issue.html file for me!) PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 08:58:32 -0800 Organization: University of Washington On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 lawrence.jones@ugsplm.com wrote: > The simple fact of the matter is that Windows and it's related > applications were explicitly designed to do things for you, > automatically, so you don't have to know what you're doing. > Unix-like systems and most of their applications, on the other hand, > were designed to do exactly what you tell them and not one thing > more, forcing you to know what you're doing in order to use them at > all. The flaw in this reasoning is the assumption that a design of "do things for you, automatically, so you don't have to know what you're doing" is a design flaw in Windows as opposed to a design requirement of any mass market operating system. It is a beautiful dream that everybody who uses a computer will know what they're doing and can use a system which does exactly what it is told to do and not one thing more. That dream is also highly unrealistic. For this reason, I think that attacks on Windows by certain segments of the UNIX community are foolish and self-defeating. It is arrogant to assume that UNIX programmers are somehow smarter than Windows programmers and would never made the same mistakes. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:48:11 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Code for MSBlast Variant Posted Online Munir Kotadia ZDNet UK February 17, 2004, 12:20 GMT Users who haven't deployed the critical security patch released by Microsoft last week are in imminent danger, after exploit code was posted online. A piece of code that exploits the critical vulnerability for which Microsoft issued a patch only last week has been posted online, raising fears of an imminent MSBlast-style attack On 10 February, Microsoft released a patch that fixes a networking flaw affecting all Windows XP, NT, 2000 and Windows Server 2003 systems. The company warned users to patch their systems because the vulnerability could be exploited by virus and worm writers. Four days after the patch was released, a piece of code was published on a French Web site that allows anyone to exploit the vulnerability, which means unpatched users can expect to be hit with another MSBlast-type worm. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,39020375,39146606,00.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 10:52:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Rural Areas and the Internet http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=112 Pew Internet Project Table of Contents: Summary of Findings Part 1: Rural Internet Access: Deployment and Availability Part 2: Rural Internet Demographics: Who's Online? Part 3: The Activities Rural Internet Users Pursue Part 4: Rural Attitudes Toward the Internet Methodology Appendices http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=112 http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/pdfs/PIP_Rural_Report.pdf Excerpt from the press release: http://www.pewinternet.org/releases/release.asp?id=73 2/17/04--Rural Americans' Internet use has grown, but they continue to lag behind others WASHINGTON (February 17, 2004) - There has been steady penetration of the Internet into rural areas in recent years and more than half of rural adults -- 52% -- now go online. However, a corresponding rise in the percentage of urban and suburban residents going online has left a persistent gap between rural areas and the rest of the country. Some 67% of urban residents and 66% of suburbanites are online. A new study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project finds that the gap is probably tied to the fact that rural residents as a group earn less and are older than their urban and suburban counterparts. Rural areas' are also distinct in how rural users get online. Some 19% of online rural residents have broadband connections at home, compared to 36% of urban residents and 32% of suburbanites. The availability of broadband connections may be partially responsible for this difference. Nearly a quarter of rural Internet users say they can't get a high-speed connection in their area, whereas 5% of urban users say this, and 10% of suburban users say a high-speed connection is unavailable. http://www.pewinternet.org/releases/release.asp?id=73 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:00:54 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cable and Internet Loom Large in Fragmented Political News http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=110 Cable and Internet Loom Large in Fragmented Political News Universe: Perceptions of Partisan Bias Seen as Growing -- Especially by Democrats Joint Report with Pew Research Center Pew Internet Project Table of Contents: Major Findings Political Information Sources and The Campaign http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=110 http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/pdfs/PIP_Political_Info_Jan04.pdf Excerpt from the press release: http://www.pewinternet.org/releases/release.asp?id=72 1/12/04--The Internet is playing a growing role in politics WASHINGTON, D.C. January 12 - More than a third of the nation's Internet users have gone online to get news and information, exchange emails about the race, or participate online in the current political campaign. Even among wired Americans, the Internet still lags far behind television and newspapers as voters' main source of political news. But the importance of the Internet continues to grow as it now rivals radio as a primary source of political information. Moreover, there is evidence that the early efforts by campaigns to engage voters through email have drawn an audience. http://www.pewinternet.org/releases/release.asp?id=72 ------------------------------ From: Hank Karl Subject: Re: Phantom DSL Reprised Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 13:31:10 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 00:04:52 GMT, Nick Landsberg wrote: > The issue may be splitter vs splitterless DSL. IIRC, adding a > splitter allows you a little more distance on the line. It may be > that your LEC doesn't have cards that can do splitterless DSL, or the > distance is to far for splitterless ADSL. Business and residential have similar offerings (business has a few more options). The ones I looked at are priced about the same for the same level of service. In my area (SNET/SBC) there's a big difference between the $160 and the $30 package: The difference between the packages: The $159.95/month package has an intro price of about $75/month for three months. It is 1.5M-6.0M down and 384K up, and seems to require a splitter to be installed. You also get 5 static IP addresses, a "$378" router that SBC sells for $199 (Cayman 3546 w/ADSL modem). There are a couple of 29.95 intro packages (its $29.95 if you have SBC all-distance). The cheapest one is $29.95 with a one-year commitment. This is limited to 384K down, 128K up. You get a couple of choices for equipment. (One is a wireless router with PCMCIA card) The single IP address is dynamic.) > Ears perk! ***RESIDENTIAL***(?) DSL! There's a difference between > residential DSL and business DSL, and it's the price they can charge > for it! > "Yes, sir. We can provide business DSL at $159.95 per month." > Out of my league, if I was running a business out of here, I might > consider it, but I'm not, so I thanked the person and hung up. > As I backtracked through the web pages I had visited, all of them had > a seemingly innucuous set of buttons, "business" vs. "residential." I > didn't try the experiment, but I suspect that if I clicked "business" > it would have shown that DSL was available, at a steep price. > So, it seems, the providers are hoarding the DSL circuits in my CO so > they can milk the businesses for $160 bucks a month before offering it > to residential customers (going rate about $30 per month). High speed > access through the cable company is about $50.00 per month. > Unless there are regulations against this, I guess I'm SOL (and so is > the original poster.) ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Experts Warn of Microsoft 'Monoculture' Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:12:50 -0500 Organization: Bell Sympatico email@crazyhat.net wrote: > Yeah, we'd all get a $5 coupon for our next purchase of a Microsoft > service pack (which they'd start charging for to cover the cost of the > lawsuit) Many times I've seen companies charge for firmware upgrades that customers want because of new features, but give the firmware upgrades away free if they were needed to fix a bug. I'd love to see a law that requires software publishers to provide customers with a freee upgrade if that's what's required to fix a serious bug or plug a vulnerability. It would definitely revolutionize the software industry - or at least split it into two groups that even executives could tell apart: those who stand by their products and those who are required to state on the package and in all advertising and catalog listings that their product should not be relied upon. It scares the crap out of me the way that big companies put big bucks on the line using off the shelf software with histories of big bugs and no one -- CIO, CFO, CEO, whoever -- ever stops to ask, "what if that software screwed up and the aftermath cost us a hundred million dollars?" Geoffrey Welsh Always looking for a good condition original 'chicklet keyboard' Commodore PET ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Organization: Bell Sympatico Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:42:00 EST lawrence.jones@ugsplm.com wrote: > But the simple fact of the matter is that Windows and it's related > applications were explicitly designed to do things for you, > automatically, so you don't have to know what you're doing. Unix-like > systems and most of their applications, on the other hand, were > designed to do exactly what you tell them and not one thing more, > forcing you to know what you're doing in order to use them at all. The implication here is that current technology forces us to choose between security and user-friendliness. I can hope that someone will invest techniques to make things user-friendly without making them insecure, but my cynical side tells me that these new techniques will be either secure or user-friendly, but not both. I must force myself to because mixing that observation with the level of stupidity that humans demonstrate at every possible opportunity leads us to the very frightening conclusion that no popular system can ever be secure. William Robison wrote: > Are we all asking the wrong question about virus software? > Why do we all keep using IE and Outlook? (kinda like hitting your > thumb with a hammer, over and over). That's like asking why we use the tires that come with our cars when there are so many better ones available. They're there and they work. Even if the replacements were free, not everyone is going to be aware of the advantages of the alternatives and not everyone who is aware is going to choose to invest the time and effort. > How many times do we have to be explotied before we realize > there has to be a better way (and there are, certainly, many > alternatives to IE/Outlook). Users have developed a comfort level with Microsoft OSes and applications; they are what everyone supports and talks. Even if a user is aware that they have been compromised (it's amazing how many computer users cannot grasp the simplest principles of operation, let alone notice when their computer is misbehaving) and they're aware of the existence of alternatives, they may not feel comfortable wandering away from the familiar. The fact that Microsoft seems to be implying that their patch process is a good enough solution doesn't help. > But don't you think that if the whole world started using *nix to > the extent they now use Windows the virus writers (like that snotty > teenage kid discussed about here in the Digest a couple weeks ago) > wouldn't shift gears and start writing things to mess with *nix like > they do Windows now? I suspect the only reason some mail programs > are relatively 'immune' at the present time is just a question of > where to get the biggest bang for the buck where the virus writers > are concerned. PAT] I've said the same thing in the past in various forums and been criticized for it -- do Mac and UNIX mail applications execute attachments as quickly and casually as Outlook [Express]? That said, many readers here will recall that RTM's internet worm (does anyone have an authoritative pice to say whether it was the first or not?) ran on UNIX and exploited Sendmail vulnerabilities; IIRC, Microsoft did not have an internet-capable platform at the time. Geoffrey Welsh Always looking for a good condition original 'chicklet keyboard' Commodore PET ------------------------------ 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 #78 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 19 00:25:16 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1J5PGg07510; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 00:25:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 00:25:16 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402190525.i1J5PGg07510@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 #79 TELECOM Digest Thu, 19 Feb 2004 00:25:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 79 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cingular's Sensation (Eric Friedebach) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (McWebber) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (Kyler Laird) Re: Need Telephone Selection Advice for Small Business (Eric Katz) Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash (Monty Solomon) RIAA Sued Under Gang Laws (Monty Solomon) Re: Social Engineering, was Re: Honesty from Earthlink (G Novosielski) Re: Social Engineering, was Re: Honesty from Earthlink (Spacey Spade) Reliable Means of Determining Servicing LEC For a Phone Number? (JL) Re: My SBC Experience (was Re: Phantom DSL Reprised) (Tony P.) Re: The Virus Underground (Nick Landsberg) Re: The Virus Underground (Barry Margolin) Cell Phone Rings Equal Bling Bling (Eric Friedebach) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Cingular's Sensation Date: 18 Feb 2004 12:55:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Aude Lagorce, 02.17.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - Cingular Wireless just spent $41 billion on breathing room. But don't expect Verizon Wireless or Vodafone to let their rival catch its breath. Cingular, the second-largest U.S. mobile operator, snatched number-three AT&T Wireless with an all-cash offer this morning after a weekend-long bidding battle with U.K. giant Vodafone. While the deal is being heralded by analysts as finally bringing about some much-needed consolidation to a fiercely competitive industry, it may not bring as much as some had hoped. By all accounts, Cingular's decision to offer an extra $3 billion overnight to cinch the deal was right. From the beginning, the carrier -- a joint venture of SBC Communications and BellSouth--was better able to justify paying a premium for AT&T Wireless than Vodafone could, because of the operational and technical cost synergies it would derive from the deal. And at $15 in cash per share, "Cingular did not overpay," says Andrew Cole, a senior vice president with telecom strategy consultancy Adventis. http://forbes.com/technology/2004/02/17/cx_al_0217cingular.html Eric Friedebach /Mortgage your Viagra!/ ------------------------------ From: McWebber Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 19:57:08 -0500 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That was the big hassle I had with > SBC: whether to retain them for phone service in order to keep the > DSL, or ditch them and lose the DSL. They were counting heavily > on the former. In my case, they lost. Had they been willing to go > half-way with me I would have still switched to Prairie Stream for > good quality, inexpensive phone service, but retained DSL. Since > SBC kept insisting *all or nothing* I said okay, nothing. Now I > have Cable One for internet with a decent size pipe and Prairie > Stream for phone. SBC is nowhere to be found in this household. I > would bet you the success of the Qwest experiment will be watched > closely by all the (old) Bell System telcos, and soon they will > all be offering the same deal. That's how the telcos do things: > one comes up with a bright idea, they all get in line and start > marching the same way. We've seen that time and again. PAT] Verizon recently caved and now allows DSL only subscriptions, so I'm sure Qworst looked at that before making the decision. McWebber No email replies read If someone tells you to forward an email to all your friends please forget that I'm your friend. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" From: Kyler Laird Organization: Insight Broadband Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 22:11:55 GMT Phil Earnhardt writes: > The end of the story changed topics: Qwest announced they would begin > to offer DSL service on a line that doesn't have regular phone > service: > "Also Monday, Notebaert said Qwest will be launching later this month > a separate DSL service, which he dubbed --'naked DSL.' Before, > customers had to subscribe to Qwest's telephone service to get DSL. Qwest is confused. It can't be done. J. Michael Healy explained the technical details long ago. http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=vwrn2.866%24mv6.1345865%40news3.mia&output=gplain Without dialtone, you don't have a connection in the C.O., no connection -- no ADSL -- very simple. They are not going to provide you with a free line to carry ADSL, neither will any other operating company in the country. --kyler [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, Kyler, I think you are confused, not Qworst. You don't have to have dialtone on a line, just battery. When I had my recorded message service running back in the 1970's with several racks of the old intercept style machines from Illinois Bell, the lines (25 or so of them) were *one way inbound* only. There was no dial tone provided, but you could hear sidetone, which is to say when you blew a bit of air into the mouthpiece, you heard it out your earpiece. If a phone is totally 'dead' you won't get that. I've seen other telephones similar, used as manual intercoms. And Bell *does* get money for those arrangements; they give nothing for free. I am sure what they do is provide a circuit with no dial tone, tie it up across the central office to the location where the ISP-like DSL office is located. They assign it a non-dialable circuit number for billing purposes so that no one can call into it either. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Google123@vinfo.com (Eric Katz) Subject: Re: Need Telephone Selection Advice for Small Business Date: 18 Feb 2004 14:54:15 -0800 Vito, We too were looking to simplify our phone system and get costs down. We had 8 Verizon CentraNet lines and a complex Panasonic PBX\VM system (a total nightmare to program ... just adjusting the time for daylight savings time was unreal!) We were also dealing with a live answering service to handle overflow or after hours calls. We are now down to two business lines and a DSL line (which we also use for voice.) We picked up the AT&T 955 and 944 phones at Staples. They are great. We can intercom between all of them, hold, transfer and conference: they also have caller ID. However they are 4 line phones and can accommodate up to 12 extensions. But what helped us cut costs the most and remain accessible to our clients was a virtual voice mail \ auto attendant system we found called FreedomPro (from www.voiceinformation.com). This service is great ... it handles our toll-free needs, it provides call forwarding, call screening, voice mail and all our other attendant \ answering service needs. We use their internet interface to tell the system to which local number and at what times to forward callers. It will even track us down if we want, bouncing from phone number to phone number until we answer. It will exhaust all programmed numbers before giving our caller the VM option. We receive our voice messages via email broadcast or we can retrieve them manually by calling the system or going online via the FreedomPro interface. The toll-free, long distance and international rates offered are much better than what Verizon could do for us. We've cut our monthly costs from about $430 down to about $185 and have sacrificed nothing ... rather, we've gained in terms of reliability and ease of use. Good luck! Eric ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 22:04:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash ST. PAUL (AP) -- The rising popularity of Internet telephones could undermine the finances of the state's 911 systems while endangering some users because the new technology doesn't alway mesh with the old emergency system. So-called Internet telephony's popularity worries Jim Beutelspacher, manager of the statewide 911 program for the Department of Public Safety, because it doesn't pay a 40-cent-per-month tax for each new subscriber. Last fiscal year, a 33-cent 911 fee generated $20.8 million. The higher fee this year is expected to bring in $25.4 million, mainly to pay for connections to public safety call centers, Beutelspacher said. But if more people drop their regular telephone service in favor of tax-free Internet calling, the financial underpinnings of 911 will be weakened, he said. The problems have been noted within the industry, but it's expected to become a bigger issue as more people turn to Internet telephony because it can be cheaper than regular telephone service. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40635970 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 22:53:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: RIAA Sued Under Gang Laws By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com It's probably not the first time that record company executives have been likened to Al Capone, but this time a judge might have to agree or disagree. A New Jersey woman, one of the hundreds of people accused of copyright infringement by the Recording Industry Association of America, has countersued the big record labels, charging them with extortion and violations of the federal antiracketeering act. Through her attorneys, Michele Scimeca contends that by suing file-swappers for copyright infringement, and then offering to settle instead of pursuing a case where liability could reach into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, the RIAA is violating the same laws that are more typically applied to gangsters and organized crime. http://news.com.com/2100-1027-5161209.html ------------------------------ From: Gary Novosielski Subject: Re: Social Engineering, was Re: Honesty from Earthlink Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:24:37 GMT Danny Burstein wrote: > Did the original poster really, really, send the account password to a > stranger? That caught my eye too. If I were calling, the conversation would have gone more like this: Tech support: Let me have your account password for verification Me: What are you, NUTS!? Doesn't Earthlink have the usual disclaimer of "None of our employees will ever ask you for your password"? If not, *why* not? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Usually, places like that ask you for some other piece of personal information instead of a *password*, such as mother's maiden name, or the last four digits of the card you use to pay for your account, etc. Or maybe, your street address or zip code. Something *you* would know, yet would not be common knowledge. Anything but an actual *password*. PAT] ------------------------------ From: spaceygum@hotpop.com (Spacey Spade) Subject: Re: Social Engineering, was Re: Honesty from Earthlink Date: 18 Feb 2004 18:19:38 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Danny Burstein wrote in message news:: > In spaceygum@hotpop.com (Spacey > Spade) writes: >> I was getting spam from Earthlink even though I had "opted out". By >> the way, AFAIK, I recommend Earthlink. Below a transcription of chat >> tech support: > [ snip ] >> name_protected:Let me know the password of your primary account for >> verification. >> myemail@addy.com:************ > Did the original poster really, really, send the account password to a > stranger? Yep. I thought it strange she would ask for my password, but I am the opposite of paranoid. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are like so many of the newer and inexperienced internet users these days. AOL for example, on every single page presented to users -- especially interactive chat pages -- always says 'An employee of AOL will NEVER ask for your password'. They know their users believe everything which is typed on the screen in front of them; treat it like gospel truth; "An employee of the internet told me I had to re-register my account (through them) or else it would be cancelled." PAT] ------------------------------ From: JL Subject: Reliable Means of Determining Servicing LEC For Given Phone Number? Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:38:07 -0800 Does anyone know of a reliable means of determining the servicing LEC for a given phone number? I'm trying to find a reliable means of determining what is the servicing LEC for any given phone number. Right now this is limited to only needing to work for CA. USA phone numbers. Using the various resources (LERG, and other similar databases) I can get down to what the operating Company is for a given NPA/NXX but with Thousand Number (block) Pooling, and porting of numbers, there are over lapping NPA/NXXs for various providers, and while the operating company for a given NPA/NXX maybe SBC (Pacific Bell) the line may in fact be serviced by Verizon (GTE). So far I'm at a loss as to how to reliably perform, what in an ideal world, would be a simple search. -JL ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: My SBC Experience (was Re: Phantom DSL Reprised) Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 19:30:58 GMT In article , nospam@crashelectronics.com says: > Nick Landsberg wrote: > It was an Illinois Bell customer service rep who spent about half an > hour going over available numbers with me when setting up new service > at my first house -- two cool numbers (xxx-8088 and xx8-0386), no > extra charge. OK, they don't do this any more (who does?). But they > did then. Verizon does -- they call them Vanity numbers now and of course there's a charge. > It was an Ameritech customer service rep who told me about Alternate > Answering and Busy Line Transfer (combined cost: $1.50/mo) when I > called to order Call Forwarding ($18/mo or thereabouts). In my > situation the cheaper alternative actually did what I wanted better > than the more expensive (but popular and heavily advertised) choice. Sometimes service droids are helpful, most times they are not. You definitely were fortunate to catch someone who knew of the existence of the service. That seems to be the main problem when dealing with phone company personnel these days -- they just don't know what the company offers or is capable of. The fact that Verizon DSL didn't know they could call Verizon repair and run a loop length test comes glaringly to mind. > It was SBC who had my DSL up in 3 days when they promised it in a > week. And when I had a bizarre intermittent problem with it, they > had two trucks out for the better part of an afternoon, and again > the next day, and fixed it. (It was a flaky line card in the RT -- > worked about 99.9% of the time.) Around here it's flaky and crappy outside plant. They're just counting the days before the massive fiber drop starts happening around here. The nice thing about it is in areas like mine -- we're already served by underground electric, and fiber can co-exist peacefully in those very same cable ducts. But knowing Verizon they'd put aerial drops of fiber because that's how the phone service is currently fed in. > Illinois Bell/Ameritech/SBC has never crammed me -- and when one of my > employees didn't say "NO!" loudly enough to some teleslime and I ended > up with "Voicenet E-mail by phone" on my bill, it was SBC who cleared > the charge and told Integretel where to stuff it. > Maybe I just lead a charmed life. In my case -- they know I'm a customer that won't back down and have friends in high enough places to cause them massive discomfort. ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 20:41:32 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > lawrence.jones@ugsplm.com wrote: >> But the simple fact of the matter is that Windows and it's related >> applications were explicitly designed to do things for you, >> automatically, so you don't have to know what you're doing. Unix-like >> systems and most of their applications, on the other hand, were >> designed to do exactly what you tell them and not one thing more, >> forcing you to know what you're doing in order to use them at all. Mark Crispin wrote: > The flaw in this reasoning is the assumption that a design of "do > things for you, automatically, so you don't have to know what you're > doing" is a design flaw in Windows as opposed to a design requirement > of any mass market operating system. > It is a beautiful dream that everybody who uses a computer will know > what they're doing and can use a system which does exactly what it is > told to do and not one thing more. That dream is also highly > unrealistic. For this reason, I think that attacks on Windows by certain segments of the UNIX community are foolish and self-defeating. It is arrogant to assume that UNIX programmers are somehow smarter than Windows programmers and would never made the same mistakes. My comment: In any system design there are many tradeoffs to be made often between opposite forces. Security and convenience are two such forces. Performance and flexibiilty, for example, are in the same category. When M$ made it's design deicision, they chose convenience, but more importantly, they chose a "tight-coupling" between components in order to make the "convenience" aspect easier to provide. (This presumes that the decision was a conscious one and didn't "just happen" because the programmers wanted it that way.) Unix, on the other hand, started out more-or-less as loosely coupled components. Partially because of the hardware limitations in the 70's. You just couldn't run a 10 MB program on a 512K machine! (By the time M$ was developing the latest versions(s) of Windows, 100-200 MB of RAM was not uncommon.) Having said that, neither way is intrinsically better than the other. With a "monolothic structure" (e.g. you can't strip the browser out of the OS without crippling it, so M$ claims), almost any flaw (security bug) will manifest itself in all aspects of the operation. Fixing it properly should involve complete regression testing of EVERYTHING! With a loosely-coupled structure, a flaw in any program does not USUALLY mean that everything in the system is broken. In theory, only the buggy program need be fixed. If the bug is in a "library routine" used by almost everyone, then this case degenerates into the same scenario as the monolithic case above. So, no, Unix programmers are no smarter than Windows programmers. It is just that the bugs are usually in isolated code, not in the big monolith. Just my $0.02. See the signature line for the parting shot. :) > The implication here is that current technology forces us to choose > between security and user-friendliness. I can hope that someone will > invest techniques to make things user-friendly without making them > insecure, but my cynical side tells me that these new techniques will > be either secure or user-friendly, but not both. > I must force myself to because mixing that observation with the > level of stupidity that humans demonstrate at every possible > opportunity leads us to the very frightening conclusion that no > popular system can ever be secure. > William Robison wrote: >> Are we all asking the wrong question about virus software? >> Why do we all keep using IE and Outlook? (kinda like hitting your >> thumb with a hammer, over and over). > That's like asking why we use the tires that come with our cars when > there are so many better ones available. They're there and they work. > Even if the replacements were free, not everyone is going to be aware > of the advantages of the alternatives and not everyone who is aware is > going to choose to invest the time and effort. >> How many times do we have to be explotied before we realize >> there has to be a better way (and there are, certainly, many >> alternatives to IE/Outlook). > Users have developed a comfort level with Microsoft OSes and > applications; they are what everyone supports and talks. Even if a > user is aware that they have been compromised (it's amazing how many > computer users cannot grasp the simplest principles of operation, let > alone notice when their computer is misbehaving) and they're aware of > the existence of alternatives, they may not feel comfortable wandering > away from the familiar. > The fact that Microsoft seems to be implying that their patch process > is a good enough solution doesn't help. >> But don't you think that if the whole world started using *nix to >> the extent they now use Windows the virus writers (like that snotty >> teenage kid discussed about here in the Digest a couple weeks ago) >> wouldn't shift gears and start writing things to mess with *nix like >> they do Windows now? I suspect the only reason some mail programs >> are relatively 'immune' at the present time is just a question of >> where to get the biggest bang for the buck where the virus writers >> are concerned. PAT] > I've said the same thing in the past in various forums and been > criticized for it -- do Mac and UNIX mail applications execute > attachments as quickly and casually as Outlook [Express]? > That said, many readers here will recall that RTM's internet worm > (does anyone have an authoritative pice to say whether it was the > first or not?) ran on UNIX and exploited Sendmail vulnerabilities; > IIRC, Microsoft did not have an internet-capable platform at the time. > Geoffrey Welsh > Always looking for a good condition original 'chicklet keyboard' > Commodore PET "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Organization: Looking for work Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:23:37 -0500 In article , Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > That said, many readers here will recall that RTM's internet worm > (does anyone have an authoritative pice to say whether it was the > first or not?) ran on UNIX and exploited Sendmail vulnerabilities; > IIRC, Microsoft did not have an internet-capable platform at the time. Times were different. That happened before the Internet was opened up to anyone willing to pay $10/month for access. Those of us who were on the Internet were a relatively benign community, and we mostly trusted each other. Few organizations bothered with firewalls at the time (if you did want one, you had to construct it yourself -- there weren't any off-the-shelf products yet). The sendmail vulnerability was quite blatant: you connected to the SMTP port and typed something like "DBUG", and you could then send arbitrary commands that would be executed by the root-owned server process. It was like a small town where everyone feels safe leaving their doors unlocked. But the landscape has changed since then. The commercialization of the Internet has opened it up to all segments of the community; we're living in an inner city where there are lots of dangerous people we need to watch out for. Microsoft had the opportunity to learn from our early experiences, but did they really take advantage of it? It seems not, since allowing the mail reader to execute active code in messages is not much different from the sendmail vulnerability that we plugged 15 years ago. To extend my analogy, Windows seems like a suburbanite driving into a ghetto and leaving his sports car unlocked and unattended; we shouldn't be surprised if it gets stripped or taken for a joy-ride. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Cell Phone Rings Equal Bling Bling Date: 18 Feb 2004 12:53:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Chana R. Schoenberger, 02.17.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - The newest hip-hop accessory for the urban set: a cell phone with rap-inspired ring tones. Phone users are rushing to download tiny music files that blare when a phone rings or when the user has voicemail. And what they want on their phones is hip-hop music. The most popular ring tone downloaded onto cell phones last year was taken from the song "In Da Club," by rapper 50 Cent, and the current front-runner is Grammy winner OutKast. Seven of the ten most-downloaded ring tones in 2003 on the Cingular Wireless network were hip-hop songs. Ring tones are big business, with $2.5 billion spent to buy them worldwide last year. In the United States, phone users spent $80 million on them in 2003, quadruple what they paid in 2002. This year, they are expected to spend north of $100 million, according to the Yankee Group research firm. Each file typically costs between 99 cents and $2.49, depending on the sound quality. But users don't seem to be deterred by the price. http://www.forbes.com/personaltech/2004/02/17/cz_cs_0217ringtones.html (Note from Eric) Not long ago I was riding up an elevator with a half-dozen or so other people. As soon as the doors shut, we all heard a soft "whoop-whoop" sound, like an alarm from a sci-fi movie. This went on for a few floors until I finally said "Okay, who's the wise guy with the Star Trek ringtone?" Nobody 'fessed up or made a move to answer a handset. Later that day I was riding down the same elevator, but alone this time. I heard the same noise, and traced the source to the ceiling of the elevator. Eric Friedebach /Mortgage your Viagra!/ ------------------------------ 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 #79 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 19 01:16:18 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1J6GHI08119; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:16:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:16:18 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402190616.i1J6GHI08119@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 #80 TELECOM Digest Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:16:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 80 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Long Distance Wrong Numbers From Everywhere (Nick Landsberg) Re: Long Distance Wrong Numbers From Everywhere (Paul Lee) Re: Long Distance Wrong Numbers From Everywhere (McWebber) Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax (none@none.com) The Very, Very Personal Is the Political (Monty Solomon) Re: The Five Sisters (Gene S. Berkowitz) Distractions While Driving -- and Not Just Cell Phones (Carl Moore) Re: Cell Phone Numbering Arrangments (Joseph) Blogs (Web Logs): What am I Not Getting? (jmayson@nyx.net) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: Long Distance Wrong Numbers From Everywhere Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 20:22:32 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Patrick basically got it right, but, for those who may not now how 800 service works: There is conceptually "no such thing" as an 800 number (or 888, 877, 866). Switches are programmed to make a "dip" into a network database when they see these prefixes. In the network database is a "routing table" which matches on dialed number, originating NPA-NXX, and time of day, among other things, to look up the actual "POTS" line to which to route the call. No part of the POTS number need match any digits of the 800 number. Thus, dialing 866-222-3333 from 973 may get you Joe's Pizza in Madison NJ while dialing the same number from 937 (Southern Ohio) may get you Horst's Hofbrau Haus in Cincinatti. Since David did get the calls from all over the country, this is not the case and it is probably a "global" routing, meaning route to the same number whatever the originating NPA. The other variation is time of day, which can be programmed in 15 minutes intervals. For example, between 8 AM and 11 AM Eastern Time, route all calls to a call center in the eastern time zone. 11 AM to 1 PM, route them 50% each to numbers in the eastern and central time-zones, etc., etc. Large companies with multiple "call-centers" use this feature. If these calls are happening at a particular time of day, then only a portion of the routing table is messed up. Nick L. David Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Patrick, > For about three weeks now we've been receiving (wrong number) long > distance calls from Florida, New York, Vermont, California, Ohio and > Massachusetts. When questioned, the few callers that remained on the > line reported they received a message either on their voice mail or on > their answering machine asking them to phone: 1-866-829-8229. This is > apparently one of A T & T's numbers in the states, and it's rerouting > to our Vancouver number. > Have you and/or your staff heard of anything like this > before? Our local provider is sorting this out; have been on the case > for 4-5 days now, but the A T & T number info we've only had for about > 18 hours now. > With appreciation, > David Kirkpatrick > davidcan@axion.net > 604-913-2000 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried 866-829-8229 myself just now > and got (what I assume) was your answering machine. What I think has > happened is that the place in charge of assigning and routing toll > free 800 numbers -- they are referred to in the telecom business as > 'RespOrgs' (or the Responsible Organizations) has somehow incorrectly > assigned your number as the recipient of these calls you are getting. > Your local service provider can do nothing for you except possibly > act in your behalf in locating the resporg and asking them to stop > the mis-routing. If that toll-free number is what I think it is, it > should be ringing to the collection department at AT&T; they want to > get the caller to pay their AT&T phone bills. My clue here is the > caller who leaves the message for the recipient does not discuss the > nature of the call or the reason for it. Laws here in the USA (Fair > Debt Collection Practices Act) forbid the 'publication' or discussion > of an alleged debt with any third party. They cannot tell 'just > anyone' who answers -- or an answering machine -- what the company > wants them to do, namely pay their bills. > Rather than get into a discussion of all that, which will only confuse > the issue, just ask your local telco (or preferably, an 800 toll-free > specialist) to find out who is the resporg on that number 866-829-8229 > and route it someplace other than your number. I'll bet anything that > there is one digit off (probably in the area code) which a data entry > operator mistakenly entered. > Aternate solution #1: Want a toll free (and literally *free* for you) > number from the USA to ring at your premises for your convenience. > Start giving out that number to your freinds, family, etc. Try to > ignore the hardships of the wrong number callers looking for AT&T. > Alternate guerilla solution #2: When you are there to receive the > calls, tell the caller that 'AT&T has decided to forgive them of their > indebtedness entirely provided they sign up with some other carrier > in the future. (?)(!). I think if the master solution does not work > rather quickly (and it is the most honorable) then alternates 1 or 2 > should work rather soon. PAT] "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ Date: 18 Feb 2004 21:13:47 -0000 From: palee@riteaid.com Subject: Re: Long Distance Wrong Numbers From Everywhere In TELECOM Digest V23 #78, David Kirkpatrick wrote (in part): > For about three weeks now we've been receiving (wrong number) > long distance calls from Florida, New York, Vermont, California, > Ohio and Massachusetts. When questioned, the few callers that > remained on the line reported they received a message either on > their voice mail or on their answering machine asking them to > phone: 1-866-829-8229. This is apparently one of A T & T's > numbers in the states, and it's rerouting to our Vancouver number. According to SBC's RespOrg identification service, the RespOrg for 866-829-8229 is "SPSC1" with a trouble reporting number of 800-600-1186. That appears to be Call-Net / Sprint Canada. I suggest you call the trouble reporting number and let them know that at least some calls to 866-829-8229 are being misrouted to your number. They should be able to take care of it within 15 to 30 minutes at most. Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ From: McWebber Subject: Re: Long Distance Wrong Numbers From Everywhere Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 19:59:46 -0500 David Kirkpatrick wrote in message news:telecom23.78.1@telecom-digest.org: > For about three weeks now we've been receiving (wrong number) long > distance calls from Florida, New York, Vermont, California, Ohio and > Massachusetts. When questioned, the few callers that remained on the > line reported they received a message either on their voice mail or on > their answering machine asking them to phone: 1-866-829-8229. This is > apparently one of A T & T's numbers in the states, and it's rerouting > to our Vancouver number. TELECOM Digest Editor gave smart-mouth solution to problem: > Alternate guerilla solution #2: When you are there to receive the > calls, tell the caller that 'AT&T has decided to forgive them of their > indebtedness entirely provided they sign up with some other carrier > in the future. (?)(!). I think if the master solution does not work > rather quickly (and it is the most honorable) then alternates 1 or 2 > should work rather soon. PAT] #3: When the caller ID shows some US number you don't recognize answer the phone, "White House, George Bush speaking." McWebber "Richter points to the lack of legal action against his company as proof that he's operating appropriately." Information Week, November 10, 2003 ------------------------------ From: none@none.com Subject: Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 19:56:01 -0800 Organization: - On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:21:07 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > By Kevin Poulsen, SecurityFocus > A small and diverse band of hobbyists steeped in the obscure languages > of embedded systems has released its own custom firmware for a popular > brand of cable modem, along with a technique for loading it -- a > development that's already made life easier for uncappers and service > squatters, and threatens to topple long-held assumptions about the > privacy of cable modem communications. > The program, called Sigma, was released in its final version last > month, and has reportedly been downloaded 350 to 400 times a day ever > since. It's designed to be flashed into the non-volatile memory of > certain models of Motorola's Surfboard line, where it runs in parallel > with the device's normal functionality. It gives users almost complete > control of their cable modem -- a privilege previously reserved for > the service provider. > The project is the work of a gang of coders called TCNiSO. With about > ten active members worldwide, the group is supported by contributions > from the uncapping community -- speed-hungry Internet users who rely > on TCNiSO's research and free hackware to surmount the bandwidth caps > imposed by service providers, usually in violation of their service > agreement, if not the law. To them, Sigma is a delight, because it > makes it simple to change the modem's configuration file -- the key to > uncapping, and, on some systems, to getting free anonymous service > using "unregistered" modems. "I've known TCNiSO for two years now and > I've done a lot of things with their techniques," wrote a Canadian > uncapper in an e-mail interview. "Sigma is the greatest one I've > seen." > http://www.securityfocus.com/news/7977 One of the things that has me concerned and hope others is what was listed in the article. That cable modem traffic is pinged or actually "Routed" off other cable modems, so that traffic can be handled more effectively as a huge LAN My questions is: 1) Where is the security for traffic on this network? 2) Why has the cable modem services industry not taken a lead to encrypt or block access of traffic not deemed for a particular router off-limits, so that it can be shared with another user??? Jeremy supercommodore@maildotcom [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although I do not know the particulars of this, I do know that Mr. Mike Flood, the general manager of Cable One, here in Independence told me 'that was all taken care of recently' when I asked him 'what prevents everyone on the cable from showing up in my Network Neighborhood, and the other way around.' I am sorry to say I did not understand his sort of technical explanation. Maybe some of you could explain it to me in simple words. Its not a problem with DSL, since everyone goes to the central office on their own pair. But with a cable strung around, what *does* prevent us from being each other's Neighbor for spy purposes, etc. Anyone? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:35:49 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Very, Very Personal Is the Political By JON GERTNER Suppose, for the sake of argument, that you are called into the boss's office and asked to help sell the citizens of the United States on one of two presidential candidates in the 2004 campaign. Hard work, but what makes it especially tough is that you've been directed to try something experimental, something that's never been done before in a national election. Instead of creating a traditional political narrative for your candidate -- one that highlights charisma or character, for instance, or one that hews to a message on taxes or Social Security -- you've been told to focus on nothing but the people who might be persuaded to vote. In other words, forget about your candidate's nuanced ideas for space exploration or ending the conflict in Iraq. Forget about TV commercials, forget about radio, forget about debates, forget about the ups and downs of the news cycle. Think voters -- just voters. And don't think only in terms of big demographic groups like senior citizens, middle-class white men or young single women; don't think about them only in terms of geographical areas like districts or precincts or even neighborhoods. Think about what they like, what they do, what they consume. Think about them one by one. Name by name, address by address, phone by phone. These are the customers you have to get to buy your Brand A over Brand B. So who are they? Where are they? Are they rich, with three kids and a jumbo mortgage? Do they own fly rods and drive minivans? Do they go to church or temple? And maybe most important, who among them has never voted, or rarely voted, or voted in ways that may deserve the special status of swing voter? To do the job right, of course, to really win this thing, you've got to find them, woo them and get them to the polls. Where to start? These days, the first stop is a comprehensive database of U.S. voters. There are fewer than half a dozen of them. One, named Voter Vault, belongs to the Republican National Committee; another, named Datamart, belongs to the Democratic National Committee. Over the past few years, thanks to technological advances and an escalating arms race between the parties, Republicans and Democrats have gone to great lengths to make campaigning more like commercial marketing. Moreover, both parties have begun to sort through their troves of information in order to identify and then court individual voters. Variations on the new political sharpshooting have been tested successfully by the Republican and Democratic Parties in several recent statewide elections. And over the next few months, a handful of pollsters, tacticians and statisticians on each side, almost certainly fewer than two dozen political pros in all, will be scrutinizing socioeconomic data in Washington and Virginia as a part of their targeting work -- sometimes they also call it microtargeting -- in the coming general election. This is a complicated business. Each party's databank has the name of every one of the 168 million or so registered voters in the country, cross-indexed with phone numbers, addresses, voting history, income range and so on -- up to as many as several hundred points of data on each voter. The information has been acquired from state voter-registration rolls, census reports, consumer data-mining companies and direct marketing vendors. The parties have also amassed detailed information about the political and social beliefs that you might have shared with canvassers who have phoned or knocked on the door over the past few years. While specifics vary, a typical voter profile like my own, for instance, would show my age, address, phone numbers; which elections I've voted in over the past 10 or 15 years and whether I've ever voted on an absentee ballot; and my e-mail address. It would include my New Jersey party registration (Democrat), whether I've ever made a political donation (none that I recall), my approximate income, my ethnicity, my marital status and the number of children living in my house. Thanks to the ready availability of subscriber lists, mortgage data and product warranty information, the parties might use records of the newspapers I read (this one), the computer I work on (a Macintosh), the men's-wear catalogs I receive (Brooks Brothers, Land's End) and the loan-to-value ratio of my home. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/15/magazine/15VOTERS.html *** 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. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Gene S. Berkowitz Subject: Re: The Five Sisters Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:55:26 -0500 In article , monty@roscom.com says: > By WILLIAM SAFIRE > WASHINGTON - If one huge corporation controlled both the production > and the dissemination of most of our news and entertainment, couldn't > it rule the world? > Can't happen here, you say; America is the land of competition that > generates new technology to ensure a diversity of voices. But > consider how a supine Congress and a feckless majority of the Federal > Communications Commission have been failing to protect our access to > a variety of news, views and entertainment. > The media giant known as Viacom-CBS-MTV just showed us how it > controls both content and communication of the sexiest Super Bowl. > The five other big sisters that now bestride the world are (1) > Murdoch-FoxTV-HarperCollins-WeeklyStandard-NewYorkPost- > LondonTimes-DirecTV; > (2) G.E.-NBC-Universal-Vivendi; (3) Time-Warner-CNN-AOL; (4) > Disney-ABC-ESPN; and (5) the biggest cable company, Comcast. > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/16/opinion/16SAFI.html But let's not forget the Gray Lady herself (a Step Sister, perhaps?): New York Times Group Holdings: (Newspapers) The New York Times, The Boston Globe, Houma Courier, Thibodaux Daily Comet, Palatka Daily News, Opelousas Daily World, Lexington Dispatch, The Gadsden Times, The Gainesville Sun, International Herald Tribune, Lake City Reporter, Lakeland Ledger, Marco Island Eagle, Fernandina Beach News-Leader, Sebring News-Sun, Santa Rosa Press Democrat, Sarasota Herald-Tribune, Spartanburg Herald-Journal, Ocala Star-Banner, Florence Times-Daily, Hendersonville Times-News, The Tuscaloosa News, Wilmington Morning Star, The Worcester Telegram & Gazette (Television Stations) KFOR Oklahoma City KFSM Fort Smith WHNT Huntsville WHO Des Moines WNEP Scranton/Wilkes-Barre WQAD Moline WREG Memphis WTKR Norfolk ... plus two FM radio stations, part of the Ovation Cable Network, various electronic information services, and THREE GOLF MAGAZINES! --Gene ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:48:23 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones I take it a suggested common denominator in police reports about traffic accidents would be to note any driver distraction which had a part in the accident. I was in a minor accident myself last month when, on a 2-lane road, an oncoming driver (who later admitted to reaching down for his gloves) drifted into my lane and hit the left side of a rented car I was driving. We did get an officer to the scene and he got the story about the gloves and the drifting into my lane, and that other driver was cited. Some time ago, I noted a news story from Pennsylvania about the governor of that state asking police to note on their reports (using "remarks" if no special cell-phone category was available) any cell-phone use which contributed to an accident. By the way, the accident I was in was in New York state, the same state where I had rented that car. It was posted in the car-rental office (and seen by me on a sign as I drove into NY state a year earlier on Interstate 81) that it is illegal in NY state to use a handheld phone while driving (I don't have it in front of me what emergency exception might exist). But I occasionally saw drivers using handheld phones anyway in NY state. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Cell Phone Numbering Arrangments Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:55:45 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 03:30:56 GMT, Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > Before the FCC banned technology-specific overlay area codes, it > authorized New York to use a new overlay code (718?) for cell phones, > faxes, and internal telco lines for several years. That code has > since become a normal overlay code, with wireline phones in it as well > as the others. Actually it was area code 917 and for a few years it was a technology specific area code for use in all five boroughs for cell phones and pagers. And yes now all classes of service can be assigned in area code 917. > Given the introduction of full number portability between wireline and > wireless phones (with some exceptions, probably temporary), the genie > is out of the bottle; it won't be possible to have an area code that > is wireless-only or wireline-only. It's not necessarily that. It has just been decided that the NANP will have area code specific mobile service. Even in plans for the expansion of the NANP there's no mention of having mobile only "area codes" which would mean the possibility of caller pays mobile service as is the case in Europe and Asia. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: jmayson@nyx.net Subject: Blogs (web logs): What am I Not Getting? Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 02:32:12 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com Pat posted his blog URL the other day: http://patricktownson-live.us.tf. Whenever I see a blog, I ask one question. Why? I will admit it can be fun to read other people's blogs, but most are mind-numbing garbage (not yours, of course, Pat ;-) And in all honesty I don't want people to know what I'm thinking. If I shared what was running through my mind, I'd probably have a nice, well-padded room on the top floor of the Austin State Hospital. I'm just curious why people blog. Are there any, for the lack of a better term, practical blogs out there? I'm not criticizing blogging, I'm just trying to understand it better. John Mayson Austin, Texas, USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Anything you don't want people to know about, you do not put on a computer. And, let's be real frank here. All of us -- everyone of us -- has secrets which would shame the devil if they were known. None of us are exceptions to that. Those of us who 'blog' generally do it to share our ideas and wisdom with the readers of same. I started my blog for just that reason: a way to interact with others outside the confines of the TELECOM Digest as desired. To share with them and learn from them and hopefully teach a few of them. I do not know about other's intentions. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 80 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 19 15:38:13 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1JKcCH13314; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 15:38:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 15:38:13 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402192038.i1JKcCH13314@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 #81 TELECOM Digest Thu, 19 Feb 2004 15:38:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 81 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (Tony P.) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (Chris Kantarjiev) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (email@crazyhat.net) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (McWebber) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (Kyler Laird) Re: The Virus Underground (Nick Landsberg) Re: The Virus Underground (William Robison) Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax (David B. Horvath, CCP) Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax (Joey Lindstrom) Advice Needed For Modem Disconnecting Problem (L. Hao) Re: Experts Warn of Microsoft 'Monoculture' (William Robison) Re: Distractions While Driving - And Not Just Cell Phones (Steven Sobol) Re: Long Distance Wrong Numbers From Everywhere (Eric Friedebach) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Organization: ATCC Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:40:16 GMT In article , Kyler@news.Lairds.org says: > Phil Earnhardt writes: >> The end of the story changed topics: Qwest announced they would begin >> to offer DSL service on a line that doesn't have regular phone >> service: >> "Also Monday, Notebaert said Qwest will be launching later this month >> a separate DSL service, which he dubbed --'naked DSL.' Before, >> customers had to subscribe to Qwest's telephone service to get DSL. > Qwest is confused. It can't be done. J. Michael Healy > explained the technical details long > ago. > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=vwrn2.866%24mv6.1345865%40news3.mia&output=gplain > Without dialtone, you don't have a connection in the C.O., no > connection -- no ADSL -- very simple. They are not going to provide > you with a free line to carry ADSL, neither will any other operating > company in the country. Not true. For example -- I have DSL on my line and I tried an experiment. I disconnect CO battery from my line and the DSL connection was fully functional without it. If you're on a DMS-100 and in Verizon New England territory dial 980 and flash the hook then hang up. That kills CO battery for 2 minutes. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, Kyler, I think you are confused, > not Qworst. You don't have to have dialtone on a line, just battery. Not even battery. See above. I think the DSLAM provides the voltage necessary. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 22:24:09 -0800 (PST) From: Chris Kantarjiev Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" > Qwest is confused. It can't be done. Oh please. I have a pair dedicated to DSL, no dial tone, right now. I've had it for years. "A line for free"? Hardly. I pay handsomely for the privilege of using that copper pair. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 00:51:52 -0700 From: In message <> Kyler Laird did ramble: > Qwest is confused. It can't be done. J. Michael Healy > explained the technical details long > ago. > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=vwrn2.866%24mv6.1345865%40news3.mia&output=gplain > Without dialtone, you don't have a connection in the C.O., no > connection -- no ADSL -- very simple. They are not going to provide > you with a free line to carry ADSL, neither will any other operating > company in the country. A swing and a miss. The line would be connected to the C.O., and the telco would still bill somebody (ISP, end user, whatever) for that pair. There is no reason a dialtone, phone number, or even power would need to be on the line (although if you want ADSL, you'd probably need regulated power.) ============ A well-dressed man walks into a bar and asks a woman to sleep with him for $1M. The woman is excited and she gives immediate consent: "Of course I'll sleep with you!". Then the man asks, "will you sleep with me for $5?". The woman indignantly replies, "Of course not! What do you think I am?". The man replies, "We've already established what you are; now we're merely haggling over the price." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:56:20 -0700 From: Joey Lindstrom Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Organization: Telus Sucks! Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Wednesday, February 18, 2004, 10:25:16 PM, Kyler Laird wrote: > Qwest is confused. It can't be done. J. Michael Healy > explained the technical details > long ago. http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=vwrn2.866%24mv6.1345865%40news3.mia&output=gplain > Without dialtone, you don't have a connection in the C.O., no > connection -- no ADSL -- very simple. They are not going to provide > you with a free line to carry ADSL, neither will any other operating > company in the country. > --kyler > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, Kyler, I think you are confused, > not Qworst. You don't have to have dialtone on a line, just battery. > When I had my recorded message service running back in the 1970's > with several racks of the old intercept style machines from Illinois > Bell, the lines (25 or so of them) were *one way inbound* > only. There was no dial tone provided, but you could hear sidetone, > which is to say when you blew a bit of air into the mouthpiece, you > heard it out your earpiece. If a phone is totally 'dead' you won't > get that. I've seen other telephones similar, used as manual > intercoms. And Bell *does* get money for those arrangements; they > give nothing for free. I am sure what they do is provide a circuit > with no dial tone, tie it up across the central office to the > location where the ISP-like DSL office is located. They assign it a > non-dialable circuit number for billing purposes so that no one can > call into it either. PAT] As rare as it is for me to agree with our esteemed moderator :-), I must concur. When I got DSL service from Cadvision, a non-telco provider, they used a separate, otherwise-unused line pair. Indeed, my existing phone line was provided by Sprint Canada, a CLEC, but even if I'd had an ILEC line, Cadvision's setup in that area was to use a separate wire pair which was used ONLY for ADSL. Later, when I moved to a different area, they had different arrangements, and I had to have Telus (ILEC) dialtone on the line. But this requirement was imposed upon them by Telus, not by any technical requirements. Indeed, the CRTC (government agency) recently told Telus and all other ILEC's to stuff that idea - they *MUST* now allow DSL over "bare" lines or lines being used by CLEC's. As soon as my current ISP (Nucleus - Cadvision was swallowed up by Telus, but that's another horror story) tells me they're prepared to do this (provision my existing DSL over a CLEC line), I'm giving Telus the heave-ho. Again. Joey Lindstrom ------------------------------ From: McWebber Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:55:59 -0500 Kyler Laird wrote in message news:telecom23.79.3@telecom-digest.org: > Qwest is confused. It can't be done. J. Michael Healy > explained the technical details long > ago. http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=vwrn2.866%24mv6.1345865%40news3.mia&output=gplain > Without dialtone, you don't have a connection in the C.O., no > connection -- no ADSL -- very simple. They are not going to provide > you with a free line to carry ADSL, neither will any other operating > company in the country. > --kyler > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, Kyler, I think you are confused, > not Qworst. They can do whatever they want with the copper coming into the CO. McWebber "Richter points to the lack of legal action against his company as proof that he's operating appropriately." Information Week, November 10, 2003 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" From: Kyler Laird Organization: Insight Broadband Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 13:12:00 GMT Kyler Laird writes: > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=vwrn2.866%24mv6.1345865%40news3.mia&output=gplain > Without dialtone, you don't have a connection in the C.O., no > connection -- no ADSL -- very simple. They are not going to provide > you with a free line to carry ADSL, neither will any other operating > company in the country. Ouch! What happened to the spacing here?! I just verified the sent message and it had this paragraph idented the same as the URL. The resulting indentation might lead someone with no sense of sarcasm who fails to look at the URL to think that *I* said/thought such a thing. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, Kyler, I think you are confused, ... and there's the verification. --kyler ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:53:58 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Barry Margolin wrote: > In article , Geoffrey Welsh > wrote: >> That said, many readers here will recall that RTM's internet worm >> (does anyone have an authoritative pice to say whether it was the >> first or not?) ran on UNIX and exploited Sendmail vulnerabilities; >> IIRC, Microsoft did not have an internet-capable platform at the time. > Times were different. That happened before the Internet was opened up > to anyone willing to pay $10/month for access. Those of us who were > on the Internet were a relatively benign community, and we mostly > trusted each other. Few organizations bothered with firewalls at the > time (if you did want one, you had to construct it yourself -- there > weren't any off-the-shelf products yet). The sendmail vulnerability > was quite blatant: you connected to the SMTP port and typed something > like "DBUG", and you could then send arbitrary commands that would be > executed by the root-owned server process. It was like a small town > where everyone feels safe leaving their doors unlocked. Yes, times were very different, Barry. I just happened to be working as a consultant for a company making proposals on government military contracts then, using Unix servers. I had just finished porting TCP/IP to their SMP box and had just started on a design for providing "Orange Book" security when the Morris worm hit. As I recall, it wasn't the "DBUG" command that did it, it was a buffer overflow (does that sound familiar, don't we ever learn?) that caused a portion of memory to be overwritten with a very carefully crafted piece of machine code which then went and fetched the rest of the worm. (My memory could be faulty on this last variation.) Because this was binary code, it would only work on specific one specific Unix variant which was most prevalent at the time, 4.3 BSD I think. (Does this also sound familiar? Pick the most prevalent OS to go out after?) The worm itself did tricks to prevent decompilation (dis-assembly) which most hackers today would not even think of. (I won't mention them so as not to give any hackers out there ideas.) It was Gene Spafford of Purdue who was instrumental in finding out what it did and how it did it, although I presume many others were also involved. Oddly enough, or maybe not oddly, the Morris worm did no damage that I can recall, other than to spawn clones of itself, tie up bandwidth on the net and eat up CPU cycles on the infected machines. If only such were the case today. As you said Barry, the internet was a very trusting community in those days, and the Morris worm should have been a wake-up call to us all. > But the landscape has changed since then. The commercialization of > the Internet has opened it up to all segments of the community; we're > living in an inner city where there are lots of dangerous people we > need to watch out for. > Microsoft had the opportunity to learn from our early experiences, but > did they really take advantage of it? It seems not, since allowing > the mail reader to execute active code in messages is not much > different from the sendmail vulnerability that we plugged 15 years > ago. To extend my analogy, Windows seems like a suburbanite driving > into a ghetto and leaving his sports car unlocked and unattended; we > shouldn't be surprised if it gets stripped or taken for a joy-ride. > Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu > Arlington, MA "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I had forgotten all about that Morris Worm thing until it was brought up here. I do remember I was speaking on the phone at that moment to jsol when he told me he could not talk anymore at that time, he and others were trying to stop the Morris Worm before it did any further damage. Some others at MIT at the time were also quite concerned about it, as was spaff. The internet was quite a different place back then. PAT] ------------------------------ From: William Robison Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Organization: The University of Iowa, Department of Physics and Astronomy Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 15:40:21 GMT Much text deleted for clarity [Authors Note: Well, I finally got tired (pissed actually) at running on Windows, it simply crashes too much, so I switched from Netscape 4.x on Windows to Netscape 7.x on Solaris. Much faster, cut & paste works right (it's a UNIX thing)] Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > William Robison wrote: >> Are we all asking the wrong question about virus software? >> Why do we all keep using IE and Outlook? (kinda like hitting your >> thumb with a hammer, over and over). > That's like asking why we use the tires that come with our cars when > there are so many better ones available. They're there and they work. > Even if the replacements were free, not everyone is going to be aware > of the advantages of the alternatives and not everyone who is aware is > going to choose to invest the time and effort. But the OEM tires look like they came from the scrap yard, off of a 15 year old car with 125,000 miles on it (2nds. set of tires). And when you take it to the shop to get the hole patched (the day after you bought it) the mechanic tells you about the other dozen patches already applied to the tire. (If any car manufacturer casually disregarded something as simple as a taillamp that failed within a few weeks on every car sold, they wouldn't be in business for long) >> How many times do we have to be explotied before we realize >> there has to be a better way (and there are, certainly, many >> alternatives to IE/Outlook). > Users have developed a comfort level with Microsoft OSes and > applications; they are what everyone supports and talks. Even if a > user is aware that they have been compromised (it's amazing how many > computer users cannot grasp the simplest principles of operation, let > alone notice when their computer is misbehaving) and they're aware of > the existence of alternatives, they may not feel comfortable wandering > away from the familiar. > The fact that Microsoft seems to be implying that their patch process > is a good enough solution doesn't help. I'm awed at how most people view their machines; as black boxes. I'm also amazed at how poor documentation is for most consumer computer hardware/software. How could you expect anyone to develop even a basic level of comprehension given to almost total lack of information that comes with a PC these days (and if you start to say on-line documentation, you simply don't get it!). I often fall back into memories of "how it was" back in "the good old days" (With out Univac 418's, processor schematics were supplied as part of the package, Source code to the operating system, enough documentation to generate the OS in a custom configuration (i.e. kernel make in the Unix world), documentation of the programming interface to the OS. Granted everything is much more complicated/powerful/LARGE these days. > That said, many readers here will recall that RTM's internet worm > (does anyone have an authoritative pice to say whether it was the > first or not?) ran on UNIX and exploited Sendmail vulnerabilities; > IIRC, Microsoft did not have an internet-capable platform at the time. I remember a worm that propogated over the DECnet networks prior to the RTM worm. The network was worldwide, with many thousands of nodes. DECnet, at that time, came configured is such a way to allow a remote system to save a program file (i.e. executable or a DCL script) on the local machine and then cause it to be executed. It couldn't access things at the level we see on todays PC's, but keep in mind that the processors of that day were probably equivalent to a 15Mhz Pentium (fifteen Megahertz, not 150), so using CPU cycles, even if you couldn't damage the file system, was a very noticeable impact (to many people, as it was a shared system). The fix was simple, was applied within a day or two everywhere, and with the next release of VMS/DECnet, the vulnerability was disabled by default (gee, what a novel idea!). Who was it that said: "We who fail to observe history are doomed to repeat it". (or is that: "We who fail to observe history are doomed to repeat it, over and over, and over and over, and...") Regards to all, -Willy ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 09:18:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax From: David B. Horvath, CCP
Reply-To: newsgroup PAT - please, no email address, too much SPAM. Name is just fine! On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 19:56:01 -0800, none@none.com wrote: > One of the things that has me concerned and hope others > is what was listed in the article. That cable modem traffic > is pinged or actually "Routed" off other cable modems, so that > traffic can be handled more effectively as a huge LAN > My questions is: > 1) Where is the security for traffic on this network? Through obscurity, the most common kind (unfortunately)! There is a standard DOCIS that is supposed to only allow data through to your PC that is addressed to your modem (supposed to prevent "sniffing"). > 2) Why has the cable modem services industry not taken a > lead to encrypt or block access of traffic not deemed > for a particular router off-limits, so that it can be > shared with another user??? Cable modem services are very much like Ethernet -- everyone on the same segment has all the data reaching the port on the back of their equipment (the modem in this case). It is up to that equipment to ignore all data not addressed to it. In theory, the company's router will prevent me from seeing your data if we are on different segments of the network. But if we are neighbors being fed off the same set of wires, the data is coming into my house. The big difference between the cable network and the phone network is that direct addressibility. With the phone, there is a set of wires that run from the phone company equipment to your house and only your house (yes, I know they have SLC's, but your signal is pulled off at that point and sent down wires only to your house). With cable, there is one wire that supplies a segment (one or more city blocks) and a splitter on the pole or pedestal that pulls the signal for your house. They can apply electrical signal filters at that point to prevent you from seeing HBO if you don't pay for it. In some cases filters allow you to see the signal. But those filters are stupid -- they know nothing about MAC or IP addresses. The data flows into each house and it is up to your equipment to determine what data should be seen by you. The older cable modems (and Ethernet cards on a regular network) can be placed in "promiscuous mode" where all data would be transfered to the CPU rather than only those packets addressed to the specific MAC address. Encryption is expensive, slows down the process, and makes it harder for the technicians to investigate problems -- that's why the companies don't implement it. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although I do not know the > particulars of this, I do know that Mr. Mike Flood, the general > manager of Cable One, here in Independence told me 'that was all > taken care of recently' when I asked him 'what prevents everyone > on the cable from showing up in my Network Neighborhood, and the > other way around.' I am sorry to say I did not understand his > sort of technical explanation. Maybe some of you could explain it > to me in simple words. It could be that Cable One went to DOCIS standard modems that prevent promiscuous mode. I don't know if there are any cable modems out there smart enough to filter based on network port. - David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 09:25:58 -0700 From: Joey Lindstrom Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Organization: Telus Sucks! Subject: Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax Wednesday, February 18, 2004, 11:16:18 PM, editor wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although I do not know the > particulars of this, I do know that Mr. Mike Flood, the general > manager of Cable One, here in Independence told me 'that was all > taken care of recently' when I asked him 'what prevents everyone on > the cable from showing up in my Network Neighborhood, and the other > way around.' I am sorry to say I did not understand his sort of > technical explanation. Maybe some of you could explain it to me in > simple words. Its not a problem with DSL, since everyone goes to the > central office on their own pair. But with a cable strung around, > what *does* prevent us from being each other's Neighbor for spy > purposes, etc. Anyone? PAT] Actually Pat, if you don't have any decent protection, then anybody in the world can browse your computer, simply by firing up Windows Explorer and typing in: \\1.2.3.4 (where 1.2.3.4 is your IP address) Without security, I'll get access to any shares you've got set up on that PC. Now, in your case, you've got two good, solid lines of defense. The first is your Linksys box, which will laugh off any such request from the outside world (unless you specifically program it to allow this sort of thing). The second is your ZoneAlarm installation, which again will stop any such request in its tracks. Point is, it doesn't matter whether you're on cable or DSL -- this will work, if the protections aren't in place. The only difference with cable (and as you've noted, most cable operators have fixed this) is that your unprotected system might BROADCAST what it's sharing to your neighbours, who otherwise would not have known you were even there. They open up Network Neighborhood one day and say "hey, what's this PATTOWNSON workgroup? where'd that come from?" -- they didn't go looking for you, as in my above example, your information came to them, unbidden. As you say, that just wasn't likely to happen with DSL but even there, depending on the layout and how the ISP's routers are configured, it's not out of the question that it COULD happen with DSL. As always, practice safe computing. Wear a condom (ZoneAlarm), keep your car doors locked (Linksys router/firewall), and be careful which neighbourhoods you drive around in. Above all, never take candy from strangers (or open unsolicited file attachments). Joey Lindstrom ------------------------------ From: L. Hao Subject: Advice Needed For Modem Disconnecting Problem Organization: Comcast Online Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 06:23:00 GMT Hi, I am in the middle of integrating a third party vendor's modem server into our product, which functions as a modem server. The server modem's codec software runs in a TI C5409 DSP. And the server runs NT4.0. We are experiencing disconnecting problems. After we connect a USR V.90 client modem to the server modem and start downloading files from internet to the client machine, we would get disconnect shortly after the starting of the downloading. And we found the reason for the disconnect was in the server side. And it was due to a DTR CLEAR IOCTL call issued from user mode level to the modem driver. The driver then turns around and disconnect the server modem in the DSP. Can anyone with experience let me know how to approach this problem? Not an expert in the modem arena, I am at lost in tracing down this DTR CLR. What I want to do is to find out why the DTR CLEAR is issued and who issues it. I have a hunch that it was triggered by something that the modem sent, but our vendor insisted that they are doing everything right. So please help me! Thanks in advance. Lee ------------------------------ From: William Robison Subject: Re: Experts Warn of Microsoft 'Monoculture' Organization: The University of Iowa, Department of Physics and Astronomy Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 15:43:35 GMT Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > email@crazyhat.net wrote: >> Yeah, we'd all get a $5 coupon for our next purchase of a Microsoft >> service pack (which they'd start charging for to cover the cost of the >> lawsuit) > Many times I've seen companies charge for firmware upgrades that > customers want because of new features, but give the firmware upgrades > away free if they were needed to fix a bug. I'd love to see a law > that requires software publishers to provide customers with a freee > upgrade if that's what's required to fix a serious bug or plug a > vulnerability. > It would definitely revolutionize the software industry - or at least > split it into two groups that even executives could tell apart: those > who stand by their products and those who are required to state on the > package and in all advertising and catalog listings that their product > should not be relied upon. > It scares the crap out of me the way that big companies put big bucks > on the line using off the shelf software with histories of big bugs > and no one -- CIO, CFO, CEO, whoever -- ever stops to ask, "what if that > software screwed up and the aftermath cost us a hundred million > dollars?" Geoff: Can I add my "over and over, and over and over..." at the end of that? :-) -Willy ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:48:55 -0600 Carl Moore wrote: > earlier on Interstate 81) that it is illegal in NY state to use a > handheld phone while driving (I don't have it in front of me what > emergency exception might exist). But I occasionally saw drivers > using handheld phones anyway in NY state. It's illegal to use a cell phone without handsfree in NYS, if I recall correctly. But only without a handsfree - with handsfree it's still legal. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Re: Long Distance Wrong Numbers From Everywhere Date: 19 Feb 2004 09:43:08 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Nick Landsberg wrote in message news:: > Patrick basically got it right, but, for those who may not now how 800 > service works: > There is conceptually "no such thing" as an 800 number (or 888, 877, > 866). Switches are programmed to make a "dip" into a network database > when they see these prefixes. > In the network database is a "routing table" which matches on dialed > number, originating NPA-NXX, and time of day, among other things, to > look up the actual "POTS" line to which to route the call. No part of > the POTS number need match any digits of the 800 number. > Thus, dialing 866-222-3333 from 973 may get you Joe's Pizza in Madison > NJ while dialing the same number from 937 (Southern Ohio) may get you > Horst's Hofbrau Haus in Cincinatti. > Since David did get the calls from all over the country, this is not > the case and it is probably a "global" routing, meaning route to the > same number whatever the originating NPA. > The other variation is time of day, which can be programmed in 15 > minutes intervals. For example, between 8 AM and 11 AM Eastern Time, > route all calls to a call center in the eastern time zone. 11 AM to 1 > PM, route them 50% each to numbers in the eastern and central > time-zones, etc., etc. Large companies with multiple "call-centers" > use this feature. > If these calls are happening at a particular time of day, then only a > portion of the routing table is messed up. > Nick L. I had the same issue, but in reverse in the late 90's. While out of town, I called my girlfriend at an 800 number ported to the home number late one evening. Quite a surprise when I woke up a guy in New York! A calling card call to the home number reached the right destination. The next day I tried calling the 800 number from a COCOT; same thing. I explained who I was and asked if they had an 800 number. Same RESPORG and everything. I was told there was a problem with the switch, and since I never saw a billing statement that was way out of line, I let it go at that. At the time I was told there was a problem with the switch in NYC. Eric Friedebach /Mortgage your Viagra!/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am reminded of the time I became the switchboard/credit/customer service/complaint department for Sears Roebuck for a day against my will. It was 1975, Illinois Bell was busy converting central offices to ESS throughout Chicago. The downtown area had been cut over a year earlier; the downtown area also had the oldest, most crappy c.o.'s at the time. I went into my office one day and the phone was ringing. At the time I had the phone number 312-WEbster-9-4600, in other words 939-4600. Two blocks away was the State Street (downtown) Sears store. Their switch- board number was WABash 2-4600, in other words 922-4600. The difference between me and Sears was they had a five-position cord board with as many operators which rocked around the clock quite literally; they had five switchboard operators all day and evening; a couple operators overnight for the credit office stuff. Sears had their entire Chicago Region credit office on the fifth floor of that particular store. I on the other hand had a single line instrument. The phone was ringing, one call after another, and another, and another, and another, never stopping ringing; hang up and it would *instantly* ring again, always with calls for Sears, one department or another, sometimes hardware, sometimes clothes, sometimes credit, you name it. It appeared Illinois Bell had taken a large funnel with a big end and a little tiny spout on the other end and poured in all the calls for Sears, the spout dumping on my end. Sears, of course, never even missed the calls at all. After talking briefly to a few of the callers, I discovered they were all in the Chicago-Beverley phone exchange, a far southwest side exchange around 95th and Western Avenue with several prefixes, including BEverley 235 and several others wired out of that central office. By just hanging up the phone a couple times after it had rang, and tapping the hook quickly I was able to regain control of my phone, which would otherwise ring (with still another call for Sears if I had stayed on hook for more than maybe five or ten seconds. When I was able to get through to 611 (the old repair service number) I was fortunate enough to reach this wise old man working there who was able to identify the problem immediatly after I described it. It seems Beverley had been 'cut' the night before to ESS, and "someone got their translations and their tables incorrect," he explained to me. "I will call over there right now and tell them to look at it and fix it. Its not just you with 4600 who is getting hassled, but whoever has 939-4321 is getting hassled with a million calls for Western Union on 922-4321, and imagine whoever has 939-9500, 'across from the Grand Central train station on 922-9500.' Give me about five or ten minutes to get those calls stopped." About ten minutes later, as he promised, my phone quit ringing with calls for Sears. He called back in maybe fifteen minutes and told me that "somehow they got 922 mixed up with 939". In those days of no area code/prefix crunch and wide open spaces between each category, apparently 939 was 'next in line' after 922 in Chicago. He was quite apologetic about it and I thanked him courteously for correcting it. Those were the days when Illinois Bell/Ameritech/Southwestern Bell/ SBC employees *actually cared* about the public they served, and automatically assumed a call from a subscriber was the purpose of their work and not an interupption to it. They did not treat the public like 'crank callers and complainers' like they do now many times. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #81 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 19 20:03:24 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1K13OM14870; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:03:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:03:24 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402200103.i1K13OM14870@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 #82 TELECOM Digest Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:03:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 82 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Plot to Stop Net Telephone (VoIP) Revolution (Charles G Gray) Reliable, Quality Int'l LD Calling Card? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Home Intercom Phone System With Cordless Phone? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Symbol Added to Morse Code (Joe Wineburgh) Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones (Rob) Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones (D Aspinwall) Re: Reliable Means of Determining LEC For Given Phone Number (Tony P.) Re: Reliable Means of Determining LEC For Given Phone Number (Greenberg) Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax (Tony P.) Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax (sidd@situ.com) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (Phil Earnhardt) Re: The Virus Underground (Scott Dorsey) Re: The Virus Underground (Barry Margolin) Nitsuko/NEC 704i and Fax Servers (Forrest Nelson) Money, Money, was Re: Internet Phones, 911 Could Clash (Danny Burstein) Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash (DevilsPGD) Now Preening on the Coffee Table: The TiVo Remote Control (M Solomon) Re: Blogs (Web Logs): What am I Not Getting? (Barry Margolin) Re: A Suspicious Netscape Icon on my DeskTop (Kan Yabumoto) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Adam Thierer on the Plot to Stop Net Telephone (VoIP) Revolution From: Charles G Gray Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 07:56:31 -0600 Pat, I'm sure your readers will find the attached item interesting. Regards, Charles G. Gray Senior Lecturer, Telecommunications Oklahoma State University - Tulsa (918)594-8433 Declan McCullagh Sent by: politech-bounces@politechbot.com 02/18/2004 11:14 PM To: declan@well.com Subject: Cato TechKnowledge: The Plan to Stop the VoIP Revolution Reply-To: athierer@cato.org From: Adam Thierer Message-Id: <20040210161250.23DCC34690@mail6.uptilt.com> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 08:12:50 -0800 (PST) The Plot to Stop the Internet Telephone Revolution Issue #73 February 10, 2004 by Adam Thierer and Wayne Crews Much has been written over the past few months about the revolutionary potential of Internet telephony, or voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) service. VoIP would let consumers make phone calls through an Internet connection, largely bypassing traditional circuit-switched wireline telephone networks. In time, some think it might come to completely replace older phone networks. In just a few short years, VoIP has gone from wishful thinking to marketplace reality as numerous companies now plan to deploy such services. This has also led many industry watchers to speak of VoIP as a veritable deregulatory deus ex machina that potentially offers a sudden and unexpected way to escape from the past century's regulatory morass. "Not so fast!" say opponents. That same potential for revolutionary change that excites some, frightens many others. This is an old story, of course. New, "disruptive technologies" are often viewed with suspicion, or even outright hostility, by those who fear they have something to lose by a change in the status quo. But technological revolutions are the healthiest part of a capitalist economy. In a world where "only the paranoid survive," it's good that organizations are forced to stay on their toes, constantly concerned about the impact of new technologies on the old ways of doing business. That's what drives the Schumpeterian "creative destruction" that makes our economy so innovative and prosperous. Often, however, when the fears over technological change reach a fever pitch, certain interests substitute a political response for a market response. For many, adjusting or abandoning an old business model is just not an option they are willing to consider. Instead, they lobby legislators or regulators for protection from the new competitors or technologies. Steamboat operators feared the rise of railroads; butter makers petitioned against margarine as a substitute; television broadcasters sought to delay competition from cable providers; and some small retailers still fight to keep large chain stores like Wal-Mart out of local communities. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that this process is playing itself out today in the debate over Internet phone calls. The issue at hand involves the regulatory classification or treatment of Internet telephone service. VoIP is something new; it does not fit neatly into the Byzantine regulatory taxonomy the FCC has established for older communications services. Its opponents want to open the door for regulation of this new service by needlessly subjecting it to the full force of traditional telecom regulations. In what would be viewed by most people as a silly squabble over semantics, volumes of paper are currently being filed at the FCC over the question of whether VoIP should be classified as a "telecommunications service" or something else, such as an "information service." Incredibly, in an era in which we should be mapping out the abolition of the FCC altogether, such definitions make a world of difference to the development of a new service. Because of the haphazard manner in which communications law has developed over the past 70 years, there exist distinct regulatory paradigms for telecom, cable, broadcasting, and wireless service. Internet-based applications do not fit into any of these categories, especially since providers in each of those old sectors can provide online services using different technological platforms or delivery mechanisms. But if VoIP comes to be regulated under one of these archaic classification schemes, especially the "telecom services" paradigm, it could be strangled while still in the cradle by a bewildering batch of federal and state regulations. Consequently, in the filings and public statements made by the various interest groups that have lined up to oppose a regulation-free VoIP environment, several recurring themes have been cited to justify its classification as a "telecom service": The potential loss of state and local telecom taxes; the need to collect universal service fees and subsidies; access for the disabled; public safety requirements such as "E911;" and the need for various other "consumer protections." For example, citing such concerns, a number of state regulators have raised a big stink about VoIP, but really they're just worried about losing some of their regulatory turf and power. Of much greater concern is the recent intervention of the law enforcement community, led by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Justice, and the Drug Enforcement Administration, which have jointly asked the FCC to assure that wiretap and monitoring capabilities easily apply to the new technology. Apparently the law enforcement agencies oppose telecommunications deregulation because it means they won't be able to spy on us quite as easily. As Jim Harper, founder of Privacilla.org, put it, "The law enforcement cart is coming before the civil society horse. The communications infrastructure is being created with eavesdropping in mind before there is any evidence of [the need for] it, plus with VoIP it won't work anyway as the criminals will use offshore VoIP or open source VoIP, rather than ... any of the major carriers." A wiretap-ready Internet that enables the sort of online surveillance that the FBI, DOJ, and DEA desire will be a costly proposition, requiring expensive equipment upgrades and ongoing regulation of this dynamic sector. Moreover, the scheme would likely entail heavy FCC involvement in the regulation of Internet telephony in the future. In one sense, what all these diverse parties, from the old hidebound state regulators to the FBI, are really saying is that unless VoIP providers can learn to "play the game" exactly the same way old telecom companies did, they should not, effectively, be allowed to provide service at all. Stated differently, this new technology must be pigeonholed into old regulatory classification schemes and regulatory paradigms of the past; it must not be allowed to breathe the free air of an unregulated communications marketplace. After all, if VoIP was allowed to develop in a relatively free, unregulated environment, just think of the horrors that might befall our society! We might make cheap phone calls or something. Adam Thierer (athierer@cato.org) is director of telecommunications studies and Wayne Crews (wcrews@cato.org) is the director of technology studies at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C. at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C. (www.cato.org/tech). They are the authors of What's Yours Is Mine: Open Access and the Rise of Infrastructure Socialism. To subscribe, or see For a list of all previous TechKnowledge articles, visit http://www.cato.org/tech/tk-index.html. [][]Cato Institute ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 14:12:53 GMT From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Reliable, Quality Int'l LD Calling Card? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services I'm looking for a quality int'l LD calling card. I'm currently using Accudial, which is very convenient and cheap, but overseas calls almost always have a long delay, making real conversation impossible. Can someone recommend a quality LD calling card, one that will give me the good connections I've becomed used to in the past few years? Many thanks. -Joel ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 14:15:15 GMT From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: home intercom phone system with cordless phone? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services In light of the dicussion about a home phone system (2-4 lines, a half-dozen extensions, perhaps) that offers intercom connections between any two phones, I'm wondering: Is there such a system that will work with a cordless phone? The idea is that the cordless phone could be one of the stations. Thanks. -Joel ------------------------------ From: Joe Wineburgh Subject: Symbol Added to Morse Code Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 09:53:16 -0500 http://www.cjonline.com/stories/021704/pag_morsecode.shtml The Associated Press Morse code is entering the 21st century -- or at least the late 20th. The 160-year-old communication system now has a new character to denote the "@" symbol used in e-mail addresses. In December, the International Telecommunications Union, which oversees the entire frequency spectrum, from amateur radio to satellites, voted to add the new character. The new sign, which will be known as a "commat," consists of the signals for "A" (dot-dash) and "C" (dash-dot-dash-dot), with no space between them. The new sign is the first in at least several decades, and possibly much longer. Among ITU officials and Morse code aficionados, no one could remember any other addition. "It's a pretty big deal," said Paul Rinaldo, chief technical officer for the American Radio Relay League, the national association for amateur radio operators. "There certainly hasn't been any change since before World War II." The change will allow ham radio operators to exchange e-mails more easily. That is because -- in an irony of the digital age -- they often use Morse to initiate conversations over the Internet. "People trade their e-mail addresses a lot," said Nick Yocanovich, a Morse code enthusiast who lives in Arnold, Md. Morse code uses two audible electrical signals -- short "dots" and slightly longer "dashes" -- to form letters, numbers and punctuation marks. Created in the 1830s by Samuel F.B. Morse, who invented the telegraph, the electronic signaling system spread across the world, and until the past few decades, it was used widely by the public, industry and government. "It was the beginning of the Information Age," said Gary Fowlie, Chief of Media Relations and Public Information for the ITU, which has its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. When Morse died in 1872, more than 650,000 miles of telegraph wire circled the globe. By the early 20th century, Morse messages were being sent wirelessly, via radio. Perhaps the most famous Morse communication is the international distress signal S-O-S. It consists of three dots, three dashes, and three more dots. But with the proliferation of digital communications technologies such as cell phones, satellites and the Internet, Morse code has lost its pre-eminent place in global communications. "There's really no reason to use it anymore," said Robert Colburn, research coordinator for the History Center of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Today it's largely the province of ham radio operators, including 700,000 in the United States. While not all of them communicate regularly in Morse, almost all are familiar with it. Some ham operators wouldn't mind more changes to spice up the language. While Morse code has a period, a question mark, and even a semicolon, it offers no simple way to articulate excitement. "I was hoping they'd add a character for the exclamation point," said Yocanovich, who is active in the International Morse Preservation Society. "It expresses an emotion that's difficult to get across any other way." ------------------------------ From: rob51166@yahoo.com (Rob) Subject: Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones Date: 19 Feb 2004 10:29:51 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Carl Moore wrote in message news:: > I take it a suggested common denominator in police reports about > traffic accidents would be to note any driver distraction which had a > part in the accident. I was in a minor accident myself last month > when, on a 2-lane road, an oncoming driver (who later admitted to > reaching down for his gloves) drifted into my lane and hit the left > side of a rented car I was driving. We did get an officer to the > scene and he got the story about the gloves and the drifting into my > lane, and that other driver was cited. > Some time ago, I noted a news story from Pennsylvania about the > governor of that state asking police to note on their reports (using > "remarks" if no special cell-phone category was available) any > cell-phone use which contributed to an accident. > By the way, the accident I was in was in New York state, the same > state where I had rented that car. It was posted in the car-rental > office (and seen by me on a sign as I drove into NY state a year > earlier on Interstate 81) that it is illegal in NY state to use a > handheld phone while driving (I don't have it in front of me what > emergency exception might exist). But I occasionally saw drivers > using handheld phones anyway in NY state. Drivers are now banned from using a cellphone while driving, unless they have an automatic handsfree headset or speaker. It's an on-the-spot fine of GBP30, or if the driver chooses to go to court it can be up to GBP1000 plus court costs. ------------------------------ From: Doug Aspinwall Subject: Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 17:47:07 -0500 Organization: None whatsoever (just ask my wife) Steven J Sobol wrote in message news:telecom23.81.13@telecom-digest.org: > Carl Moore wrote: >> earlier on Interstate 81) that it is illegal in NY state to use a >> handheld phone while driving (I don't have it in front of me what >> emergency exception might exist). But I occasionally saw drivers >> using handheld phones anyway in NY state. > It's illegal to use a cell phone without handsfree in NYS, if I recall > correctly. But only without a handsfree - with handsfree it's still > legal. > JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA > Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) /sjsobol@JustThe.net > PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED Check out www.cellular-news.com/car_bans/ New York is currently the only state to ban hand-held cell phones while driving without using a hands-free device. Several states have tried to pass a similar ban for the general public, but they have not passed. Several states have bans for bus drivers and/or school bus drivers. Doug Aspinwall Near Dover, DE (the only state capital without a commercial airport) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Could someone please tell me in a convincing way what is the difference between a motorist who exercises reasonable caution most of the time but talks on a cell phone and a police officer chasing someone at 100 miles per hour on a busy highway while talking into a microphone on a police radio? Both of them are 'distracted' are they not? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Reliable Means of Determining LEC For Given Phone Number? Organization: ATCC Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:43:19 GMT In article , no@spam.com says: > Does anyone know of a reliable means of determining the servicing > LEC for a given phone number? > I'm trying to find a reliable means of determining what is the > servicing LEC for any given phone number. Right now this is limited to > only needing to work for CA. USA phone numbers. Using the various > resources (LERG, and other similar databases) I can get down to what > the operating Company is for a given NPA/NXX but with Thousand Number > (block) Pooling, and porting of numbers, there are over lapping > NPA/NXXs for various providers, and while the operating company for a > given NPA/NXX maybe SBC (Pacific Bell) the line may in fact be > serviced by Verizon (GTE). > So far I'm at a loss as to how to reliably perform, what in an ideal > world, would be a simple search. http://www.telcodata.us/telco.html For example, keying in my NPA/NXX (401/621) if I click on the switch info link I get (Even if the zip code is wrong, it should be 02903 and the post office that serves 02903 is right in back of the CO.): Number of results: 51 Information on PRVDRIWADS2: State: RI English Name: CLLI: PRVDRIWADS2 Switch Type: Northern Telecom DMS100 (Digital) Host Host CLLI (if remote): Status: () LATA: NO LATA KNOWN (999) Exchanges Served: 51 Building CLLI: PRVDRIWA (See DSLReports information on this wirecenter) Street Address: 234 WASHINGTON ST PROVIDENCE, RI 2905 Tandem: SS7 Point Code: List of served exchanges: 401-222 401-224 401-243 401-272 401-273 401- 274 401-276 401-277 401-278 401-282 401-290 401-331 401-332 401-350 401- 351 401-370 401-421 401-444 401-452 401-453 401-454 401-455 401-456 401- 457 401-458 401-459 401-460 401-478 401-482 401-521 401-525 401-528 401- 544 401-553 401-563 401-564 401-572 401-574 401-575 401-588 401-598 401- 621 401-751 401-752 401-776 401-831 401-861 401-863 401-865 401-867 401- 868 List of served ratecenters: PROVIDENCE,RI List of carriers on switch: VERIZON NEW ENGLAND INC. (9102) WEBLINK WIRELESS, INC. (6385) List of other switches in building: PRVDRIWADS2 PRVDRIWAHAA PRVDRIWADS1 PRVDRIWAXSY prvdriwax1y PRVDRIWAX7Y PRVDRIWA06T PRVDRIWAOMD PRVDRIWAXWY PRVDRIWADS4 ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Reliable Means of Determining LEC For Given Phone Number? Date: 19 Feb 2004 16:48:36 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , JL wrote: > Does anyone know of a reliable means of determining the servicing > LEC for a given phone number? > I'm trying to find a reliable means of determining what is the > servicing LEC for any given phone number. Right now this is limited to > only needing to work for CA. USA phone numbers. Using the various > resources (LERG, and other similar databases) I can get down to what > the operating Company is for a given NPA/NXX but with Thousand Number > (block) Pooling, and porting of numbers, there are over lapping > NPA/NXXs for various providers, and while the operating company for a > given NPA/NXX maybe SBC (Pacific Bell) the line may in fact be > serviced by Verizon (GTE). Take a look at: http://www.telcodata.us/telco.html Rich Greenberg Work: Rich.Greenberg atsign worldspan.com + 1 770 563 6656 N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign panix.com + 1 770 321 6507 Eastern time zone. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT), Red & Shasta(Husky,(RIP)) Owner:Chinook-L Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/ Asst Owner:Sibernet-L ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax Organization: ATCC Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 19:08:33 GMT In article , none@none.com says: > On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:21:07 -0500, Monty Solomon > wrote: >> By Kevin Poulsen, SecurityFocus >> A small and diverse band of hobbyists steeped in the obscure languages >> of embedded systems has released its own custom firmware for a popular >> brand of cable modem, along with a technique for loading it -- a >> development that's already made life easier for uncappers and service >> squatters, and threatens to topple long-held assumptions about the >> privacy of cable modem communications. >> The program, called Sigma, was released in its final version last >> month, and has reportedly been downloaded 350 to 400 times a day ever >> since. It's designed to be flashed into the non-volatile memory of >> certain models of Motorola's Surfboard line, where it runs in parallel >> with the device's normal functionality. It gives users almost complete >> control of their cable modem -- a privilege previously reserved for >> the service provider. >> The project is the work of a gang of coders called TCNiSO. With about >> ten active members worldwide, the group is supported by contributions >> from the uncapping community -- speed-hungry Internet users who rely >> on TCNiSO's research and free hackware to surmount the bandwidth caps >> imposed by service providers, usually in violation of their service >> agreement, if not the law. To them, Sigma is a delight, because it >> makes it simple to change the modem's configuration file -- the key to >> uncapping, and, on some systems, to getting free anonymous service >> using "unregistered" modems. "I've known TCNiSO for two years now and >> I've done a lot of things with their techniques," wrote a Canadian >> uncapper in an e-mail interview. "Sigma is the greatest one I've >> seen." >> http://www.securityfocus.com/news/7977 > One of the things that has me concerned and hope others is what was > listed in the article. That cable modem traffic is pinged or actually > "Routed" off other cable modems, so that traffic can be handled more > effectively as a huge LAN > My questions is: > 1) Where is the security for traffic on this network? > 2) Why has the cable modem services industry not taken a lead to > encrypt or block access of traffic not deemed for a particular router > off-limits, so that it can be shared with another user??? 1) Baseline Privacy 1.0 -- not exactly the most secure of them. It encrypts the TCP/IP stream from the headend to the cable modem. Kind of obvious that this group has defeated Baseline 1.0. 2) Because the cable companies are in it for one thing and one thing only. To earn as much as they possibly can in an environment that while not a monopoly is closer to an oligopoly. > Jeremy supercommodore@maildotcom > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although I do not know the particulars > of this, I do know that Mr. Mike Flood, the general manager of Cable > One, here in Independence told me 'that was all taken care of recently' > when I asked him 'what prevents everyone on the cable from showing up > in my Network Neighborhood, and the other way around.' I am sorry to > say I did not understand his sort of technical explanation. Maybe some > of you could explain it to me in simple words. Its not a problem with > DSL, since everyone goes to the central office on their own pair. But > with a cable strung around, what *does* prevent us from being each > other's Neighbor for spy purposes, etc. Anyone? PAT] The thing about cable vs. DSL is that the cable coming into your home is a shared medium. On the cable side it looks like one big Ethernet LAN even using CDMA/CD. DSL as you've correctly stated, isn't a shared medium at the subscriber side. But at the DSLAM, of course it's shared. When I had the @Home service my machines IP address was hijacked by someone else. Went to use my machine one day and found I couldn't get on no matter what I did. Diagnostics said everything on my end was working fine. Called Cox and they figured it out. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax From: sidd@situ.com Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 21:02:03 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although I do not know the particulars > of this, I do know that Mr. Mike Flood, the general manager of Cable > One, here in Independence told me 'that was all taken care of recently' > when I asked him 'what prevents everyone on the cable from showing up > in my Network Neighborhood, and the other way around.' I am sorry to > say I did not understand his sort of technical explanation. Maybe some > of you could explain it to me in simple words. Its not a problem with > DSL, since everyone goes to the central office on their own pair. But > with a cable strung around, what *does* prevent us from being each > other's Neighbor for spy purposes, etc. Anyone? PAT] They probably block the ports that the Microsoft Network protocols use. ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Date: 19 Feb 2004 13:21:26 -0800 Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://newsguy.com] In article , Phil Earnhardt says: > I've been unable to find any details on this service: if the $33 > includes an ISP, if you are really getting "unlimited" services on the > 1.5Mbps pipe, etc. I contacted Qwest customer service today and asked about the service. The agent knew about the service, but had no details. I asked the salesman when they would have details. He said that the service will be available on 3/1/04 but did not know when pricing and service details would be available. --phil ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Date: 19 Feb 2004 16:34:54 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Nick Landsberg wrote: > As I recall, it wasn't the "DBUG" command that did it, it was a buffer > overflow (does that sound familiar, don't we ever learn?) that caused > a portion of memory to be overwritten with a very carefully crafted > piece of machine code which then went and fetched the rest of the > worm. (My memory could be faulty on this last variation.) Because > this was binary code, it would only work on specific one specific Unix > variant which was most prevalent at the time, 4.3 BSD I think. (Does > this also sound familiar? Pick the most prevalent OS to go out > after?) As I recall, the Morris worm did different exploits on different machines. I know it did take advantage of DBUG when it was available, but it also did a buffer overrun trick. I _think_ the buffer overrun only worked on the vax ... the Morris worm infected both the vax and Sun-3 machines. > It was Gene Spafford of Purdue who was instrumental in finding out > what it did and how it did it, although I presume many others were > also involved. At the time, he was Gene Spafford of Georgia Tech. > As you said Barry, the internet was a very trusting community in those > days, and the Morris worm should have been a wake-up call to us all. It was a wake up call to everyone who was on the internet back then. But remember, those were the days when Microsoft was saying the internet was irrelevant. Microsoft has long had real problems playing with others in the same sandbox, and they persistently, repeatedly, constantly implement features with no thought whatsoever to security. I mean, the whole notion of automatically executing a .exe file in a mail message being read? What EVER possessed anyone to think that was a good idea? We won't even talk about some of the serious design issues in Microsoft networking. Most of these problems have been patched around, but there is only so much patching around you can do with a fundamentally flawed system. >> Microsoft had the opportunity to learn from our early experiences, but >> did they really take advantage of it? It seems not, since allowing >> the mail reader to execute active code in messages is not much >> different from the sendmail vulnerability that we plugged 15 years >> ago. To extend my analogy, Windows seems like a suburbanite driving >> into a ghetto and leaving his sports car unlocked and unattended; we >> shouldn't be surprised if it gets stripped or taken for a joy-ride. Microsoft did not learn from the early experiences of internet users, and in fact they went out of their way to avoid listening to them. When Microsoft produced an SMTP server that was in violation of RFC822, Eric Allman talked to the designers about integration issues and he was told "We're Microsoft. We don't follow standards, we make them." That sort of attitude is precisely why Microsoft is having all of these problems. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Organization: Looking for work Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 17:05:38 -0500 In article , Nick Landsberg wrote: > As I recall, it wasn't the "DBUG" command that did it, it was a buffer > overflow (does that sound familiar, don't we ever learn?) that caused > a portion of memory to be overwritten with a very carefully crafted > piece of machine code which then went and fetched the rest of the > worm. (My memory could be faulty on this last variation.) Because > this was binary code, it would only work on specific one specific Unix > variant which was most prevalent at the time, 4.3 BSD I think. (Does > this also sound familiar? Pick the most prevalent OS to go out > after?) As with some modern worms, the Morris Worm had multiple entry vectors. It did exploit a buffer overflow, but that was in fingerd, not sendmail. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA ------------------------------ From: Forrest Nelson Subject: Nitsuko/NEC 704i and Fax Servers Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 14:22:00 -0800 Does anyone have experience with configuring a 704i to integrate with fax servers preferably using extensions that can out-pulse the called extension number after the fax board answers. Thanks, J. Forrest Nelson, RCDD Affiliated Engineers NW, Inc. (AEI) mailto:jfnelson@aeieng.com e-mail http://www.aeieng.com web 206-256-0800 phone 206-256-0423 fax ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Money, Money, was Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 05:48:13 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Monty Solomon writes: > ST. PAUL (AP) -- The rising popularity of Internet telephones could > undermine the finances of the state's 911 systems while endangering > some users because the new technology doesn't alway mesh with the old > emergency system. > So-called Internet telephony's popularity worries Jim Beutelspacher, > manager of the statewide 911 program for the Department of Public > Safety, because it doesn't pay a 40-cent-per-month tax for each new > subscriber. Aside from the bigger issue that "911 centers" should (in my opinion, that is -- rational folk can disagree with this a bit) be supported the same way other government business is, namely through the general tax levy, there's a very specific point here: In audit after audit in NYS (and others, although being from NY it's the one I'm most familiar with) it turns out that any so-called "911 surcharge" is simply absorbed into the general gov't revenue/expense stream In fact, just yesterday (18-Feb) the NYS Comptroller realased yet another report. The details aren't yet up on his webpage [a], but quoting from a typical news report: "E-911 surcharge on cell phones helps state pay its bills Updated: 2/18/2004 11:05 PM By: News 10 Now Staff A report released Wednesday by the State Comptroller's Office said New York is diverting revenue intended for improving emergency 911 services to the state's general fund. http://news10now.com/content/all_news/?ArID=10875&SecID=83 [a] it'll be at: http://www.osc.state.ny.us probably in a day or two. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What's so unusual about government squandering and mis-appropriating the money they were given (or rather, took from us under various false pretenses? Do you remember how, prior to the various state lotteries we were told the money would be used to support the schools? Now the lottery money just goes into general revenue and the schools are in the same miserable condition they always were. Oh, and the taxes on alcohol and cigarettes: going to be used to help fight alcoholism and tobacco addiction, right? Oh, and have you heard about the infamous tobacco settlement that R.J. Reynolds and the others signed? Gonna be used to pay for hospital for cancer patients, right? The states have squandered that money so badly -- everything *but* medical treatment -- now R.J. Reynolds has petitioned the court saying since the states are not living up to their promises to use the money as dictated, the tobacco companies should not have to pay it either. Never, never expect the governments to keep up their end of deals they made. The only thing that matters is the federal program which I call 'no servants left behind' ... a takeoff on Bush's 'no child left behind'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy! Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 07:51:56 GMT In message <> Monty Solomon did ramble: > Last fiscal year, a 33-cent 911 fee generated $20.8 million. The > higher fee this year is expected to bring in $25.4 million, mainly to > pay for connections to public safety call centers, Beutelspacher said. > But if more people drop their regular telephone service in favor of > tax-free Internet calling, the financial underpinnings of 911 will be > weakened, he said. > The problems have been noted within the industry, but it's expected to > become a bigger issue as more people turn to Internet telephony > because it can be cheaper than regular telephone service. But presumably as more and more people get phone lines incapable of dialing 911, the costs for operating 911 should drop as well, no? The nice thing about standards, there is enough for everyone to have their own. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:07:22 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Now Preening on the Coffee Table: The TiVo Remote Control By KATIE HAFNER TO most home viewers, remote controls may seem like ancillary sidekicks to the main attraction that is the television, DVD player or digital video recorder. Yet in some ways the remote has become the centerpiece of home entertainment: so many functions have been relegated to this slip of an object that if it is lost, you may find yourself unable to do so much as call up a menu for watching the movie you popped into the DVD player. But if the remote control is a linchpin, it is also often an inscrutable one. A typical remote may have some 40 buttons, with functions that are hard to divine. Often the labels - "toggle," "planner" and the like - are no help. The device can feel like an afterthought, thrown together without any planning at all. Increasingly, however, electronics companies are recognizing that building an easy-to-use remote control is an important and challenging task. To improve the remote, they are deploying teams of experienced industrial designers who focus on the product for months -- and reaching out to consumers for advice. In 1998, design engineers at TiVo , the Silicon Valley company that helped introduce the digital video recorder to the world, set out to produce a distinctive remote control. The result was a textbook blend of complexity and ease of use. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/19/technology/circuits/19remo.html ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Blogs (web logs): What am I Not Getting? Organization: Looking for work Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:41:23 -0500 In article , jmayson@nyx.net wrote: > And in all honesty I don't want people to know what I'm thinking. Yet that's precisely what you were doing when you posted your message to this list, isn't it? > I'm just curious why people blog. Are there any, for the lack of a > better term, practical blogs out there? I don't blog, either, but I assume it's for the same reasons that people participate in newsgroups or mailing lists, and in earlier times logged into BBSes. They're all just variations on the same theme, aren't they? People like to communicate about their interests. Or is there something different about blogs that makes you think they require further explanation? Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA ------------------------------ From: tech@xxcopy.com (Kan Yabumoto) Subject: Re: A Suspicious Netscape Icon on my DeskTop Date: 18 Feb 2004 23:37:03 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com jbl wrote in message news:: > In , tech@xxcopy.com (Kan Yabumoto) > wrote: >> BTW, the Netscape icon that mysteriously appered on my Desktop is a >> link to the following sign-up form: >> https://register.isp.netscape.com/default.jsp?promo=NS_2_6_2_2003_12_6 >> The brief description of the service can be viewed from: >> http://www.getnetscape.com/index.adp?promo=NS_2_7_7_2003_10_2 > These sound like "legitimate" netscape pointers, as opposed to some > phisher or malware supplier. Thank you for your response. I had no doubt that the icon was pointing to a "legitimate" site which is the real Netscape site. But, I had a strong suspicion that the funny rearrangement of the icons on my Desktop (that does not happen very often on an XP system) was not just a coincidence. I did not put the icon there. It was "planted" by some software (either as a result of some aggressive web page that I visited, or some other mechanism that I don't know). > Do you have automatic netscape updating turned on? No. I do not have Netscape (I suppose you mean Netscape's browser, "Navigator" -- I used to used it before Microsoft came out with IE -- many years ago). To come to think of it, I have the Mozilla browser that I use every now and then (in order to read some web page whose hard-coded extremely small font size makes it impossible to read). But, I assume Mozilla is independent from Netscape (Mozilla seems to have components from Netscape) and I still do not believe Mozilla has a feature which exhibit such a strange behavior. > (Or might you have accidentally clicked 'yes' when it put up > a box asking you if you wanted to update your netscape?[1]) It is a remote possibility (but, I have not knowingly done such a thing). [1] I have a problem with software that does this kind of thing. If I'm clicking and/or typing fast, some box will pop up, intercept my next "enter" keypress and disappear before I get a chance to realize that something is there, much less read what it says. I agree. The problem of many such pop-up windows is that they abruptly steal the screen input-focus from my current window in such a way that my regular typing-activity is interrupted. Since no one else has responded to my question, this is probably not a wide-spread experience which is shared by many other users (I suspected my original theory even more after I did some research and found out that Netscape had been renewing their effort in the ISP business during the past 6 weeks). I may have to accept your hypothesis that it could have been my inadvertent input (response to some popup/dialog) ... Anyway, regardless of how the icon was placed on my Desktop, what Netscape is offering to the visitors to the web site seems such a lousy deal I started to question Netscape's business "ethics" (not just what they offer as an ISP, but the way they want to promote their business). Kan ------------------------------ 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 #82 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 20 15:49:22 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1KKnLE22290; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:49:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:49:22 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402202049.i1KKnLE22290@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 #83 TELECOM Digest Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:49:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 83 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Apple's Other Hardware Hit (Monty Solomon) ESPN Ends Ugly Fight With Cox Over Fees (Monty Solomon) U.S. Cable Modem Growth Slows, Opening Door to DSL (Monty Solomon) Charter Cable Posts Narrower 4Q Loss (Monty Solomon) CommScope Reports Fourth Quarter 2003 Results (Monty Solomon) Record Industry Targets 531 More Filesharers (Monty Solomon) Intel Unveils Platform Strategy for Ultra-Wideband Wireless (M. Solomon) Re: Home Intercom System With Cordless Phone (Jonathan E Cowperthwait) Re: Home Intercom System With Cordless Phone (Andrew Bell) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (John McHarry) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (Steven J Sobol) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (epg1@comcast.net) Re: Now Preening on the Coffee Table: The TiVo Remote Control (C. Dold) Re: Now Preening on the Coffee Table: The TiVo Remote Control (Tony P.) Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax (Lawrence Jones) Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: My SBC Experience (was Re: Phantom DSL Reprised) (Joel M. Hoffman) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 21:27:27 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Apple's Other Hardware Hit BYTE OF THE APPLE By Alex Salkever As with the iPod, the hot Airport line of wireless-networking gear shows that ease of use and an eye for coming trends bring outsize gains. Anyone following Apple Computer ( AAPL ) should be forgiven if they feel that iPod has hogged all the glory lately. The wildly successful digital music player has dominated media coverage and garnered accolades, as well as capturing about one-third of the market for these devices. But that golden halo has overshadowed another big Apple hardware success: Its popular Airport line of wireless networking devices. The Airport Extreme base station acts as a wireless broadband router that can support up to 50 computers, Macs or PCs. Apple also makes wireless broadband cards that allow Macs to pull in signals based on the 802.11 standard, known as Wi-Fi. Apple engineers jumped on the Wi-Fi bandwagon early, building Airport-card slots into iMacs and other Apple computers four years ago. Indeed, Apple had seen the promise of wireless broadband when 802.11 was only emerging from standards bodies (see BW Online, 2/18/04, "Wi-Fi's Growing Pains" ). http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2004/tc20040219_0887_tc056.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 21:38:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ESPN Ends Ugly Fight With Cox Over Fees By GARY GENTILE AP Business Writer LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Sports cable network ESPN has reached new agreements with two cable television systems, ending a particularly nasty dispute with Cox Communications that saw the launch of dueling Web sites and ad campaigns. The deal with Cox keeps ESPN and ESPN 2 on the extended basic tier level of cable service _ meaning it will be available to most Cox cable subscribers. Cox, in the face of what it said was unwarranted price increases by ESPN, had threatened to move the cable channels to a premium level of service. Also Thursday, ESPN announced it had a similar long-term deal with Charter Communications. In exchange for lower annual fee increases, Charter agreed to add three new services to its system. Specific terms of the new deals were not released, except that ESPN confirmed the new annual price increases will be less than 20 percent. On its own Web site, Cox said the new deal called for an average rate increase of 7 percent per year. ESPN already charges the highest wholesale rates of any ad-supported cable network. Last year, it said it would seek to negotiate new, longer-term deals with lower rate increases as it expands its services. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40648556 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 21:39:56 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Cable Modem Growth Slows, Opening Door to DSL By Michael Learmonth NEW YORK, Feb 19 (Reuters) - As the market for high-speed Internet connections moves into many American homes, telephone companies are finally starting to take market share from once-dominant cable companies. The top U.S. cable operators -- Comcast Corp. , Time Warner Inc. (NYSE:TWX), Cox Communications Inc. , and Charter Communications Inc. (NASDAQ:CHTR) -- all reported slower growth in the last quarter among new consumers signing up for high-speed Internet service. Meanwhile, the top telephone companies offering high-speed Internet access, SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) and Verizon Communications (NYSE:VZ), are experiencing growth reminiscent of cable's heyday in 2002 and early 2003. Cable still holds 64 percent of the high-speed data market, but that share may shrink in the coming year as the telcos make inroads among more price-sensitive consumers with their slower, cheaper digital subscriber line, or DSL, offerings. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40647934 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 21:43:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Charter Cable Posts Narrower 4Q Loss By JIM SUHR AP Business Writer ST. LOUIS (AP) -- Charter Communications Inc., the nation's third-largest cable TV systems operator, said Thursday its loss narrowed in the fourth quarter versus a year ago as it pressed its bid to restructure and cut debt. The St. Louis-based company, controlled by Microsoft Corp. co-founder Paul Allen and serving about 6.6 million customers in 40 states, said Thursday it lost $58 million, or 20 cents per share, during the three months ended Dec. 31. That compared with a loss of $1.87 billion, or $6.36 a share, a year ago. Both earnings figures were after payments of $1 million in preferred stock dividends. Analysts surveyed by Thomson First Call were expecting a loss of 42 cents a share. Fourth-quarter revenues rose 2 percent to $1.22 billion from $1.19 billion, growth the company largely pinned on a 47 percent rise in high-speed data revenues. Operating costs and expenses were flat in the latest period at $733 million, reflecting higher programming costs partly offset by reduced marketing and other expenses. Charter, with about $18.6 billion in debt, launched a restructuring effort in 2002 and pressed it throughout last year. As part of that, Charter posted a $35 million special charge in the fourth quarter of 2002, mostly tied to its work force cutbacks and winnowing operations from three divisions and 10 regions into five operating divisions, eliminating redundancies and streamlining its management. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40647043 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 21:46:34 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CommScope Reports Fourth Quarter 2003 Results HICKORY, N.C., Feb. 19 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- CommScope, Inc. (NYSE:CTV) today announced fourth quarter results for the period ended December 31, 2003, which was prior to the acquisition of the Connectivity Solutions business of Avaya Inc. The Company reported sales of $153.8 million and a net loss of $1.0 million, or $0.02 per share, for the fourth quarter. The net loss included after-tax equity in losses of OFS BrightWave, LLC of $0.08 per share related to CommScope's minority ownership interest in this venture. For the fourth quarter of 2002, CommScope reported sales of $135.9 million and a net loss of $3.5 million or $0.06 per share. This net loss reflected after-tax equity in losses of OFS BrightWave of $0.08 per share. CommScope's sales for the fourth quarter rose 13% to $153.8 million, compared to $135.9 million in the year-ago quarter and rose 3% sequentially compared to $148.7 million in the third quarter of 2003. Sales rose year- over-year in all major product groups. Enterprise LAN sales increased more than 50% from the depressed year-ago sales levels. Wireless/Other Telecom sales more than doubled year-over-year. Orders booked in the fourth quarter of 2003 were $149.4 million compared to $132.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2002 and $152.2 million in the preceding quarter. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40646393 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 22:19:49 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 17.5: Record Industry Targets 531 More Filesharers EFFector Vol. 17, No. 5 February 18, 2004 donna@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 280th Issue of EFFector: * Record Industry Targets 531 More Filesharers * EFF Privacy Coalition Presses Congress for Hearings on Travel Privacy * Update on CAPPS II Passenger Profiling: What's Going On? * Let the Sun Set on PATRIOT - Section 215 * Update on IEEE Electronic Voting Standards - Progress! * Internet Pioneer Gives Over $1.2 Million to EFF to Defend Online Freedom * Deep Links (14): Jim Griffin - "The war is over. The public has won." * Staff Calendar: 02.25.04 - Fred von Lohmann speaks at the Future of Music Coalition's Music Summit West, U.C. Hastings Law School, San Francisco, CA; 03.02.04 - Seth Schoen speaks at OpenBSD Users Group, San Francisco, CA; 03.03.04 - Fred von Lohmann speaks at Digital Piracy Dilemma Panel, London, UK * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/17/5.php ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 22:41:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Intel Unveils Platform Strategy for Ultra-Wideband Wireless Intel Unveils Platform Strategy for Ultra-Wideband Wireless Technology; UWB Technology Offers High-Speed Wireless Data Transfer Between Devices - Feb 18, 2004 02:45 PM (BusinessWire) SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 18, 2004--Intel Corporation today outlined its plans to drive the development of a complete, standards- based, common platform for ultra-wideband (UWB) wireless technology. Future UWB technology-based products built on this platform will enable high-speed transfer of multimedia content between devices in the home or office, at lower costs and without the hassle of wires. UWB is a wireless radio technology for transmitting data between consumer electronics, PC peripherals and mobile devices within short range at very high speeds, while consuming little power. It is ideally suited for wireless transfer of high-quality multimedia content, such as wirelessly streaming family videos from the digital video recorder to a high-definition television in the living room or wirelessly connecting a mobile PC to a projector in a conference room to deliver a presentation. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40635576 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 22:35:28 -0600 Subject: Re: Home Intercom System With Cordless Phone? From: Jonathan E Cowperthwait I imagine I won't be the only reader to recommend the following: The Siemens GigaSet system offers exactly what has been described -- I have an older system (four years old) that supports two CO lines and eight internal extensions; the units are gigahertz cordless handsets resembling oversized cellphones -- I've put one in every room of the house. Depending on need, the system can be configured with pseudo DID, different line access and privacy settings for each extension, and the usual gamut of intercom dialing, transfers, conferencing, and parking. I've been supremely happy with the system. The older generation of GigaSet system equipment is easily obtained online through, e.g., eBay; the newest version of the system, with more bells and whistles, is available via retail, but of course costs a bit more. On 2/19/04 7:03 PM, was written: > In light of the dicussion about a home phone system (2-4 lines, a > half-dozen extensions, perhaps) that offers intercom connections > between any two phones, I'm wondering: > Is there such a system that will work with a cordless phone? The idea > is that the cordless phone could be one of the stations. Best, Jonathan Edward Cowperthwait Schrdinger Partners, LLP San Francisco Chicago AOL Instant Messenger: cplus11 Tel. main: +1 773 752 1048 Tel. direct: +1 312 528 3534 Tel. mobile: +1 312 914 0003 Facsimile: +1 312 528 3501 ------------------------------ From: Andrew Bell Subject: Re: Home Intercom Phone System With Cordless Phone? Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 11:11:08 -0500 joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote about Home Intercom Phone System With Cordless Phone: > In light of the dicussion about a home phone system (2-4 lines, a > half-dozen extensions, perhaps) that offers intercom connections > between any two phones, I'm wondering: > Is there such a system that will work with a cordless phone? The idea > is that the cordless phone could be one of the stations. Siemens makes a 2 line system (the 8825) that handles up to 8 cordless extensions from a single base. The base is a fully functional station as well, with a built in 4 mailbox answering machine and auto-attendant. It has full intercom between all handsets, conference calling, etc. http://www.my-siemens.com Andrew ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 19:34:29 -0500 Tony P. wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, Kyler, I think you are confused, >> not Qworst. You don't have to have dialtone on a line, just battery. > Not even battery. See above. > I think the DSLAM provides the voltage necessary. Actually some DSL modems can be run back to back over a dry pair, such as an alarm circuit. This is useful in some applications. ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:04:44 -0600 Chris Kantarjiev wrote: >> Qwest is confused. It can't be done. > Oh please. I have a pair dedicated to DSL, no dial tone, right now. > I've had it for years. > "A line for free"? Hardly. I pay handsomely for the privilege of > using that copper pair. Hey, there is such a thing as DSL without dialtone. It's called SDSL. :P JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ From: epg1@comcast.net Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:00:15 +0000 McWebber (mcwebber@my-deja.com) wrote: > Verizon recently caved and now allows DSL only subscriptions, so I'm > sure Qworst looked at that before making the decision. Can anyone provide details of DSL-only subscriptions through Verizon (in Eastern Massachusetts, if it matters)? I would love to tell Comcast where to shove their overpriced service. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, if you think the telephone company is going to give you a better deal *and* stick to their word, you might need to review your premises. (in other words, think again.) PAT] ------------------------------ From: dold@NowXPreeni.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Now Preening on the Coffee Table: The TiVo Remote Control Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 02:59:11 UTC Organization: a2i network Monty Solomon wrote: > In 1998, design engineers at TiVo , the Silicon Valley company that > helped introduce the digital video recorder to the world, set out to > produce a distinctive remote control. The result was a textbook blend > of complexity and ease of use. > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/19/technology/circuits/19remo.html I thought this was an article about some new remote that Tivo was offering. The current Tivo control could use a lot of ergonomic help. It is disparingly called a peanut in the users' groups. There is no distinction of which way is up when it fits in your hand. It's easy to pick it up backwards and start pressing the wrong buttons, since the volume up-down and channel up-down are conveniently close enough to center to be used upside down. It probably won't work, since the infrared is pointed at your chest, but it takes a moment to realize. Obviously the user isn't expected to hit "clear" very often, since it almost requires two hands to hit while still pointed at the Tivo. There are two gigantic buttons that I never use. It doesn't control anything except the Tivo ... The Remote for my DirecTV was a much better design. The Tivo remote strikes me as first and foremost a fanciful design that makes the Tivo experience the mopst prominent feature. And why does a four year old remote get an article in today's NYTimes? Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Now Preening on the Coffee Table: The TiVo Remote Control Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 03:59:08 GMT In article , monty@roscom.com says: > By KATIE HAFNER > TO most home viewers, remote controls may seem like ancillary > sidekicks to the main attraction that is the television, DVD player or > digital video recorder. Yet in some ways the remote has become the > centerpiece of home entertainment: so many functions have been > relegated to this slip of an object that if it is lost, you may find > yourself unable to do so much as call up a menu for watching the movie > you popped into the DVD player. > But if the remote control is a linchpin, it is also often an > inscrutable one. A typical remote may have some 40 buttons, with > functions that are hard to divine. Often the labels - "toggle," > "planner" and the like - are no help. The device can feel like an > afterthought, thrown together without any planning at all. Some time back I ordered the OmniRemote module from Pacific Neo-Tek. Works rather well with my Visor Prism. Only thing was, it didn't want to hear it with Cox's GI cable boxes. That was just a frequency issue and I resolved it. In any case, I was able to consolidate all the remotes onto this thing and it's great. Best part -- you can put only the buttons you really use on a screen, and then put lesser used buttons on another page. I do that with the VCR and DVD players. For example, the first VCR page has the usual controls, numbers for channel selection, and certain features I use all the time. The other page has programming/timer features. ------------------------------ From: lawrence.jones@ugsplm.com Subject: Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 09:16:15 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com Tony P. wrote: > The thing about cable vs. DSL is that the cable coming into your > home is a shared medium. On the cable side it looks like one big > Ethernet LAN even using CDMA/CD. Not quite. Cable modems transmit and receive on completely different frequency bands, so it's not possible for one cable modem to receive another cable modem's transmissions. And it isn't CSMA/CD: The CMTS (the head end) is the only thing that transmits on the downstream channel, so there's no need for access control. The upstream channel is divided into slots that are scheduled by the CMTS (the schedule is broadcast on the downstream channel). Slots are usually assigned to specific modems, so no other access control is needed. CSMA/CD is only used when a slot is specifically assigned for it (mostly just for modems to announce themselves when they first boot, although it's may also be allowed for general transmissions when there's no pending traffic to be scheduled). -Larry Jones Buddy, if you think I'm even going to BE here, you're crazy! -- Calvin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:45:52 GMT From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash Organization: Excelsior Computer Services >> But if more people drop their regular telephone service in favor of >> tax-free Internet calling, the financial underpinnings of 911 will be >> weakened, he said. > But presumably as more and more people get phone lines incapable of > dialing 911, the costs for operating 911 should drop as well, no? Seems to me it's just the opposite. 911 *can* respond to VoIP, but it's (currently) more expensive. Each VoIP phone that uses the 911 network instead of a landline doubly drains 911 funds. While on the topic, though, why do only phone users pay the 911 tax? I'd be curious to know how many 911 calls come the phone where the trouble is, and how many are calls about something else? My guess is that many, maybe even most, 911 calls are to help someone else ("that building is on fire," "I heard gunshots," "there's been an accident," etc.) -Joel ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:47:48 GMT From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: My SBC Experience (was Re: Phantom DSL Reprised) Organization: Excelsior Computer Services >> It was an Illinois Bell customer service rep who spent about half an >> hour going over available numbers with me when setting up new service >> at my first house -- two cool numbers (xxx-8088 and xx8-0386), no >> extra charge. OK, they don't do this any more (who does?). But they >> did then. Sometimes you can get a rep to cycle through several numbers, at random when you get a new line. It doesn't usually take long to get a number that ends in zero. -Joel ------------------------------ 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 #83 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 20 19:06:46 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1L06jf26014; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:06:46 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:06:46 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402210006.i1L06jf26014@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 #84 TELECOM Digest Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:03:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 84 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Distractions While Driving, And Not Just Cell Phones (L. Jones) Re: Distractions While Driving, And Not Just Cell Phones (Novosielski) Re: Distractions While Driving, And Not Just Cell Phones (D Aspinwall) Re: Distractions While Driving, And Not Just Cell Phones (Joel Hoffman) Re: Distractions While Driving, And Not Just Cell Phones (Joe Wineburgh) Re: Distractions While Driving, And Not Just Cell Phones (Andrew Bell) Re: Distractions While Driving, And Not Just Cell Phones (Lisa Minter) Re: Money, Money, was Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Clash (Tony P.) Re: Symbol Added to Morse Code (Tony P.) Pros & Cons of Digital Epabx Compare to Hybrid Epabx (sonal) Use a Multiline Phone in a Single-line Jack (Jameson) Reliable Means of Determining LEC For Phone Number? (Betty Cockrell) Re: Internet Phones, 911 Could Clash (Alan Burkitt-Gray) Re: Internet Phones, 911 Could Clash (Dave Garland) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: lawrence.jones@ugsplm.com Subject: Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 09:16:16 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Could someone please tell me in a > convincing way what is the difference between a motorist who exercises > reasonable caution most of the time but talks on a cell phone and a > police officer chasing someone at 100 miles per hour on a busy highway > while talking into a microphone on a police radio? Both of them are > 'distracted' are they not? PAT] Not in the same way. The cell phone user is likely concentrating on the conversation and driving on autopilot. The officer, on the other hand, is likely concentrating on the driving and talking into the radio (*not* carrying on a conversation) on autopilot. The officer is almost certainly a much better trained driver, too. Numerous studies have shown that talking on a phone is far more distracting than listening to the radio, putting on nail polish, or even having a conversation with someone *in* the car. As far as I know, no one knows for sure *why* that is, but my guess is that it has a lot to do with how most of us have learned to block out outside distractions while talking on the phone. -Larry Jones That's the problem with nature. Something's always stinging you or oozing mucus on you. -- Calvin ------------------------------ From: Gary Novosielski Subject: Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 09:02:32 GMT Doug Aspinwall wrote: > New York is currently the only state to ban hand-held cell phones > while driving without using a hands-free device. Several states have > tried to pass a similar ban for the general public, but they have not > passed. New Jersey passed such a bill recently, and it was signed into law. I believe it takes effect July 1. It is only a secondary offense; an officer cannot stop you merely for using a phone handset, if you're doing nothing else wrong. However, if you are stopped for another infraction the officer can add the cellphone violation to whatever else they write you up for. =Gary ------------------------------ From: Doug Aspinwall Subject: Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 06:35:26 -0500 Organization: None whatsoever (just ask my wife) Doug Aspinwall wrote in message news:telecom23.82.6@telecom-digest.org: > Check out www.cellular-news.com/car_bans/ > New York is currently the only state to ban hand-held cell phones > while driving without using a hands-free device. Several states have > tried to pass a similar ban for the general public, but they have not > passed. > Several states have bans for bus drivers and/or school bus drivers. > Doug Aspinwall > Near Dover, DE (the only state capital without a commercial airport) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Could someone please tell me in a > convincing way what is the difference between a motorist who exercises > reasonable caution most of the time but talks on a cell phone and a > police officer chasing someone at 100 miles per hour on a busy highway > while talking into a microphone on a police radio? Both of them are > 'distracted' are they not? PAT] Police officers are trained to drive and communicate simultaneously. The ordinary driver is not. Perhaps that should be a requirement of obtaining a driver's license. Just might save some lives. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:39:18 GMT From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones Organization: Excelsior Computer Services > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Could someone please tell me in a > convincing way what is the difference between a motorist who exercises > reasonable caution most of the time but talks on a cell phone and a > police officer chasing someone at 100 miles per hour on a busy highway > while talking into a microphone on a police radio? Both of them are > 'distracted' are they not? PAT] The difference is obvious: The police officer going 100 MPH can give a ticket to the motorist with the cell phone, but not vice versa ... ------------------------------ From: Joe Wineburgh Subject: Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:33:27 -0500 Thought I heard some rumblings recently about this in NJ as well; As of 1/20/04 it is now illegal in NJ, technically only as a 'secondary' offense, but we all know how that works, don't we? #JOE http://www.nj.gov/cgi-bin/governor/njnewsline/view_article.pl?id=1712 Governor Signs Law Banning Hand-Held Cell Phones While Driving Building A Better New Jersey: Making Roads Safer (RIDGEFIELD)-Governor James E. McGreevey signed legislation today that bans the use of hand-held cell phones while operating a moving vehicle. The new law will continue the Governor's efforts to "Build a Better New Jersey" by making New Jersey highways safer. "Cell phones have become inescapable," said McGreevey. "They are part of our daily lives. This ban will not threaten that. Like any other instrument that could be dangerous, cell phones must be used responsibly. Requiring drivers to keep both hands on the wheel will save lives" The bill allows the use of wireless telephones equipped for hands-free operation in moving vehicles, provided the placement of those hands-free telephones does not interfere with the operation of federally required equipment on the vehicles, such as air bags. Drivers may use a hand-held telephone in a moving motor vehicle only if: (1) They have reason to fear for their lives or safety, or believe that a criminal act may be perpetrated against them or another person requiring the use of the wireless telephone while the car is moving; or (2) To report a fire, traffic accident, serious road hazard or medical or hazardous materials emergency, or to report a person who is driving in a reckless, careless or otherwise unsafe manner or who appears to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs. "Enactment of this law will end the confusion many motorists face while driving through our state, never knowing which towns prohibit the use of hand-held cell phones while driving," said Assemblyman Douglas H. Fisher (D-Cumberland). "We now have a uniform law that will require drivers to minimize distractions while driving, making our roads safer." Enforcement of the law by State or local law enforcement officers is to be accomplished only as a secondary action when the driver has been pulled over for a traffic violation or another offense. The penalties for violating the provision may range from $100 to $250. No motor vehicle points or automobile insurance eligibility points would be assessed for a violation of this law. Last year, a Quinnipiac University poll showed New Jersey's voters 85 percent of New Jersey's voters overwhelmingly favor a hand-held cell phone ban. Even those who used cell phones said drivers should keep their hands on the wheel. Earlier today, the Governor signed "Florence's Law" which lowers the blood alcohol content from 0.10 to 0.08 percent and "Michael's Law" which requires a person who commits a third or subsequent DWI offense to serve a 180-day prison term in a county jail or workhouse. ------------------------------ From: Andrew Bell [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Could someone please tell me in a > convincing way what is the difference between a motorist who exercises > reasonable caution most of the time but talks on a cell phone and a > police officer chasing someone at 100 miles per hour on a busy highway > while talking into a microphone on a police radio? Both of them are > 'distracted' are they not? PAT] Two reasons, I think. A - the police officer is presumably talking about the task at hand (which is driving), rather than something completely unrelated. B - police (or taxi, bus, ham, whatever) radios are not held to the ear. Don't ask me to explain it, but there just seems to be something about holding a phone to your ear that causes (a lot of) people to partition themselves mentally. They focus their attention on the phone call, and let the subconscious mind drive. I *know* I do this - that's why I won't use a handheld and drive. I admit, it took a close call for me to recognize this pattern, but I don't seem to have the same problem when using a handsfree unit. Andrew ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:00:00 CST An item in the police activity column, or police blotter of the Independence Reporter yesterday said the police had chased some guy driving over by 11th and Sycamore Streets who had come out of the Sidecar (a tavern by the railroad station) who jumped in his car and sped away when they tried to stop him to talk about his condition (drunk and driving.) They chased him for several blocks before they caught him, and according to the story in the newspaper, he was talking on his cell phone all the time police were chasing after him. They finally caught him when he ran up onto the sidewalk and into a fence around a house on 11th Street. Besides being drunk while driving, they also charged him with using his cell phone in an unsafe way. I would guess so. Lisa ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Money, Money, was Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 03:51:36 GMT In article , dannyb@panix.com says: > In Monty Solomon > writes: >> ST. PAUL (AP) -- The rising popularity of Internet telephones could >> undermine the finances of the state's 911 systems while endangering >> some users because the new technology doesn't alway mesh with the old >> emergency system. >> So-called Internet telephony's popularity worries Jim Beutelspacher, >> manager of the statewide 911 program for the Department of Public >> Safety, because it doesn't pay a 40-cent-per-month tax for each new >> subscriber. > Aside from the bigger issue that "911 centers" should (in my opinion, > that is -- rational folk can disagree with this a bit) be supported > the same way other government business is, namely through the general > tax levy, there's a very specific point here: > In audit after audit in NYS (and others, although being > from NY it's the one I'm most familiar with) it turns > out that any so-called "911 surcharge" is simply absorbed > into the general gov't revenue/expense stream It's not just in NYS -- happens here in RI too. Everything rolls right into the general fund. And who holds the purse strings -- our esteemed legislators of course. I invite you to go to http://www.projo.com and see who's had their hand in the cookie jar. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Symbol Added to Morse Code Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 04:05:49 GMT In article , Joe_Wineburgh@cable.comcast.com says: > http://www.cjonline.com/stories/021704/pag_morsecode.shtml > The Associated Press > Morse code is entering the 21st century -- or at least the late 20th. > The 160-year-old communication system now has a new character to > denote the "@" symbol used in e-mail addresses. > In December, the International Telecommunications Union, which > oversees the entire frequency spectrum, from amateur radio to > satellites, voted to add the new character. > The new sign, which will be known as a "commat," consists of the > signals for "A" (dot-dash) and "C" (dash-dot-dash-dot), with no space > between them. Ahem -- that's dit-dah dah-dit-dah-dit -- another amateur radio prosign to remember. Thing is AT is dit-dah dah, several elements shorter than the new prosign. I hate it when that happens. kd1s - an extra who had to do the 20WPM code damn it. ------------------------------ From: son_tha@yahoo.com (sonal) Subject: Pros & Cons of Digital Epabx Compare to Hybrid Epabx Date: 20 Feb 2004 02:59:21 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hello, I want to buy new Epabx system for my office. I need maximum 40 extension & KTS. Can any one please tell me pros & cons of Digital Epabx compare to Hybrid Epabx. At present I have quote for Karel 40, Panasonic 1232, Matrix Eternity & Symense 48i. Which is advisable? I would appreciate your answer. Thanks, Sonal Thakker ------------------------------ From: jameson_ray@comcast.net (Jameson) Subject: Use a Multiline Phone in a Single-Line Jack Date: 20 Feb 2004 06:45:52 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi Everyone, I was just given three GE 2-9405C phones. After doing some online research, I found that they must have two lines connected in one jack on the back to operate. They will not just operate on a single line (which is true, as I have tried it on the single-line jacks in my house). Because we don't have two phone lines, I would like to know if anyone has an idea on a way to make a custom cable, or buy an adaptor. Thanks in advance! -Jameson [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Often times telephone devices *will* work on one line but the pin out on the modular connecting cord is wrong. One line devices usually come only with a cord for 'one line' which is typically the red/green wires on the first and fourth pins (if they are present) in the modular cord. You might start by getting four wire modular cords, such as at Radio Shack. The two inner pins, which usually relate to the yellow/black wires make the 'second line' work. Or if you get a six-wire cord, then the scheme is the two outermost pins (1 and 6 are blue and white) the two middle pins (2 and five are black and yellow) and the two innermost pins (3 and 4 are green and red). If a cord like that fits into the base of your phone (so the pins on the cord touch the pins of the phone when it is plugged in) then your problem is mostly solved. If the phone(s) still do not work, look at the box on the wall where the wires come in and the modular cord plugs in. Assuming the wiring is sort of standard, the cover plate will have the red/green wires working but the yellow/black wires will either be tied on to two screws but doing nothing, or not tied down at all (sometimes). What you will want to do is 'trick the phone' into thinking it is being served on 'line two' instead of 'line one'. Swap out the red/green wires in the modular cord and attach them to the places where the black/yellow wires (that had been or would be) used for 'line two' if you had such a thing. In other words, take the live pair you do have coming in and make sure they are attached to the two center pins by the time it reaches the phone, typically yellow and black. What is unclear to me is your use of the phrase "two lines connected in one jack." I checked the GE website and did *not* find anything entitled "GE 2-9405C" or anything remotely similar. There were pictures of some phones you might have been referring to. If what I said above does not help write again and be more specific about the 'two lines connected in one jack' and if it means two actual working phone line pairs, or two sets of wires, working or not. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Betty Cockrell Subject: Reliable Means of Determining LEC For Given Phone Number? Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 09:12:38 -0600 In article , no@spam.com says: > Does anyone know of a reliable means of determining the servicing LEC > for a given phone number? > I'm trying to find a reliable means of determining what is the > servicing LEC for any given phone number. Right now this is limited to > only needing to work for CA. USA phone numbers. Using the various > resources (LERG, and other similar databases) I can get down to what > the operating Company is for a given NPA/NXX but with Thousand Number > (block) Pooling, and porting of numbers, there are over lapping > NPA/NXXs for various providers, and while the operating company for a > given NPA/NXX maybe SBC (Pacific Bell) the line may in fact be > serviced by Verizon (GTE). > So far I'm at a loss as to how to reliably perform, what in an ideal > world, would be a simple search. The changes resulting from local competition (UNE, Resale, Porting and pooling) have made look ups at an NPANXX level increasingly inaccurate. One solution is to do a LIDB GETDATA Query for the Account Owner (or OCN Operating Company Number) for the telephone number in question. LIDB GETDATA services are available through several companies on a per query basis. ------------------------------ From: Alan Burkitt-Gray Subject: Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:06:49 -0000 Dr. Joel M. Hoffman (joel@exc.com) asked: > 'Why do only phone users pay the 911 tax? I'd be curious to know how > many 911 calls come the phone where the trouble is, and how many are > calls about something else? My guess is that many, maybe even most, > 911 calls are to help someone else ("that building is on fire," "I > heard gunshots," "there's been an accident," etc.)' Goodness me, Joel. Sounds almost like you're suggesting the community as a whole should act together and fund a collective service, just like we do here in Europe. Do be careful, or some folks'll be accusing you of socialism or other European habits. Alan Burkitt-Gray Editor, Global Telecoms Business Euromoney Institutional Investor plc, Nestor House, Playhouse Yard, London EC4V 5EX, UK tel +44 20 7779 8518 fax +44 20 7779 8248 email aburkitt@euromoneyplc.com Global Telecoms Business http://www.globaltelecomsbusiness.com is official publication at TeleManagement World, Nice, France, May 17-20 2004, with supplement plus three daily newspapers. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Having the 'nerve' to say you sometimes prefer how the Europeans do things is sort of a problem here in this newsgroup at times, isn't it Alan? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:02:11 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote: > While on the topic, though, why do only phone users pay the 911 tax? Because it was easy to sneak that in, and provides implausible deniability to the politicians who want to say they're "lowering taxes". It's all the rage, call it a "mandatory surcharge" or a "user fee" or an "access charge", anything but a "tax". Too bad truth-in-advertising doesn't apply to politicians. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, Dave, it also occurs to me that the present attacks on VOIP (Internet phone service) by politicians and others also helps the FBI/Justice people who have a king-size grudge right now about how difficult it will be to trace or tap or bug telephone calls using this medium. Don't listen to that balogna about how the 'poor 911 tax will suffer so badly because of people getting into VOIP'. They've made more than enough money to fund every 911 call center in the world many times over; that is, if they had spent the money properly, not misappropriated it or sqaundered it on other often times useless projects as part of the overall goal to have 'no servants left behind'. They just cannot stand having anything around they cannot have their hands in, can they? PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #84 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Feb 21 00:21:09 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1L5L9t28648; Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:21:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:21:09 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402210521.i1L5L9t28648@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 #85 TELECOM Digest Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:21:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 85 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 779 to Overlay 815 in Northern Illinois (Mark J Cuccia) 321 Studios Will Appeal Court Ruling (Monty Solomon) Order in 321 Studios vrs. MGM (Monty Solomon) DVD-XCOPY Contains Remote De-Activation Feature (Monty Solomon) Cable and Satellite Have Blurred Difference Between Networks (Solomon) Judge: DVD-Copying Software is Illegal (Monty Solomon) Re: Symbol Added to Morse Code (Gary Novosielski) Re: Symbol Added to Morse Code (William Warren) Re: Distractions While Driving, And Not Just Cell Phones (N Landsberg) Re: Distractions While Driving, And Not Just Cell Phones (jmayson) Re: Distractions While Driving, And Not Just Cell Phones (Tony P.) Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash (email@crazyhat.net) Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash (Tony P.) Re: Pros & Cons of Digital Epabx Compare to Hybrid Epabx (Tony P.) Re: Home Intercom Phone System With Cordless Phone? (Tom Betz) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (Tony P.) Re: ESPN Ends Ugly Fight With Cox Over Fees (Tony P.) Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax (Tony P.) 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: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:56:41 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: 779 to Overlay 815 in Northern Illinois It WILL BE 779 to overlay 815! See the press release dated today, 20-Feb-2004, from the Illinois Commerce Commission's (state regulatory) website, transcribed below ... http://www.icc.state.il.us/tc/docs/040220AC815PR.pdf ICC DIRECTS OVERLAY OF NEW AREA CODE FOR 815 AREA IN NORTHERN ILLINOIS February 20, 2004 Beth Bosch The Illinois Commerce Commission has issued an order establishing an "overlay" of a new area code, to supplement the telephone number supply in Illinois' 815 area code. The 815 area code serves northern Illinois, including the cities of DeKalb, Joliet, Kankakee and Rockford. NeuStar, Inc., under contract by the Federal Communications Commission to act as the national numbering administrator, has assigned 779 to be new area code. Once in service, 779 will serve the same geographic area presently served by 815. The overlay plan, approved by the ICC on February 4, was chosen from several other relief alternatives, including various geographic splits. A geographic split divides an existing area code into two or more parts, requiring at least 50 percent of customers to change their telephone numbers. By contrast, the overlay will serve the same geographic area of the existing 815 area code, allowing all current customers to keep their 815 telephone numbers, while new customers to the area may be assigned a telephone number in the new area code. NeuStar first identified the 815 area code as being in need of "relief" in May of 2000. The "relief" designation identifies an area code that may run out of numbers within a short period of time unless conservation efforts are employed, and one that will ultimately need to be supplemented by a new area code. Since then, a variety of conservation measures have been put in place to prolong the life of the 815 area code and use telephone numbers more efficiently. For example, in June of 2003, thousand block number pooling went into effect in a significant portion of 815. Number pooling allows multiple telecommunications carriers to share telephone numbers within a prefix serving the same geographic area. Prior to number pooling, each individual telecommunications carrier needed its own unique "prefix" (10,000 numbers) in order to serve a city or town. Since the introduction of thousand block number pooling, more than 1.6 million phone numbers have been "donated" to the "pool" by carriers. These numbers, in turn, can be used by other companies wishing to provide service in the same cities and towns. Number pooling and the voluntary return or reclamation of unneeded or unused numbering resources, continues to maximize the efficient use of numbers. Telephone numbers in the new 779 area code will not be assigned until the 815 area code has reached exhaust. At that time, FCC rules mandate that all telephone calls be made dialing the full 10-digit or 1+10-digit phone number, even within the same area code. This does not affect the cost of the call. A local call remains local, and a toll call remains toll, regardless of the number of digits that are dialed to complete it. Prior to the assignment of numbers from the new 779 area code, customers in the 815 area code will have a period of time to adjust to dialing 10 or 1+10 digits to complete their calls. There will be at least a 90-120 day notice period prior to activation of the new 779 area code. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:56:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 321 Studios Will Appeal Court Ruling 321 Studios Will Appeal Court Ruling ST. LOUIS, Feb. 20 /PRNewswire/ -- 321 Studios (321) will appeal today's ruling of the Northern District Court of California's Judge Susan Illston, and will seek a stay during the appeal process. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200402202309_PRN__CGF044 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 23:27:08 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Order in 321 Studios v. MGM, et al. 321 STUDIOS v. METRO GOLDWYN MAYER STUDIOS, INC., ET AL. Order Granting Defendants' Motion For Partial Summary Judgment And Resolving Related Motions http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/mgm/321mgm22004ord.pdf ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:58:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DVDXCOPY Contains Remote De-Activation Feature 321 Studios Shuts Down Piracy Suspect Preliminary Injunction and Transfer Motions to be Heard in New York City Court Today ST. LOUIS, Feb. 5 /PRNewswire/ -- 321 Studios (321) declares that its piracy prevention measures are working on the day transfer and preliminary injunction motions are to be heard in a New York City courtroom. 321 Studios recently relied on DVDXCOPY's built-in piracy prevention measures - the backup copy video disclaimer and ability to remotely de-activate a customer's copy of DVDXCOPY -- to shut down an accused copyright pirate. 321 first heard of this Illinois man's alleged activities in court papers related to Paramount Pictures Corporation and Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation v. 321 Studios, a lawsuit filed in the Southern District Court of New York on November 14, 2003. The company took action the same day by remotely de-activating the man's copy of DVDXCOPY XPRESS. 321 Studios has several anti-piracy measures built into its DVDXCOPY series of software, including: -- An eight-second, indelible video warning, similar to the FBI warning found at the beginning of many DVD movies, alerting viewers of the backup copy that the DVD is not an original and is to be only used for non-commercial, personal use. -- An electronic watermark that can trace any backup copy made with DVDXCOPY back to the original point of purchase allowing 321 Studios to remotely de-activate the software and prevent further misuse. -- An embedded bit flag that prevents making a copy of a copy using DVDXCOPY. -- A $10,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of any person using 321's software to pirate movies. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200402051302_PRN__CGTH019 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 23:13:00 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: "Cable and Satellite Have Blurred the Difference Between Networks" Excerpt from Cable Boxes Can Block Unwanted Channels 20 February 2004, 1:35pm ET By JONATHAN D. SALANT Associated Press Writer http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200402201835_APO_V1388 The problem, critics say, is that cable and satellite have blurred the difference between networks. The traditional free networks _ CBS, NBC, ABC and Fox _ are just different channels on the cable box. The result is that a parent or child who channel surfs might click the "up" button on the remote control and go from CBS to Spike TV's "Stripperella," a cartoon about a buxom stripper doubling as a crime fighter, or FX's "Nip/Tuck," about a sex-crazed plastic surgeon. "The average person sees no difference between the two," said L. Brent Bozell III, president of the Parents Television Council, a conservative advocacy group. "The key distinction between the two of them _ i.e., you subscribe to cable _ is kind of flawed as well." Cable companies sell tiers of channels. If you want Disney and Discover Kids, you also must take MTV and FX. The only channels ordered individually are "premium" channels like Home Box Office and Showtime. FCC Commissioner Kevin Martin said he wants to allow subscribers to pick and choose cable channels. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200402201835_APO_V1388 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:43:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Judge: DVD-Copying Software is Illegal By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com After eight months of deliberation, a San Francisco federal judge has ruled that software company 321 Studios' popular DVD-copying products are illegal. In a ruling released Friday, Judge Susan Illston granted Hollywood studios' request for an injunction against 321 Studios, saying the small software company has seven days to stop distributing its DVD-copying products. http://news.com.com/2100-1025-5162749.html ------------------------------ From: Gary Novosielski Subject: Re: Symbol Added to Morse Code Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:23:37 GMT Tony P. wrote: > Ahem -- that's dit-dah dah-dit-dah-dit -- another amateur radio > prosign to remember. Ahem yourself, actually @ would be di-dah-dah-di-dah-dit. There's no pause in the middle. > Thing is AT is dit-dah dah, several elements shorter than the new > prosign. Well, Yes, but di-dah-dah was already taken. It's the letter W. ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: Symbol Added to Morse Code Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 02:40:19 GMT Tony P. wrote in message news:telecom23.84.9@telecom-digest.org: > In article , > Joe_Wineburgh@cable.comcast.com says: >> http://www.cjonline.com/stories/021704/pag_morsecode.shtml >> The Associated Press >> Morse code is entering the 21st century -- or at least the late 20th. >> The 160-year-old communication system now has a new character to >> denote the "@" symbol used in e-mail addresses. >> In December, the International Telecommunications Union, which >> oversees the entire frequency spectrum, from amateur radio to >> satellites, voted to add the new character. >> The new sign, which will be known as a "commat," consists of the >> signals for "A" (dot-dash) and "C" (dash-dot-dash-dot), with no space >> between them. > Ahem -- that's dit-dah dah-dit-dah-dit -- another amateur radio > prosign to remember. Thing is AT is dit-dah dah, several elements > shorter than the new prosign. > I hate it when that happens. > kd1s - an extra who had to do the 20WPM code damn it. I recommend that hams continue using the old style AT instead of AC , so that spammers can't strip their addresses off the airwaves and send them junk mail ads for ham radio gear. Just a thought. Bill (Remove the 'noham' portion of my return address for direct replies.) ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 23:08:41 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Gary Novosielski wrote: > Doug Aspinwall wrote: >> New York is currently the only state to ban hand-held cell phones >> while driving without using a hands-free device. Several states have >> tried to pass a similar ban for the general public, but they have not >> passed. > New Jersey passed such a bill recently, and it was signed into law. I > believe it takes effect July 1. > It is only a secondary offense; an officer cannot stop you merely for > using a phone handset, if you're doing nothing else wrong. However, > if you are stopped for another infraction the officer can add the > cellphone violation to whatever else they write you up for. > =Gary Any bets as to how long it will be before it becomes a primary offense???? They said that about the seat-belt law, too. Any self-respecting cop can come up with a reason to stop you at any time. Thus this "secondary infraction" wording is pure horse-bleep. "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh sure ... if a police officer could not think of any reason to arrest you he would be a poor police officer indeed. That's why laws such as 'disorderly conduct' are so valuable. Anyone saying they are not disorderly have never met a police officer who decided they were. If you are 'disorderly' then you can bed while they look up other more serious offenses against you. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jmayson@nyx.net Subject: Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:00:19 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com > A - the police officer is presumably talking about the task at hand > (which is driving), rather than something completely unrelated. Not to mention, police officers are trained to drive at such speeds. The average driver isn't. John Mayson Austin, Texas, USA ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Distractions While Driving -- And Not Just Cell Phones Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 23:23:04 GMT In article , gpn@suespammers.org says: > Doug Aspinwall wrote: >> New York is currently the only state to ban hand-held cell phones >> while driving without using a hands-free device. Several states have >> tried to pass a similar ban for the general public, but they have not >> passed. > New Jersey passed such a bill recently, and it was signed into law. I > believe it takes effect July 1. > It is only a secondary offense; an officer cannot stop you merely for > using a phone handset, if you're doing nothing else wrong. However, > if you are stopped for another infraction the officer can add the > cellphone violation to whatever else they write you up for. Give it time. Once they figure out what a cash cow it's going to be it will become a primary offense. It surprises me that the seatbelt law in Rhode Island is still secondary, though there has been a push to make it primary. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:35:24 -0700 From: In message <> joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) did ramble: >>> But if more people drop their regular telephone service in favor of >>> tax-free Internet calling, the financial underpinnings of 911 will be >>> weakened, he said. >> But presumably as more and more people get phone lines incapable of >> dialing 911, the costs for operating 911 should drop as well, no? > Seems to me it's just the opposite. 911 *can* respond to VoIP, but > it's (currently) more expensive. Each VoIP phone that uses the 911 > network instead of a landline doubly drains 911 funds. Most of the VoIP services I've seen don't offer 911. I would expect that a phone which cannot call 911, by definition, costs the 911 system less then a number which can call 911. Admittedly, at their best, some VoIP services forward 911 to a local 7 digit emergency number of some sort. I could accept that these calls cost more to handle since the emergency operator will not have accurate caller information as they would with a valid E911 service. Even if you wanted to implement full E911, I'd still suggest that false locations would occur since the VoIP service could have been moved, Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Vonage offers 911 service. They ask you FIRST to sign up for it THEN wait for their comfirmation before you start using it. When I was unable to get a local Vonage number I took a San Franciso 415 number. I enrolled in 911 and a day ot two later, Vonage responded saying I was registerd at my street address. I got a letter the same day or next day from City of Independence Police confirming it as given by Vonage via PSAP. Then once Vonage got into this rural area of s.e. Kansas and had an area 620 local number avail- able, I took that instead, and signed up that number 620-402-0134 for 911 also. Vonage sent that one through like the earlier one, but because the first one 'obviously' was not Kansas -- e.g. San Francisco -- when the paperwork got here to Independence a day or two later, the lady from the police department called me and asked, "Did you move over to Winfield (KS), where the number is at?" When I told her it was still my Vonage computer phone but with a more local number, but Vonage was not yet co-located here in town. Terra World is all over this part of the state; I do not know why Vonage chose Winfield instead of Independence (20 miles away) but no matter I guess. So she corrected their records at the police station to show same address but new 620 number. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 23:46:44 GMT In article , dave.garland@wizinfo.com says: > It was a dark and stormy night when joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel > M. Hoffman) wrote: > While on the topic, though, why do only phone > users pay the 911 tax? Because it was easy to sneak that in, and > provides implausible deniability to the politicians who want to say > they're "lowering taxes". It's all the rage, call it a "mandatory > surcharge" or a "user fee" or an "access charge", anything but a > "tax". Too bad truth-in-advertising doesn't apply to politicians. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, Dave, it also occurs to me > that the present attacks on VOIP (Internet phone service) by > politicians and others also helps the FBI/Justice people who have a > king-size grudge right now about how difficult it will be to trace > or tap or bug telephone calls using this medium. Don't listen to > that balogna about how the 'poor 911 tax will suffer so badly > because of people getting into VOIP'. They've made more than enough > money to fund every 911 call center in the world many times over; > that is, if they had spent the money properly, not misappropriated > it or sqaundered it on other often times useless projects as part of > the overall goal to have 'no servants left behind'. They just cannot > stand having anything around they cannot have their hands in, can > they? PAT] Most law enforcement doesn't know it's ass from it's elbow when it comes to telecommunications technology. I had to laugh while watching the HBO series "The Wire" -- yeah right, regular grunt cops are going to understand wiretaps, etc. The reality of it is that tapping ANY line is easy. Digital switches make it a simple proposition -- I remember a key demo on an AT&T 5ESS/2000 - we could pluck any number and listen in, and the parties on the line wouldn't even know it because we were just picking a bit stream out of the matrix. The same is true of VoIP -- that call has to be routed through somewhere -- and you can bet there's a way to monitor. Even though the main path is over IP it eventually enters a switch somewhere that authenticates the connection (Wouldn't do to have people who don't pay on the network!) and then finds a path to the PSTN to route the call. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But the fact that the call drops onto the public telephone network is only because there are still some folks who do not have Vonage (or other VOIP) phones. When two VOIP customers call each other on the phone, the call does NOT go on the telephone network. As more and more people sign up for Vonage as an example, less and less of the VOIP traffic will find its way onto the public telephone network. As far as having 'people who do not pay on the network', we *DO* pay! We pay Vonage each month. And that is the beef the authorities have now. Gradually fewer and fewer calls (of the no-good citizens they wish to track) will ever reach the network, making tracking them nearly impossible unless one bunch of public servants (justice, FBI, etc) can convince another bunch of the public servants (FCC, various regulators) that Vonage and other VOIP connections have to be treated like 'regular' telephones. (Oh, don't they just wish!) If they cannot get what they want by an appeal to the regulators and they cannot get anywhere by appealing to your sense of good citizenship and how the 911 funds are going to go bankrupt, and how police will not be able to find the pervert who raped your grandmother because the 911 PSAP database is all screwed up since some bad citizens insist on using VOIP, then they will go to Congress and the President and twist their arms for relief in the form of laws, etc. You won't get away with it for very long. But in the meantime, while they are still tolerating it, if you want to try a month of Vonage as my gift to you, just write to me not-for pub and request a Vonage e-coupon. You get a month of free service (the second month) of whatever service plan you choose with no further obligation. Just write and ask for it : ptownson@telecom-digest.org . or call my 'business office' at 620-402-0134 or 773-353-5067 whichever is closest to you. Vonage is very good about delivering your ATA box promptly and getting you in business. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Pros & Cons of Digital Epabx Compare to Hybrid Epabx Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 23:30:47 GMT In article , son_tha@yahoo.com says: > Hello, > I want to buy new Epabx system for my office. I need maximum 40 > extension & KTS. > Can any one please tell me pros & cons of Digital Epabx compare to > Hybrid Epabx. > At present I have quote for Karel 40, Panasonic 1232, Matrix Eternity > & Symense 48i. > Which is advisable? Know what I like about the better digital systems? One pair. Hybrids take at least two pairs and even some digital systems had phones that were so power hungry that one of the pairs had to be power. In the case of my dealings with the G3i the 8410's were one pair, while the 7406D's were two pair. As for reliability -- the 7406D's had it hands down. ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: Home Intercom Phone System With Cordless Phone? Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:31:40 +0000 (UTC) Organization: XOme Quoth Andrew Bell in news:telecom23.83.9@telecom- digest.org: > joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote about Home Intercom Phone > System With Cordless Phone: >> In light of the dicussion about a home phone system (2-4 lines, a >> half-dozen extensions, perhaps) that offers intercom connections >> between any two phones, I'm wondering: >> Is there such a system that will work with a cordless phone? The idea >> is that the cordless phone could be one of the stations. > Siemens makes a 2 line system (the 8825) that handles up to 8 cordless > extensions from a single base. The base is a fully functional station > as well, with a built in 4 mailbox answering machine and > auto-attendant. It has full intercom between all handsets, conference > calling, etc. Has anyone here used the three-line Circle Communications 5.8 GHz system Hello Direct is selling at ? I may need to put WiFi in an office where I now use a KX-TG4000 system, and the systems will be incompatible with each other, living in the same spectrum. It would be nice to be able to stay with cordless phones. "I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country ... corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." - Abraham Lincoln, to Col. William F. Elkins, Nov. 21, 1864 ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 21:38:38 GMT In article , epg1@comcast.net says: > McWebber (mcwebber@my-deja.com) wrote: >> Verizon recently caved and now allows DSL only subscriptions, so I'm >> sure Qworst looked at that before making the decision. > Can anyone provide details of DSL-only subscriptions through Verizon > (in Eastern Massachusetts, if it matters)? I would love to tell > Comcast where to shove their overpriced service. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, if you think the telephone > company is going to give you a better deal *and* stick to their word, > you might need to review your premises. (in other words, think again.) > PAT] Somewhat true -- I was promised 1.5MBps service and got 760KBps but know what, it's as fast or faster in many cases than Cox own 2MBps service promise. just go to http://www.verizon.net and on that page I believe there's a script that will tell you if you qualify for DSL. ** WARNING ** The folks at Verizon DSL are a little bit brain dead. I was told I was 27K feet from the CO when I know that's not the case. Turns out I'm actually 9K feet from the CO, or 1/3 the distance. Their records are notoriously bad. So don't accept a no answer without first calling repair and asking them to run a loop length test. Then call the Verizon DSL folks and explain that you called repair and they verified the distance recorded in the Verizon DSL database is wrong. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: ESPN Ends Ugly Fight With Cox Over Fees Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 21:39:59 GMT In article , monty@roscom.com says: > By GARY GENTILE AP Business Writer > LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Sports cable network ESPN has reached new > agreements with two cable television systems, ending a particularly > nasty dispute with Cox Communications that saw the launch of dueling > Web sites and ad campaigns. > The deal with Cox keeps ESPN and ESPN 2 on the extended basic tier > level of cable service _ meaning it will be available to most Cox > cable subscribers. Cox, in the face of what it said was unwarranted > price increases by ESPN, had threatened to move the cable channels to > a premium level of service. > Also Thursday, ESPN announced it had a similar long-term deal with > Charter Communications. In exchange for lower annual fee increases, > Charter agreed to add three new services to its system. > Specific terms of the new deals were not released, except that ESPN > confirmed the new annual price increases will be less than 20 percent. > On its own Web site, Cox said the new deal called for an average rate > increase of 7 percent per year. I'm so glad I kicked Cox to the curb. It's nothing but increase after increase with them. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Cable Modem Hackers Conquer the Co-ax Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 21:42:10 GMT In article , lawrence.jones@ugsplm.com says: > Tony P. wrote: >> The thing about cable vs. DSL is that the cable coming into your >> home is a shared medium. On the cable side it looks like one big >> Ethernet LAN even using CDMA/CD. > Not quite. Cable modems transmit and receive on completely different > frequency bands, so it's not possible for one cable modem to receive > another cable modem's transmissions. And it isn't CSMA/CD: The CMTS > (the head end) is the only thing that transmits on the downstream > channel, so there's no need for access control. The upstream channel > is divided into slots that are scheduled by the CMTS (the schedule is > broadcast on the downstream channel). Slots are usually assigned to > specific modems, so no other access control is needed. CSMA/CD is > only used when a slot is specifically assigned for it (mostly just for > modems to announce themselves when they first boot, although it's may > also be allowed for general transmissions when there's no pending > traffic to be scheduled). Ooops -- my bad. But there is in fact contention on the downstream side. In any case, overload a headend with nodes and watch what happens to cable modems. Performance drops like a rock. ------------------------------ 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 #85 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Feb 22 17:09:47 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1MM9l810502; Sun, 22 Feb 2004 17:09:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 17:09:47 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402222209.i1MM9l810502@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 #86 TELECOM Digest Sun, 22 Feb 2004 17:09:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 86 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Circuit Court Upholds Do Not Call List; Telemarketers Appeal (Editor) MCI Commercial Actors Having Problems Getting Paid (Ray Normandeau) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: Cable and Satellite Have Blurred Difference Between Networks (Sobol) Re: The Virus Underground (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash (email@crazyhat.net) Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash (notmyrealname@nospam.com) Home Phone System: Talkswitch, KX-TD308 Alternative? (Susan) Re: Reliable, Quality Int'l LD Calling Card? (John Levine) Re: Use a Multiline Phone in a Single-Line Jack (Gary Breuckman) Re: Home Intercom Phone System With Cordless Phone? (SELLCOM Tech) Spam Question (SELLCOM Tech Support) 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: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:11:44 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Federal Court Upholds Do Not Call List; Telemarketers Appeal Consumers won a big victory this past week when the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed claims that the list violates free speech rights and is unfair to businesses. The appeals court said the registry of more than 56 million phone numbers is a reasonable attempt by the government to protect citizens' privacy. "Just as a citizen/consumer can avoid unwanted door-to-door visits by salesmen and peddlers by placing a 'No Solicitation' sign in a cons- picuous, easy to view place in his front yard or on the door of his home and be left alone, we believe this registry, along with technical efforts by telephone companies such as denying 'blocked ID calls' from telemarketers are quite lawful and consitutional. We are convinced that the First Amendment does not prohibit the government from giving consumers this option. The government does not require it, instead it merely allows consumers to have a tool to refuse to listen." Michael Powell, Chair of the Federal Communications Commission and his counterpart at the Federal Trade Commission, Timothy Muris issued a statement expressing their pleasure that "this popular program, like America's dinner hour, will not be interuppted." The court did conclude however, that callers requesting charitable contributions were not as troublesome and would be permitted to continue their work. Likewise, said the court, "we are very reluctant to intervene in what is considered to be political speech and will not impose on political callers. In its news report last week, the *Independence Reporter* added a 'side bar' telling people who wished to register their phone numbers for the DNC list or who wished to register a complaint about a violation could do so at http://www.donotcall.gov or by telephone at 1-888-382-1222. It also warned that "now that the rush from last October is over" and the list is largely in place, each new implemen- tation or addition to the DNC should occur more promptly; but you must allow about 30 days for telemarketers to process additions, etc. It also noted that the FTC administrators of the Do Not Call list would be inclined to be lenient on 'first time' or 'rare' violations of the registry for some unspecified period of time while telemarketers 'worked the bugs out of their systems'. Telemarketers agreed, through their attornies to refrain from calling people on the list while they continued to pursue further appeals to the circuit court's ruling, and they vowed there would be further appeals, as needed to the Supreme Court. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: rayta@msn.com (Ray Normandeau) Subject: MCI Commercial Actors Having Problems Getting Paid Date: 21 Feb 2004 13:37:06 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com MSN addy is no good. It is alleged that some NYC SAG actors, recently, may have in some cases, been given bad checks for a SAG commercial done in October. Others may have gotten no check at all. SAG has been contacted. BUT I would like to know how many people have been affected. It is alleged that payroll compnay checks were sent to an office that got SAG members the jobs. It is alleged that, the office claimed to be an talent employment agency when in actuality, and under NYS law it may not be licensed as such. It is further alleged, that without authorization, said office diverted actors' pay checks to their own bank account and that said office then wrote their own checks as repayent for the diversion, and that those are the checks bouncing. If you recently got a bad check for a late 2003 SAG job or have not been paid for a late 2003 SAG job please send me details at: BadCheck@BuzzNYC.us which is a temporary disposible addy. I may be able to put you in touch with a SAG member who may also be a possible victim. UPDATE of Feb 20/2004: It is claimed that actors asking to see copies of original checks with deduction stub for MCI commercial are told that such is unavailable. Actors going to bank in person to cash check from "agency" are told there is "insufficient funds" to cash check. No one has seen copy of any checks from MCI itself. ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:56:26 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Kyler Laird wrote: > Without dialtone, you don't have a connection in the C.O., no > connection -- no ADSL -- very simple. They are not going to provide > you with a free line to carry ADSL, neither will any other operating > company in the country. > --kyler Sorry, you are the one that is confused. C.O.s have had non-dial-tone loops for years, for burglar alarms, "hot lines," etc, you name it. Dial tone is simply a switch service for dial customers to let them know the switch is ready to receive pulse or DTMF customer signalling. DSL requires nothing other than line voltage and a termination in the C.O. to the ASDL equipment. ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Cable and Satellite Have Blurred Difference Between Networks Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 10:26:37 -0600 Monty Solomon wrote: > FCC Commissioner Kevin Martin said he wants to allow subscribers to > pick and choose cable channels. > http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200402201835_APO_V1388 It would be nice, but my old cable company and my current cable company both gave me a box that allows me to password-protect channels on an individual basis, so it's not a really big deal. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Sunday Independence Reporter noted that in a survey of area cable subscribers, most were unaware of how to block channels at the local, or 'box' level. Some knew how to do it, but many subscribers did not know it could be done 'locally' and assumed it had to be done at the cable head end, and they had not bothered to call and ask for it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 15:31:25 -0500 Organization: Bell Sympatico Scott Dorsey wrote: > Microsoft has long had real problems playing with others in the same > sandbox, and they persistently, repeatedly, constantly implement > features with no thought whatsoever to security. While true, the sadder (and more frightening) truth is that Microsoft is better than most Windows software vendors. > I mean, the whole notion of automatically executing a .exe file in a > mail message being read? What EVER possessed anyone to think that was > a good idea? Ponder Nick Landsberg's point about integration: Outlook Express is integrated with Internet Explorer and uses its HTML rendering engine, which is designed to execute Javascript, Java, ActiveX, and more. Outlook is integrated with Office and uses Word's Rich Text Format engine ... which also supports autoexec macros, inherited from Word days. Each of these components has questionable security security decisions in itself, but combining them without an analysis of the security implications -- which is probably impossible, since there may be no security analysis of the components -- was asking for trouble. > Most of these problems have been patched around, but there is only so > much patching around you can do with a fundamentally flawed system. ... which implies that they would have to start from scratch, and they're not going to do that as long as we keep paying them billions for an overgrown bootloader. But, in addition to design flaws, security is compromised by bugs such as buffer overflows ... implying that they would also have to write bug-free code -- at least in certain modules -- and that, too, seems to be lost among software developers these days. I'm not even convinced that secure software could be developed and sold at a price that would appeal to the mass market. Geoffrey Welsh Always looking for a good condition original 'chicklet keyboard' Commodore PET ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 13:49:36 -0700 From: In message <> Tony P. did ramble: > The same is true of VoIP -- that call has to be routed through somewhere > -- and you can bet there's a way to monitor. Even though the main path is > over IP it eventually enters a switch somewhere that authenticates the > connection (Wouldn't do to have people who don't pay on the network!) > and then finds a path to the PSTN to route the call. No. I have a Cisco ATA-186 here, if I were to make an IP call to 10.x.x.22 it would go over a VPN to my office, and connect me to my boss. There is no point where that could be effectively monitored without physical access to one of the networks (on either side). Sure, my ISP could be convinced to monitor my packets, but that wouldn't help them break our VPN's encryption. At no time would my call touch the PSTN in any way, shape or form. Ah, the miracle mile, where value wears a neon sombrero and there's not a single church or library to offend the eye. ------------------------------ From: notmyrealname@nospam.com Subject: Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 18:07:13 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, Dave, it also occurs to me > that the present attacks on VOIP (Internet phone service) by > politicians and others also helps the FBI/Justice people who have a > king-size grudge right now about how difficult it will be to trace > or tap or bug telephone calls using this medium. Don't listen to that > balogna about how the 'poor 911 tax will suffer so badly because of > people getting into VOIP'. They've made more than enough money to > fund every 911 call center in the world many times over; that is, if > they had spent the money properly, not misappropriated it or sqaundered > it on other often times useless projects as part of the overall > goal to have 'no servants left behind'. They just cannot stand having > anything around they cannot have their hands in, can they? PAT] Pat, since you mention the FBI, have you seen this news? "The former chief internal watchdog at the FBI has pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a 6-year-old girl and has admitted he had a history of molesting other children before he joined the bureau for what became a two-decade career. " See the whole article at http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/sns-ap-fbi-child-molester,0,5538886.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-headlines ------------------------------ From: Susan Subject: Home Phone System: Talkswitch, KX-TD308 Alternative? Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 17:51:47 GMT I currently use a Talkswitch and previously had a Panasonic 308 (and still have all the handsets). My family is unhappy with the Talkswitch since you have to memorize all the codes to make it perform the most basic functions (I've tried countless ways to program the wireless phones to make it easier, but nothing beats the simplicity of a hold button that actually puts the phone on hold). Since I have a base investment in the KX-TD, I could reacquire all the KSU equipment -- but it is expensive, and I have the same problem with the wireless phones (unless I buy the very expensive Panasonic digital wireless). Key needs beyond the usual are: one at home business, simplicity for family and guests, intercom so you can tell someone to pick up the phone without yelling, flexibility to mix wired and wireless. Should I stick with the Talkswitch, reacquire the Panasonic -- or is there a better option to consider? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Feb 2004 19:17:52 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Reliable, Quality Int'l LD Calling Card? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA Try Cognidial, also sold by Cognigen at ld.net. I've had pretty good luck with them, and their international rates look lower than Accudial's. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly. ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Re: Use a Multiline Phone in a Single-Line Jack Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 15:14:31 -0600 Organization: Puma's Lair - catbox.com In article , Jameson wrote: > Hi Everyone, > I was just given three GE 2-9405C phones. After doing some online > research, I found that they must have two lines connected in one jack on > the back to operate. They will not just operate on a single line (which > is true, as I have tried it on the single-line jacks in my house). > Because we don't have two phone lines, I would like to know if anyone > has an idea on a way to make a custom cable, or buy an adaptor. > Thanks in advance! > -Jameson > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Often times telephone devices *will* work > on one line but the pin out on the modular connecting cord is wrong. One > line devices usually come only with a cord for 'one line' which is > typically the red/green wires on the first and fourth pins (if they are > present) in the modular cord. You might start by getting four wire > modular cords, such as at Radio Shack. The two inner pins, which usually > relate to the yellow/black wires make the 'second line' work. Or if you > get a six-wire cord, then the scheme is the two outermost pins (1 and 6 > are blue and white) the two middle pins (2 and five are black and > yellow) and the two innermost pins (3 and 4 are green and red). If a > cord like that fits into the base of your phone (so the pins on the cord > touch the pins of the phone when it is plugged in) then your problem is > mostly solved. > If the phone(s) still do not work, look at the box on the wall where the > wires come in and the modular cord plugs in. Assuming the wiring is sort > of standard, the cover plate will have the red/green wires working but > the yellow/black wires will either be tied on to two screws but doing > nothing, or not tied down at all (sometimes). What you will want to do > is 'trick the phone' into thinking it is being served on 'line two' > instead of 'line one'. Swap out the red/green wires in the modular cord > and attach them to the places where the black/yellow wires (that had > been or would be) used for 'line two' if you had such a thing. In other > words, take the live pair you do have coming in and make sure they are > attached to the two center pins by the time it reaches the phone, > typically yellow and black. I'm confused, because all the single-line jacks I've seen use the two center pins for line 1, which are red/green. The cords are usually black-red-green-yellow, reversed to YGRB on the opposite end. Two-wire cords, which as you said come with some devices to avoid problems, also use only the two center pins, red/green. And yes, I've made special cords for two-line phones, split at the wall end into two plugs for single jacks. You can also buy plug-in adapters that look like a modular T adapter but actually split out the two lines to separate jacks and can be used to solve some of these problems. -- Gary Breuckman [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are right; I stand corrected. When I wrote my original answer, I examined a 'specially built' modular cord that had only the first and last pins it. After reading your reply I sacrificed it and found red/green wires in the two middle places (2 and 3) and yellow/black in the first and fourth places. Someone had diddled with it -- it became obvious someone had extracted the two center pins in order to 'make it work' on some device or another which had wanted the 'second line' only. Anyway, between you and I, I hope we answered the man's inquiry; he has not written back. PAT] ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Home Intercom Phone System With Cordless Phone? Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 16:23:48 -0500 Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) posted on that vast internet thingie: > In light of the dicussion about a home phone system (2-4 lines, a > half-dozen extensions, perhaps) that offers intercom connections > between any two phones, I'm wondering: > Is there such a system that will work with a cordless phone? The idea > is that the cordless phone could be one of the stations. Have a look at the Panasonic KX-TG4000b. What range are you looking for? Another nice phone is the TMC ET-4000 for a wired installation that allows any single line cordless phone to be integrated to the system with a module. (We use the ET4000s here at SELLCOM with the Motorola 5.8 phones with the cordless module.) Tom Betz posted on that vast internet thingie: > I may need to put WiFi in an office where I now use a KX-TG4000 > system, and the systems will be incompatible with each other, living > in the same spectrum. It would be nice to be able to stay with > cordless phones. We have had people buy the KX-TG4000b because of its reputation for co-existing comfortably with wireless lans. If that doesn't work the TMC ET4000 is nice and was my pick for use here at SELLCOM (with Motorola 5.8 cordless phones) Steve at SELLCOM http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Siemens, AT&T, Panasonic, Motorola Vtech 5.8Ghz; TMC ET4000 4line Epic phone, OnHoldPlus, Talkswitch, Watchguard! Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. Minisplitter log splitter If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I saw a really neat 'home brew' but professional looking intercom built in a phone once several years ago. They used a two-line turn button phone; the telephone (or c.o. line) was on one side of the turn button with the red/green wires. The other side of the turn button was the intercom which ran to an office upstairs. Not everyone knows this, but those old turn button, two line phones had a *third* position as well; the twist button could be pressed down and released. Normally the blue/white pair of wires was attached to that set of contacts, and use that third position as a manual buzzer to notify the other station. The blue/white pair normally was used as a bypass for the call 'on hold' while the other side of the button was in a conversation. But you could just as easily use the blue/white to operate a buzzer at the opposite end. If you had two actual phone pairs instead you had to have a 'side ringer' for one of the two lines, since the same bell could not be used to ring both lines (problems with the current in the line.) But if you were cheap and did not want to buy or (rent from telco) a second, side ringer for the other line, there were also ways to wire the one existing ringer in the phone so that the bell would ring for whichever line was in the *opposite position* of the line you were using. (Harper Theatre in Hyde Park, Chicago, 773-BUTterfield 8-1717; the box office and the business office which was upstairs). PAT] ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Spam Question Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 16:33:45 -0500 Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com OK, we all see the never ending spam promoting sites that are hosted usually in China by way of cn.net or in Russia. The spammers rape ISPs all over with throw away accounts knowing that their foreign site will be up long enough to make it worthwhile. I don't believe it will ever stop until the big US enablers are held responsible for that which they are enabling. If the spam sites were in the US would the US enablers not be held responsible? Want to see spam stop? Hold the US enablers of the foreign spam websites liable and watch how quick the spam becomes unprofitable. When you report spam to the uce@ftc.gov or wherever, also report the US enabler who is providing connectivity to the USA for the spam site. Steve at SELLCOM (the opinions expressed here do not reflect the opinions of anyone else at all; but they SHOULD!) http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Siemens, AT&T, Panasonic, Motorola Vtech 5.8Ghz; TMC ET4000 4line Epic phone, OnHoldPlus, Talkswitch, Watchguard! Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. Minisplitter log splitter If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ 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 #86 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Feb 22 23:35:50 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1N4ZoE12644; Sun, 22 Feb 2004 23:35:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 23:35:50 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402230435.i1N4ZoE12644@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 #87 TELECOM Digest Sun, 22 Feb 2004 23:35:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 87 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: A Photographic History of Ameritech (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: The Virus Underground (Nick Landsberg) Re: The Virus Underground (Mark Crispin) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (Tony P.) Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash (Tony P.) Re: Question About 802.11g Wireless Router/Signal Booster (S. Peterson) 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: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:57:22 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Book Review: A Photographic History of Ameritech Did you know 'Ameritech' originally stood for '(AM)erican (I)nformation (TECH)nologies, Inc.? You will learn that and a lot more in a recent book "A Photographic History of Ameritech". Subtitled 'Snapshots in Time', this photgraphic essay of the companies which make up the present day north-central region of SBC is a brilliant presentation of how our past evolved into our present. Written and compiled by William D. Caughlin, the manager of Ameritech Corporate Archives, with co-authors Brian F. Coffey and Ilana N. Pergam, this 200-page large size paperback book uses pictures to tell the story of the history of telephone service from its beginning in 1876 through the end of 1999, when Ameritech (or Illinois Bell as most of us knew it) became part of SBC, or what we knew as Southwestern Bell. When Alex Bell invented the telephone in March, 1876, many considered it just a novelty, an electrical toy. Everyone -- at least all readers of this Digest -- are aware of how Western Union essentially thumbed its nose at the invention, a snub that about a century later would put it out of business, along with email showing up a few years later. The Chicago Telephonic Exchange was founded on June 26, 1878 to serve the needs of Chicago businessmen. When the general public also wanted phone service, the Chicago Telephonic Exchange merged with a competitor to form the Chicago Telephone Company, in business from 1881 through 1920 to provide local service around the city. About the same time, (1883-1920) Central Union Telephone Company started offering service in other parts of northern and central Illinois. Actually ahead of Chicago by about 9 months (it started in October, 1877) was the Michigan Telephone and Telegraph Construction Company, which was the nation's first Bell Operating Company. Like Chicago, their first interest was private line service for businesses, but on August 5, 1878 the Detroit Telephonic Exchange opened for business. During 1879, telephone exchanges were established in several towns throughout Michigan, and after two years, in 1881, these various Michigan exchanges were affiliated in the Michigan Bell Telephone Company, and two years following that, in 1883 (through 1904) the Michigan Telephone Company was formed. Then comes January, 1879 and the Columbus, Ohio Telephone Exchange. By the end of 1879, there were cities all over Ohio with phone service. It was about that time, that telephone switchboards were started. In the earliest days telephones were all connected directly to each other: in other words if company A had a phone and company B had a phone and Company C wanted to talk to A and B they had to have two telephones, one each to A and B. Multiply that by the number of companies in Chicago alone and you can see why the skies overhead were black with telephone wires running in all directions. Most companies had a phone to most other companies, so typically there were wires running through the air everywhere. Ditto in Detroit, Cleveland and elsewhere. In March, 1879, Ameritech's first predecessor in Indiana -- the Indiana District Telephone Company began operations in Indianapolis. It eventually became part of the Central Union Telephone Company and had phone exchanges all over the state. Milwaukee's first switchboard opened in 1879, and in July, 1882 (through 1983) the Wisconsin Telephone Company was incorporated to serve that state. These five companies -- Central Union, Chicago Telephone, Cleveland Telephone, Michigan Telephone and Wisconsin Telephone became known as Associated Companies in the Bell System, and that is what this photographic essay is all about: The 1876 through 1999 period as those five companies were born, developed, merged then merged again and (as Ameritech) had still another merger into Southwestern Bell Telephone Company which then changed its name into SBC. The rapid expansion of telephone service in those early years brought with it the need for many skilled employees, especially operators. Although the first operators were young men, it soon became apparent that the subscribers preferred women in this role. Women soon became the switchboard operators, and men handled installation and maintain- ence. But around 1972, the companies began once again employing young men as operators in Directory Assistance and elsewhere. Page 139 in this book shows a young man at work in Directory Assistance in Dayton, Ohio. Caughlin and his associates picked through nearly one hundred thousand pictures in their archives and present several hundred of them in this fascinating book along with some text to place all the pictures in context. The book is broken into several parts, covering these periods of time: 1876-1899 1900-1939 1940-1969 1970-1999 and in addition a section is devoted to Ameritech's lineage. You may wish to order one or more personal copies for your library. The SBC Archives and History Center is pleased to offer the book entitled, Snapshots in Time: A Photographic History of Ameritech. This 192-page soft-cover book chronicles the evolution of telecommunications in the SBC Midwest (former Ameritech) five-state region through select historical images. It offers more than 225 captioned photos of switchboard operators, crews with their vehicles and technicians testing central office equipment. The book begins with an 1876 portrait of Alexander Graham Bell and ends in 1999, on the eve of the SBC/Ameritech merger. The cost for each book is $25.00, plus $4.95 for shipping. To order, fill out the form below. If you have questions, please call Bill Caughlin at (210) 524-6192. Or send him an e-mail at wc2942@sbc.com --------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER FORM FOR Snapshots in Time: A Photographic History of Ameritech NAME __________________________________________________ BUSINESS UNIT ________________________________________ ADDRESS _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ CITY _________________________ STATE _____ ZIP __________ PHONE NUMBER (______)_________________________ I would like to order _______ copy(ies) each at $25.00, plus $4.95 shipping, for a total of _____________. No cash, please. Make your check or money order payable to SBC Services, Inc. and send it to: SBC Archives and History Center 7990 IH-10 West Floor 1 San Antonio, Texas 78230 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This review will go in the Telecom Archives section on history for future reference. You may wish to visit the history section in the archives http://telecom-digest.org and check out several interesting files there about the history of the telephone, etc. I am in the process now of attempting to establish an online museum of telephone history with pictures, etc. I'll need readers help to do it however. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:22:49 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > Scott Dorsey wrote: >> Microsoft has long had real problems playing with others in the same >> sandbox, and they persistently, repeatedly, constantly implement >> features with no thought whatsoever to security. > While true, the sadder (and more frightening) truth is that Microsoft > is better than most Windows software vendors. >> I mean, the whole notion of automatically executing a .exe file in a >> mail message being read? What EVER possessed anyone to think that was >> a good idea? > Ponder Nick Landsberg's point about integration: Outlook Express is > integrated with Internet Explorer and uses its HTML rendering engine, > which is designed to execute Javascript, Java, ActiveX, and more. > Outlook is integrated with Office and uses Word's Rich Text Format > engine ... which also supports autoexec macros, inherited from Word > days. Each of these components has questionable security security > decisions in itself, but combining them without an analysis of the > security implications -- which is probably impossible, since there may > be no security analysis of the components -- was asking for trouble. Thank you for the attribution :) I believe it may be worse than you mention above. I had heard (but cannot attest to) that the Internet Explorer rendering engine was used by the OS to actually render the graphics for the whole display. In the programming industry, everyone is clamoring for code re-use, but what this may be spawning is "bug re-use". (Tongue only partially in cheek). No wonder it takes such a long time to get a fix out. There scores of things which may break instead of being fixed. >> Most of these problems have been patched around, but there is only so >> much patching around you can do with a fundamentally flawed system. > ... which implies that they would have to start from scratch, and > they're not going to do that as long as we keep paying them billions > for an overgrown bootloader. But, in addition to design flaws, > security is compromised by bugs such as buffer overflows ... implying > that they would also have to write bug-free code -- at least in > certain modules -- and that, too, seems to be lost among software > developers these days. I'm not even convinced that secure software > could be developed and sold at a price that would appeal to the mass > market. > Geoffrey Welsh > Always looking for a good condition original 'chicklet keyboard' > Commodore PET "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: The Virus Underground Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:06:29 -0800 Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Geoffrey Welsh wrote: >> I mean, the whole notion of automatically executing a .exe file in a >> mail message being read? What EVER possessed anyone to think that was >> a good idea? > Ponder Nick Landsberg's point about integration: More to the point: at the time that Microsoft made this unfortunate decision, they were playing catch-up with existing software from other vendors. Those of you who may not remember a time when the evil empire was not a significant Internet player may be surprised to learn that it was standard procedure in many MUAs to open an attachment by effectively double-clicking this. This was not just in Windows 3.1 MUAs; it was also in Macintosh OS 7 and even some UNIX nascent GUI MUAs. One UNIX MUA would happily untar an attached tarball in an email message, running tar as root! Those of us who argued against this practice were, at the time, lonely voices in the wilderness. Multi-media mail was the "way of the future" and those who argued security considerations were damned obstructionists who were to be ignored. We are paying the price today for bad decisions made in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The evil empire is by no means innocent; its mass distribution of vulnerable MUAs made it easier for attackers. But their bad decision didn't arise in a vacuum. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Organization: ATCC Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:10:15 GMT In article , Sammy@nospam.biz says... > Kyler Laird wrote: >> Without dialtone, you don't have a connection in the C.O., no >> connection -- no ADSL -- very simple. They are not going to provide >> you with a free line to carry ADSL, neither will any other operating >> company in the country. >> --kyler > Sorry, you are the one that is confused. C.O.s have had non-dial-tone > loops for years, for burglar alarms, "hot lines," etc, you name it. > Dial tone is simply a switch service for dial customers to let them > know the switch is ready to receive pulse or DTMF customer signalling. > DSL requires nothing other than line voltage and a termination in the > C.O. to the ASDL equipment. The provider of the line voltage can be either the DSLAM or in most cases, the CPE with regard to DSL. One of these days when I'm bored I'll hook the scope up to the line jack on the DSL modem and see what I get. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Internet Phones, 911 Systems Could Clash Organization: ATCC Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:13:18 GMT In article , email@crazyhat.net says: > In message <> Tony P. > did ramble: >> The same is true of VoIP -- that call has to be routed through >> somewhere -- and you can bet there's a way to monitor. Even though >> the main path is over IP it eventually enters a switch somewhere >> that authenticates the connection (Wouldn't do to have people who >> don't pay on the network!) and then finds a path to the PSTN to >> route the call. > No. I have a Cisco ATA-186 here, if I were to make an IP call to > 10.x.x.22 it would go over a VPN to my office, and connect me to my > boss. There is no point where that could be effectively monitored > without physical access to one of the networks (on either side). > Sure, my ISP could be convinced to monitor my packets, but that wouldn't > help them break our VPN's encryption. > At no time would my call touch the PSTN in any way, shape or form. > Ah, the miracle mile, where value wears a neon sombrero and there's not a > single church or library to offend the eye. Ok -- on a pure IP to IP call yes. But doesn't the router do any kind of authentication in order to verify you're a registered user of the service? If that's the case they know both your identity and your ISP. It's just one more layer of subpoenas that's all. The upshot is that all ISP's are going to have to open ports to law enforcement over which voice traffic travels, and there will have to be a backdoor into the encryption. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Who says ISP's are going to have to open ports to law enforcement? They would hope so! And if they *eventually* were forced in a court to do so, then what happens when law enforcement discovers at that point all the traffic is encrypted by the user's own standards for same? Is it then back to court to get another subpoena to break into my encryption? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Scott Peterson Subject: Re: Question About 802.11g Wireless Router/Signal Booster/Antenna Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 14:37:12 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: scottp4.removethistoreply@mindspring.com O K wrote: > My current setup is I have a Linksys WRT54G wireless router which > supports B and G infrastructure. I have a 802.11b Wireless PCI card > in my PC. In my condo, I can verify that the wireless portion of the > network between the wireless router and my PC are functioning. I then > take my PC to another floor in my building, and I get little to no > signal. I would like to add either a signal booster and/or an antenna > to make my network functional. The first thing I'd try is to switch to a G card in your PC. They have much better range and penetration in buildings. You should have several options for which channel to use. Try several and see if one is any better than the others. Also, when you do that, reconfigure your router to G only. Often when running mixed mode you don't get the best throughput. Scott Peterson Santa's elves are just a bunch of subordinate Clauses. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V23 #87 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 23 14:53:00 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1NJqxh18597; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:53:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:53:00 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402231953.i1NJqxh18597@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 #88 TELECOM Digest Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:53:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 88 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #421, February 23, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Home Phone System: Talkswitch, KX-TD 308 Alternative (Sellcom Tech) Re: Question About 802.11g Wireless Router/Signal Booster (Tony P.) Multiplexing And Framing? (Shantanu Gupta) Flexion X300 PABX (Bruce Phipps) Papers on Incidence of Quality on Total Traffic (Federico Perpere) Re: Book Review Corrections, Comments (Bill Caughlin) Share Day for February (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 11:36:13 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #421, February 23, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 421: February 23, 2004 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** ALLSTREAM: www.allstream.com ** BELL CANADA: www.bell.ca ** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: www.cisco.com/ca ** CYGCOM INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES: www.cygcom.com ** GROUP TELECOM: www.360.net ** JUNIPER NETWORKS: www.juniper.net ** PRIMUS CANADA: www.primustel.ca ** SPRINT CANADA: www.sprint.ca ** TELUS: www.telus.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Telus Appeals Arbitration Ruling ** Microcell Raises $450 Million ** Ciena Buys Ottawa Equipment Maker ** Cingular Wins Bidding for AT&T Wireless ** Rogers Links Wireless Messaging to Computers ** Aliant Offers Wi-Fi Hotspots ** Allstream Plans Job Cuts ** Canada Payphone Activates 350 Sites ** Craig Refiles Suit Against Look, UBS ** CRTC Grants Service Improvement Rate Increase ** CRTC Denies Telebec Centrex Changes ** Inukshuk Supports Web-Based Learning ** Telehop Expands Flat-Rate Service ** Microsoft Extends Lindows Suit to Canada ** Primus Sales Increase ** Rogers Raises US$750 Million ** Telecom Suppliers Raise New Equity CSI Wireless Cygnal Infowave SR Telecom ** Charter Offer for Telemanagement Online ============================================================ TELUS APPEALS ARBITRATION RULING: Telus has asked the Canada Industrial Relations Board to reconsider its decision directing the company to offer binding arbitration to the Telecommunications Workers Union. Telus has also appealed the CIRB ruling to the Federal Court. (See Telecom Update #418) MICROCELL RAISES $450 MILLION: Microcell Telecom has raised $450 million in bank financing. Microcell plans to use about $100 million of the funds for new capital and general corporate expenses and the rest to repay existing debts. CIENA BUYS OTTAWA EQUIPMENT MAKER: Ciena Corp, a U.S.-based supplier of carrier network equipment, has agreed to buy Catena Networks, which makes gear used by carriers to supply broadband Internet access, for US$486.7 million. Ciena says it will retain Catena's CEO and 230 Ottawa employees. CINGULAR WINS BIDDING FOR AT&T WIRELESS: AT&T Wireless has agreed to its purchase by Cingular Wireless, a joint venture of SBC and BellSouth, for US$41 billion. Cingular beat out Vodaphone, which had bid $38 billion. The merged company, which will be the largest U.S. cellco, will hold AT&T's 33% stake in Rogers Wireless. ROGERS LINKS WIRELESS MESSAGING TO COMPUTERS: Customers of Rogers AT&T Wireless can now download free software that links their cellphones to computer-based text messaging. The software is from Zim, an Ottawa company headed by Michael Cowpland. ALIANT OFFERS WI-FI HOTSPOTS: Aliant has begun a six-month trial of five Wi-Fi LAN Internet access sites, located in Halifax, St. John's, Moncton, and Charlottetown. There is no charge for access. ALLSTREAM PLANS JOB CUTS: According to published reports, Allstream says it will cut 118 of its 4,000 staff positions across Canada in the coming months. CANADA PAYPHONE ACTIVATES 350 SITES: Canada Payphone Corporation has completed purchase of the payphones, payphone sites, and supporting hardware of failed supplier Global Access Communications. CPC has reactivated 350 of these sites during the last three months. CRAIG REFILES SUIT AGAINST LOOK, UBS: Craig Wireless International has asked the Ontario Superior Court to reverse an agreement allowing Unique Broadband Systems to take majority ownership of Look Communications. The action replaces a suit filed and then withdrawn in a Manitoba court. (See Telecom Update #395) CRTC GRANTS SERVICE IMPROVEMENT RATE INCREASE: CRTC Telecom Decision 2004-9 permits Amtelecom to increase local rates in order to cover Service Improvement Plan expenses, and instructs the telco to complete these improvements by year- end 2005. The decision, which varies Decision 2001-756 and Order 2002-230, affects several other small telcos, including NorthernTel and O.N.Telcom. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/dt2004-9.htm CRTC DENIES TELEBEC CENTREX CHANGES: The CRTC has denied a Telebec application to add features to its Centrex service and increase discounts based on contract length, because Telebec's tariff notice supplied no costing data. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2004/o2004-53.htm INUKSHUK SUPPORTS WEB-BASED LEARNING: Inukshuk Internet, which holds spectrum licences for MDS-based wireless Internet service, has committed $700,000 for distance learning projects in Quebec. (See Telecom Update #204, 226) TELEHOP EXPANDS FLAT-RATE SERVICE: Customers of Telehop Communi- cations' dial-around flat-rate LD service in Ontario can now call the Montreal area for an additional $10/month. MICROSOFT EXTENDS LINDOWS SUIT TO CANADA: Microsoft has asked an Ottawa court for a trademark injunction against Lindows.com, a distributor of the Linux operating system. Microsoft, which has filed similar suits in the U.S. and elsewhere, says Lindows' name infringes on its Windows trade mark. PRIMUS SALES INCREASE: Primus Telecom Canada reports 2003 revenue of $299 million, a 16.5% increase over the previous year. ROGERS RAISES US$750 MILLION: Rogers Wireless has raised US$750 million in debt, most of which will be used to retire previous debt contracted at higher interest rates. TELECOM SUPPLIERS RAISE NEW EQUITY: ** CSI Wireless, a Calgary-based supplier of phones and GPS products, has raised $16.25 million. ** Cygnal Technologies of Markham, Ontario, has raised $10 million. ** Infowave, a Vancouver-based wireless software developer, is raising $8 million. ** SR Telecom of Montreal, which supplies fixed wireless access gear, has raised $44 million. CHARTER OFFER FOR TELEMANAGEMENT ONLINE: Time is running out. Act now to take advantage of special Charter Subscriber rates for Telemanagement and Telemanagement Online. Download full details (including 107 reasons to subscribe now!) today. ** Subscribe now and start your subscription with the March issue, featuring Part 2 of our in-depth report on IP telephony systems for branch offices, plus uninhibited comments from suppliers on how to improve your RFPs. www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub-online.html ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2003 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Home Phone System: Talkswitch, KX-TD308 Alternative? Organization: www.sellcom.com Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:21:50 GMT Susan posted on that vast internet thingie: > Key needs beyond the usual are: one at home business, simplicity for > family and guests, intercom so you can tell someone to pick up the > phone without yelling, flexibility to mix wired and wireless. > Should I stick with the Talkswitch, reacquire the Panasonic -- or is > there a better option to consider? Well, the Talkswitch does have analog ports which can be "split" so you could have a cordless phone and desk phones. I believe that the Talkswitch desk phones have programmable buttons that might fit your needs. Steve at SELLCOM http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Siemens, AT&T, Panasonic, Motorola Vtech 5.8Ghz; TMC ET4000 4line Epic phone, OnHoldPlus, Talkswitch, Watchguard! Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. Minisplitter log splitter If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Question About 802.11g Wireless Router/Signal Booster/Antenna Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:12:07 GMT In article , scottp4.removethistoreply@mindspring.com says: > O K wrote: >> My current setup is I have a Linksys WRT54G wireless router which >> supports B and G infrastructure. I have a 802.11b Wireless PCI card >> in my PC. In my condo, I can verify that the wireless portion of the >> network between the wireless router and my PC are functioning. I then >> take my PC to another floor in my building, and I get little to no >> signal. I would like to add either a signal booster and/or an antenna >> to make my network functional. > The first thing I'd try is to switch to a G card in your PC. They > have much better range and penetration in buildings. You should have > several options for which channel to use. Try several and see if one > is any better than the others. Also, when you do that, reconfigure > your router to G only. Often when running mixed mode you don't get > the best throughput. Feh -- I've dealt with a, b, and g cards and they all have the same crappy propagation. It's a function of their frequency range. Frequency has an inverse relationship with distance. And at higher frequencies the tendency toward multi-path interference increases. G cards just have slightly better sensitivity, that's all. ------------------------------ From: shantanu_gupta2kplus2@yahoo.co.in (Shantanu Gupta) Subject: Multiplexing And Framing? Date: 23 Feb 2004 01:15:36 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi friends, I'm building a project in which there are 4 channel RS422 data,20 DIPS and one audio channel data coming continously.i.e. I have two separate mux/dmux unit.Audio signal is uses for telephonic conversetion. 1 unit mux unit is connected to dmux of other side and vice versa. Both unit seperated by distance sends data continuously. RS422= 1920bytes/sec/channel DIPS= 800bytes/sec Audio= 8Kbytes/sec Total frame size is 64 bits excluding HDLC frame tags.We are using HDLC protocol for framing and error detection.How i mux & dmux data at a same time so that data can not be missed(bandwidth?).I am using TDM multiplexing. Can I implement MUX by using Micro-controller, i.e by giving chip selects for the inputs on time division basis.DMUX is implemented inside the FPGA. Please give me some idea how to multiplex all these data and how can synchronize the HDLC frames.I'm using 16 MHz clock oscillator for Micro-controller and 64 MHZ for the FPGA. ------------------------------ From: bruce_phipps@my-deja.com (bruce phipps) Subject: Flexion X300 PABX Date: 23 Feb 2004 03:29:48 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Anyone encountered the Flexion X300 BusinessGuardian unified messaging voice/data PABX? The firm went bust a couple of years ago, but I think there are still units in the field in UK and USA. Anyone supplying support for these? Bruce ------------------------------ From: federico@highconnection.com.ar (Federico Perpere) Subject: Papers on Incidence of Quality on Total Traffic Date: 23 Feb 2004 08:56:01 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hola! I'm looking for papers on how voice quality incides on average/total duration of calls. I'm looking for guides on doing the tradeoff between cheapness of routes and quality, to get the better profit. Can somebody refer me to that? Thanks, Federico ------------------------------ From: William D. Caughlin Subject: Author's Feedback on Book Review Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 11:13:49 -0600 Dear Patrick: Many thanks for your splendid review. It should spur a lot of interest in the book published in September 1999. We had already received five prior orders because of your earlier mass e-mail. I have two minor quibbles, though, about your review: (1) the book's primary title is 'Snapshots in Time,' while the subtitle is 'A Photographic History of Ameritech;' and (2) the official name of Ameritech between 1983 and 1991 was American Information Technologies Corporation. There was no "Inc." in it. Ameritech Corporation (the official name beginning in 1991) merged in October 1999 with SBC Communications Inc. (the holding company formerly known until 1995 as Southwestern Bell Corporation, or simply SBC). Southwestern Bell Telephone Company was just one of the many subsidiaries of parent SBC. Today, the former is called SBC Southwest. As part of the process to create a unified national brand, in December 2002, Ameritech became known as SBC Midwest and the former Illinois Bell (a.k.a. Ameritech Illinois) was rebranded as SBC Illinois. At the same time, the holding company Pacific Telesis Group (acquired by SBC in April 1997) became SBC West. And later, Southern New England Telecommunications Corporation (acquired in October 1998), parent of SNET, was simply renamed SBC East in January 2004. In fact, the former Bell Operating Companies in the 13 SBC states are now doing business as: SBC California, SBC Connecticut, SBC Indiana, SBC Missouri, SBC Texas, and so on. Ours is a very complicated industry, and so all the mergers and name changes tend to make things unclear. Finally, I was the manager of the *former* Ameritech Corporate Archives. That entity moved in June 2002 from Chicago to San Antonio, and is but one collection (out of five) in the present SBC Archives and History Center. Thank you again for sharing my book with your readers. I hope they will like it as much as you. About your request (in private email), there is no unified source regarding the history of exchange names in Chicago. It would take hours of painstaking research to piece the whole story together. I offered you photocopies of the exchange histories for NW Indiana to answer some of your questions. We have similar histories for the Chicago exchanges -- Chicago-Edgewater, Chicago-Pullman, Chicago-Yards, etc. But these amount to hundreds of pages of information from the 19th Century to roughly 1967 or so. Do you want me to photocopy these for you, so you can do the research? Regarding our archival photos, we have digitized about 250 images (out of 200,000), which are currently mounted on the SBC Archives and History Center Intranet website, launched in December. Pending legal approval, we hope to make the site accessible to SBC retirees through the retiree portal. But reproduction of individual photos outside SBC requires license agreements approved by the Legal Dept. SBC doesn't want its copyrighted photos ending up in uncontrolled ventures without its permission. William D. Caughlin Corporate Archivist SBC Archives and History Center 7990 IH-10 West, Floor 1 San Antonio, Texas 78230 Tel: (210) 524-6192 Fax: (210) 321-5577 E-mail: wc2942@sbc.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My thanks to Bill Caughlin for his corrections as needed. And by copy of this note in his email, I am advising him that **anything** he wants to share about the history of the 'telephone company' in general, or SBC/Ameritech's role in such will be a welcome addition to our archives in the history files at http://telecom-digest.org . And Bill, it won't be just me doing research from whatever you send; it will be all the people who rely on our archives here as an FAQ on telephony or who search our archives; on average, about eight thousand viewers day read the web-based version of this Digest or explore our web site; many additional thousands read the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup on Usenet. Readers, if you missed the last edition of the Digest and the review of Caughlin's fine book and the order form which was included to get a personal copy, please see issue 87 from late Sunday night/early Monday morning. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:09:01 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Share Day for February We are at that time again -- once per month here, regardless of the amount of message traffic coming through -- where I pause to ask for your kind and generous financial assistance in the costs of producing and distributing the TELECOM Digest around the internet. The biggest part of my job each month is weeding through the spam and viruses which arrive relentlessly day after day. That part alone requires two to three hours daily, mainly I suppose since the spammers are getting wiser about the spam filters and traps we have set up all over to catch them. The virus spreaders are still clinging to the 'Microsoft Update' line; all that can be simply junked as is, but the spammers are getting trickier, for sure. Well none of what I say on that is anything you have not heard before many times, so let me say no more about it except that where Digests such as this one used to be able to be produced with a few key clicks most days, now it is very, very dangerous not to give at least a cursory glance at the items as they are being edited for publication. Entire Digests (of various genres) have been killed off for lack of interest among other things when one or two or three people took them over and began abusing them. Ditto Usenet newsgroups. Unlike public radio or public television, where the idea seems to be to take one or two 'fund raising' periods each year and then do literally nothing but sit on air and raise money for two or three weeks until they have met their budget for the year, I prefer to spread it out with a few messages each month over the same period of time. Five to six hundred -- or even a thousand -- messages of general interest over a month's time, then three or four fund raising reminders. My editing is far from perfect, and things slip in that some of you do not approve of, but I think TELECOM Digest is a little better than most of the text/email-based Digests on the net these days. If you want to do your part to help, as always it is greatly appreciated. You are the best person to decide what this Digest and newsgroup is worth financially, and how much you can afford to keep it going in its present form. Two ways to help: go to our web site http://telecom-digest.org and there on the front page, near the bottom, is a PayPal donation button. Click it and fill in the details. You can use any credit card of your choice. Or, if you prefer to send a check or money order to get a better record, that is fine also, in which case you would direct it to: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Post Office Box 50, Independence, KS 67301-0050. Thanks in advance for your usual fine, generous help. ------------------------------ 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 #88 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 25 00:46:25 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1P5kPI28738; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 00:46:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 00:46:25 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402250546.i1P5kPI28738@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 #89 TELECOM Digest Wed, 25 Feb 2004 00:45:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 89 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Vonage Troubles (John Schmerold) Ameritech Book Review (Charles G Gray) Verizon Land Line International Rates (Roman) VoIP and DTMF Decoding (John M.) Reciprocal Link Request (Mark Evans) Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law (Sammy@nospam.biz) Microsoft Goes Mobile With Openwave (Eric Friedebach) Share Day for February (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:22:03 -0600 From: John Schmerold Subject: Vonage Troubles We've been using Vonage and find that 2 - 3 times per week we pick up the phone and get dead air. When we call Vonage support during these outages, there are no available support personell. Internet connectivity is flawless during these outages (we have a lightly loaded T1.) Anyone else having this problem? Any suggestions? Has anyone figured out a way to monitor remote Vonage boxes (we were provided the Motorola VT1000 boxes) with What's Up Gold? This would be somewhat helpful if we could inform the users that there is a problem. TIA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have had the same problem in the past, (short periods of no dial tone, otherwise good connectivity, people calling in reach Voicemail (as though Vonage could not find me; the phone never even rang, etc.) Vonage tech support offered me this advice based on my Linksys router/firewall. Go to the set up screen on the Linksys router. Select 'advanced options' and then 'port forwarding'. Set up these three customized applications: TFTP from/to port 69 only, SIP from 5060 to 5063, RTP from 10,000 to 20,000. Check the box for UDP protocol only, forward all three of the above applications to whichever address applies in your case (for me it was 192.168.1.100) and check the box to enable all three applications. Then of course, save your work. According to tech support, that should end the occassional 'no dial tone' problem, and the occassional 'Vonage cant find you' problem. Your mileage may vary, depending on the kind of firewall/router you have. My Linksys firmware is 1.45.7, revision of July 31, 2003. I am a little leary whenever anyone tells me to poke all those holes in my firewall, but according to tech support once again, as long as you are routing it ONLY to the Vonage phone you should have no problems. If I wake up tomorrow to discover I was summarily raped overnight and my protections all blown to pieces I will be certain to tell everyone here about it. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Ameritech Book Review From: Charles G Gray Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:34:02 -0600 Pat, I ordered my copy of the Ameritech "Snapshots in Time" book when you ran the first item on it in the Digest. I received it last Friday, and I couldn't be happier with it. As an example of its thorough coverage, and demonstration of progress in the industry, readers might want to compare the operator's "headset" from 1880 (page 14) with the "earbuds" of today. The 1880 model was so heavy that it had to be supported by a shoulder harness. Regards. Charles G. Gray Senior Lecturer, Telecommunications Oklahoma State University - Tulsa (918)594-8433 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, that was pretty wild. Then the picture of the young dude with a Plantronics 'licorice stick' tube coming down to his mouth and a rubber tip in his ear was also pretty wild. Changes made in the industry over the decades have been pretty hard to believe. I first got one of those Plantronic rubber tips which just sit in your ear (I think the way it works on talking is it just hears the bones in your head rattling as you talk) in 1972 when I was working the midnight shift in Amoco Credit Card Sales Authorization. They were pretty nifty. I wish I had another one now in place of my 'more conventional' headphones. Anyone have a spare one they will send me? PAT] ------------------------------ From: rnadgor@email.com (Roman) Subject: Verizon Land Line International Rates Date: 23 Feb 2004 13:42:04 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com To make a long story short: My girlfriend is in Spain for the semester, and I have a Verizon landline in my house. I went on their website to see how much it would cost to call, and it said $0.10 a minute and a $4 fee. Sounded very cheap to me, so I made several hours of phone calls. I got my bill yesterday: $630. Called Verizon. They told me that I needed to call them and agree to pay the $4 to activate the international calling for that price. Since I did not, I was charged $3.09 a minute. They refused to charge me the $4 and then how much I would have paid, saying it was my fault I didn't pay the $4 even though on their website there is no mention of calling them to pay it or that there is a different rate if you don't pay it etc ... Has anyone had this problem or know a way to get out of it / convince them that they should charge me the price it would have been had it been $4. I'm a poor college student who simply can't afford that type of payment. I have no idea what to do. Thanks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe an appeal to the chairman's office would work. It has for me a couple times. Or else filing a commission complaint. But really, what made you think they would automatically know of your intentions and put you on the $4 plan? For them to do that without your okay is also illegal; it is known as 'cramming'. This really isn't Verizon's fault at all; try again tomorrow with a different rep and see if she will help you before you go the appeals route. If you get out of this mess in one piece, start reading their advertising more closely, and *always* tell the business office your intentions before you make calls like this. PAT] ------------------------------ From: john@totalb.com (John M.) Subject: VoIP and DTMF Decoding Date: 23 Feb 2004 15:58:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I plan to implement an IVR solution using VoIP. A VoIP gateway/router connects my telco voice circuits to the local Ethernet LAN using G.711 and my app server is simply a Linux box on the LAN that acts as a VoIP termination device via the Ethernet. My app will answer a call, play an audio prompt, receive a touchtone DTMF reply, and then stream the selected pre-recorded audio program. I have one question: Does VoIP have DTMF decoding built-in to the protocol? Or would my app server have to decode the raw PCM digital audio in order to detect the touch tones? Any advice appreciated. THANKS! ------------------------------ From: Mark Evans Subject: Reciprocal Link Request Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 04:18:00 -0800 Hi Patrick, I enjoy using your website often for research and vendor information. I would like to see if you would entertain having a reciprocal link to my site? I would like to place your link at: http://www.bottaboom.com/phonelinks.htm I believe my visitors could benefit from the information contained at your site. My homepage is http://www.bottaboom.com Thanks for your consideration. J. Mark Evans President Bottaboom.com Ph: 520-572-1772 Fax: 520-572-6404 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, there is a mention of your web site, and I hope people use your service and enjoy it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 05:49:23 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Mike wrote: > I registered on that Do Not Call list back when it first came out. > When it went into affect we stopped receiving all those annoying > telemarketing phone calls. But ever since that new law came out that > requires telemarketers to display info on the caller id, we've been > getting about 3 "out of area" calls everyday at the same times they > used to call. What law requires telemarketers to deliver Caller ID? ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Microsoft Goes Mobile With Openwave Date: 24 Feb 2004 10:58:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Aude Lagorce, 02.24.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - Microsoft's aggressive foray into the mobile phone business gathered steam when the software giant announced an agreement with mobile software maker Openwave Systems to bring MSN Mobile services to wireless operators and handset vendors worldwide. Today's announcement, which comes just a few months after Microsoft struck a partnership with Motorola to produce a wireless phone that runs its Windows Mobile software, indicates that the world's biggest software concern is determined to pursue its push into the phone business. By embedding MSN Mobile within Openwave's Phone Suite Version 7, Microsoft wants to make it easy for operators and handset manufacturers to quickly deliver phones able to provide access to the MSN services, including Hotmail e-mail and also MSN Messenger, an instant-message service used by 110 million subscribers. The Openwave announcement is Microsoft's riposte to rival AOL, a Time Warner unit whose Instant Messenger already is available on several mass-market phones. http://www.forbes.com/personaltech/2004/02/24/cx_al_0224microsoft.html Eric Friedebach /Mortgage your Viagra!/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:09:01 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Share Day for February We are at that time again -- once per month here, regardless of the amount of message traffic coming through -- where I pause to ask for your kind and generous financial assistance in the costs of producing and distributing the TELECOM Digest around the internet. The biggest part of my job each month is weeding through the spam and viruses which arrive relentlessly day after day. That part alone requires two to three hours daily, mainly I suppose since the spammers are getting wiser about the spam filters and traps we have set up all over to catch them. The virus spreaders are still clinging to the 'Microsoft Update' line; all that can be simply junked as is, but the spammers are getting trickier, for sure. Well none of what I say on that is anything you have not heard before many times, so let me say no more about it except that where Digests such as this one used to be able to be produced with a few key clicks most days, now it is very, very dangerous not to give at least a cursory glance at the items as they are being edited for publication. Entire Digests (of various genres) have been killed off for lack of interest among other things when one or two or three people took them over and began abusing them. Ditto Usenet newsgroups. Unlike public radio or public television, where the idea seems to be to take one or two 'fund raising' periods each year and then do literally nothing but sit on air and raise money for two or three weeks until they have met their budget for the year, I prefer to spread it out with a few messages each month over the same period of time. Five to six hundred -- or even a thousand -- messages of general interest over a month's time, then three or four fund raising reminders. My editing is far from perfect, and things slip in that some of you do not approve of, but I think TELECOM Digest is a little better than most of the text/email-based Digests on the net these days. If you want to do your part to help, as always it is greatly appreciated. You are the best person to decide what this Digest and newsgroup is worth financially, and how much you can afford to keep it going in its present form. Two ways to help: go to our web site http://telecom-digest.org and there on the front page, near the bottom, is a PayPal donation button. Click it and fill in the details. You can use any credit card of your choice. Or, if you prefer to send a check or money order to get a better record, that is fine also, in which case you would direct it to: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Post Office Box 50, Independence, KS 67301-0050. Thanks in advance for your usual fine, generous help. ------------------------------ 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 #89 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 25 14:30:12 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1PJUCK05092; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:30:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:30:12 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402251930.i1PJUCK05092@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 #90 TELECOM Digest Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:30:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 90 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Memories: Old Fashioned Three Slot Payphones (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law (Joe Morris) Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law (Paul Vader) Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law (Bob Snyder) Federal Law, was Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law (Danny Burstein) Re: Vonage Troubles (William Van Hefner) Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates (Tony P.) Share Day for February (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:33:16 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Memories: Old Fashioned Three Slot Coin Phones Sixteen years ago, in January, 1988, John Levine and other participants here including myself got into a discussion of 'Enterprise' phone numbers, the pre-1970 forerunner to what are now toll-free 800 numbers. In the 1960's we never expected reverse-charge toll free to ever be automated, and we certainly had no inkling that the assigned numbering space (code 800) would ever be expanded several times over with 888,877, 866, etc. As that discussion was concluding, we got into talking about the old fashioned three slot coin phones and how guys would abuse them to re-use their money when making calls. Let's join that conversation in progress as we analyzed coin phone numbers and the methodology Bell used to process the calls, etc. PAT Date: 7 Jan 88 22:39:45 GMT From: decvax!ima!johnl@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (John R. Levine) Organization: Not enough to make any difference Subject: Re: Enterprise Numbers and other funny phone numbers In article <2257@cup.portal.com> Patrick_A_Townson@cup.portal.com writes: > OTHER MORE OR LESS STANDARDIZED PHONE NUMBERS IN THE 1930'S - 1950'S: > ... > Coin phones always began with a 9, as in 9xxx. This was universally > recognized ... Well, not quite universally. My phone number is -9650 and as far as I can tell hasn't been changed since the house got dial service, other than changing the prefix from UNIversity to the equivalent 864. (I'm not that old, but the number came with the house.) I note that -9649 is indeed a payphone in a nearby bar. -9950 used to be the local business office, causing a certain number of strange calls. My understanding is that they put special relays on pay phone lines that bounced when they connected, making a distinctive ticky-ticky sound that the operator could recognize. For that matter, when you make a toll call from a payphone, how does the long distance company know that it's a payphone? Special trunks? Special bits in ANI messages? Only AT&T does anything interesting with direct dialed calls from payphones, but the other LD companies at least know to block them. John Levine, ima!johnl John R. Levine, IECC, PO Box 349, Cambridge MA 02238-0349, +1 617 492 3869 { ihnp4 | decvax | cbosgd | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, Levine@YALE. something Gary Hart for President -- Let's win one for the zipper. Date: 8 Jan 88 05:32:22 GMT From: ptsfa!perl@ames.arpa (R. Perlman) Organization: Pacific Bell Marketing Subject: Re: Enterprise Numbers and other funny phone numbers In article <838@ima.ISC.COM> johnl@ima.UUCP (John R. Levine) writes: > In article <2257@cup.portal.com> Patrick_A_Townson@cup.portal.com writes: >> OTHER MORE OR LESS STANDARDIZED PHONE NUMBERS IN THE 1930'S - 1950'S: >> ... >> Coin phones always began with a 9, as in 9xxx. This was universally >> recognized ... > Well, not quite universally. My phone number is -9650 and as far as > I can tell hasn't been changed since the house got dial service, > other than changing the prefix from UNIversity to the equivalent > 864. Actually you are both right! In step-by-step offices the 4 and 9 levels were ofter tied together when all line thousands groups were'nt needed. A non-coin would be assigned the number -4xxx and a coin -9xxx, in fact it didn't matter whether you dialed a 4 or nine, you get the same number. BTW, Operators have listings by area code showing all the NNXs (actualy NXXs) that have coin stations. Usually only 1 code per CO has coin lines. If a number (for 3rd number or collect calling) is a -9xxx & is in a coin NNX then the Operator checks with Rate & Route for a "coin check" to see if the number is indeed a coin box. "there's no success like failure and failure's no success at all" Bob Dylan Richard Perlman 1E300 2600 Camino Ramon, San Ramon, CA 94583 (415) 823-1398 uucp {ames,pyramid,ihnp4,lll-crg,dual}!ptsfa!perl || ceo rdperlman:8 Date: 8 Jan 88 16:59:14 GMT From: codas!ablnc!maxwell@bikini.cis.ufl.edu (Robert Maxwell) Organization: AT&T, Maitland, Florida Subject: Re: Enterprise Numbers and other funny phone numbers >> Coin phones always began with a 9, as in 9xxx. This was universally >> recognized ... > Well, not quite universally. Back in the days before the TSPS operator positions, the operators had an indexed list at their positions that they used for identifying area codes that listed almost every city or exchange in the USA. One of items also listed in this index was the pay phone number series in any exchange that used a special group of numbers. It has been a few years since I last saw one, but I do remember the numbers for pay phones could be anything from an exchange + 1 digit (ie: 321-9) to a group of numbers (ie: 321-7800 to 321-8299). As I remember the instructions with the list, this was a group to be checked for possible pay phone, not necessarily an absolute list. I don't consider myself very old, but I can remember when the phones were so automatic, you didn't have to turn a dial or push buttons, you would just speak the number you wanted into the mouthpiece and the connection would be made. :-) > For that matter, when you make a toll call from a payphone, how does > the long distance company know that it's a payphone? Special trunks? > Special bits in ANI messages? Only AT&T does anything interesting > with direct dialed calls from payphones, but the other LD companies > at least know to block them. With ESS offices, the programming takes care of handling special needs for a given line. It is reasonably simple to prevent charging LD calls to a given line, no matter which company you use for LD. The same basic technique that gives you 1+ dialing to your LD company can control how the calls are accepted from a pay phone. Bob Maxwell AT&T DP&CT | All standard (and most non_standard) Maitland, FL ihnp4!ablnc!maxwell | disclaimers apply. Date: 12 Jan 88 06:43:03 GMT From: imagen!atari!portal!cup.portal.com!Patrick_A_Townson@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Organization: The Portal System (TM) Subject: Re: Enterprise Numbers and other funny phone numbers Perlman points out a method of detecting coin service which is correct. If in fact the receiving number is coin; and if the caller insists on making the call collect, and provided some fool on the receiving end agrees to accept the collect call then he has to deposit the money as if he were making the call. The only problem is, the distant operator cannot supervise the collection properly. The operator tells called party to hang up and wait a minute ... she calls inward in the city in particular, and asks for assistance from a local operator in manipulating the coin collection table; assistance in dumping the coins in the box, collecting for overtime, etc. The local operator calls the coin box, gets the money and connects the parties. Does anyone on here remember when coin phones had on the top for nickles, dimes and quarters AND had no trap door on the coin return AND had regular -- not armored -- cable to the handset? As little kids we rarely paid for calls. We either applied ground to the line through a tiny pin hole in the handset cord (which we put there, of course) or we used a coat hanger bent in a funny way which we stuck up the coin return. We would deposit the money which fell on the table inside. The process was the operator would apply the tip and ring one way to throw the table and toss the money in the box or would apply it in reverse to throw the table in the direction of the return slot, to give the money back if there was no answer, etc. To make long distance calls, we would use the same quarter(s) over and over. The operator would ask for two dollars -- in would go two or three quarters (clung clung clung) ..." just a minute operator, I am looking for more change! ..." and that coat hanger would go up the return slot and trip the table, sending our quarters down the chute and back to us ... "Ok operator, here is the rest of the money ..." and if we were fast enough, or the operator was not suspicious, the coat hanger could be used to retrieve the three quarters ... some operators immediatly collected when there was an answer, especially if they suspected hanky panky on the other end ... some would not wait for the full collection, but grab the coins as they came in, hitting that ring key over and over knowing the brat-child on the other end of the line had been thwarted in the process ... Some of the older exchanges in downtown Chicago years ago had to have the assistance of a special "trunk operator" to return the money if a call was not complete. Your operator would give up on completing the call and tell you to hold on ... after a few seconds and a click, someone would answer "Wabash trunking" ... and your operator would say something like "return on circuit 5096" ... and the phone would clatter and your coins would fall back out to you. And there was also (downtown) the Franklin Coin Central Office which handled nothing but pay phones in the downtown area. -------------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: (From 2004) Does the above all look like Egyptian hieroglyphics to some of our younger readers? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joe Morris Subject: Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:37:49 UTC Organization: The MITRE Organization Sammy@nospam.biz writes: > Mike wrote: >> I registered on that Do Not Call list back when it first came out. >> When it went into affect we stopped receiving all those annoying >> telemarketing phone calls. But ever since that new law came out that >> requires telemarketers to display info on the caller id, we've been >> getting about 3 "out of area" calls everyday at the same times they >> used to call. > What law requires telemarketers to deliver Caller ID? Try the Code of Federal Regulations: 16CFR310.4(a)(7) (FTC Telemarketer Sales Rules) and 47CFR64.1200 (FCC rules governing telemarketers). The FTC announcement of the new rules can be found at http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/01/callerid.htm Joe Morris ------------------------------ From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader) Subject: Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:42:37 -0000 Organization: Inline Software Creations Sammy@nospam.biz writes: >> requires telemarketers to display info on the caller id, we've been >> getting about 3 "out of area" calls everyday at the same times they >> used to call. > What law requires telemarketers to deliver Caller ID? The same law which established the national do not call list. The FCC added several provisions onto the law concerning things it regulates, and this was one of their rules. As of 01/29/2004, it's against the law for a telemarketer to suppress caller-id, or have it show incorrect information. * -- * PV something like badgers -- something like lizards -- and something like corkscrews. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law From: Bob Snyder Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 13:16:26 -0500 Sammy@nospam.biz writes: > Mike wrote: > What law requires telemarketers to deliver Caller ID? 47 C.F.R. Sec 64.1200 http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/01/callerid.htm is the FTC's press release about this change to the Telemarketing Sales Rule. This (as all FTC rules) only apply if there is interstate trade going on, so if it's all within one state, these rules may not apply. Note that a number of states have enacted laws/regulations where telemarkets must at least respect the FTC's Do Not Call list. Also, the FTC is proposing to reduce the time telemarketers have to check the Do Not Call list from once a quarter to every 30 days. See http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/02/040210tsrnpr.htm for details. The comment period ends Feb 26, which may be in the past by the time this gets out. Bob ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Federal Law, was Re: "Out of Area" Caller ID Law Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:48:35 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Sammy@nospam.biz writes: > Mike wrote: >> I registered on that Do Not Call list back when it first came out. >> When it went into affect we stopped receiving all those annoying >> telemarketing phone calls. But ever since that new law came out that >> requires telemarketers to display info on the caller id, we've been >> getting about 3 "out of area" calls everyday at the same times they >> used to call. > What law requires telemarketers to deliver Caller ID? Someone posted the following to TELECOM Digest a few weeks ago: Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 03:33:42 -0500 Subject: No More Blank/Fake Caller ID For (Most) Telemarketers Compliance on the Line: Telemarketers to Start Transmitting Caller ID Information Beginning January 29, 2004, telemarketers must transmit Caller ID information in order to comply with the Federal Trade Commission's Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR). This information will help consumers choose which sales calls they want to take. Telemarketers are required to transmit their telephone number, and if possible, their name, to consumers' Caller ID services. [ snip ] http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/01/callerid.htm Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: William Van Hefner Subject: Re: Vonage Troubles Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:43:37 -0800 I've had the same problem myself. I have the sneaking suspicion that Vonage only has so many ports that can operate at once, and that if too many people are using the service, others aren't going to get a dialtone. It's much like during an emergency (earthquake, tornado, etc.) when everyone tries to pick up the phone and call at once, some people won't be able to get a dialtone immediately. In Vonage's case, I think that this is due to them overselling capacity. They probably just don't have the capacity to handle the number of customers they have at the moment, since they are expanding so rapidly. Remember a few years ago when AOL customers ranted because all of their dial-up lines were constantly busy? This smells like the same type of situation. My own Vonage box (Cisco ATA) is plugged into a Linux router, which flawlessly handles countless thousands of website requests each and every day, which is plugged into an Adtran CSU/DSU and then a Cisco router, which plugs into our T-1. We are nowhere near capacity on our T-1, and have experienced maybe 10 minutes of downtime in the past year. It definitely is not our equipment, nor the excellent T-1 service we receive from Sprint. It is definitely a "Vonage problem". I will say this for Vonage. When it works, it WORKS. Call quality on our T-1 is not telco quality. It is superior to telco quality. I have also tried using Vonage on SDSL and a cable modem. I get quality roughly equivalent to a cellphone using those. Anyone looking at using SIP phone service right now might want to take a look at some of the other players, until Vonage can get its act back together. iConnectHere.com is still catching up to Vonage, when it comes to adding local phone numbers, but their rates are pretty good. They've been doing SIP for a lot longer than Vonage has, as well. If the situation with Vonage gets much worse, I may consider giving them a spin. William Van Hefner Editor - TheDigest.Com On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:22:03 -0600 John Schmerold wrote about Vonage Troubles: > We've been using Vonage and find that 2 - 3 times per week we pick up > the phone and get dead air. When we call Vonage support during these > outages, there are no available support personell. > Internet connectivity is flawless during these outages (we have a > lightly loaded T1.) > Anyone else having this problem? > Any suggestions? > Has anyone figured out a way to monitor remote Vonage boxes (we were > provided the Motorola VT1000 boxes) with What's Up Gold? This would > be somewhat helpful if we could inform the users that there is a > problem. > TIA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: After following the tech advice given to me by Vonage last night, nothing -- thus far -- has broken down or gone wrong here; the firewall is not leaking as of yet so I am going to again suggest the mods the tech told me about Vonage and Linksys firewalls to eliminate (supposedly all) of that problem of periodic no-Vonage dial tone and Vonage unable-to-locate user for incoming call: Implement the 'punctures' in your firewall as was described in issue 89 on this topic. Let Vonage and me know if it works for you as well. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:31:12 GMT In article , rnadgor@email.com says: > To make a long story short: My girlfriend is in Spain for the > semester, and I have a Verizon landline in my house. I went on their > website to see how much it would cost to call, and it said $0.10 a > minute and a $4 fee. Sounded very cheap to me, so I made several hours > of phone calls. I got my bill yesterday: $630. Called Verizon. They > told me that I needed to call them and agree to pay the $4 to activate > the international calling for that price. Since I did not, I was > charged $3.09 a minute. They refused to charge me the $4 and then how > much I would have paid, saying it was my fault I didn't pay the $4 > even though on their website there is no mention of calling them to > pay it or that there is a different rate if you don't pay it etc ... > Has anyone had this problem or know a way to get out of it / convince > them that they should charge me the price it would have been had it > been $4. I'm a poor college student who simply can't afford that type > of payment. I have no idea what to do. To hell with Verizon LD to Europe. USADataNet has connectivity to most major European nations for .08 a minute and there's no call setup fee. > Thanks. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe an appeal to the chairman's > office would work. It has for me a couple times. Or else filing a > commission complaint. But really, what made you think they would > automatically know of your intentions and put you on the $4 plan? > For them to do that without your okay is also illegal; it is known > as 'cramming'. This really isn't Verizon's fault at all; try again > tomorrow with a different rep and see if she will help you before > you go the appeals route. If you get out of this mess in one piece, > start reading their advertising more closely, and *always* tell the > business office your intentions before you make calls like this. > PAT] Policies like these are predatory on the part of AT&T. No wonder they're doing so badly. It looks like they took a few pages from the MCI playbook. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:09:01 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Share Day for February We are at that time again -- once per month here, regardless of the amount of message traffic coming through -- where I pause to ask for your kind and generous financial assistance in the costs of producing and distributing the TELECOM Digest around the internet. The biggest part of my job each month is weeding through the spam and viruses which arrive relentlessly day after day. That part alone requires two to three hours daily, mainly I suppose since the spammers are getting wiser about the spam filters and traps we have set up all over to catch them. The virus spreaders are still clinging to the 'Microsoft Update' line; all that can be simply junked as is, but the spammers are getting trickier, for sure. Well none of what I say on that is anything you have not heard before many times, so let me say no more about it except that where Digests such as this one used to be able to be produced with a few key clicks most days, now it is very, very dangerous not to give at least a cursory glance at the items as they are being edited for publication. Entire Digests (of various genres) have been killed off for lack of interest among other things when one or two or three people took them over and began abusing them. Ditto Usenet newsgroups. Unlike public radio or public television, where the idea seems to be to take one or two 'fund raising' periods each year and then do literally nothing but sit on air and raise money for two or three weeks until they have met their budget for the year, I prefer to spread it out with a few messages each month over the same period of time. Five to six hundred -- or even a thousand -- messages of general interest over a month's time, then three or four fund raising reminders. My editing is far from perfect, and things slip in that some of you do not approve of, but I think TELECOM Digest is a little better than most of the text/email-based Digests on the net these days. If you want to do your part to help, as always it is greatly appreciated. You are the best person to decide what this Digest and newsgroup is worth financially, and how much you can afford to keep it going in its present form. Two ways to help: go to our web site http://telecom-digest.org and there on the front page, near the bottom, is a PayPal donation button. Click it and fill in the details. You can use any credit card of your choice. Or, if you prefer to send a check or money order to get a better record, that is fine also, in which case you would direct it to: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Post Office Box 50, Independence, KS 67301-0050. Thanks in advance for your usual fine, generous help. ------------------------------ 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 #90 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 26 14:26:00 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1QJQ0214096; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:26:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:26:00 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402261926.i1QJQ0214096@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 #91 TELECOM Digest Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:26:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 91 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: Developing Secure Distributed Systems with CORBA (R Slade) Sony Demonstrates It's 'Like No Other' With New Products (Monty Solomon) Control Your Webcam With Your Cellphone (Eagletron Inc.) Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates (John R. Levine) Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates (Ray Normandeau) Re: Vonage Troubles (Nick Landsberg) Re: Vonage Troubles (John Schmerold) Re: Vonage Troubles (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: Memories: Old Fashioned Three Slot Coin Phones (Nick Landsberg) Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Al Gillis) Nexpath PBX BIOS Password (Brad Wooddell) Re: Spoofing a "Bounced" E-Mail Error Message? (Linc Madison) Walkie-Talkies Get A Makeover (Eric Friedebach) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 08:32:10 -0800 Subject: Book Review: Developing Secure Distributed Systems With CORBA BKDSDSCO.RVW 20031201 "Developing Secure Distributed Systems with CORBA", Ulrich Lang/Rudolf Schreiner, 2002, 1-58053-295-0, U$69.00/C$106.95 %A Ulrich Lang %A Rudolf Schreiner %C 685 Canton St., Norwood, MA 02062 %D 2002 %G 1-58053-295-0 %I Artech House/Horizon %O U$69.00/C$106.95 617-769-9750 800-225-9977 fax: +1-617-769-6334 %O http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1580532950/robsladesinterne http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1580532950/robsladesinte-21 %O http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/1580532950/robsladesin03-20 %P 308 p. %T "Developing Secure Distributed Systems with CORBA" Chapter one is an introduction, but it very quickly gets into CORBA (Common Object Request Broker Architecture) jargon, and C++ API calls. The explanations could be written with more clarity for outsiders. Security is first defined, in chapter two, in terms of restricting access, but the authors are not clear about whether they are primarily concerned with integrity or confidentiality. The material then goes on to a good overview of security management basics and a very brief outline of some security concerns in the CORBA environment. The lead- in to the CORBA security architecture, in chapter three, is a lengthy discussion of the benefits of flexibility, abstraction, and simplicity: the authors then note that the CORBA architecture is not simple. MICO, an open source CORBA compliant object request broker, has a security component (MICOsec), and chapter four is dedicated mostly to installation instructions. Chapter five looks at programming CORBA level one security, using MICOsec and C++, while chapter six takes a longer look at the more complex level two requirements. CORBA security does have support for applications that do not contain any security provisions (a rather interesting concept), and these are reviewed in chapter seven. CORBA security is not widely understood, and this work can assist both those needing a conceptual idea of the system and those needing to program with it. copyright Robert M. Slade, 2003 BKDSDSCO.RVW 20031201 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca rslade@sun.soci.niu.edu Are you sure that [nine nine nine nine nine nine is] random? That's the problem with randomness. You can never be sure. www.unitedmedia.com/comics/dilbert/archive/dilbert-20011025.html http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:44:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sony Demonstrates It's 'Like No Other' With New Products Open House Highlights Include HDTVs Designed to Comply with CableLabs(R) CableCARD(TM) Technology, Plus New Portable Audio and Digital Imaging Products PARK RIDGE, N.J., Feb. 25 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Reinforcing the depth and durability of its "Like No Other(TM)" marketing mantra, Sony Electronics today spotlighted its latest new products and technologies at a press briefing during its annual Open House event for the nation's consumer electronics retailers. Whether it's the industry's most comprehensive line of integrated HDTV televisions designed to comply with CableLabs(R) CableCARD(TM) technology; new high-definition digital cable receiver/hard disc recorders; eye-opening portable audio products in the PSYC(R), S2(R) and Street Style(R) lines; or new intelligent digital imaging products, Sony again displayed its ability to combine its signature design with innovative technologies geared toward providing both simplicity and enhanced entertainment value to consumers. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40686393 ------------------------------ From: sales@eagletron.com (Eagletron Inc.) Subject: Control Your Webcam With Your Cellphone Date: 25 Feb 2004 18:21:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com We have just released TrackerCam 5.1 which adds WML and i-mode support for viewing your webcam from Internet-enabled cell phones. This is again a free download. If your webcam is mounted on a TrackerPod, you can swivel it around with your phone. More info at http://www.trackercam.com ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates Date: 25 Feb 2004 22:01:20 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > To hell with Verizon LD to Europe. USADataNet has connectivity to most > major European nations for .08 a minute and there's no call setup fee. USA Datanet's rates aren't particularly low any more. My Cognidial dialaround service charges 6.7 cpm. If you're really cheap and have a PC with a DSL or better connection and a headset, net2phone's rate to Spain is 3.9 cpm. ------------------------------ From: rayta@msn.com (Ray Normandeau) Subject: Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates Date: 26 Feb 2004 07:40:37 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Tony P. wrote in message news:: > In article , rnadgor@email.com > says: >> To make a long story short: My girlfriend is in Spain for the >> semester, and I have a Verizon landline in my house. I went on their >> website to see how much it would cost to call, and it said $0.10 a >> minute and a $4 fee. Sounded very cheap to me, so I made several hours >> of phone calls. I got my bill yesterday: $630. Called Verizon. They >> told me that I needed to call them and agree to pay the $4 to activate >> the international calling for that price. Since I did not, I was >> charged $3.09 a minute. You musta meant 30.9 CPM! Long Distance as low as 2.0 Cents Per Minute, no other fee. Will work on cell phones! Fantastic international rates! Spain: 4.5 CPM using 800# access or $0.0250 using local dial-up access. https://www.onesuite.com/ Promotion Code 034720367 gives you 20 free minutes. ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net Subject: Re: Vonage Troubles Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:11:18 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet William Van Hefner wrote: > I've had the same problem myself. I have the sneaking suspicion that > Vonage only has so many ports that can operate at once, and that if > too many people are using the service, others aren't going to get a > dialtone. It's much like during an emergency (earthquake, tornado, > etc.) when everyone tries to pick up the phone and call at once, some > people won't be able to get a dialtone immediately. In Vonage's case, > I think that this is due to them overselling capacity. They probably > just don't have the capacity to handle the number of customers they > have at the moment, since they are expanding so rapidly. Remember a > few years ago when AOL customers ranted because all of their dial-up > lines were constantly busy? This smells like the same type of > situation. If it is a case of "once in a while" we don't get no dial tone, then it may be a case of nont doing proper traffic engineering. Traditionally, there is something called an "Erlang Blocking Factor" which is used to determine the number of resources required based on a percentage of blocked calls. This is based on the probability of call arrivals within a time period and the expected holding time of the calls. For example, if you want to handle a base 100 simultaneous calls on average and provide a level of service where 1% of the calls get no-dial-tone, you would provide maybe 100 + x ports. If you wanted only 0.1% of the calls to get NDT, you would provide 100+y (where y>x) and so forth. If the base is 200, then both x and y are a smaller percentage of the base number based on probability and statistics. Note that the erlang factor is used for "normal" call arrival distribution rates. Once a special event occurs, like an earthquake in San Francisco where everyone starts calling their relatives there, these factors go out the window. Thus, bad/no traffic engineering (or setting the factor to something like 5%, i.e. 1 out of every 20 calls gets NDT) would account for someone getting NDT 2-3 times a week. It would not account for conditions where there was NDT for prolonged periods unless you were particularly unlucky, in which case you should sue Maxwell's Demon :) (Oh, I'm sorry, Maxwell's Demon only applies to thermodynamics, but his cousins probably haunt the phone networks :) > My own Vonage box (Cisco ATA) is plugged into a Linux router, which > flawlessly handles countless thousands of website requests each and > every day, which is plugged into an Adtran CSU/DSU and then a Cisco > router, which plugs into our T-1. We are nowhere near capacity on our > T-1, and have experienced maybe 10 minutes of downtime in the past > year. It definitely is not our equipment, nor the excellent T-1 > service we receive from Sprint. It is definitely a "Vonage problem". > I will say this for Vonage. When it works, it WORKS. Call quality on > our T-1 is not telco quality. It is superior to telco quality. I have > also tried using Vonage on SDSL and a cable modem. I get quality > roughly equivalent to a cellphone using those. Anyone looking at using > SIP phone service right now might want to take a look at some of the > other players, until Vonage can get its act back together. > iConnectHere.com is still catching up to Vonage, when it comes to > adding local phone numbers, but their rates are pretty good. They've > been doing SIP for a lot longer than Vonage has, as well. If the > situation with Vonage gets much worse, I may consider giving them a > spin. > William Van Hefner > Editor - TheDigest.Com > On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:22:03 -0600 John Schmerold > wrote about Vonage Troubles: >> We've been using Vonage and find that 2 - 3 times per week we pick up >> the phone and get dead air. When we call Vonage support during these >> outages, there are no available support personell. >> Internet connectivity is flawless during these outages (we have a >> lightly loaded T1.) >> Anyone else having this problem? >> Any suggestions? >> Has anyone figured out a way to monitor remote Vonage boxes (we were >> provided the Motorola VT1000 boxes) with What's Up Gold? This would >> be somewhat helpful if we could inform the users that there is a >> problem. >> TIA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: After following the tech advice given > to me by Vonage last night, nothing -- thus far -- has broken down > or gone wrong here; the firewall is not leaking as of yet so I am > going to again suggest the mods the tech told me about Vonage and > Linksys firewalls to eliminate (supposedly all) of that problem of > periodic no-Vonage dial tone and Vonage unable-to-locate user for > incoming call: Implement the 'punctures' in your firewall as was > described in issue 89 on this topic. Let Vonage and me know if it > works for you as well. PAT] "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:31:42 -0600 From: John Schmerold Subject: Re: Vonage Troubles I really want Vonage to work, however, I suspect William's hypothesis is correct. We have the Motorola boxes outside the firewall, so there no punctures that are needed. In addition, each unit has its own IP address. It would be very helpful, if Vonage was forthcoming with utilization statistics so we could determine where the real problem lies. I have not been able to get this level of assistance from them. In addition, it would be very helpful if we knew how to monitor the boxes so we could perform some more tests & confirm that they are routing the calls to our landline phones when there are outages. I may have some time later this week to play with What's Up Gold to test the connections. > From: William Van Hefner > Subject: Re: Vonage Troubles > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:43:37 -0800 > I've had the same problem myself. I have the sneaking suspicion that > Vonage only has so many ports that can operate at once, and that if > too many people are using the service, others aren't going to get a > dialtone. It's much like during an emergency (earthquake, tornado, > etc.) when everyone tries to pick up the phone and call at once, some > people won't be able to get a dialtone immediately. In Vonage's case, > I think that this is due to them overselling capacity. They probably > just don't have the capacity to handle the number of customers they > have at the moment, since they are expanding so rapidly. Remember a > few years ago when AOL customers ranted because all of their dial-up > lines were constantly busy? This smells like the same type of > situation. > My own Vonage box (Cisco ATA) is plugged into a Linux router, which > flawlessly handles countless thousands of website requests each and > every day, which is plugged into an Adtran CSU/DSU and then a Cisco > router, which plugs into our T-1. We are nowhere near capacity on our > T-1, and have experienced maybe 10 minutes of downtime in the past > year. It definitely is not our equipment, nor the excellent T-1 > service we receive from Sprint. It is definitely a "Vonage problem". > I will say this for Vonage. When it works, it WORKS. Call quality on > our T-1 is not telco quality. It is superior to telco quality. I have > also tried using Vonage on SDSL and a cable modem. I get quality > roughly equivalent to a cellphone using those. Anyone looking at using > SIP phone service right now might want to take a look at some of the > other players, until Vonage can get its act back together. > iConnectHere.com is still catching up to Vonage, when it comes to > adding local phone numbers, but their rates are pretty good. They've > been doing SIP for a lot longer than Vonage has, as well. If the > situation with Vonage gets much worse, I may consider giving them a > spin. > William Van Hefner > Editor - TheDigest.Com > On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:22:03 -0600 John Schmerold > wrote about Vonage Troubles: >> We've been using Vonage and find that 2 - 3 times per week we pick up >> the phone and get dead air. When we call Vonage support during these >> outages, there are no available support personell. >> Internet connectivity is flawless during these outages (we have a >> lightly loaded T1.) >> Anyone else having this problem? >> Any suggestions? >> Has anyone figured out a way to monitor remote Vonage boxes (we were >> provided the Motorola VT1000 boxes) with What's Up Gold? This would >> be somewhat helpful if we could inform the users that there is a >> problem. >> TIA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: After following the tech advice given > to me by Vonage last night, nothing -- thus far -- has broken down > or gone wrong here; the firewall is not leaking as of yet so I am > going to again suggest the mods the tech told me about Vonage and > Linksys firewalls to eliminate (supposedly all) of that problem of > periodic no-Vonage dial tone and Vonage unable-to-locate user for > incoming call: Implement the 'punctures' in your firewall as was > described in issue 89 on this topic. Let Vonage and me know if it > works for you as well. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Vonage Troubles Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 08:41:48 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications I've had Vonage for 11 months now, and have used it at two different locations (Cable modem and DSL). I lose dial tone occasionally and have found, every time, that if I reboot the Cisco and perhaps the cable modem, it comes back just fine. William Van Hefner wrote: > I've had the same problem myself. I have the sneaking suspicion that > Vonage only has so many ports that can operate at once, and that if > too many people are using the service, others aren't going to get a > dialtone. It's much like during an emergency (earthquake, tornado, > etc.) when everyone tries to pick up the phone and call at once, some > people won't be able to get a dialtone immediately. In Vonage's case, > I think that this is due to them overselling capacity. They probably > just don't have the capacity to handle the number of customers they > have at the moment, since they are expanding so rapidly. Remember a > few years ago when AOL customers ranted because all of their dial-up > lines were constantly busy? This smells like the same type of > situation. > My own Vonage box (Cisco ATA) is plugged into a Linux router, which > flawlessly handles countless thousands of website requests each and > every day, which is plugged into an Adtran CSU/DSU and then a Cisco > router, which plugs into our T-1. We are nowhere near capacity on our > T-1, and have experienced maybe 10 minutes of downtime in the past > year. It definitely is not our equipment, nor the excellent T-1 > service we receive from Sprint. It is definitely a "Vonage problem". > I will say this for Vonage. When it works, it WORKS. Call quality on > our T-1 is not telco quality. It is superior to telco quality. I have > also tried using Vonage on SDSL and a cable modem. I get quality > roughly equivalent to a cellphone using those. Anyone looking at using > SIP phone service right now might want to take a look at some of the > other players, until Vonage can get its act back together. > iConnectHere.com is still catching up to Vonage, when it comes to > adding local phone numbers, but their rates are pretty good. They've > been doing SIP for a lot longer than Vonage has, as well. If the > situation with Vonage gets much worse, I may consider giving them a > spin. > William Van Hefner > Editor - TheDigest.Com ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net Subject: Re: Memories: Old Fashioned Three Slot Coin Phones Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:31:08 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > Sixteen years ago, in January, 1988, John Levine and other > participants here including myself got into a discussion of > 'Enterprise' phone numbers, the pre-1970 forerunner to what > are now toll-free 800 numbers. In the 1960's we never expected > reverse-charge toll free to ever be automated, and we certainly > had no inkling that the assigned numbering space (code 800) would > ever be expanded several times over with 888,877, 866, etc. As that > discussion was concluding, we got into talking about the old > fashioned three slot coin phones and how guys would abuse them to > re-use their money when making calls. Let's join that conversation > in progress as we analyzed coin phone numbers and the methodology > Bell used to process the calls, etc. [SNIP] Thanks for the trip down memory lane, Pat. Just to add a few things: Part of the reasoning for putting lots of 9's and 0's on coin lines was that they would not be called often. Back in the days of rotary dial, dialing a "9" would use up 9 times the time on the equipment as a "1" . Since coin lines were less likely to be dialed, they usually got the high numbers. As I remember it, businesses paid a premium for numbers such as MU(rray Hill) 5-1000 because of all those zeros. Nowadays it doesn't matter. As to the coin slots. Way back when, my frat house had a coin phone in it. We didn't do anything overtly illegal to it, but anyone who used anything OTHER THAN NICKELS was a marked man. You see, nickels use up more space per $$ than either dimes or quarters. Using only nickels insured that the coin box filled up faster. Once the coin box was full, the phone would register the nickles dropping down, but they would slide into the return chute. You got to make your calls for free as soon as the coin box filled up. "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 19:15:23 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Hi All... Thanks to Pat for bringing up an item regarding three-slot coin telephones, coin numbering assignments and other interesting stuff. His article mentioned Enterprise numbers. So now, someone, please enlighten us about the difference between Enterprise and Zenith numbers. I think they did more or less the same thing -- acting like present-day Toll-Free numbers to allow callers from one area to call without charge (usually) a business in another place that is usually toll. But why where there two "flavors"? Was one an interstate service while the other was intrastate? Or did the name of the service depend upon which Bell company was the service provider? And here's a couple of bonus questions ... Who can name all the 22 Operating Companies of the Bell System? What was the name of the metal recovery company the Bell System used to recover copper, lead and other metals resulting from their disconnects? Thanks, Pat! Al [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To answer your first question, Enterprise and Zenith were the same thing basically; Bell used Enterprise and (I think) the GTE and other 'independent' telephone companies used Zenith. In either case they each had four trailing digits. Either they could reverse-charge call other numbers on the same exchange only; or other numbers in the same state; or other numbers only in *other* states; or all numbers from anywhere, just as 800 numbers are handled today. The operator had all the details on her flip chart for the most commonly used Enterprise/Zenith numbers, other less well known Enterprise/Zenith numbers had details on file at Rate & Route which was 815+161 in Morris, Illinois most of the time, a function provided for AT&T under contract with Illinois Bell. AT&T contracted out most of its smaller 'back office' functions such as Rate & Route (to Illinois Bell), 'non-subscriber calling cards' (to Cincinnati Bell); Separations and Settlements (to New York Telephone and Pacific Telephone), etc. I hear your question: how could someone who was NOT a subscriber to a *specific* telephone company (which we know almost always meant X Bell and AT&T) have a calling card (or as they called them in those days, credit cards)? Well there were the military personnel on active duty; traveling salesman who always stayed in various hotels, etc, but had no specific home base of operations, and so forth. They all recieved 'non-sub' style credit cards from the phone company if they ask for one. And there were the 'special billing' style accounts, HUGE corporations and government agencies where the bills were all handled from one or another central location. Special billing style 'non (specific telco)-sub credit cards' were handled on contract for AT&T by Southwestern Bell I think. I think also -- just cannot remember for sure -- that any police or sheriffs who had a large enough coverage area that some of their citizens would be required to call 'long distance' to reach the police or sheriff (and for all offices of the FBI!) were given a Zenith number for their (out of toll free local calling area) citizens to use. I did see a very ancient (1950-ish) phone book for here in Independence where the FBI (located in Wichita) was listed as 'subscribers in Indpce and C'ville, ask Operator for Zenith xxxx' Please note, even though this is a Southwestern Bell (and thus, under the old system, AT&T) region those were cases where they used Zenith instead of Enterprise. I think maybe the federal government required the use of Zenith for their accounts, even though it was ultimatly via Bell/AT&T. Please recall that the independent telcos (of which GTE (an amalga- mation of other independent telcos) was the largest, originally had refused to give in or 'sell out to the Bell' right after the start of the 20th century largely because of Ted Vail's (original AT&T's Chairman) tactics. Every one of them hated Bell with a passion, but dealt with Ma Bell when they had to. They did their own thing, but copied Bell business practices by and large. Thus the Zenith versus Enterprise label. They even formed their own national association (USITA - United States Independent Telephone Association) to act as a 'watchdog' on Bell. Do times change? Well in the last USITA national convention prior to divestiture (1981) the principal speaker at USITA was none other than Charles Brown, AT&T chairman, By then they had all gotten to be bosum buddies! PAT] ------------------------------ From: brady47@bellsouth.net (Brad Wooddell) Subject: Nexpath PBX BIOS Password Date: 25 Feb 2004 10:45:18 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Does anyone here know what it might be? Thanks! ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Spoofing a "Bounced" E-Mail Error Message? Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 23:25:12 -0800 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed I can tell you from extensive personal experience that it is absolutely pointless to send a bounce message to a spam. First of all, as many people have pointed out, if you as an end-user without control of the actual SMTP server are generating a bounce message and sending it back up the pipe, there is very little chance that it will ever go to the spammer. It will probably go either to a non-working address, or, worse, to an innocent third party. I get a lot of bounce messages on spams that I had nothing to do with sending. Secondly, even if you have control of the SMTP server and can generate the bounce in real time at the appropriate stage, it's still pointless. Contrary to what some have suggested, though, spammers DO NOT ignore bounce messages. They don't take you off their list because you bounced a message; instead, they consider the bounce to be a request to re-send the same spam message. A few months ago, I moved my e-mail onto a server where I have complete control of the SMTP connection. I discovered that if I reject spam messages, the spammer simply tries again (and again and again and again) from as many as 15 or 20 of the "zombie" machines that he controls remotely, all within a matter of a minute or two. Several of the recent major "e-mail viruses" have actually been designed to create a network of compromised Microsoft Windows PCs, preferably with DSL or cable modem connections, that will do the spammers' bidding. What I do instead is to have my SMTP server *DISCARD* anything that I'm reasonably certain is a spam message. The *ONLY* things I bounce are messages that have some reasonable possibility of being honest mistakes by legitimate correspondents. I have a list of over 4100 domains whose mail I discard, and several other kinds of filters. If you connect to my server and claim that your machine is , I check to see if you really are. If you aren't, you don't get a bounce message -- in fact, you get a delivery confirmation. However, your message only gets delivered to the electronic black hole. Sending bounce messages to spammers, whether you do it at the "right" time (during the original SMTP connection) or at the "wrong" time (any time after that), is *AT* *BEST* a waste of your time. Even with the spammers who actually <*gasp*> use their own servers and tell the truth about their identities, still don't remove you from their lists just because you bounce one message. That could easily be a transient error, even if the rejection code unambiguously says "no such user." Maybe if the number of bounces from your address reaches a certain threshhold, they might throw you into a separate bin to try again in a few days/weeks/months. Spammers do not care if you don't want their messages. They also don't care how much of other people's resources they waste trying to deliver their spew. If they did care, they wouldn't be sending spam in the first place. I would, though, like to throw in a plug for an end-user spam filtering product that I use. It's called *Spamfire*. It was originally developed for Macintosh (OS 9 and OS X), but is now also available for Windows XP. It uses a list of filters with positive or negative points attached. If the accumulated score for a message exceeds the threshhold value you specify, the message is tagged as spam and dealt with accordingly. The developers, Matterform Software, update the filters frequently, typically a couple of times a week at least. In fact, one of the features of the program is a simple command to report back to the developers any spam that slipped through the filters. There is a certain amount of overhead involved, because your legit messages end up getting downloaded twice, but you should notice a dramatic decrease in the spam that actually reaches your inbox. If you go here: you can download a free trial version, and I get credit for referring you. The other thing that EVERYONE should do to cut down on the spam problem is to make sure that you have working anti-virus software with up-to-date virus definitions files (often referred to as ".DAT" files). It's tricky, because many of the viruses try to disable the most popular anti-virus programs, but connecting a PC -- especially a Microsoft Windows PC -- to the Internet without solid anti-virus protection makes you not only a danger to yourself, but also a menace to the entire worldwide Internet community. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * lincmad@suespammers.org All U.S. and California anti-spam laws apply, incl. CA BPC 17538.45(c) This text constitutes actual notice as required in BPC 17538.45(f)(3). DO NOT SEND UNSOLICITED E-MAIL TO THIS ADDRESS. You have been warned. ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Walkie-Talkies Get A Makeover Date: 26 Feb 2004 09:19:06 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Aude Lagorce, 02.25.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - Six months ago, an application that allows cell phones to morph into walkie-talkies was heralded as the next big thing in wireless telephony. Suddenly the blue-collar feature was hip and everyone had to have it--never mind that Nextel Communications phones had been equipped with the technology for more than a decade. Within three months of each other, Verizon Wireless, the mobile arm of Verizon Communications, and Sprint PCS trumpeted the launch of their own walkie-talkie features, respectively called "Push to Talk" and "Ready Link." The services were rolled out with great pomp in the fall. But since then, the two operators' chirping has gone almost completely silent. Walkie-talkies are not exactly the latest technology. But as Nextel will attest, the oldest recipes sometimes make the best cakes. The company may not have snazzy picture phones or a third-generation network, but at $69 per month, it still boasts the highest revenue per user in the industry. http://www.forbes.com/personaltech/2004/02/25/cx_al_0225nextel.html Eric Friedebach /Mortgage your Viagra!/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Am I correct (at least in the case of Nextel) as I was told this is not a true 'walkie talkie' function in terms of using radio frequencies but merely a sort of fancy one-button speed dial type thing? That is, you press the button and speak, but the delay in getting a response from the other end is because the phone is silently setting up the call, ringing and getting the other end to answer via the 'walkie talkie' function. I've never seen a small handheld radio that could get that far in its talking without a lot of static and interference (which you don't hear on a Nextel at least.) PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #91 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 26 21:07:22 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1R27Mm16193; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:07:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:07:22 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402270207.i1R27Mm16193@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 #92 TELECOM Digest Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:07:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 92 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Vonage Troubles (Rich Greenberg) Re: Vonage Troubles (Tony P.) Re: Vonage Troubles (John Schmerold) VoIP Phone (Brian E. Williams) Re: Walkie-Talkies Get A Makeover (Steven J. Sobol) Re: Walkie-Talkies Get A Makeover (Nick Landsberg) Anyone Know of a ISDN/PRI or SIP to GR-303 'Converter' ?? (Brett) Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates (Steven J Sobol) Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates (Tony P.) Re: Memories: Old Fashioned Three Slot Coin Phones (jbl) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Nick Landsberg) Coin Phones (Charles G Gray) Outsourcing From OTHER Perspective (grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk) GarrettCom, Inc. Industrial Ethernet & Carrier Ethernet (garrettcom) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Vonage Troubles Date: 26 Feb 2004 14:32:58 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , wrote: > I've had Vonage for 11 months now, and have used it at two different > locations (Cable modem and DSL). > I lose dial tone occasionally and have found, every time, that if I > reboot the Cisco and perhaps the cable modem, it comes back just fine. And if you do nothing but wait about the same length of time, does it still come back? Rich Greenberg Work: Rich.Greenberg atsign worldspan.com + 1 770 563 6656 N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign panix.com + 1 770 321 6507 Eastern time zone. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT), Red & Shasta(Husky,(RIP)) Owner:Chinook-L Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/Asst Owner:Sibernet-L ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Vonage Troubles Organization: ATCC Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:34:16 GMT In article , Sammy@nospam.biz says: > I've had Vonage for 11 months now, and have used it at two different > locations (Cable modem and DSL). > I lose dial tone occasionally and have found, every time, that if I > reboot the Cisco and perhaps the cable modem, it comes back just fine. Hmmm ... I really want to know more about how Vonage actually works. For instance, if it's just pure IP most of the time (which right now it's not because eventually the call lands on a PSTN number) it should work ALL the time. The only reason I can see that rebooting everything would bring the service back is because I note that cable providers of internet service frequently loose DNS services. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:54:03 -0600 From: John Schmerold Subject: Re: Vonage Troubles We spent the last 45 minutes off-line due to a "momentary server problem". It sure would be nice if someone would offer a monitor service kind of like DSLReports offers for ISPs, perhaps this would shame Vonage into doing something. Then again, we may need to go back to SBC ... > From: Nick Landsberg > Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net > Subject: Re: Vonage Troubles > Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:11:18 GMT > Organization: AT&T Worldnet > William Van Hefner wrote: >> I've had the same problem myself. I have the sneaking suspicion that >> Vonage only has so many ports that can operate at once, and that if >> too many people are using the service, others aren't going to get a >> dialtone. It's much like during an emergency (earthquake, tornado, >> etc.) when everyone tries to pick up the phone and call at once, some >> people won't be able to get a dialtone immediately. In Vonage's case, >> I think that this is due to them overselling capacity. They probably >> just don't have the capacity to handle the number of customers they >> have at the moment, since they are expanding so rapidly. Remember a >> few years ago when AOL customers ranted because all of their dial-up >> lines were constantly busy? This smells like the same type of >> situation. > If it is a case of "once in a while" we don't get no dial tone, then > it may be a case of nont doing proper traffic engineering. > Traditionally, there is something called an "Erlang Blocking Factor" > which is used to determine the number of resources required based on a > percentage of blocked calls. This is based on the probability of call > arrivals within a time period and the expected holding time of the > calls. > For example, if you want to handle a base 100 simultaneous calls on > average and provide a level of service where 1% of the calls get > no-dial-tone, you would provide maybe 100 + x ports. If you wanted > only 0.1% of the calls to get NDT, you would provide 100+y (where y>x) > and so forth. If the base is 200, then both x and y are a smaller > percentage of the base number based on probability and statistics. > Note that the erlang factor is used for "normal" call arrival > distribution rates. Once a special event occurs, like an earthquake > in San Francisco where everyone starts calling their relatives there, > these factors go out the window. > Thus, bad/no traffic engineering (or setting the factor to something > like 5%, i.e. 1 out of every 20 calls gets NDT) would account for > someone getting NDT 2-3 times a week. It would not account for > conditions where there was NDT for prolonged periods unless you were > particularly unlucky, in which case you should sue Maxwell's Demon :) > (Oh, I'm sorry, Maxwell's Demon only applies to thermodynamics, but > his cousins probably haunt the phone networks :) >> My own Vonage box (Cisco ATA) is plugged into a Linux router, which >> flawlessly handles countless thousands of website requests each and >> every day, which is plugged into an Adtran CSU/DSU and then a Cisco >> router, which plugs into our T-1. We are nowhere near capacity on our >> T-1, and have experienced maybe 10 minutes of downtime in the past >> year. It definitely is not our equipment, nor the excellent T-1 >> service we receive from Sprint. It is definitely a "Vonage problem". >> I will say this for Vonage. When it works, it WORKS. Call quality on >> our T-1 is not telco quality. It is superior to telco quality. I have >> also tried using Vonage on SDSL and a cable modem. I get quality >> roughly equivalent to a cellphone using those. Anyone looking at using >> SIP phone service right now might want to take a look at some of the >> other players, until Vonage can get its act back together. >> iConnectHere.com is still catching up to Vonage, when it comes to >> adding local phone numbers, but their rates are pretty good. They've >> been doing SIP for a lot longer than Vonage has, as well. If the >> situation with Vonage gets much worse, I may consider giving them a >> spin. >> William Van Hefner >> Editor - TheDigest.Com >> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:22:03 -0600 John Schmerold >> wrote about Vonage Troubles: >>> We've been using Vonage and find that 2 - 3 times per week we pick up >>> the phone and get dead air. When we call Vonage support during these >>> outages, there are no available support personell. >>> Internet connectivity is flawless during these outages (we have a >>> lightly loaded T1.) >>> Anyone else having this problem? >>> Any suggestions? >>> Has anyone figured out a way to monitor remote Vonage boxes (we were >>> provided the Motorola VT1000 boxes) with What's Up Gold? This would >>> be somewhat helpful if we could inform the users that there is a >>> problem. >>> TIA >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: After following the tech advice given >> to me by Vonage last night, nothing -- thus far -- has broken down >> or gone wrong here; the firewall is not leaking as of yet so I am >> going to again suggest the mods the tech told me about Vonage and >> Linksys firewalls to eliminate (supposedly all) of that problem of >> periodic no-Vonage dial tone and Vonage unable-to-locate user for >> incoming call: Implement the 'punctures' in your firewall as was >> described in issue 89 on this topic. Let Vonage and me know if it >> works for you as well. PAT] ------------------------------ From: sorry_no_email@yahoo.com (BrianEWilliams) Subject: VoIP Phone Date: 26 Feb 2004 13:42:24 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am looking to add a second phone line to use in my home office. Since the phone company charges a setup fee, and then every little extra is more money, I thought I might use one of the new Voice over IP phones/systems that are available. I looked at Vonage (www.vonage.com), and the features are nice at a decent price, but my home network makes it a little awkward. The cable modem is in my basement, which then feeds into a router that feeds all the rooms. Having the Vonage device in my home office means that Vonage can't ensure service quality by prioritizing phone traffic over other traffic. Having the Vonage device in the basement doesn't work at all. If you are interested, here are some schematics: http://www.vonage.com/installation_multiple.php http://www.vonage.com/installation_multiple_alternate.php Anyway, I thought there might be a phone that just plugs into my USB port, which would be pretty slick if it works, although it means leaving my computer on if I want to get calls. Any suggestions? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you want to prioritize traffic to make the phone work better, then a USB port where it will be fighting all the time with the other stuff (on that computer) is NOT the way to go. And what does your *home office* have to do with it (as opposed for example to an 'office' office? And why is the cable modem in the basement? Or conversely why can't you use a somewhat longer ethernet connection in order to put the Cisco ATA box (or whatever kind of adapter you would get with Vonage) at some place that was more conven- ient for you to use. And instead of running off that box a relatively short distance to the nearest phone connection (which if it were in the basement would be more awkward for you) use the modular connecting plug on the back of the ATA box to a spare addtional pair to your incoming phone terminal box, then tie that pair all around your house so you used it at your convenience, as a line appearance on various phones. And there is a 'bandwidth adjustment' on the Vonage website which you can reach from the Vonage dashboard. But it is confusing the way it appears on your screen: Mine defaulted exactly in the center of the gauge with 'more bandwith' being to the right and 'less bandwidth' being to the left (on this slider thing which ran from 30 Kbs on the left up to 120 Kbs on the right side.) People would complain they could not hear/understand me, so I (I thought logically) kept cranking the slider to the right: more bandwidth! More! More!! But it just kept getting worse. Then the Vonage people explained to me I had to move it to the *left*, not right. "Move it all the way to the left, at 30 Kbs, reboot the Cisco ATA and wait a few minutes (like 15-20) for everything to catch up you, then try it, and don't forget to install the TFTD and SIP things in your firewall." When I did all that, and waited a few minutes for Vonage to 'catch up with me' it all worked *much better*. Not certain it would work correctly, I put in a call to the one chronic complainer I talk to a lot who *always* knows when I am on Vonage 'because it always sounds so crappy' and even he this time said 'It sounds a lot better now, what did you do to it?' before I told him I had done anything at all. He said that before I made the adjustments Vonage gave me, whenever my weather station via the Windows 95 would let loose with an FTP transfer to my display at http://weatherforecast.us.tf or http://weatherforecast.n3.net it would always blank out my voice talking on the Vonage. Now, he says, it only ever so occassionally 'clips' a word here and there. Of course I am running not only the weather station and its camera to the net, but also a camera view of my computer room all the time for anyone who gets their kicks by spying on me http://patricktownson.us.tf so I do put a load on the cable, yet I do not have that much trouble with it since I made the recommended (by Vonage) adjustments. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Walkie-Talkies Get A Makeover Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:43:00 -0600 TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Eric Friedebach : > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Am I correct (at least in the case of > Nextel) as I was told this is not a true 'walkie talkie' function in > terms of using radio frequencies but merely a sort of fancy one-button > speed dial type thing? That is, you press the button and speak, but > the delay in getting a response from the other end is because the > phone is silently setting up the call, ringing and getting the other > end to answer via the 'walkie talkie' function. I've never seen a > small handheld radio that could get that far in its talking without > a lot of static and interference (which you don't hear on a Nextel at > least.) PAT] Nextel's isn't. iDEN, the protocol they use, is a protocol that combines SMR radio frequency usage (for the push-to-talk) and cellular usage. Verizon and Sprint's are services that ride over IP technology, if I'm remembering correctly. I don't think the call setup is the same as for a cellular call. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net Subject: Re: Walkie-Talkies Get A Makeover Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:54:13 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Eric Friedebach wrote: > Aude Lagorce, 02.25.04, Forbes.com [SNIP] > Walkie-talkies are not exactly the latest technology. But as Nextel > will attest, the oldest recipes sometimes make the best cakes. The > company may not have snazzy picture phones or a third-generation > network, but at $69 per month, it still boasts the highest revenue per > user in the industry. [SNIP] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Am I correct (at least in the case of > Nextel) as I was told this is not a true 'walkie talkie' function in > terms of using radio frequencies but merely a sort of fancy one-button > speed dial type thing? That is, you press the button and speak, but > the delay in getting a response from the other end is because the > phone is silently setting up the call, ringing and getting the other > end to answer via the 'walkie talkie' function. I've never seen a > small handheld radio that could get that far in its talking without > a lot of static and interference (which you don't hear on a Nextel at > least.) PAT] As far as I know you are correct. The same (or similar) kinds of network databases are queried as for 800 calls. Ring-tone back to the caller is suppressed. It IS just speed-dialing with a fancy name, conceptually. (The above is based on one particular implementation with which I have a passing familiarity. It may or may not be that everyone uses a similar implementation.) "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: brett@nemeroff.com (Brett) Subject: Anyone Know of a ISDN/PRI or SIP to GR-303 'Converter' ?? Date: 26 Feb 2004 11:36:13 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi there, I know this may seem silly, and I know it's much more complicated than I'm making it, but here's my situation. I have a Sonus softswitch and I want to provide GR-303 trunk groups. I'm not opposed to an external solution, however I want to be able to provide service to traditional GR-303 RDTs. Multiple groups are prefered. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Brett Please reply to list or: brett+dated+1079033735.ccdfd2@nemeroff.com ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:44:33 -0600 Roman wrote: > To make a long story short: My girlfriend is in Spain for the > semester, and I have a Verizon landline in my house. I went on their > website to see how much it would cost to call, and it said $0.10 a > minute and a $4 fee. Sounded very cheap to me, so I made several hours > of phone calls. I got my bill yesterday: $630. Called Verizon. They > told me that I needed to call them and agree to pay the $4 to activate > the international calling for that price. Since I did not, I was > charged $3.09 a minute. They refused to charge me the $4 and then how > much I would have paid, saying it was my fault I didn't pay the $4 > even though on their website there is no mention of calling them to > pay it or that there is a different rate if you don't pay it etc ... > Has anyone had this problem or know a way to get out of it / convince > them that they should charge me the price it would have been had it > been $4. I'm a poor college student who simply can't afford that type > of payment. I have no idea what to do. File complaints with your state attorney general and public service/ public utilities commission. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates Organization: ATCC Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:41:26 GMT In article , johnl@iecc.com says: >> To hell with Verizon LD to Europe. USADataNet has connectivity to most >> major European nations for .08 a minute and there's no call setup fee. > USA Datanet's rates aren't particularly low any more. > My Cognidial dialaround service charges 6.7 cpm. If you're really > cheap and have a PC with a DSL or better connection and a headset, > net2phone's rate to Spain is 3.9 cpm. In my case, my domestic calls constitute more than 98% of my calling and I like the way USADatanet caps the max on the call depending on the region, particularly considering most of my calls are on the eastern seaboard .99 max region. My rate for those calls effectively drops to .02 a minute or less. For international calls that usually last < 10 minutes the .08 a minute doesn't break the bank. ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: Memories: Old Fashioned Three Slot Coin Phones Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:38:21 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , Nick Landsberg wrote: > TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: >> Sixteen years ago, in January, 1988, John Levine and other >> participants here including myself got into a discussion of >> 'Enterprise' phone numbers, the pre-1970 forerunner to what >> are now toll-free 800 numbers. In Intermountain Bell land (a large part of the future USWest and then Qwest) we didn't have Enterprise numbers, we had Zenith numbers. > Part of the reasoning for putting lots of 9's and 0's on coin lines > was that they would not be called often. Back in the days of rotary > dial, dialing a "9" would use up 9 times the time on the equipment as > a "1" . Since coin lines were less likely to be dialed, they usually > got the high numbers. As I remember it, businesses paid a premium for > numbers such as MU(rray Hill) 5-1000 because of all those zeros. > Nowadays it doesn't matter. Here in the west the premium numbers were more likely to end in two or three "1"s, e.g. MAin 4-8411. Nobody had the patience to pull all those zeros, so the highly valued numbers ended in the shortest possible pulls. Thousand-ending numbers were not very common in the areas I lived. /JBL ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:43:12 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Al Gillis wrote: > Hi All... [SNIP] > And here's a couple of bonus questions ... Who can name all the 22 > Operating Companies of the Bell System? What was the name of the > metal recovery company the Bell System used to recover copper, lead > and other metals resulting from their disconnects? I'm guessing about the ones with ? after them. New England Telephone New York Telephone NJ Bell Bell of PA Chesapeake and Potomac of Virginia C & P of DC C & P of Maryland C & P of W. Va. (or were all of these considered one company?) Diamond State Telephone Southern Bell South Central Bell Illinois Bell Indiana Bell Michigan Bell Ohio Bell? (I think Cincinatti Bell was an independent, but I'm not sure) Wisconsin Bell? Don't know about Minnesotta? :( Southwest Bell Pacific Tel and Tel (wonder if Nevada Bell counts as a separate company?) Mountain Bell Northwest Bell. Totally lost on which company served the great plains states. And a portion of SNET (about 20%) was also owned by AT&T, I think. (Southern New England Telephone) and the answer to the bonus question is ... Nassau Smelting! > Thanks, Pat! > Al > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To answer your first question, Enterprise > and Zenith were the same thing basically; Bell used Enterprise and (I > think) the GTE and other 'independent' telephone companies used > Zenith. In either case they each had four trailing digits. Either they > could reverse-charge call other numbers on the same exchange only; or > other numbers in the same state; or other numbers only in *other* > states; or all numbers from anywhere, just as 800 numbers are handled > today. The operator had all the details on her flip chart for the > most commonly used Enterprise/Zenith numbers, other less well known > Enterprise/Zenith numbers had details on file at Rate & Route which > was 815+161 in Morris, Illinois most of the time, a function provided > for AT&T under contract with Illinois Bell. > AT&T contracted out most of its smaller 'back office' functions such > as Rate & Route (to Illinois Bell), 'non-subscriber calling cards' (to > Cincinnati Bell); Separations and Settlements (to New York Telephone > and Pacific Telephone), etc. I hear your question: how could someone > who was NOT a subscriber to a *specific* telephone company (which we > know almost always meant X Bell and AT&T) have a calling card (or as > they called them in those days, credit cards)? Well there were the > military personnel on active duty; traveling salesman who always > stayed in various hotels, etc, but had no specific home base of > operations, and so forth. They all recieved 'non-sub' style credit > cards from the phone company if they ask for one. And there were the > 'special billing' style accounts, HUGE corporations and government > agencies where the bills were all handled from one or another central > location. Special billing style 'non (specific telco)-sub credit > cards' were handled on contract for AT&T by Southwestern Bell I > think. > I think also -- just cannot remember for sure -- that any police or > sheriffs who had a large enough coverage area that some of their > citizens would be required to call 'long distance' to reach the police > or sheriff (and for all offices of the FBI!) were given a Zenith > number for their (out of toll free local calling area) citizens to > use. I did see a very ancient (1950-ish) phone book for here in > Independence where the FBI (located in Wichita) was listed as > 'subscribers in Indpce and C'ville, ask Operator for Zenith xxxx' > Please note, even though this is a Southwestern Bell (and thus, > under the old system, AT&T) region those were cases where they used > Zenith instead of Enterprise. I think maybe the federal government > required the use of Zenith for their accounts, even though it was > ultimatly via Bell/AT&T. > Please recall that the independent telcos (of which GTE (an amalga- > mation of other independent telcos) was the largest, originally > had refused to give in or 'sell out to the Bell' right after the > start of the 20th century largely because of Ted Vail's (original > AT&T's Chairman) tactics. Every one of them hated Bell with a passion, > but dealt with Ma Bell when they had to. They did their own thing, > but copied Bell business practices by and large. Thus the Zenith > versus Enterprise label. They even formed their own national > association (USITA - United States Independent Telephone Association) > to act as a 'watchdog' on Bell. Do times change? Well in the > last USITA national convention prior to divestiture (1981) the > principal speaker at USITA was none other than Charles Brown, AT&T > chairman, By then they had all gotten to be bosum buddies! PAT] "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ Subject: Coin Phones From: Charles G Gray Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 14:10:43 -0600 Further to the discussion on why so many coin phones were assigned NXX-8/9XXX. For companies/corporations that used a PBX or CCSA they invariably used 9 to access an "outside line". In many cases, an entire NXX would be assigned to the company. Some used 8 for access to their private network. Sometimes they would use 99 for outside, and 98 for private network access. In either case, since 9XXX could never be used as part of the company's internal dial plan, the telco used these number blocks for pay phones. Otherwise, they might not have been assigned at all. Regards, Charles G. Gray Senior Lecturer, Telecommunications Oklahoma State University - Tulsa (918)594-8433 ------------------------------ From: grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk Subject: Outsourcing From OTHER Perspective Reply-To: grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:32:11 +0000 Organization: Customer of PlusNet > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/26/opinion/26FRIE.html > "How can it be good for America to have all these Indians doing our > white-collar jobs?" I asked 24/7's founder, S. Nagarajan. > Well, he answered patiently, "look around this office." All the > computers are from Compaq. The basic software is from Microsoft. The > phones are from Lucent. The air-conditioning is by Carrier, and even > the bottled water is by Coke, because when it comes to drinking water > in India, people want a trusted brand. On top of all this, says Mr. > Nagarajan, 90 percent of the shares in 24/7 are owned by U.S. > investors. This explains why, although the U.S. has lost some service > jobs to India, total exports from U.S. companies to India have grown > from $2.5 billion in 1990 to $4.1 billion in 2002. What goes around > comes around, and also benefits Americans. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Benefits American shareholders. Does it benefit American workers ? Or do American workers own so many shares in outsourced companies, they don't need a job ? Best newsgroup for debates on the topic of Job Outsourcing & Job Sorcery alt.computer.consultants ------------------------------ From: mktg@garrettcom.com Subject: GarrettCom, Inc.: Industrial Ethernet and Carrier Class Ethernet Date: 26 Feb 2004 11:25:43 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com NEW COMPACT CONVERTER SWITCH PRODUCTS PROMISE CONVENIENT, COST-EFFECTIVE EDGE CONNECTIVITY IN INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET NETWORKS GarrettCom Introduces Family of Products that Combine Media Converter and Switch Functionality to Reduce Costs and Increase Reliability February 12, 2004 Fremont , Calif. GarrettCom, Inc., has made edge-of-the-network connectivity for industrial applications easier, more reliable, and less expensive. The company's Magnum CS Ethernet Converter Switch family is the only set of products on the market today that offers the convenience of a two-port edge switch plus a media converter in one compact and modular package smaller than a typical PDA. In a CS product, one 10 Mb or 100 Mb fiber port connects to the fiber backbone, while the two 10/100 copper switch ports provide convenient access to PLCs, IEDs, sensors, and other devices in the industrial plant or at remote industrial sites. By improving upon the traditional stand-alone media converter, GarrettCom offers a flexible, cost-effective connectivity solution and eliminates one point-of-failure in the system for more reliable operation. The ability to select fiber port types, various DC and AC power input options, and any of three levels of temperature ratings enables users of the Magnum CS products to get the best price-to-value ratio for each application. A companion Convenient Switch product, the Magnum S14, offers four 10/100 copper ports in the same small package as the Converter Switch products. "Space and money are always at a premium in a utility installation," said Rick Hillis, Manager Communications Engineering Electronic Systems. Salt River Project, Phoenix , Ariz. GarrettCom's Converter Switch solution allows us to connect our copper-ported equipment into our Ethernet backbone in an extremely convenient and cost-effective manner. It's good to work with a company that understands the realities and economies of the environment in which we operate." The Magnum CS products are ideal for any location where a small number of PLCs or other industrial devices need to be connected upstream over a fiber cable, or where two or three devices need to be aggregated and connected over copper cable. There are no wasted ports; when expansion is needed, it is easy to drop in an additional Converter Switch or Convenient Switch device. The Magnum CS products are designed to allow the user to select the best package for the application. Like most GarrettCom products, the Magnum CS products come in multiple levels of hardiness to cover the entire range of industrial edge-switch application requirements. GarrettCom's three-tier YOR hardiness ratings range from the "yellow" office and wiring closet model to the "orange" hardened model for factory floor and the "red" premium-rated model to withstand outdoor temperature extremes. Where the choice of power type previously has been conditioned upon the temperature rating of the application, the new Magnum CS line allows users to have any power input type in any temperature rating. "The Converter Switch product is a new type of industrial Ethernet device," said Frank Madren, GarrettCom president. "Not only does a Converter Switch device do the traditional copper-to-fiber translation, but it also offers multiple copper ports. It is economical, too, costing no more than traditional Media Converters." Product Specifications The Magnum CS14 Converter Switch products come with one 100 Mb fiber port and two RJ-45 copper ports. The Magnum CSN14 Converter Switch products come with a 10 Mb fiber port and two RJ-45 copper ports. Both Converter Switch models handle standard media distances on all connected media segments. The Magnum S14 Convenient Switch product comes with four RJ-45 copper ports. All three models are packaged in the same type of enclosure, and can be mounted and used together for application convenience. All fiber ports can be configured with any standard or Small Form Factor (SFF) multi-mode or single-mode connector. Power source choices are 110 or 220 VAC, or 12V, 24V or -48V DC. Dual source power is supported. All products can be ordered to meet office (Yellow), factory floor ( Orange), or outdoor (Red) levels of hardening, and come with panel-mount brackets; DIN-Rail is optional. For more information, go to http://www.garrettcom.com/converter_switches.htm Contact GarrettCom, Inc. Email: mktg@garrettcom.com Tel: 1-510-438-9071 Tel: 1-510-438-9072 Web Site: www.GarrettCom.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: 620-330-6774 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 #92 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Feb 28 00:30:51 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1S5UoG27538; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:30:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:30:51 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402280530.i1S5UoG27538@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 #93 TELECOM Digest Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:31:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 93 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Internet Society Launches New Workshop (Internet Society) TiVo Introduces 140-Hour TiVo Series2 Digital Video (Monty Solomon) Internet Lawsuit Could Have Global Effect (Monty Solomon) RegisterSite.com and Seven Other Registrars Sue ICANN (Monty Solomon) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Al Gillis) Re: Vonage Troubles (Sammy@nospam.biz) Vonage Question [was VoIP Phone] (Joe Wineburgh) Re: VoIP Phone (BrianEWilliams) Re: Coin Phones (Tony P.) Re: Coin Phones (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: Memories: Old Fashioned Three Slot Coin Phones (Joseph) Re: Memories: Old Fashioned Three Slot Coin Phones (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates (Scott Dorsey) Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates (John R. Covert) Re: Outsourcing From OTHER Perspective (Justin Time) Re: Anyone Know of a ISDN/PRI or SIP to GR-303 'Converter' (K Daniels) Re: Home Phone System: Talkswitch, KX-TD308 Alternative? (Carl Navarro) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Internet Society Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:25:33 +0100 Subject: Internet Society Launches New Workshop Announcement: Internet Society launches new Workshop Resource Centre Geneva, Switzerland - February 25th, 2004 - The Internet Society (ISOC) today announced the launch of the ISOC Workshop Resource Centre, a new web-based portal supporting organisers of network technology workshops worldwide. On-line now at http://ws.edu.isoc.org the ISOC Workshop Resource Centre provides a repository for sharing multi-lingual network training materials as well as a range of planning tools and information for trainers on how to set up and organise workshops. It also provides access to a directory of trainers and their competences and encourages interaction between members of the training community. "Today's announcement once again highlights ISOC's commitment to sustainable Internet technology education initiatives. ISOC has a long and successful track record in education, and our programs which began in 1993 have helped bring Internet connectivity to most of the world's developing countries. The ISOC Workshop Resource Centre not only allows us to bring the education materials used in these programs to a much wider audience than was previously possible, but it also provides a single source of valuable resources and tools for trainers and workshop organisers," said Lynn St. Amour, ISOC's President and CEO. "We believe that the ISOC Workshop Resource Centre will allow faster and more efficient deployment of network training while empowering many other training efforts locally." Development of the ISOC Workshop Resource Centre was made possible thanks to support from the Public Interest Registry ( http://www.pir.org ) and sponsorship by Qualys Inc. ( http://www.qualys.com ). "Qualys' support of ISOC and the new Workshop Resource Centre is consistent with our belief that education and training, particularly when it comes to Internet security, must be accessible on a global level," said Philippe Courtot, chairman and CEO of Qualys. "With ISOC's leadership, we have the ability to expand the knowledge of advanced Internet technologies to new areas of the world where education is critical. Qualys is pleased to work with ISOC to expand its current base of programs." Specific features of the ISOC Workshop Resource Centre allow users to: - Upload and download materials for network training workshops - Find tools and checklists to plan educational programs - Search for potential workshop instructors - Review archived presentations and teaching materials from various events around the world - Participate in on-line planning discussions for upcoming events - Obtain peer review for lab exercises and curriculum - Locate sources for lab equipment and technical books Technical development of the ISOC Workshop Resource Centre was carried out by a team from the Network Startup Resource Centre ( http://www.nsrc.org ) at the University of Oregon. Materials available now were supplied from previous courses and by instructors from across the globe. For further information about the site, or for details of how to submit educational materials to the portal, please send email to: admin@ws.edu.isoc.org. ABOUT ISOC The Internet Society ( http://www.isoc.org ) is a not-for-profit membership organization founded in 1991 to provide leadership in Internet related standards, education, and policy. With offices in Washington, DC, and Geneva, Switzerland, it is dedicated to ensuring the open development, evolution and use of the Internet for the benefit of people throughout the world. ISOC is the organizational home of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and other Internet-related bodies who together play a critical role in ensuring that the Internet develops in a stable and open manner. For over 12 years ISOC has run international network training programs for developing countries and these have played a vital role in setting up the Internet connections and networks in virtually every country connecting to the Internet during this time. ABOUT QUALYS Founded in 1999, Qualys, Inc. is a market-leading Web Service Provider offering on-demand network security audits and vulnerability management. More than 150 Fortune 1000 companies, federal and state agencies, and hundreds of small to medium businesses use Qualys services to measure and enforce network security effectiveness, reduce risk and comply with federal regulations. ABOUT PIR Public Interest Registry ( http://www.pir.org ) is a not-for-profit Corporation created by the Internet Society (ISOC) to manage the .ORG top-level domain. PIR's mission is to manage the .ORG domain in a manner that supports the continuing evolution of the Internet as a research, education and communications infrastructure, while educating and empowering the non-commercial community to most effectively utilize the Internet. PIR is based in Reston, Virginia. ABOUT NSRC The Network Startup Resource Centre (NSRC), a non-profit organisation, has worked since the late 1980s to help develop and deploy networking technology in various projects throughout Asia/Pacific, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, the Middle East, and the New Independent States. Partially supported by the US National Science Foundation, the NSRC provides technical and engineering assistance to international networking initiatives building access to the public Internet, especially to academic/research institutions and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). The NSRC is based at the University of Oregon. ________________________________________________________________________ FOR FURTHER DETAILS: Internet Society: http://www.isoc.org Peter Godwin Senior Program Manager E-mail: godwin@isoc.org Internet Society 4, rue des Falaises 1205 Geneva Switzerland Tel: +41 (22) 807 14 47 Fax: +41 (22) 807 14 45 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 09:39:07 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Introduces 140-Hour TiVo Series2 Digital Video Recorder for $349 After $50 Rebate Increased Capacity Gives Consumers Ability to Record Even More Episodes of Their Favorite Shows SAN JOSE, Calif., Feb. 27 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo Inc. (Nasdaq: TIVO), the pioneer in digital video recording (DVR) services, today introduced a 140-hour model of the popular TiVo(R) Series2(TM) DVR that will allow consumers to record even more of their favorite programs, and further enjoy the control and ease of use of the TiVo service. The 140-hour Series2 DVR is priced at a Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) of $399, but, after a $50 mail-in rebate offered by TiVo, consumers can get the 140-hour DVR for as low as $349 with the purchase of TiVo service through the end of May 2004.* The 140-hour unit can be purchased today directly from TiVo either online at www.tivo.com or by calling 1-877-BUY-TiVo. It will be coming soon to consumer electronics retailers including BestBuy.com, CircuitCity.com, Amazon.com and Good Guys. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40704019 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:34:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Internet Lawsuit Could Have Global Effect By ANICK JESDANUN AP Internet Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- On its face, the latest showdown between the company that runs much of the Internet's core and the organization that oversees key aspects of the global network is a basic contractual dispute. But whatever a federal court in Los Angeles decides could have broad implications over whether financial or public interest ultimately drives decisions on how Internet users worldwide visit Web sites and send e-mail, legal experts say. On Thursday, VeriSign Inc. sued the oversight body, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, saying ICANN's decisions have impeded efforts by VeriSign to offer new, moneymaking services. The contract between VeriSign and ICANN is indeed vague, and both sides have strong arguments, said Jonathan Weinberg, a Wayne State University law professor who follows Internet policy. A decision could set precedent over whether ICANN has legal authority to halt emerging Internet services that it considers "good for VeriSign and bad for the Internet as a whole," Weinberg said. VeriSign, based in Mountain View, Calif., sought injunction relief and unspecified damages against ICANN, which the U.S. government designated in 1998 to handle domain names and other Internet addressing policies. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40713641 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:38:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: RegisterSite.com and Seven Other Registrars Sue ICANN SEATTLE--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 27, 2004-- Internet Governing Board Set to Vote March 6 in Rome A second lawsuit has been filed in as many days against ICANN, the global governing body for the internet. This suit, filed by an ad-hoc group of eight internet domain name registrars, seeks to enjoin the governing body from artificially installing a system of reassigning expired internet domain addresses that is "anti-consumer, anti-competitive and unnecessary." - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40712749 ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 19:10:07 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Nick - That was great work! And, of course, you win the Bonus points! Use them wisely! Some comments and minor nits: ---The company that held forth in the upper middle states was Northwestern Bell, with the two Dakotas, Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska. --- In the Pacific Northwest of the US it was (what else?) Pacific Northwest Bell (Oregon, Washington and part of Idaho). In the far eastern part of Oregon and some places in Idaho there was a little operation called the Malhuer Home Telephone Company. I used to see references to it in Oregon PUC tariff filing information) --- I think the C&P companies were all separate at the end (1984) but were surely all one company in the early days. How else would they all get that exquisitely arcane name? (That sort of reminds me of the full name of the A&P supermarkets: "The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company"! That name certainly has more class than most of the names in vogue today, don't you think?) --- What state was the "Diamond State"? I'm guessing Rhode Island... (and here's another exquisitely arcane name: "Rhode Island and Providence Plantations". That was its name when King Charles II released control of the place). --- Nevada Bell was a separate entity until 1984, when the Californians got it. Do you suppose Nevada Bell was the smallest BOC in terms of number of lines? --- It's interesting to me that in some cases many states were served by one company (Mountain Bell and Northwestern Bell, for example) but in lots of cases a Bell company was confined to a single state. I suppose this was because of taxes or regulation but it might just have been some agreements made with previous owners as companies were purchased before the Kingsbury Commitment came into the fore. So thanks!! PAT! MARK! Anything to add to Nicks information? And Pat, thanks for adding your information about back office functions spread across the System. (Sorry this is getting so long!) Al Nick Landsberg wrote in message news:telecom23.92.11@telecom-digest.org: > Al Gillis wrote: >> Hi All... > [SNIP] >> And here's a couple of bonus questions ... Who can name all the 22 >> Operating Companies of the Bell System? What was the name of the >> metal recovery company the Bell System used to recover copper, lead >> and other metals resulting from their disconnects? > I'm guessing about the ones with ? after them. > New England Telephone > New York Telephone > NJ Bell > Bell of PA > Chesapeake and Potomac of Virginia > C & P of DC > C & P of Maryland > C & P of W. Va. > (or were all of these considered one company?) > Diamond State Telephone > Southern Bell > South Central Bell > Illinois Bell > Indiana Bell > Michigan Bell > Ohio Bell? > (I think Cincinatti Bell was an independent, > but I'm not sure) > Wisconsin Bell? > Don't know about Minnesotta? :( > Southwest Bell > Pacific Tel and Tel (wonder if Nevada Bell > counts as a separate company?) > Mountain Bell > Northwest Bell. > Totally lost on which company served the great plains states. > And a portion of SNET (about 20%) was also owned > by AT&T, I think. (Southern New England Telephone) > and the answer to the bonus question is ... > Nassau Smelting! >> Thanks, Pat! >> Al ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Vonage Troubles Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 06:02:27 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Rich Greenberg wrote: > In article , > wrote: >> I've had Vonage for 11 months now, and have used it at two different >> locations (Cable modem and DSL). >> I lose dial tone occasionally and have found, every time, that if I >> reboot the Cisco and perhaps the cable modem, it comes back just fine. > And if you do nothing but wait about the same length of time, does it > still come back? Don't know, because if I need to use it I don't hang around and wait. ------------------------------ From: Joe Wineburgh Subject: Vonage Question [was: VoIP Phone] Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 11:21:11 -0500 Has anyone actually set this up and used it this way? I'm ordering the service and this was exactly what I was thinking of doing per the comments on the Vonage web site suggesting it was possible and would like to get some feedback from others who are using it in this configuration. Thanks. #JOE [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am in the process of thinking it through now. When the weather gets a bit warmer and daylight lasts a little longer, I am certain I will do it. Just take care that you use a pair which is totally idle and does not have dialtone anywhere on it. If telco dialtone gets on that line, sure as the world it will fry that ATA box. I'll have to first go to the phone demarc outside my house on the wall, and *completely disconnect* the spare pair which drops in from the telephone pole, tie it up out of the way. Then I will take the phone box in my computer room (with only one pair on it) and attach the second pair to the back side of the Vonage ATA box. Those two pairs (one idle, the other in use) go through the wall to the outside where they snake up to the demarc. Then its back outside to the demark and make sure the connections are correct there. At that point one set of (four) wires runs around the house to my bedroom and the other set of (four) wires runs under the house to the other side where wires come up through the floor through the wall to the wall phone in my dining area. Now my landline phone will be on the one pair running to the bedroom and under the house to the kitchen and to my computer room (formerly a back bedroom) on the third set of wires. Ergo, Vonage on one set of wires, telco on the other set of wires. I'll need to buy, or inherit a few two-line phones with a hold button on them. I think the Vonage ATA box can handle a REM of 3 but I guess I will find out. Even though the last time I checked it, three months ago or so (when fall weather was here) that second pair which used to be my mother's phone when she lived here had no dial tone on it -- just battery -- I never know but what Southestern Bell may have since grabbed it to use elsewhere and not bothered to cut the multiples here in my demarc. Probably not, but I would hate to waste a Cisco ATA box by having it fried some day. I did a similar thing in Chicago several years ago, but with an old Melco PBX. That was technically 'wrong' I guess, even before the divestiture when landlords inherited all the house pairs in an apart- ment building; or the rule on 'conduits in common' took effect. I found some multiples up and down Greenview Street that telco had forgotten to open and still had deserted the cable in place. So my Melco served a couple buddies in the apartment building down the street from me, and when dialing zero on the phone attached to that PBX they reached Operator Pat. You know how much people squawk about telco problems. If most people had *any idea* how many multiples there are out there on their (so called) private phone which wind up getting terminated as an 'unused pair' in someone else's house, it would be a terrible scandal. My assumption was if Illinois Bell had ever had a technician ring out those lines my PBX was on, he would hear dial tone and 'just assume' plant had made an error in their records and select another pair for his job. (Not an unreasonable assumption if you know about the age-old street cables in Chicago.) In one of the old apartment buildings where I filched a pair from the inside box in the basement I found some pairs tied together with a string and a little tag by a phone man dated **1931**, long since forgotten about. PAT] ------------------------------ From: sorry_no_email@yahoo.com (BrianEWilliams) Subject: VoIP Phone Date: 26 Feb 2004 13:42:24 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Thanks for the info. My responses are inline below. sorry_no_email@yahoo.com (BrianEWilliams) wrote in message news:: > I am looking to add a second phone line to use in my home office. > Since the phone company charges a setup fee, and then every little > extra is more money, I thought I might use one of the new Voice over > IP phones/systems that are available. > I looked at Vonage (www.vonage.com), and the features are nice at a > decent price, but my home network makes it a little awkward. The > cable modem is in my basement, which then feeds into a router that > feeds all the rooms. Having the Vonage device in my home office means > that Vonage can't ensure service quality by prioritizing phone traffic > over other traffic. Having the Vonage device in the basement doesn't > work at all. If you are interested, here are some schematics: > http://www.vonage.com/installation_multiple.php > http://www.vonage.com/installation_multiple_alternate.php > Anyway, I thought there might be a phone that just plugs into my USB > port, which would be pretty slick if it works, although it means > leaving my computer on if I want to get calls. Any suggestions? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you want to prioritize traffic to > make the phone work better, then a USB port where it will be fighting > all the time with the other stuff (on that computer) is NOT the way to > go. Good point, and I think I will rule out a USB phone. > And what does your *home office* have to do with it (as opposed > for example to an 'office' office? I wasn't too clear. My home office happens to be on the second floor, and that is where I want the equipment to make installation simple. > And why is the cable modem in the basement? That is where I installed my "telecom closet" when we built the house, and I also have a secondary office down there, although it isn't very comfortable. The cable modem in the basement feeds into the Linksys router which then feeds into an ethernet patch bay which runs cable from the basement into all the rooms. > Or conversely why can't you use a somewhat longer ethernet > connection in order to put the Cisco ATA box (or whatever kind of > adapter you would get with Vonage) at some place that was more conven- > ient for you to use. If I use the preinstalled wiring, then I couldn't have internet access in all the other rooms of the house. I *could* patch the cable modem signal up to the ethernet port in my home office, but then how would I get it from there to the rest of the house? I suppose I could get a wireless network, but I have been spoiled by my wired 100 mbs ethernet. > And instead of running off that box a relatively short distance to > the nearest phone connection (which if it were in the basement would > be more awkward for you) use the modular connecting plug on the back > of the ATA box to a spare addtional pair to your incoming phone > terminal box, then tie that pair all around your house so you used > it at your convenience, as a line appearance on various phones. Not a bad idea. The phone terminal box is just outside the garage. I will look into this. > And there is a 'bandwidth adjustment' on the Vonage website which you > can reach from the Vonage dashboard. But it is confusing the way it > appears on your screen: Mine defaulted exactly in the center of the > gauge with 'more bandwith' being to the right and 'less bandwidth' > being to the left (on this slider thing which ran from 30 Kbs on the > left up to 120 Kbs on the right side.) People would complain they > could not hear/understand me, so I (I thought logically) kept cranking > the slider to the right: more bandwidth! More! More!! But it just > kept getting worse. Then the Vonage people explained to me I had to > move it to the *left*, not right. "Move it all the way to the left, > at 30 Kbs, reboot the Cisco ATA and wait a few minutes (like 15-20) > for everything to catch up you, then try it, and don't forget to > install the TFTD and SIP things in your firewall." When I did all > that, and waited a few minutes for Vonage to 'catch up with me' it > all worked *much better*. > Not certain it would work correctly, I put in a call to the one > chronic complainer I talk to a lot who *always* knows when I am on > Vonage 'because it always sounds so crappy' and even he this time > said 'It sounds a lot better now, what did you do to it?' before I > told him I had done anything at all. He said that before I made the > adjustments Vonage gave me, whenever my weather station via the > Windows 95 would let loose with an FTP transfer to my display at > http://weatherforecast.us.tf or http://weatherforecast.n3.net it > would always blank out my voice talking on the Vonage. Now, he says, > it only ever so occassionally 'clips' a word here and there. Of > course I am running not only the weather station and its camera to > the net, but also a camera view of my computer room all the time for > anyone who gets their kicks by spying on me http://patricktownson.us.tf > so I do put a load on the cable, yet I do not have that much trouble > with it since I made the recommended (by Vonage) adjustments. PAT] Sounds like Vonage is not what I want. My current land line doesn't cost much more, with unlimited local and long distance, call waiting, 3-way, and voice mail. I thought I could save a few bucks by switching, but I think I will give it some more time. Thanks for the help. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But for anyone who thinks Vonage may fit their application, they can get a month of free service from me by asking for an e-coupon. But do me a favor. Don't sign up for Vonage *then* ask me for a free month of service. You have to use *my e-coupon* to click on in order to get the free month. I'll get you the coupon right away in return email. Email to ptownson@telecom-digest.org and ask for a Vonage free trial. No obligations. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Coin Phones Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 06:37:13 GMT In article , graycg@okstate.edu says: > Further to the discussion on why so many coin phones were assigned > NXX-8/9XXX. > For companies/corporations that used a PBX or CCSA they invariably > used 9 to access an "outside line". In many cases, an entire NXX > would be assigned to the company. Some used 8 for access to their > private network. Sometimes they would use 99 for outside, and 98 for > private network access. In either case, since 9XXX could never be > used as part of the company's internal dial plan, the telco used these > number blocks for pay phones. Otherwise, they might not have been > assigned at all. Interesting. When I worked for Ernst & Young, LLP they initially used 9 for local, 8 for LD. Then when we finally linked a bunch of switches together the requirement to dial 8 went away and we had 4 digit dialing among the Providence, Boston and Manchester offices. This was in the time frame of 1995 to 1997. ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Coin Phones Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:27:27 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Charles G Gray wrote: > Further to the discussion on why so many coin phones were assigned > NXX-8/9XXX. > For companies/corporations that used a PBX or CCSA they invariably > used 9 to access an "outside line". In many cases, an entire NXX > would be assigned to the company. Some used 8 for access to their > private network. Sometimes they would use 99 for outside, and 98 for > private network access. In either case, since 9XXX could never be > used as part of the company's internal dial plan, the telco used these > number blocks for pay phones. Otherwise, they might not have been > assigned at all. Ah yes, especially 9xxx. Then, they slowly released those to residential use. I recall, perhaps in the early 1980s, making a person call from an associate's house who had XXX-9XXX. The operator balked and said I must be calling from a pay phone. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Memories: Old Fashioned Three Slot Coin Phones Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 10:18:09 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:38:21 -0700, jbl wrote: > Here in the west the premium numbers were more likely to end in two or > three "1"s, e.g. MAin 4-8411. Nobody had the patience to pull all > those zeros, so the highly valued numbers ended in the shortest > possible pulls. > Thousand-ending numbers were not very common in the areas I lived. That's not really why you had numbering that way. It's likely that the central offices in that area were step-by-step (Strowger.) In Strowger offices all lower to upper numbers were from 1 to 0 and numbers that automatically stepped would step in the direction 1>2>3> etc. So, you'd very rarely see businesses with XX00 or X000. In step offices there were dedicated number grouping for numbers that would auto step to the next in the hunting group e.g. in Portland, Maine the Maine Medical Center had SPruce 5-5454. The 54XX selectors/connectors were for numbers that hunted. You'd never see businesses with multiple lines in a step office with the initial number being X000 or XX00. OTOH in cities where they had either panel or crossbar offices you'd commonly see businesses with XX00 or X000 (e.g. PEnnsylvania 5-6000) because the switch counted from 0-9 rather than 1-0 as would be the case for step-by-step/Strowger switches. remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 20:20:11 EST Subject: Re: Memories: Old Fashioned Three Slot Coin Phones jbl writes on Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:38:21 -0700: > Here in the west the premium numbers were more likely to end in two or > three "1"s, e.g. MAin 4-8411. Nobody had the patience to pull all > those zeros, so the highly valued numbers ended in the shortest > possible pulls. > Thousand-ending numbers were not very common in the areas I lived. The reason large groups ended in "11" was that they were served by step offices. Step offices count from 1 to 10, so a hundred line group starts with 11, not 00. A dial pull of zero (0) is 10 pulses, and a number ending in 00 would be the very last number on the connector, and could only be a single line. Most of the west and southwest did indeed use step equipment originally, including southern California and the L.A. area, which is why large rotary groups in our areas ended in 11, giving a possible trunk group as large as 100 rotary lines. (Going beyond a 100-line group in a step office had numerous complications.) The difficulty of the customers' tedious dial pulls and the greater holding time did not come into it. Most customers, particular large customers, did not like to change their numbers when common control equipment came to these areas and replaced the step equipment, so many numbers ending in 11 still exist. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates Date: 27 Feb 2004 10:38:17 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Ray Normandeau wrote: > Tony P. wrote in message > news:: >> In article , rnadgor@email.com >> says: >>> To make a long story short: My girlfriend is in Spain for the >>> semester, and I have a Verizon landline in my house. I went on their >>> website to see how much it would cost to call, and it said $0.10 a >>> minute and a $4 fee. Sounded very cheap to me, so I made several hours >>> of phone calls. I got my bill yesterday: $630. Called Verizon. They >>> told me that I needed to call them and agree to pay the $4 to activate >>> the international calling for that price. Since I did not, I was >>> charged $3.09 a minute. > You musta meant 30.9 CPM! No. AT&T charged me $2/minute on a call to Canada because I did not have the international calling plan. I could see $3/minute to Spain being in the same general range. AT&T refused to reimburse me the call, and I lost in Small Claims Court since I did indeed not purchase the international calling plan and the judge agreed with the AT&T lawyer that although the charge was high it was standardized. You can believe that I will not be using AT&T long distance service again, nor will many of my friends. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 14:19:50 -0500 (EST) From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates Roman had written: > To make a long story short: My girlfriend is in Spain ... > so I made several hours of phone calls. I got my bill yesterday: > $630. Called Verizon. They told me that I needed to call them and > agree to pay the $4 to activate the international calling ... > Since I did not, I was charged $3.09 a minute. > ... on their website there is no mention of calling them ... > or that there is a different rate if you don't pay it ... > I'm a poor college student who simply can't afford that type > of payment. I have no idea what to do. and Steven J Sobol thought he would help: > File complaints with your state attorney general ... Waste of time. I'd suggest you get a part-time job. Although Pat's suggestion that an appeal to the chairman might work, I doubt it. You were charged the advertised rate. The Verizon web site is very clear: "For the occasional international caller, we offer basic international rates for no Monthly fee. If you do not choose an international plan when you sign up for a domestic long distance plan, you will be charged the following flat rates..." http://www22.verizon.com/ForYourHome/ld/plan_basicintlrates.asp You must have been looking at the "International Choice Calling Plan". http://www22.verizon.com/ForYourHome/ld/plan_ICPWEST.asp Notice the "order" button. That was your clue that you had to order the service to get something other than the basic rates. /john ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Outsourcing From OTHER Perspective Date: 27 Feb 2004 07:06:49 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk wrote in message news:: >> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/26/opinion/26FRIE.html >> "How can it be good for America to have all these Indians doing our >> white-collar jobs?" I asked 24/7's founder, S. Nagarajan. >> Well, he answered patiently, "look around this office." All the >> computers are from Compaq. The basic software is from Microsoft. The >> phones are from Lucent. The air-conditioning is by Carrier, and even >> the bottled water is by Coke, because when it comes to drinking water >> in India, people want a trusted brand. On top of all this, says Mr. >> Nagarajan, 90 percent of the shares in 24/7 are owned by U.S. >> investors. This explains why, although the U.S. has lost some service >> jobs to India, total exports from U.S. companies to India have grown >> from $2.5 billion in 1990 to $4.1 billion in 2002. What goes around >> comes around, and also benefits Americans. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Benefits American shareholders. > Does it benefit American workers ? > Or do American workers own so many shares in outsourced companies, > they don't need a job ? > Best newsgroup for debates on the topic of Job Outsourcing & Job Sorcery > alt.computer.consultants Hmmm ... My Random House Dictionary defines Sorcery as: sor•cer•y (sôr‚sƒ rŽ) n., pl. -cer•ies the practices of a person who is thought to have supernatural powers granted by evil spirits; black magic; witchery. [1250–1300; ME sorcerie < ML sorceria. See SORCERER, -Y3] Which, I guess, describes the job of a consultant? Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 10:26:25 -0800 From: Kelly Daniels Reply-To: telco44@comcast.net Organization: Kelly Daniels Subject: Re: Anyone Know of a ISDN/PRI or SIP to GR-303 'Converter' ?? Brett wrote: > Hi there, > I know this may seem silly, and I know it's much more complicated than > I'm making it, but here's my situation. I have a Sonus softswitch and > I want to provide GR-303 trunk groups. I'm not opposed to an external > solution, however I want to be able to provide service to traditional > GR-303 RDTs. Multiple groups are prefered. > Any help would be appreciated. > Thanks, > Brett > Please reply to list or: brett+dated+1079033735.ccdfd2@nemeroff.com Most GR-303 interfaces are still pretty much COT/RDT related. You will need to develop an emulation interface in the trunk group assignments of the Sonus if the RDTs are existing. Part of the GR-303 interface is the signaling interface for oss interface. While it can be ignored, the GR-303 inteface provides the main line side enhancments through these assignments. I moved from IXC to LEC switch tech and network design. I had trouble understanding the differences between TR-1 and GR-303 interfaces. I was forever trying to provide the GR-303 interfaces from either the line-side part of the switch or the TR-1 interfaces before GR303 was developed. There was always a way but often a remote mux needed ringing and some flash-hook control. What are your VoIP options? I am not that fully familiar with Sonus. Kelly ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Home Phone System: Talkswitch, KX-TD308 Alternative? Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 19:56:30 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 17:51:47 GMT, Susan wrote: > I currently use a Talkswitch and previously had a Panasonic 308 (and > still have all the handsets). My family is unhappy with the Talkswitch > since you have to memorize all the codes to make it perform the most > basic functions (I've tried countless ways to program the wireless > phones to make it easier, but nothing beats the simplicity of a hold > button that actually puts the phone on hold). Since I have a base > investment in the KX-TD, I could reacquire all the KSU equipment -- > but it is expensive, and I have the same problem with the wireless > phones (unless I buy the very expensive Panasonic digital wireless). > Key needs beyond the usual are: one at home business, simplicity for > family and guests, intercom so you can tell someone to pick up the > phone without yelling, flexibility to mix wired and wireless. > Should I stick with the Talkswitch, reacquire the Panasonic -- or is > there a better option to consider? You sort of answered your own question. You hold the telephones for a Panasonic system, yet you spent more money for a Talkswitch controller that you (or your family) hates. Are you into punishment that you want to try a THIRD alternative? I'd look for another TD. I confess, my SOHO system is a TD-308 tied to a CID cordless so I can roam throughout the house and get office calls. I have 1 or 2, depending on the season, digital phones and all the rest single line devices on the system. Carl Navarro ------------------------------ 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 #93 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Feb 28 17:00:13 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1SM0DD03626; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:00:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:00:13 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402282200.i1SM0DD03626@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 #94 TELECOM Digest Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:00:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 94 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Court: DeCSS Ban Violated Free Speech (Monty Solomon) Residents Express Annoyance Over Cable Cost Discrepancies (M. Solomon) Picture, Michael Powell in a Bra (John Bartley) 3 Slot Coin Phones (Julian Thomas) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Tony P.) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Nick Landsberg) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Linc Madison) Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: Vonage Question [was: VoIP Phone] (Pete Romfh) Re: Vonage Question [was: VoIP Phone] (Flatus Ohlfahrt) Re: Vonage Question [was: VoIP Phone] (John Levine) Re: Vonage Troubles (John Schmerold) 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: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 10:27:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Court: DeCSS Ban Violated Free Speech By Evan Hansen Staff Writer, CNET News.com A California appeals court on Friday reversed a 4-year-old order barring the publication of a DVD-cracking tool on the Internet, finding the injunction violated the defendant's free speech rights. The case was closely watched as a test of how much protection companies can expect in California for trade secrets that become widely distributed online. The plaintiff, the DVD Copy Control Association, had argued that Andrew Bunner violated its intellectual property rights by posting on the Internet code known as DeCSS that can be used to bypass Hollywood's encryption scheme for DVDs. Bunner's attorneys had countered that the code was no longer a secret by the time he posted it on his Web site. On Friday, California's Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, reversing a trial judge's order first issued in 1999. http://news.com.com/2100-1026-5166887.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 10:40:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Residents Express Annoyance Over Cable Cost Discrepancies By Connie Paige, Globe Correspondent, 2/19/2004 Boston Globe Hudson selectmen called a Comcast Corp. employee on the carpet at a meeting last month to find out why cable TV bills are higher there than in neighboring communities. Frank Foss, Comcast's manager of government and community relations, explained that it relates to the services provided to Hudson. Selectmen asked Foss to break down costs; they're still waiting. "I'm not really happy about it," said Selectman Joseph Durant. "I don't think I've ever gotten a straight answer out of them, ever." Cable TV companies serving the western suburbs charge different rates even in neighboring communities, sometimes for the same channel lineups. Customers in Hudson, for example, pay $49 monthly for standard cable service, even though they get the same programs as residents in nearby Maynard, where the rate is $47; Stow, $46; and Sudbury, $44.75, according to company rate cards. Standard service includes the networks and sports, children's, travel, and food channels, but no premium fare such as HBO. The same is true for the area around Watertown, where the standard- service Comcast bill is $41.75 per month, while in Needham, it's $43.75; Wellesley, $45.50; and Weston, $46.75, rate cards show. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/02/19/residents_express_annoyance_over_cable_cost_discrepancies/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 02:35:14 PST From: John Bartley or K7AAY@ARRL.NET Subject: Picture, Michael Powell in a Bra Yes, Michael Powell in a bra. Some telecom or computer magazine I've read within the past week had a B&W pic of the Chair of the FCC in a bra. I'd heard he wore it at some stag event, and wasn't surprised when I saw it; just trashed the magazine, and forgot about it. Now, I've read the Notice of Rulemaking for BPL (internet service over power lines), and need that picture, because there's nothing like sophomoric humor on the part of Powell to illustrate the cavalier way the FCC is approaching the issue. What issue? Go set your tune your hi-fi to AM, pick a spot between local stations, and turn up the vpolume about half way. Then, try to have a phone conversation over a bad cellular connection with your ear six inches from the speakers, and you will still have an easier time communicating than hams will when we experience the 16 db over S9 interference already demonstrated by BPL. That interference explains why Austria and Japan already tried, then abandoned, BPL. However, this is 'the best government which lobbyist money can buy', so we get the FCC telling us in the Notice they expect power companies to fix the problems, the same power companies who already take *months* to resolve RFI (radio frequency interference) problems with existing tech. The burden of proof of the problem will be on the *ham*. How easy is it to talk to your power company? Hams know it gets much harder when interference problems arise. Hams have to buy all of our own gear to equip ourselves to be able to communicate in emergencies, and we're a part of just about every emergency plan there is. How many hams will learn the special skills needed for shortwave and longwave and make the investment of $$$$ to buy the gear, if all we get is static from BPL? You have to practice just like it's for real to be competent in something so demanding as passing radio traffic, and longwave and shortwave require very different skills than the VHF and UHF short-range frequencies which are unaffected by BPL. Folks, I need this pic to help me prove my point. Anyone remember what magazine that picture was in? Thanks, 73s and best regards, John E. Bartley, III K7AAY telcom admin, PDX - Views mine. celdata cjb net - Handheld Cellular Data FAQ *This post quad-ROT13 encrypted. Reading it violates the DMCA.* ------------------------------ From: Julian Thomas Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 09:54:42 -0500 Subject: 3 Slot Coin Phones I'm surprised that some of the old stories haven't surfaced yet (possible urban legends) about the ingenuity that students developed in order to avoid actually spending the coins for a call. First, there was 'spinning pennies'. But the story I like best was about the contest for the best device to fake out the registering of coins. The winner -- one of the first examples of thinking outside the [coin]box -- was a simple board with 3 bells mounted to it. Striking the right bell made it sound to the OPR like the corresponding coin had been deposited and registered. Julian Thomas: jt@jt-mj.net http://jt-mj.net In the beautiful Finger Lakes Wine Country of New York State! Boardmember of POSSI.org - Phoenix OS/2 Society, Inc http://www.possi.org -- -- Windows: From the people who brought you EDLIN! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think some phone phreaks built an electronic box do to that, but do not remember its name. You fill in the blank: a _____ box . I do know that Illinois Bell once had a very misprogrammed number; you dialed it (from a regular home phone) and when there was an answer, a recording would say 'the call you have dialed requires a ten-cent deposit, please deposit ten-cents.' Only having two nickels, I would rapidly punch the three and six buttons on my touch tone like this: 'ding-ding (very short pause) 'ding-ding'. Bell's equipment would come back and demand another ten cents. If I just sat there presently a live operator would come on the line and say, 'our equipment did not register your money, deposit it again.' Okay operator, here it is ... and I would press the buttons (3&6) rapidly again. The operator obviously heard what appeared to be coins going in, and she released the call out to the network. As long as I kept making the required ding-ding deposits and then answering the inquiring operator with more ding-dings the call just kept looping around to itself and making the request for money over and over. After doing it about five or six times, the audio transmission quality got so bad I had to just abandon my call. (snicker). I think we played with that off and on for a week or so, eventually tiring of it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 05:47:43 GMT In article , alg@aracnet.com says: > Nick - > That was great work! And, of course, you win the Bonus points! Use > them wisely! > Some comments and minor nits: > --- What state was the "Diamond State"? I'm guessing Rhode Island... > (and here's another exquisitely arcane name: "Rhode Island and > Providence Plantations". That was its name when King Charles II > released control of the place). Bzzzzttt ... wrong answer. Diamond State was Delaware, not the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. It is still the official name of the state btw, as a former state employee I ought to know. We were covered by New England Telephone which became Nynex, then Bell Atlantic and now Verizon. Just a slight identity crisis. ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 10:04:39 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Al Gillis wrote: > Nick - > That was great work! And, of course, you win the Bonus points! Use > them wisely! Thanks ... some responses to your comments interspersed here ... > Some comments and minor nits: > ---The company that held forth in the upper middle states was > Northwestern > Bell, with the two Dakotas, Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska. > --- In the Pacific Northwest of the US it was (what else?) Pacific > Northwest Bell (Oregon, Washington and part of Idaho). In the far > eastern part of Oregon and some places in Idaho there was a little > operation called the Malhuer Home Telephone Company. I used to see > references to it in Oregon PUC tariff filing information) > --- I think the C&P companies were all separate at the end (1984) but > were surely all one company in the early days. How else would they > all get that exquisitely arcane name? (That sort of reminds me of the > full name of the A&P supermarkets: "The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea > Company"! That name certainly has more class than most of the names > in vogue today, don't you think?) I agree, they could have been the same at some point, but don't know for sure. It could have been a similar situation to Southern Bell which split into Southern Bell and South Central Bell at some point because someone felt it was just too large a company. (Funny how it got merged back in again thanks to Judge Green.) > --- What state was the "Diamond State"? I'm guessing Rhode Island... > (and here's another exquisitely arcane name: "Rhode Island and > Providence Plantations". That was its name when King Charles II > released control of the place). I'm pretty sure that Diamond State telephone was Delaware. > > --- Nevada Bell was a separate entity until 1984, when the > Californians got it. Do you suppose Nevada Bell was the smallest BOC > in terms of number of lines? No idea about the number of lines. I am pretty sure tho that Nevada was a separate company in name only. I remember having several meetings at Pac Bell in the early 80's regarding a system to support outside plant trouble-shooting. There was a poster in almost every conference room which read: "Don't forget about Nevada." Could have had to do with regulation as you note below. > --- It's interesting to me that in some cases many states were served > by one company (Mountain Bell and Northwestern Bell, for example) but > in lots of cases a Bell company was confined to a single state. I > suppose this was because of taxes or regulation but it might just have > been some agreements made with previous owners as companies were > purchased before the Kingsbury Commitment came into the fore. > So thanks!! PAT! MARK! Anything to add to Nicks information? > And Pat, thanks for adding your information about back office functions > spread across the System. > (Sorry this is getting so long!) > Al "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Speaking of the old Nevada Bell, did you ever see their telephone book? One book *only* for the entire state. After the front part of the book was devoted to the two or three large cities they serviced, then it went just page after page of toll station listings. The name of the town, followed by either one or two 'toll station' numbers, in one case I think five listings. Four of five such toll station communities listed on each page, and the same redundant instructions listed for each one: "To reach the subscribers in xxxx, dial your zero operator and ask for 'xxxx toll station number xx'. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 13:23:04 -0800 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed In article , Al Gillis wrote: > --- It's interesting to me that in some cases many states were served > by one company (Mountain Bell and Northwestern Bell, for example) but > in lots of cases a Bell company was confined to a single state. I > suppose this was because of taxes or regulation but it might just have > been some agreements made with previous owners as companies were > purchased before the Kingsbury Commitment came into the fore. > So thanks!! PAT! MARK! Anything to add to Nicks information? There was also at least one exception in the other direction: almost all of the "Bell" areas of Texas were in the territory of Southwestern Bell, but the westernmost tip, the area around El Paso, was served by Mountain Bell. (Roughly the same part of Texas that is in the Mountain Time Zone instead of Central.) That area was transferred to Southwestern Bell, now SBC, as part of the Bell System breakup. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * lincmad@suespammers.org * primary e-mail: Telecom at LincMad dot com All U.S. and California anti-spam laws apply, incl. CA BPC 17538.45(c) This text constitutes actual notice as required in BPC 17538.45(f)(3). DO NOT SEND UNSOLICITED E-MAIL TO THIS ADDRESS. You have been warned. ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 06:15:28 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications TELECOM Digest Editor noted in reply to writer: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe an appeal to the chairman's >> office would work. It has for me a couple times. Or else filing a >> commission complaint. But really, what made you think they would >> automatically know of your intentions and put you on the $4 plan? >> For them to do that without your okay is also illegal; it is known >> as 'cramming'. This really isn't Verizon's fault at all; try again >> tomorrow with a different rep and see if she will help you before >> you go the appeals route. If you get out of this mess in one piece, >> start reading their advertising more closely, and *always* tell the >> business office your intentions before you make calls like this. >> PAT] > Policies like these are predatory on the part of AT&T. No wonder > they're doing so badly. It looks like they took a few pages from the MCI > playbook. Absolutely predatory on the part of Verizon. The web site should have stated both rates, and in large, clear print stated that the "theft" rate automatically applied unless you called the company and signed up. In this day and age, how can you even trust them to sign you up? ------------------------------ From: Pete Romfh Subject: Re: Vonage Question [was: VoIP Phone] Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 06:16:34 -0600 Organization: Not Organized Joe Wineburgh wrote: > on the back of the Vonage box to connect to connect to a > pair going round the house to multiple phones> > Has anyone actually set this up and used it this way? I'm > ordering the service and this was exactly what I was > thinking of doing per the comments on the Vonage web site > suggesting it was possible and would like to get some > feedback from others who are using it in this > configuration. > Thanks. > #JOE == Pat's useful info snipped ==== I have this working right now. I replaced my 2nd RBOC line (about $40/mo) with Vonage. The Cisco ATA sits in my closet where the DSL, router, and (home run) wiring all terminate. I just put an RJ-11 on the end of some cross-connect wire, pulled off the jumper coming in from the protector, and punched down the XC wire. On my (2-line) phones L1 is my local (Houston) line and L2 is my (Chicago) Vonage line. I'm driving 5 (electronic) ringers on it with no problem but I'll bet the REN is down around 3. Works fine and is simple for my spouse to understand. Having a Chicago line is handy for my relatives living there and it's fun to call my (Houston) co-workers from saying I'm starting in to work. When I show up in the office 20 minutes later they wonder how I got from Chicago to Houston so quickly. Ocassionally I forget and try to dial a local number on L2 but am quickly reminded by an error tone. Local calls here are 10-digits and Vonage calls are 1+10 digits. I've registered the street address on Vonage's system so a 911 call on L2 will still be correctly identified. Pete Romfh, Telecom Geek & Amateur Gourmet. promfh at Texas dot net ------------------------------ From: Flatus Ohlfahrt Subject: Re: Vonage Question [was: VoIP Phone] Date: 28 Feb 2004 13:11:16 GMT Organization: USAF Ret On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 16:21:11 GMT, Joe Wineburgh wrote in news:telecom23.93.7@telecom-digest.org: > of the Vonage box to connect to connect to a pair going round the > house to multiple phones> > Has anyone actually set this up and used it this way? I'm > ordering the service and this was exactly what I was > thinking of doing per the comments on the Vonage web site > suggesting it was possible and would like to get some > feedback from others who are using it in this configuration. I've done it and it works fine. And, I've taken it one step further by having the ATA plug in to my Talkswitch Concero. I have four internal branches from the Concero that are automatically managed by hour of the day and type of call, e.g., fax, voice, or calls to be forwarded to my cellphone. It gives me great good pleasure to announce that there is absolutely no physical connection between my 'internal phone company' and BellSouth! Flatus [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I had never thought of that, but now I suspect, the Vonage ATA would work quite well as the in/output to the 9-level on a small PBX system. From any phone in the house, dial '9' and get an outside line from Vonage. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 28 Feb 2004 14:28:42 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Vonage Question [was: VoIP Phone] Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > of the Vonage box to connect to connect to a pair going round the > house to multiple phones> > Has anyone actually set this up and used it this way? Yes, that's what I do. I unplugged my second line at the outside box and put a piece of electrical tape over the jack as a hint to any telco guys who might happen by. In my office I have a two line phone with the usual two jacks, one for L1/L2, one for L2 only, so I left the first jack plugged into the wall, and plugged the second jack into the ATA box. The phone bridges the two jacks, so the Vonage line now goes all over the house, and works fine on the two other two-line phones. I think I read somewhere that the ATA can power up to five ringers, but I wouldn't push it. It works fine with three. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: John, aren't you involved with the sewers there in Trumansburg any longer? You used to have that as part of one of your several .sig files. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 10:27:56 -0600 From: John Schmerold Subject: Re: Vonage Troubles Spent a couple of hours of unbillable time listening to client complain. Vonage music on hold, Vonage saying they're going to tweak something. No more. I'm going to pick someone else, not sure what yet, but Vonage is growing too fast and they don't have the willingness to say "sorry we're full for now". There are many people that can sell well, many people that deliver well, I should have gone with someone that can deliver well. Sammy@nospam.biz wrote about Re: Vonage Troubles on Fri, 27 Feb 2004 06:02:27 -0800 saying: > Rich Greenberg wrote: > > >> In article , >> wrote: >>> I've had Vonage for 11 months now, and have used it at two different >>> locations (Cable modem and DSL). >>> I lose dial tone occasionally and have found, every time, that if I >>> reboot the Cisco and perhaps the cable modem, it comes back just fine. >> And if you do nothing but wait about the same length of time, does it >> still come back? > Don't know, because if I need to use it I don't hang around and wait. > From: Joe Wineburgh > Subject: Vonage Question [was: VoIP Phone] > Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 11:21:11 -0500 > of the Vonage box to connect to connect to a pair going round the > house to multiple phones> > Has anyone actually set this up and used it this way? I'm ordering the > service and this was exactly what I was thinking of doing per the > comments on the Vonage web site suggesting it was possible and would > like to get some feedback from others who are using it in this > configuration. > > Thanks. > > #JOE ------------------------------ 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 #94 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Feb 28 22:22:58 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1T3MwY05880; Sat, 28 Feb 2004 22:22:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 22:22:58 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402290322.i1T3MwY05880@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 #95 TELECOM Digest Sat, 28 Feb 2004 22:23:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 95 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Tony P.) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Wesrock@aol.com) Nevada; Other BOC Oddities (Mark J Cuccia) Re: Nevada Bell (Wesrock@aol.com) The 22 Bell Operating Telcos as of 1984 (Mark J Cuccia) Last Laugh! Re: Vonage Question [was: VoIP Phone] (John Levine) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Organization: ATCC Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 01:25:12 GMT In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Speaking of the old Nevada Bell, did > you ever see their telephone book? One book *only* for the entire > state. After the front part of the book was devoted to the two or > three large cities they serviced, then it went just page after page > of toll station listings. The name of the town, followed by either one > or two 'toll station' numbers, in one case I think five listings. > Four of five such toll station communities listed on each page, and > the same redundant instructions listed for each one: "To reach the > subscribers in xxxx, dial your zero operator and ask for 'xxxx toll > station number xx'. PAT] Rhode Island is an oddity in that there is the big book that is distributed to Providence rate centers (Ie. those served by PRVDRIWA and PRVDRIBR which amounts to roughly 85% of the numbers in the state!) and covers all numbers in the state, while outlying communities get community directories and in cases have to request the Providence book. Why they don't just distribute one book to the entire state I'll never know. Last I knew there was the Providence book, the Pawtucket book, one for Wickford, Newport, and Woonsocket. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 20:23:48 EST Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers In a message dated Fri, 27 Feb 2004 19:10:07 -0800, Al Gillis writes: > --- In the Pacific Northwest of the US it was (what else?) Pacific > Northwest Bell (Oregon, Washington and part of Idaho). In the far > eastern part of Oregon and some places in Idaho there was a little > operation called the Malhuer Home Telephone Company. I used to see > references to it in Oregon PUC tariff filing information) Originally Pacific Northwest Bell was part of Pacific Telephone and Telegraph. I happened to know slightly the guy who became the first president of PNB when it was split off as a separate company. (That was when the CEOs of Bell operating companies were consistently called "president" rather than "chairman".) Not connected with that, I recall seeing the Malheur Home Telephone Company always included in the companies covered by the Bell System benefit, savings and pension plans, so I always assumed it was a Bell company with an unusual relationship to the system. Perhaps someone else knows. Linc Madison writes: > There was also at least one exception in the other direction: almost > all of the "Bell" areas of Texas were in the territory of Southwestern > Bell, but the westernmost tip, the area around El Paso, was served by > Mountain Bell. (Roughly the same part of Texas that is in the Mountain > Time Zone instead of Central.) That area was transferred to > Southwestern Bell, now SBC, as part of the Bell System breakup. At the same time, Southwestern Bell transferred the part of the St. Louis metropolitan exchange on the east side of the Mississippi River to Illinois Bell. I may be wrong, but it is my recollection it was a few years before divestiture. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 18:45:11 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Nevada; Other BOC Oddities Regarding the topic of Nevada, TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > Speaking of the old Nevada Bell, did you ever see their telephone book? > One book *only* for the entire state. The Nevada Bell Telephone Company (or was it the Bell Telephone Comapny of Nevada), which was actually a *subsidiary* of the BOC "Pacific Telephone & Telegraph" (Pac*Bell) going back "way back when", did publish one directory ... (however -- read on ...) > After the front part of the book was devoted to the two or three large > cities they serviced, then it went just page after page of toll station > listings. The name of the town, followed by either one or two 'toll > station' numbers, in one case I think five listings. Four of five such > toll station communities listed on each page, and the same redundant > instructions listed for each one: "To reach the subscribers in xxxx, > dial your zero operator and ask for 'xxxx toll station number xx'. But the "Nevada Bell" directory was the only directory the only directory published by Nevada Bell, it was by *NO MEANS* the "ONLY" directory for the rest of the state. There were directories published by other telcos for their service areas, which in most cases are *NOT* included in the (SBC) Nevada*Bell directory! Sprint-Centel's Las Vegas Metro directory is MUCH MUCH larger than the (SBC) Nevada Bell directory. And their own Directory Assistance bureau used to have to be contacted by Nevada Bell's "Reno" Inward/Directory for D.A. requests, even into the 1990s (if one still reached the real distant-end local telco D.A. on NPA+555-1212 via their LD carrier). Below is what I posted to TELECOM Digest back in April of last year (2003) regarding this subject: Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 20:42:49 -0500 (CDT) From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Nevada's Printed Telephone Directories John David Galt wrote: > Nevada is also probably the largest state covered by a single directory > (depending how you count -- that is, SBC's directory includes the > listings for the entire state, but in independent-telco areas you will > see smaller books showing only the local area). (snip) AFAIK, the SBC-NV*Bell directory does *NOT* contain any listings for the region of Sprint-Centel Las Vegas. Sprint-Centel publishes its *OWN rather large directory for its region, for the most part all "EAS" (local" wrt itself. There is the independent telco of Moapa Valley Telco just to the northeast of Vegas Metro. I don't know offhand if they print their own directory, neither do I remember offhand if Moapa Valley Telco is listed in Sprint-Centel's directory. I don't think that SBC-NV*Bell necessarily includes these listings. [FEB.2004 additional note: Moapa Valley Telco does publish their own small directory, so common amongst independent telcos in rural areas; They are NOT included in the Las Vegas directory of Sprint-Centel. However, in 1959, the Vegas directory did have a section of Moapa Valley Telco.] Some of the other independents in Nevada do print their own directories, such as Lincoln County Telco. I seem to remember that (SBC) NV*Bell's directory did *NOT* include listings for Lincoln County Telco in years past. And of course, there are other stateline situations where Nevada ratecenters and customers (both NPA 702 in southeastern NV, and NPA 775 in the rest-of-the-state) are served out of (indep.telcos in) adjacent state (Bell) LATAs, either Qwest-LEC (USWest) or maybe SBC-Pac*Bell from CA. I don't know if any of these are necessarily included in the SBC-NV*Bell directory. But I seriously doubt that the SBC-NV*Bell directory now includes the Sprint-Centel Las Vegas Metro listings, as this directory itself is quite large, and had never previously been included in the "Bell of Nevada" directory. [end of April 2003 quote] Now as for "BOC oddities" in other states/BOCs ... Diamond State Telephone, the BOC for the state of Delaware, which is now part of VeriZon (Bell Atlantic), was also likewise a *subsidiary* of a neighbering BOC, in this case, Bell of Pennsylvania. And also, the southesast PA VZ/Bell-Atlantic/Bell-of-PA "Philadelphia Metro" LATA includes the *ENTIRE* state of Delaware within its boundaries! The "count" of the 22 BOCs included all four C&P state-sepcific telcos uniquely: VA, DC, MD, West-VA This "count" also included Diamond State Telephone and Nevada Bell uniquely, even though each was actually a subsidiary of a larger adjacent BOC. Southern New England Telephone (for virtually all of CT; now part of SBC), and Cincinnati Bell (in the Cincinnati OH Metro area, also including the Covington KY area across the Ohio River, and also a very small part of southeast Indiana which was "independent" but "homed" on Cin.Bell's tandem and AT&T toll machines in Cincinnati) were considered BOCs but not "full fledged" ones since AT&T owned a minority (less than 50%) share of each. These two were never counted as part of the 22 BOCs. SNET is now part of SBC, but in all cases, including Southwestern Bell, the "Bell" logo has come down. Cincinnati Bell (which is sort-of-independent) continues to have the word "Belll" in its name and continues to use the 1970s era "Bell" logo. BellSouth continues to retain the 1970s-era "Bell" logo. VeriZon (Bell Atlantic/NYNEX) has actually *introduced* the 1970s-era "Bell" logo in previous *GTE/CONTEL* areas, such as on trucks, buildings, payphone signage, etc! BTW, I read a report from the WSJ about a week ago that VeriZon is seriously considering selling off (GTE) Hawaiian Telco and also SOME of its NYTel/NYNEX/BA franchise area in upstate NY! When GTE took over Contel in 1992/93, they sold off SOME territory (both old Contel and old GTE) to either Alltel or Citizens (depending on the state), and also some sold to regional "consortiums" as well. This re-organization continued into 1994. In a few cases, Alltel sold some of its states' franchise areas to GTE, sort of a "swap". WIth the merger of GTE(Contel) with BA(NYNEX) to form VeriZon in 2000, some old GTE (and GTE-former-Contel) territory still under GTE until 2000 was sold off in 2000 and 2002, to Alltel or Citizens (same as ten years previous), as well as to CenturyTel (based here in Louisiana), to the newly created "Valor Telecom", to Iowa Network Services, and all of GTE's twelve or thirteen service areas scattered in Alaska were sold to ATEAC (Alaska Telephone Exchange Aquisitions Consortium), owned by about six different long-standing Alaskan based (independent) telcos, those former GTE ratecenters farmed out amongst the owners forming ATEAC. And back to "Bell" ... AT&T/WECo did own a part of Bell Canada/NECo. This ownership was significant in 1956, but as part of that consent decree, AT&T/WECO sold off all of its ownership of Bell Canada/NECo over time, to where in the early 1970s, AT&T owned only about 2% of Bell/NECo in Canada. This last bit was sold off in early 1975, and Bell Canada was now completely independent of AT&T in the US, and Bell Canada's NECO was now renamed Northern Telecom, whcih has since competed against AT&T/WECO/Lucent in the US for market share of switching and customer-premesis equipment! In the early 1970s, when Bell Canada/NECo was preparing for the separation from AT&T/WECo/Bell Labs, they formed their own "Bell Northern Research" organization ofr R&D. The BNR name/organization has since been completely submerged into NortelNetworks in more recent years. BNR/NT designed the "SP-1" switch, similar to the (analog) ESS, used in Canada and many independent telcos in the US back n the 1970s/80s. THey also developed the TOPS and DMS, which competed against TSPS/OSPS and other WECO switching, even in Bell areas in the US prior to 1984! Bell Canada also has owned large parts of the telcos in other provinces over the years as well, such as NBTel (New Brunswick), MTT (Maritime Tel & Tel in Nova Scotia which in turn owned Prince Edward Island Telco), and NewTel (Newfoundland). At one time in the 1930s/40s era, these "Atlantic Province" telcos under Bell Canada even used the "Bell System" logo of that era. Bell Canada itself was located in most of (but not all of) Quebec and Ontario. Linc Madison mentioned the El Paso TX area (now SBC), prior to divestiture of 1984 being Mountain Bell (later US-West now Qwest-LEC). And this part of Texas (El Paso Metro) has been MOUNTIAN and NOT Central Time! Also, that part of Illinois east of St.Louis at one time up until around the 1970s, was part of Southwestern Bell, not Illinois Bell (Ameritech), but now all of that is under SBC. These locations are actually associated with the Southwestern Bell LATA for St.Louis MO Metro, not any Illinois based LATA of Ameritech. The northwestern tip of Indiana was until around the 1960s/70s, served by Illinois (Bell) Telephone, not by Indiana Bell. Later, the BOC was Indiana Bell, but this part of Indiana "homed" on Chicago and with divestiture is associated with the Chicago IL Metro LATA. Of course, both Indiada Bell and Illinois Bell were placed under the Ameritech banner with 1984, and now that is part of SBC. I also was told that up until around the early 1930s, the northeastern (Hudson River area) part of New Jersey, right across the Hudson from New York City and other NY state Hudson River suburbs, was part of the BOC New York Telephone, but then transferred over to New Jersey Bell. Also note that Panel and #1XB switching was used in this part of NJ closest to New York City, while the rest of the state had SXS switching (of course manual switchboards were still in use in many places into the 1950s as well). Idaho: Excepting little small independents scattered throughout southern and central Idaho, the southern part is the "IDAHO" LATA (or more specficially it should be called the Boise ID LATA), a legacy of Mountain Bell. The central part of Idaho is associated with the Spokane WA metro LATA, a legacy of Pacific Northwest Bell. Both Mountain Bell and Pac-NW Bell, along with "Northwestern Bell" (serving the upper midwest of MN, IA, NE, SD, ND) became "US West" with 1984, and since 2000 has been taken over by Qwest. Northern Idaho (Coeur d'Alene, Rathdrum, Post Falls, etc) is virtually exclusively GTE-now-VeriZon, and a GTE LATA unto itself. Pacific Northwest Bell was created in the early 1960s (I think), carved out of Pacific Telephone & Telegraph (now SBC's Pac*Bell). Pac Tel & Tel shrunk down to just California (and its Bell Tel of Nevada subsidiary). But prior to the 1960s, Pacific Telephone (and Telegraph) also served Oregon, Washington state, and the central part of Idaho which "homed" on Spokane WA. South Central Bell was created circa 1968/69, carved out of Southern Bell. So Bell retained NC, SC, GA, FL, while S.C.Bell took over KY, TN, AL, MS, LA. There is an interesting history to the southestern part of the US: In the early part of the 20th Century, there was a BOC called Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph, serving what was eventually to become South Central Bell, except for Alabama. AL was part of the BOC called "The Great Southern Telephone & Telegraph Company". These were "merged" in the 1920s or 30s to become Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph. Then South Central Bell was carved out in the late 1960s, taking over the old Cumberland Tel & Tel, this time including Alabama. And then with 1984, BellSouth was created to take over both SCBell and So.Bell. The legacy names were continued until around 1995, but since then, BellSouth has become the common/public name for the local operating telcos, in addition to the corporate name. There is a lot more history/nostalgia/etc. that isn't discussed here. There were *NUMEROUS* state-specific and sub-state BOC names in the *REALLY* old days of the later 19th and early 20th Centuries, eventually consolidating and buying/selling off with nearby independents, until there was some "stability" of the 1920s thru 80s era. But even that "stability" as mentioned above, didn't have its "exceptions". Maybe Wes Leatherock can share with us some of the pre-1930s era of the Southwestern Bell states! :) Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA CSA ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 20:50:35 EST Subject: Re: Nevada Bell In a message dated 2/28/04 4:03:29 PM Central Standard Time, TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Speaking of the old Nevada Bell, did > you ever see their telephone book? One book *only* for the entire > state. After the front part of the book was devoted to the two or > three large cities they serviced, then it went just page after page > of toll station listings. The name of the town, followed by either one > or two 'toll station' numbers, in one case I think five listings. > Four of five such toll station communities listed on each page, and > the same redundant instructions listed for each one: "To reach the > subscribers in xxxx, dial your zero operator and ask for 'xxxx toll > station number xx'. PAT] The largest city in Nevada, Las Vegas, was not and is not served by Bell. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 18:46:58 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: The 22 Bell Operating Telcos as of 1984 And, so now here is a summary of the Twenty-Two BOCs as of the time of divestiture, grouped according to their seven Regional Bell Holding Corporations as created in the 1984 breakup of AT&T's Bell System. The names of the BOCs and RBHCs are as of 1984, with some notes as to recent developments. (NYNEX, taken over by Bell Atlantic in the later 1990s, now VeriZon): - New England Tel & Tel (ME, NH, VT, ME, RI) - New York Tel (NY, and the towns of Greenwich & Byram in CT) (Bell Atlantic, took over GTE and all renamed VeriZon in 2000): - New Jersey Bell (NJ) - Bell of Pennsylvania (PA) - Diamond State Telephone (DE); owned/managed by Bell of Pa. and the four C&P Telcos: - C&P of MD - C&P of DC - C&P of VA - C&P of WVa. (Ameritech, taken over by SBC in the later 1990s): - Ohio Bell - Indiana Bell - Michigan Bell - Illinois Bell - Wisconsin Bell/Telephone (BellSouth): - Southern Bell (NC, SC, GA, FL) - South Central Bell (KY, TN, AL, MS, LA) (Southwestern Bell, now simply part of SBC): - Southwestern Bell (MO, KS, OK, AR, TX) (US West, merged with Qwest-LD in 2000, assuming the Qwest name): - Northwestern Bell (MN, IA, NE, SD, ND) - Mountain Bell (MT, CO, NM, AZ, UT, WY, southern ID) - Pacific Northwest Bell (OR, WA, central strip of ID) (Pacific Telesis): - Pacific Bell (CA) - Nevada Bell (NV); owned/managed by Pacific Bell Note that Southern New England Telephone (for virtually all of CT) and Cincinnati Bell (for the Cincinnati OH Metro area including suburbs in KY and IN as well) are *NOT* counted as part of the 22 BOCs, since AT&T owned a minority share of these two. Bell Canada and its holdings were no longer considered corporately part of AT&T/US-Bell as of 1975, and are not included in the tables above. Mark J Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA CSA ------------------------------ Date: 29 Feb 2004 02:09:34 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Last Laugh! Re: Vonage Question [was: VoIP Phone] Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: John, aren't you involved with the > sewers there in Trumansburg any longer? You used to have that as part > of one of your several .sig files. PAT] Don't worry, I'm still the sewer commissioner. But ask me again in April. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What's going to happen in April, John? Are the good citizens of Trumansburg going to put you out to pasture, or perhaps flush you down the sewer? I wish I could figure out how the sewer service fee here in Independence is handled. All I know is they take the average of your water consumption during January and February then again in November and December of each year and with that four month average they then compute the sewer service charge. They take those four months and multiply it by some factor to calculate the sewer. My water bill is typically just a few dollars each month, but the sewer is normally two or three times higher. Then there is an additional charge on the bill each month for 'trash collection fee' which has been $10.75 per month as long as I can remember. It always comes in total to between $40-45 per month no matter how little water I use, which is the only part of it that gets metered. One day when I was down at City Hall paying my bill I asked the lady how they calculated it. She explained it but it still is a mystery to me. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #95 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Feb 29 16:24:28 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i1TLOSN11644; Sun, 29 Feb 2004 16:24:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 16:24:28 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200402292124.i1TLOSN11644@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 #96 TELECOM Digest Sun, 29 Feb 2004 16:24:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 96 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson In Naming Computer Viruses, Speed and Confusion Rule (Monty Solomon) Phones Under Lock and Code (TechNews.com) (Monty Solomon) EFFector 17.6: Tell MEPs to Reserve Tough New IP Enforcement (M Solomon) EPIC Alert 11.04 (Monty Solomon) Enthusiasts Call Web Feed Next Big Thing (Monty Solomon) TiVo-Like Devices to Get Booster Shot (Monty Solomon) The Real TiVo (Monty Solomon) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Herb Stein) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: The 22 Bell Operating Telcos as of 1984 (Nick Landsberg) Re: The 22 Bell Operating Telcos as of 1984 (Joseph) Re: Nevada Bell (Steven J Sobol) Re: Nevada; Other BOC Oddities (Wesrock@aol.com) Southern/South Central Bell Border, was Re: Nevada (Stanley Cline) Verizon Says That Hawaii and Upstate NY Are For Sale (John R Levine) Re: Verizon Says That Hawaii and Upstate NY Are For Sale (Mark J Cuccia) Re: Verizon Says That Hawaii and upstate NY Are For Sale (John R Levine) "Upstate NY" (Re: Verizon Plans to Sell ...) (Mark J Cuccia) 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: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 02:47:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: In Naming Computer Viruses, Speed and Confusion Rule Survival Of the Catchiest By Mike Musgrove Washington Post Staff Writer Early one Monday afternoon, Craig Schmugar, virus research manager at computer security firm Network Associates Inc., was at his desk taking a quick look at the programming inside a new computer worm that his team had just discovered, still in the early stages of circulating the Web. As Schmugar scanned through the worm's deciphered code, his adrenaline started pumping. This one had ambitions. The worm disguised itself as a bounced piece of e-mail and had an innovative way of collecting addresses, looking for more potential victims. Schmugar had a feeling this one was going to create a lot of trouble; it was time to sound the alarms -- but first he needed to attach a name. What to call it? Antivirus companies compete with each other fervently in the hopes that their customers will hear about the latest computer-based threat from them first. The result is that when there's an outbreak of a new virus or worm, companies often race to offer competing names for the same bug. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6924-2004Feb25.html http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/02/29/confusion_reins_in_naming_of_viruses_that_bug_computers/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 02:55:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Phones Under Lock and Code (TechNews.com) By Mike Musgrove Washington Post Staff Writer Since last fall, cell-phone users have been able, with some patience, to take their phone numbers with them when they change carriers. But it's still tricky to move a cell phone itself from one service to the next -- even when both carriers use the same wireless standard. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14265-2004Feb28.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 00:50:31 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 17.6: Tell MEPs to Reserve Tough New IP Enforcement EFFector Vol. 17, No. 6 February 25, 2004 donna@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 281st Issue of EFFector: * Action Alert: Tell MEPs to Reserve Tough New IP Enforcement Tools for Real Criminals * EFF Releases File Sharing Recommendations: Suggests Voluntary Collective Licensing at Future of Music Event * Court Endorses Ban on DVD Copy Technology * Trademark Law Shouldn't Prejudice Internet Ads * Let the Sun Set on PATRIOT - Section 206 * Deep Links (13): Critics Hail, EMI Targets DJ Danger Mouse's "Grey Album" * Staff Calendar: 03.02.04 - Seth Schoen speaks at OpenBSD Users Group, San Francisco, CA; 03.03.04 - Fred von Lohmann speaks at Digital Piracy Dilemma Panel, London, UK; 03.04.04 - Gwen Hinze speaks at Digital Divide: New Currents in Digital Downloading, Davis, CA * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/17/6.php ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 00:51:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EPIC Alert 11.04 ======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 11.04 February 25, 2004 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_11.04.html ====================================================================== Table of Contents ====================================================================== [1] Supreme Court Sides With Government on Privacy Act Damages [2] Agencies Issue Reports on CAPPS II, JetBlue Disclosure [3] EPIC Testifies on Medical Privacy and Banking [4] EPIC Demands FBI Database Accuracy [5] Courts Reject Business "Free Speech" Challenges to Privacy Law [6] News in Brief [7] EPIC Bookstore: The Patriot Act Game [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_11.04.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 01:07:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Enthusiasts Call Web Feed Next Big Thing By Frank Bajak, AP Technology Editor, 2/27/2004 NEW YORK -- E-mail is crippled, concussed by an irrepressible spam stream. Web surfing can be equally confounding, a wobbly wade through bursts of pop-ups and loudmouthed video ads. And that may explain the excitement these days over a somewhat crude but nifty software tool that automatically delivers updated information to your computer directly from your favorite Web sites. Enthusiasts see these Web feeds as sketching the outline of the next Net revolution. The technology behind them is called RSS and I rely on it daily to consult The New York Times, the BBC, CNET News, Slashdot and a few dozen other Web sites that employ RSS to make the very latest news stories or bits of commentary available for the plucking. Aided by software on my computer that goes out and retrieves my feeds, I swiftly sort through headlines and summaries. By clicking on included hyperlinks, I can visit originating sites for more detail. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/02/27/enthusiasts_call_web_feed_next_big_thing/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 01:50:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo-Like Devices to Get Booster Shot By Ed Frauenheim Staff Writer, CNET News.com Having proved their popularity with American couch potatoes, digital video recorders are about to get a boost in features that will allow them to zap several video streams throughout networked homes. Engineers in the consumer electronics lab of hard-drive maker Maxtor, for example, are working on DVR-type devices that can record or broadcast at least six media streams at a time. That compares to three streams in current DVRs, which are hard-drive-based machines that can record video and temporarily pause live broadcasts. Three-stream machines can simultaneously record two live channels while playing a previously recorded program. DVRs in development not only will be able to serve up video in multiple rooms at the same time, but also handle data from a home video security system, said Jasbir Sidhu, director of engineering for consumer electronics products at Maxtor. The coming DVRs may hit the market sometime in the next 18 months, he said. The strategy of making DVRs more powerful and comprehensive could help cement their place in the household electronics pantheon and hold off competition from PC makers that have unfurled plans to put modified desktops on top of televisions. http://news.com.com/2100-1041-5164465.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 02:32:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Real TiVo By Lance Ulanoff One of Amazon's most popular technology books last month was Hacking TiVo. The book's enormous popularity intrigues me because of what it says about TiVo digital video recorders: 1) Geeks love the TiVo; and 2) Many of these same gadget-happy TiVo owners are not satisfied with TiVo in its off-the-shelf incarnation. I've spent many envious minutes listening to people talk about TiVo-ing their favorite shows, and I've wanted to get in on the action for quite some time. I'm also aware that many people think TiVo needs upgrading-myself included. With that in mind, I turned to WeaKnees.com.com, a TiVo upgrade and parts company. WeaKnees.com takes TiVo Series 2 systems, and throws in another hard drive, bumping up the storage capacity from 80 hours (at lowest visual quality) to as many as 320 hours. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1538555,00.asp ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 23:35:37 -0600 Actually, I can't back it up, but I don't think it happened at divestiture. Linc Madison wrote in message news:telecom23.94.7@telecom-digest.org: > In article , Al Gillis > wrote: >> --- It's interesting to me that in some cases many states were served >> by one company (Mountain Bell and Northwestern Bell, for example) but >> in lots of cases a Bell company was confined to a single state. I >> suppose this was because of taxes or regulation but it might just have >> been some agreements made with previous owners as companies were >> purchased before the Kingsbury Commitment came into the fore. >> So thanks!! PAT! MARK! Anything to add to Nicks information? > There was also at least one exception in the other direction: almost > all of the "Bell" areas of Texas were in the territory of Southwestern > Bell, but the westernmost tip, the area around El Paso, was served by > Mountain Bell. (Roughly the same part of Texas that is in the Mountain > Time Zone instead of Central.) That area was transferred to > Southwestern Bell, now SBC, as part of the Bell System breakup. > Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * lincmad@suespammers.org > * primary e-mail: Telecom at LincMad dot com > All U.S. and California anti-spam laws apply, incl. CA BPC 17538.45(c) > This text constitutes actual notice as required in BPC 17538.45(f)(3). > DO NOT SEND UNSOLICITED E-MAIL TO THIS ADDRESS. You have been warned. Herb Stein Herb@herbstein.com ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 09:19:11 EST Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers In a message dated Sun, 29 Feb 2004 01:25:12 GMT Tony P. writes: > Rhode Island is an oddity in that there is the big book that is > distributed to Providence rate centers (Ie. those served by PRVDRIWA > and PRVDRIBR which amounts to roughly 85% of the numbers in the > state!) and covers all numbers in the state, while outlying > communities get community directories and in cases have to request the > Providence book. > Why they don't just distribute one book to the entire state I'll never > know. The decision is usually based on maximizing Yellow Pages advertising revenue. > Last I knew there was the Providence book, the Pawtucket book, one for > Wickford, Newport, and Woonsocket. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net Subject: Re: The 22 Bell Operating Telcos as of 1984 Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 03:45:29 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Mark J Cuccia wrote: > And, so now here is a summary of the Twenty-Two BOCs as of the time of > divestiture, grouped according to their seven Regional Bell Holding > Corporations as created in the 1984 breakup of AT&T's Bell System. > The names of the BOCs and RBHCs are as of 1984, with some notes as to > recent developments. [ SNIP - Good list Mark ] Let's not forget the "subsidiaries of subsidiaries" which also were around. I don't know of how many there might have been but I first joined the "Bell System" with .... [drumroll] Empire City Subway Co. Ltd. It was (is still?) a wholly owned subsidiary of the what was then NY Tel and is now Verizon. Way back when, circa, 1890, they signed a contract with the city of NY to provide conduits for "low-voltage electric service". Eventually, they were bought out by NY Tel, but still retained their corporate identity, and had to sell conduit ("underground pipe", thus the term "subway") space to all bona-fide communications providers. Officially, they "sold" space to NY Tel, Western Union and the cable companies, but the huge majority was for NY Tel. The contract was a sweet deal. ECS was allowed to make "up to 10% profit" with the rest going to the City of New York. There were many years when the "profit" was 9.98% :) "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: The 22 Bell Operating Telcos as of 1984 Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 08:42:39 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 18:46:58 CST, Mark J Cuccia wrote: > (NYNEX, taken over by Bell Atlantic in the later 1990s, now VeriZon): > - New England Tel & Tel (ME, NH, VT, ME, RI) > - New York Tel (NY, and the towns of Greenwich & Byram in CT) New England Tel & Tel also MA! remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Nevada Bell Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 21:46:33 -0600 Wesrock@aol.com wrote: >> the same redundant instructions listed for each one: "To reach the >> subscribers in xxxx, dial your zero operator and ask for 'xxxx toll >> station number xx'. PAT] > The largest city in Nevada, Las Vegas, was not and is not served by > Bell. And Nevada is not a heavily populated state. Drive from my house in Apple Valley to Las Vegas up Interstate 15 and you drive through a whole lot of nothing up to the state line, and even then there's nothing but a few casinos until you hit the Vegas area. (It's a three hour drive.) Other parts of Nevada border the Death Valley area of California -- also not a very heavily populated area :) JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 09:44:55 EST Subject: Re: Nevada; Other BOC Oddities In a message dated Sat, 28 Feb 2004 18:45:11 CST Mark J Cuccia writes: > Maybe Wes Leatherock can share with us some of the pre-1930s era of > the Southwestern Bell states! :) At one time before I retired I could have found this information, but now I can recall only a small part of it. There was a Missouri & Kansas Telephone Company, a Bell company, which also extended its operations into Oklahoma Territory. Meantime a group of four businessmen in my home town of Perry, Oklahoma, organized a telephone company to operate a line between Perry and Pawnee and also a local exchange in Perry. This was, as I recall, originally named the Arkansas Valley Telephone Company, later changing its name to the Pioneer Telephone Company. The Pioneer Telephone Company expanded to various parts of the territory, including to Oklahoma City, where both Pioneer and M & K had exchanges. Apparently both were losing money in Oklahoma, and in 1905 the Bell officers agreed to provide major financing to the Pioneer Company and turn over the M&K properties in Oklahoma to it. The Pioneer Telephone Company changed its name to Pioneer Telephone & Telegraph Company and thus became part of the Bell System. At one time, in the historical files in my office, I had the original "license agreement" between Pioneer T&T and AT&T, the document that made a company part of the "Bell System." Three of the four men who organized the original company in Perry became executives of what eventually was merged into Southwestern Bell, one of them become SWBT president. As I recall, M & K did not include the eastern part of Missouri (St.Louis area), but I don't remember the name of the company that operated there. There was a Southwestern Telephone & Telegraph Company, which is seems to me operated in Texas, and perhaps into Arkansas. In 1917 all the various companies in the territory took the name "Southwestern Bell Telephone Company," but at least at first continued as separate corporations. Exactly when they were merged could never be determined with exactitude. The various corporations continued in existence, however. Probably in the 1970s or early 1980s the lawyers asked me to look into this, since someone had sued the Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, an Oklahoma corporation. This corporation still had a legal existence and had an annual meeting once a year in the state vice president's office. The lawyers wanted to, and did, reply that SWBT, an Oklahoma corporation, could not have been at fault since it had no employees, no motor vehicles, and no operations. The other lawyer eventually figured out he should sue the Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, a Missouri corporation. As I recall, there were over 100 telephone companies in Oklahoma which eventually became part of the Pioneer T&T Company, later Southwestern Bell (Oklahoma) and, of course, even later, the Oklahoma operations of SWBT (Missouri). Probably similar aggregations occurred in the other states, which would suggest more than 1,000 companies merged or were bought out to form SWBT. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Southern/South Central Bell Border, was Re: Nevada; BOC Oddities Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 06:34:41 GMT On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 18:45:11 CST, Mark J Cuccia wrote: > South Central Bell was created circa 1968/69, carved out of Southern > Bell. So Bell retained NC, SC, GA, FL, while S.C.Bell took over KY, > TN, AL, MS, LA. There is an interesting history to the southestern > part of the US: There were areas of Georgia along the Tennessee and Alabama state lines, and a tiny part of the southwestern corner of North Carolina, that were technically part of Southern Bell territory, but were for actually served by South Central Bell after the SB/SCB split more or less under "contract" with Southern Bell: - Rossville, Tennga, and McCaysville, GA (adjacent to Chattanooga, Benton, and Copperhill, TN respectively) - Liberty (Cherokee County), NC (adjacent to Copperhill, TN) - Georgetown, GA (adjacent to Eufaula, AL) All these areas are served by central offices in TN/AL except for part of the Rossville rate center which is served by a CO in Georgia (which also serves customers in Tennessee and has a CLLI starting with "CHTGTN" = Chattanooga TN even though it's physically in Georgia.) The bills sent to customers in those areas, including my parents and later myself, said in very small letters "agent for Southern Bell" under the SCB name. When everything was folded into BellSouth Telecommunications, the SCB/SB split went away along with the bill verbiage, but the border areas are to this day treated as part of BellSouth-TN/-AL, and customers in the border areas are charged for most, but not all, services under TN and AL tariffed pricing, not GA or NC tariffed pricing. (Which state's rates apply to what is rather inconsistent -- for instance, customers in the GA border areas near Chattanooga are charged TN rates for directory assistance but GA rates for operator-handled calls.) Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune ------------------------------ Date: 29 Feb 2004 04:17:32 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Verizon Says That Hawaii and Upstate NY Are For Sale Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The next several messages in this issue of the Digest did *not* begin here but were part of a series of messages between John Levine and Mark J. Cuccia which were copied to the Digest, by one or the other of them. PAT] > I read a report from the WSJ about a week ago that VeriZon is > seriously considering selling off (GTE) Hawaiian Telco and also SOME > of its NYTel/NYNEX/BA franchise area in upstate NY! Yes, it said that VZ is thinking of selling Hawaiian Tel and their NY territory outside of metro NY. Hawaiian Tel I can understand, since Hawaii is a long way from the rest of the US, but we're all scratching our heads about upstate NY. It's not isolated, being adjacent to VT, MA, PA, and of course downstate all of which are dominated by VZ, and it's not particularly expensive to serve compared to other rural areas like, say, Maine. It's not even all that rural, since it includes Buffalo, Syracuse, and Albany, each of which are considerably larger than any city in Maine. We also can't figure out who they plan to sell it to. The obvious candidate would be Citizens, which recently swallowed a lot of upstate telcos including the one that serves Rochester, but they're in the midst of a sale of their own and aren't about to buy anything. Alltel has only a few small towns, Sprint has nothing in NY at all. The best guess we can come up with is that they think that without downstate, a different owner would get more USF money. Or one cynic thinks that VZ is run by BA guys who only care about Centrex, and there's not enough Centrex upstate to make them happy. And if they want to sell Hawaiian Tel, why aren't they selling Codetel? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 05:58:17 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: Verizon says that Hawaii and upstate NY are for sale John Levine wrote: > Mark J. Cuccia wrote: >> I read a report from the WSJ about a week ago that VeriZon is >> seriously considering selling off (GTE) Hawaiian Telco and also >> SOME of its NYTel/NYNEX/BA franchise area in upstate NY! > Yes, it said that VZ is thinking of selling Hawaiian Tel and their NY > territory outside of metro NY. > Hawaiian Tel I can understand, since Hawaii is a long way from the > rest of the US They got out of the dozen or so legacy-GTE ratecenters scattered around Alaska about the time GTE/Contel + BA/NYNEX => VeriZon (circa 2000). So I guess now Hawaii is falling into that same category of being "too far away", according to the current VZ corporate mindset? > But we're all scratching our heads about upstate NY. It's not isolated, > being adjacent to VT, MA, PA, and of course downstate all of which are > dominated by VZ, and it's not particularly expensive to serve compared > to other rural areas like, say, Maine. It's not even all that rural, > since it includes Buffalo, Syracuse, and Albany, each of which are > considerably larger than any city in Maine. I wonder if they intend to sell the "rural" areas of upsate NY, while retaining Buffalo, Syracuse, Albany (Tri-Cities), etc? John, what does your local media (radio/TV/newspapers) say in any detail about "upstate New York", regarding NY Tel/ NYNEX/ Bell Atlantic/ VeriZon and plans to sell off certain ratecenters? > We also can't figure out who they plan to sell it to. The obvious > candidate would be Citizens, which recently swallowed a lot of upstate > telcos including the one that serves Rochester, but they're in the > midst of a sale of their own and aren't about to buy anything. Alltel > has only a few small towns, Sprint has nothing in NY at all. Does CenturyTel have any territory in NY State? And also, what might Citizens' Tel. sellng? > The best guess we can come up with is that they think that without > downstate, a different owner would get more USF money. Or one cynic > thinks that VZ is run by BA guys who only care about Centrex, and > there's not enough Centrex upstate to make them happy. > And if they want to sell Hawaiian Tel, why aren't they selling Codetel? And regarding "legacy-GTE" areas outside of the continental/conterminous/ mainland US (CONUS, in military/government terminology) -- i.e., legacy GTE service areas (at one time or another) in the Caribbean, the Pacific, and Canada: CODETEL, in the Dominican Republic, a "legacy GTE" area going back many decades! An acronymn being Espanol, "Compania Dominicana de Telefonos". Also in the Caribbean, GTE-now-VeriZon also took over (or merged with) Puerto Rico Telephone Company/Authority as well a few years ago. And out in the Pacific: The Northern Mariana Islands (Saipan, Tinian, Rota, etc.) but *NOT* Guam, the LEC there is known as "Micronesian Telcommunications" (not to be confused with the one-time US-and-UN possession or territory of the Federated States of Micronesia) is also part of the GTE-now-VeriZon organization. GTE's far-flung "empire" once included the Philippines Long Distance Telephone Company, the largest of several telcos/telecomms serving this once-US possesion. PLDT was a General Telephone System property from the mid-1950s until the mid-1960s, at which time GT&E wanted to take over the Mutual Telephone Company of Hawaii, as well as the recently formed (to merge numerous scattered independent telcos in eastern Quebec), QuebecTel. I would think that maybe the FCC/FTC/etc. required or maybe "suggested" to GT&E to sell off PLDT before taking over the Mutual-HTC. (GTE's dozen or so service areas in Alaska and the year 2000 sale of them to ATEAC, is mentioned earlier in this post). And now for "north-of-the-border, up-Canada-way": Telus in Canada has a relationship with GTE-now-VeriZon through the old (mostly) GTE-held "British Columbia Telephone Company" (BC Tel) which merged with (Alberta's) Telus (formerly AGT Alberta Government Telpehones, and also Edmonton Telephones) -- BC Tel (now part of Telus) covering "most" of BC (but not the northern section especially), and also GTE-held QuebecTel of *eastern* Quebec. In Spring 2000, at the time the BZ/NYNEX and GTE/Contel merger took effect to become VeriZon, GTE's QuebecTel and Telus agreed to have GTE's QuebecTel reorganized as now being under Telus as TelusQuebec. GTE-now-VZ still owns a noticeable but now minority share of Telus. And back here in "CONUS", as mentioned in my previous post, VeriZon sold off several legacy-GTE areas to Citizens' Tel, Alltel, CenturyTel in the 2000 to 2002 timeframe, right after GTE and BA merged effective April 2000. Some GTE area (parts of TX, all GTE in OK and NM, and Texarkana AR along with Texarkana TX) were sold off into the newly created "Valor Telecom" (other areas of GTE in Texas have been retained by VeriZon), and all of what was GTE in Iowa was sold to "Iowa Telecom" formerly known as INS, Iowa Network Services, which started off in the 1980s as a support group to the numerous small independent telcos in the state, to provide them with a centralized method of handling "Equal Access" dialing and routing with the new and numerous competitive LD carriers. INS-now-Iowa Telecom has also become a provider of other telecom network-based services, such as Operator and Directory Assistance services, tandem homing and routings, etc, and now is an incumbent (independent) LEC with the purchase of the legacy-GTE service areas in Iowa. Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA CSA ------------------------------ Date: 29 Feb 2004 10:22:44 -0500 From: John R Levine Subject: Re: Verizon Says That Hawaii and Upstate NY Are For Sale > I wonder if they intend to sell the "rural" areas of upsate NY, while > retaining Buffalo, Syracuse, Albany (Tri-Cities), etc? The WSJ piece said all of upstate, including the cities. > John, what does your local media (radio/TV/newspapers) say Nothing. I haven't heard anything other than the WSJ piece. > Does CenturyTel have any territory in NY State? And also, what might > Citizens' Tel. sellng? Century Tel has nothing in the northeast at all. Their closest property is 83,000 lines in Ohio, an ex-Centel property. The 2.5 lines that VZ is thinking of selling is bigger than all of Century Tel put together. It'd be a very big gulp. Citizens seems to be selling the whole company in a leveraged buyout. An LBO involves taking on vast amounts of debt, which means that they couldn't buy anything else any time soon and are more likely to be selling bits around the edges to pay down the debt. Other than that they'd be the obvious candidate. They're only a little bigger than Century Tel, but they have over 550,000 lines in upstate NY already. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies Information Superhighwayman wanna-be http://iecc.com/johnl Sewer Commissioner "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 13:00:06 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: "Upstate NY" (re VeriZon plans to sell...) John R Levine wrote: > Mark J. Cuccia wrote: >> I wonder if they intend to sell the "rural" areas of upsate NY, while >> retaining Buffalo, Syracuse, Albany (Tri-Cities), etc? > The WSJ piece said all of upstate, including the cities. Now I wonder where the "dividing line" might be? I assume that all of NPA 914 (Westchester County) and a good chunk of the split off 845, will most likely be retained by VZ. At least the NYCity LATA #132 part of NPA 845 ... I wonder if Poughkeepsie NY will stay VZ or not? They are a separate LATA, and split to NPA 845 from 91 a few years back. I guess everything around Albany-Troy-Schnectady and northward/westward, anything that isn't the NYCity Metro LATA #132 (I still wonder about Poughkeepsie), will most likely be sold off... What would be interesting is if Qwest-LEC or SBC (or even BellSouth) would take it over! If BellSouth were to take it over, what *NAME* would BellSouth Corporation use for marketing and as the local operating company, as this area is *NOT* "south"! :-) >> John, what does your local media (radio/TV/newspapers) say > Nothing. I haven't heard anything other than the WSJ piece. I would have been suprised that there was nothing mentioned locally in the news/press/media, but lately I've seen stories elsewhere from other "internet" based sources, other than the "local" news sources even those with webpages of recent local news. On Friday 20 February 2004, the Illinois Commerce Commission announced that they had approved the overlay of NPA 815 in northern IL (except Chicago Metro), to take place "sometime forthcoming, when the new NPA code and numbering resources would be needed". (Some of us estimate that it might be 2005). However, I couldn't find ANYTHING on this in online news sources that were "local" to Chicago or northern Illinois! The Press Release from the ICC (which I transcribed here last week) also mentioned that 779 would be the new overlay area code as assigned by Neustar-NANPA. This was going to be the code that some of us had "guessed" to be a "relief" code for NPA 815 whenever it would need relief in the future ... Anyhow ... even Neustar-NANPA (as of Sunday 29 February 2004) doesn't mention anything of NPA 779 or that 815 is being overlaid, on the "public" area of their website. No mention in the "area codes" lookup and reports section, nothing in the "press release" section, etc. >> Does CenturyTel have any territory in NY State? And also, what might >> Citizens' Tel. sellng? > Century Tel has nothing in the northeast at all. Their closest > property is 83,000 lines in Ohio, an ex-Centel property. The 2.5 lines > that VZ is thinking of selling is bigger than all of Century Tel put > together. It'd be a very big gulp. CenturyTel does indeed tend to stick with rural areas and smaller towns. But they have been growing over the past ten-plus years though! > Citizens seems to be selling the whole company in a leveraged buyout. > An LBO involves taking on vast amounts of debt, which means that they > couldn't buy anything else any time soon and are more likely to be > selling bits around the edges to pay down the debt. Other than that > they'd be the obvious candidate. They're only a little bigger than > Century Tel, but they have over 550,000 lines in upstate NY already. That *IS* interesting about Citizens' Tel. I wasn't aware of thier current financial situation! You'd mentioned in the earlier post that Alltel does have a few small towns in NY. I wonder if they might consider taking over all of that chunk of upstate NY (NYTel/NYNEX/BA/VZ)? > Regards, > John Levine, johnl@iecc.com Thanks for the additional info on the VZ "upstate NY" situation as you know it to be! Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA CSA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The [preceeding three or four messages were not originally here in the Digest but were part of personal correspondence between John Levine and Mark J. Cuccia which were copied here the Digest by one or the other of them. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #96 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Feb 29 23:33:47 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i214XlZ14396; Sun, 29 Feb 2004 23:33:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 23:33:47 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403010433.i214XlZ14396@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 #97 TELECOM Digest Sun, 29 Feb 2004 23:33:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 97 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Technology Triumphs 'Do Not Call' List: Block ALL Unwanted Calls (Chase) Re: In Naming Computer Viruses Speed and Confusion Rule (Gene Berkowitz) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Lisa Hancock) Re: The 22 Bell Operating Telcos and their Subs and their Subs. (Gillis) Re: The 22 Bell Operating Telcos as of 1984 (Diamond Dave) Re: Nevada Bell (Al Gillis) Re: Nevada Bell (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: The Real TiVo (Clarence Dold) Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Southern/South Central Bell Border, was Re: BOC Oddities (jmayson) Re: Verizon Says That Hawaii and Upstate NY Are For Sale (Sammy@nospam) Re: Verizon Says That Hawaii and Upstate NY Are For Sale (John Levine) Re: "Upstate NY" (was Re: Verizon Plans to Sell) (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: "Upstate NY" (was Re: Verizon Plans to Sell) (Steven J Sobol) The Thread DID Continue From the Digest (was Re: Verizon Plans) (Cuccia) Last Giggle/Snicker! Re: Picture, Michael Powell in a Bra (Al Gillis) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ken@Privacy-Call.com (Ken Chase) Subject: Technology Triumphs 'Do Not Call' List - Block ALL Unwanted Calls Date: 29 Feb 2004 18:19:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com In response to numerous questions about the 'Do Not Call' List and blocking unwanted calls, we are posting information about the latest release, the http://privacycall.com/pages/caller-id-screener-intro.htm TECHNOLOGY TRIUMPHS OVER FTC'S "DO NOT CALL" LIST New Caller ID Screener Allows Only 'Invited' Callers to Ring - Free of Fees (SCOTTSDALE, AZ) Telemarketing companies and exempted groups may have found loopholes in the new National Do Not Call List, but telecom automation groundbreaker Bill Sasso of Digitone Communications thwarts them again with his latest invention, the http://privacycall.com/pages/id-screener-3.htm Privacy Call ID Screener A small, tabletop device designed for customers who subscribe to Caller ID, the Privacy Call ID Screener allows only 'Invited' callers to ring their phone. All other callers are handled as the consumer chooses. Although the device is customizable, its use is simple. Callers on the consumer's 'Invited' list ring through without interference, while anonymous or unfamiliar callers are asked to identify themselves or leave a message, without ringing the phone. Callers on the consumer's 'Excluded' list cannot ring the phone or leave a message, including cell phone, out-of-state, and international callers. "We call it 'Caller ID with attitude!'" says Sasso. "Now consumers can choose who can ring their phone, and when, without the limits and extra monthly charges from your telephone service provider. Using the unit's Caller ID screen, it only takes a push of a button to add callers to your 'Included' or 'Excluded' list. And, using the 'Wildcard' feature, the consumer can 'Invite' or 'Exclude' entire area codes, prefixes or number sets. With the ID Screener, exemptions like those to the National 'Do Not Call' List simply do not exist." A snap to install, the Privacy Call ID Screener prevents telemarketing calls, predictive dialers, misdialed numbers, hang-up calls, false faxes, pollsters, political organizations, exes, creditors and anyone else the consumer doesn't want to talk to ... ever again. Additional benefits include a call-forwarding feature that, on a single line, seamlessly connects 'Invited' callers to a cell phone or alternate location, as well as a 'Do Not Disturb' mode. This feature prevents all callers from ringing the phone during set hours, such as bedtime and study time, either on a one-time or daily basis. "The ID Screener is particularly useful for people who keep unusual hours, such as those working the graveyard or swing shifts," says Sasso. "During 'Do Not Disturb' hours, 'Invited' callers can leave a message, but the phone will not ring, ensuring total privacy." A secret emergency code is provided in case of emergencies. The Privacy Call ID Screener is the latest addition to the Privacy Call series, designed to help residential consumers and business owners better manage their telephone communications and reduce monthly telephone charges. Consisting of six different models, Privacy Call Series products are available at the Privacy Call website www.Privacy-Call.com or by calling (888) 833-5333. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This sounds a great deal to me like the old Privcode machine, which was popular back in the 1970's. It was attached to the phone line, and was sensitive enough to go off hook at the slightest hint of a change in voltage, so the phones seldom if ever actually rang. Instead, this machine -- the Privcode -- would announce its intentions and demand that the caller enter or speak his Privcode ID number (actually, it was referred to as the 'extension' number desired by the caller. The proper three digit 'extension' allowed the phones to ring. Otherwise, the caller got transferred to an answering machine. Really a great device, and manufactured in those days by IMM (International Mobile Machines) of Bala Cynwyd, PA. It is no longer available I don't think. Perhaps this new machine which Ken Chase describes is a good replacement. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Gene S. Berkowitz Subject: Re: In Naming Computer Viruses, Speed and Confusion Rule Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 22:29:23 -0500 In article , monty@roscom.com says: > Survival Of the Catchiest > By Mike Musgrove > Washington Post Staff Writer > Early one Monday afternoon, Craig Schmugar, virus research manager at > computer security firm Network Associates Inc., was at his desk taking > a quick look at the programming inside a new computer worm that his > team had just discovered, still in the early stages of circulating the > Web. > As Schmugar scanned through the worm's deciphered code, his adrenaline > started pumping. This one had ambitions. > The worm disguised itself as a bounced piece of e-mail and had an > innovative way of collecting addresses, looking for more potential > victims. Schmugar had a feeling this one was going to create a lot of > trouble; it was time to sound the alarms -- but first he needed to > attach a name. What to call it? > Antivirus companies compete with each other fervently in the hopes > that their customers will hear about the latest computer-based threat > from them first. The result is that when there's an outbreak of a new > virus or worm, companies often race to offer competing names for the > same bug. > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6924-2004Feb25.html > http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/02/29/confusion_reins_in_naming_of_viruses_that_bug_computers/ All the more reason why these should be reduced to a CRC32. "Kuul" names just glorify these pests further. --Gene [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It really is sad, isn't it, that there have to be entire departments at companies these days to deal with the massive amounts of viruses (or do you say virii?) and spam floating around. It is also very sad that the 'general public' neither understands or seems to believe how bad these problems have gotten. In fact, the same 'general public' is a big part of the problem with their deliberate 'cc: everyone-I-Can Think of' jokes and anecdotal stories. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: 29 Feb 2004 17:55:14 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Nick Landsberg wrote: > I'm pretty sure that Diamond State telephone was Delaware. Yes, that's Delaware. For some reason, Diamond State Telephone was operated as a unit of Bell Telephone Co. of Penna, even though I think it was legally a completely separate company. Even today, Delaware is part of the Phila area LATA. If you look at a map of lower NJ along the Delaware River, you'll noticed the border is along the river shoreline, not in the middle. There's a part of of the land on the Jersey side that is actually part of Delaware (near National Park, NJ). While we're on the subject of strange geography, there's a little island off New Foundland, St. Pierre IIRC, that is completely part of France with no connection to Canada. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Speaking of the old Nevada Bell, did > you ever see their telephone book? One book *only* for the entire > state. After the front part of the book was devoted to the two or > three large cities they serviced, then it went just page after page > of toll station listings. The name of the town, followed by either one > or two 'toll station' numbers, in one case I think five listings. > Four of five such toll station communities listed on each page, and > the same redundant instructions listed for each one: "To reach the > subscribers in xxxx, dial your zero operator and ask for 'xxxx toll > station number xx'. PAT] I guess today it no longer looks that like. What I find peculiar is looking at a road map of Nevada, with numerous areas outlined and marked "danger zone", but no explanation of what the danger is or how one should stay safe and clear. As to "Rhode Island and Planataions", could someone explain that name? Lastly, I checked Google and if I read it correctly, there was stuff on Enterprise numbers posted back in 1998. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Were the Google references in 1998 messages *about* Enterprise, or were they cases of people still having them in service? I know after 800 service started, Bell continued to offer Enterprise as a grandfathered arrangement for several more years. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: The 22 Bell Operating Telcos and their Subs and their Subs... Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 14:51:20 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Nick Landsberg wrote in message news:telecom23.96.10@telecom-digest.org: > Mark J Cuccia wrote: >> And, so now here is a summary of the Twenty-Two BOCs as of the time of >> divestiture, grouped according to their seven Regional Bell Holding >> Corporations as created in the 1984 breakup of AT&T's Bell System. >> The names of the BOCs and RBHCs are as of 1984, with some notes as to >> recent developments. > [ SNIP - Good list Mark ] > Let's not forget the "subsidiaries of subsidiaries" which also were > around. I don't know of how many there might have been but I first > joined the "Bell System" with .... [drumroll] > Empire City Subway Co. Ltd. > It was (is still?) a wholly owned subsidiary of the what was then NY > Tel and is now Verizon. Way back when, circa, 1890, they signed a > contract with the city of NY to provide conduits for "low-voltage > electric service". Eventually, they were bought out by NY Tel, but > still retained their corporate identity, and had to sell conduit > ("underground pipe", thus the term "subway") space to all bona-fide > communications providers. Officially, they "sold" space to NY Tel, > Western Union and the cable companies, but the huge majority was for > NY Tel. > The contract was a sweet deal. ECS was allowed to make "up to 10% > profit" with the rest going to the City of New York. There were many > years when the "profit" was 9.98% :) Nick - that's a great Sub of a Sub! Clearly one only a very few have ever heard of! (Certainly not me!) One of the bigest of the "sub of a sub" would of course be Teletype Corporation. Also under the Western Electric banner is Sandia Labs that helped end WWII by helping the Manhatten Project. Who can point out more of them? And don't you just love the old "lightning bolt" type used in the WE logo years ago. Wish that were a True-Type choice! ------------------------------ From: Diamond Dave Subject: Re: The 22 Bell Operating Telcos as of 1984 Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 19:42:35 -0500 Organization: The BBS Corner / Diamond Mine On-Line On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 03:45:29 GMT, Nick Landsberg wrote: > Let's not forget the "subsidiaries of subsidiaries" which also were > around. I don't know of how many there might have been but I first > joined the "Bell System" with .... [drumroll] > Empire City Subway Co. Ltd. Empire City Subway still exists to this day. Website: http://www.empirecitysubway.com/ > From the main page of their website: "Empire City Subway Company (ECS) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Verizon that specializes in subsurface engineering and construction services. Since 1891, ECS has held a franchise from the City of New York to build and maintain a conduit and manhole infrastructure in Manhattan and the Bronx. ECS rents this space to telecommunications and cable television service providers. " Dave ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: Nevada Bell Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 14:40:27 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Steven J Sobol wrote in message news:telecom23.96.12@telecom-digest.org: > Wesrock@aol.com wrote: (Snip) > And Nevada is not a heavily populated state. Drive from my house in > Apple Valley to Las Vegas up Interstate 15 and you drive through a > whole lot of nothing up to the state line, and even then there's > nothing but a few casinos until you hit the Vegas area. (It's a three > hour drive.) > Other parts of Nevada border the Death Valley area of California -- > also not a very heavily populated area :) And let's not forget that Northern Nevada along the Oregon border can be pretty short of humanoids as well. Also, my rich uncle's Air Force put me up in Wendover, Utah for a while. Aside from a casino in "West" Wendover, NV the only action was watching UP freights roll through the area! Al > JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA > Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / > sjsobol@JustThe.net > PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Nevada Bell Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 14:45:41 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Wesrock@aol.com wrote: > The largest city in Nevada, Las Vegas, was not and is not served by > Bell. > Wes Leatherock > wesrock@aol.com What about until the end of WW II? ------------------------------ From: dold@TheXRealXT.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: The Real TiVo Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 22:13:57 UTC Organization: a2i network Monty Solomon wrote: > One of Amazon's most popular technology books last month was Hacking > TiVo. The book's enormous popularity intrigues me because of what it > says about TiVo digital video recorders: 1) Geeks love the TiVo; and > 2) Many of these same gadget-happy TiVo owners are not satisfied with > TiVo in its off-the-shelf incarnation. As a Tivo owner, I have not hacked. I think some folks hack because they can. I don't feel a pressing need. Some hack to add more storage space, but I don't use the unit for archiving a movie I might watch next year. I only have things on there that have appeared in the last few weeks that I intend to watch in the next few weeks. There are four sets of hacks. 1- Adding more disk space (weaknees). I have no need. 2- Simple remote-control-programmed changes to the interface. I use some of these. 3- Poking around in Linux, for some feature additions, but mostly just to poke around. I don't use this, although it is somewhat attractive. 4- Serious feature additions, morphing of standalone with DirecTivo, and copying of video files to DVD. Uncharted territory for my tastes. If the ethernet interface was already enabled on my DirecTivo, I would use it, but I don't intend on popping the paint on the warranty-sealed screws unless there is some real benefit. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:47:43 GMT From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates Organization: Excelsior Computer Services [re charging $3.00 or so per minute for overseas calls made without a calling plan] > Absolutely predatory on the part of Verizon. The web site should > have stated both rates, and in large, clear print stated that the > "theft" rate automatically applied unless you called the company and > signed up. This is but one more example of the drawbacks of privatizing the phone system. If companies can still make money charging $0.15/minute to Europe, what in the world makes anyone think it's better for consumers to have companies charging 20 times that? -Joel ------------------------------ From: jmayson@nyx.net Subject: Re: Southern/South Central Bell Border, was Re: Nevada; Oddities Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 23:40:22 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com > - Rossville, Tennga, and McCaysville, GA (adjacent to Chattanooga, > Benton, and Copperhill, TN respectively) > - Liberty (Cherokee County), NC (adjacent to Copperhill, TN) > - Georgetown, GA (adjacent to Eufaula, AL) > All these areas are served by central offices in TN/AL except for part > of the Rossville rate center which is served by a CO in Georgia (which > also serves customers in Tennessee and has a CLLI starting with > "CHTGTN" = Chattanooga TN even though it's physically in Georgia.) I worked for AT&T in Tucker, GA. One day my phone rang and the caller immediately went into a monologue about a patient (I got an earful about medical history, vitals, etc.) I interrupted her and told her I was an AT&T employee, not a doctor. She then demanded I connect her to such-and-such hospital. I was just a back office, co-op student who wrote dBase III databases, not an operator. At the time all of north Georgia was 404. Peope in GA but near Chattanooga could dial just 7-digits (or 1+7-digits) to reach that city. Apparently she was outside of that zone, so I got the call in Tucker. John Mayson Austin, Texas, USA ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Verizon Says That Hawaii and Upstate NY Are For Sale Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 14:48:53 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications > And if they want to sell Hawaiian Tel, why aren't they selling ... Hawaiian Tel is a tough operation. Each island is one big local calling area. It will never change. The money used to be in inter-island toll until competition set in. ------------------------------ Date: 1 Mar 2004 01:20:05 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Verizon Says That Hawaii and Upstate NY Are For Sale Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> John, what does your local media (radio/TV/newspapers) say http://www.syracuse.com/business/poststandard/index.ssf?/base/business-4/1078047320315550.xml I found an article in today's Syracuse Post-Standard. They reiterate the reasons VZ would want to sell the upstate NY territory, lower profits than downstate, hostile regulators who are about to fine them yet again for lousy service, etc. But they can't figure out who'd want to buy it, either. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 17:47:39 EST Subject: Re: "Upstate NY" (Re: Verizon Plans to Sell ...) In a message dated Sun, 29 Feb 2004 13:00:06 CST Mark J Cuccia writes: > What would be interesting is if Qwest-LEC or SBC (or even BellSouth) > would take it over! If BellSouth were to take it over, what *NAME* > would BellSouth Corporation use for marketing and as the local > operating company, as this area is *NOT* "south"! :-) Southwest Airlines seems to be operating profitably in Providence, Albany and Baltimore without changings its name, not to mention Northwest Airlines operations in the South and Southeast and indeed in many parts of the world. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, but ... the objective of Southwest Airlines is for the carriage of passengers and freight to somewhere in the southwest, is it not? Or does Southwest Airlines have much or any 'local' traffic around New England and New York City? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: "Upstate NY" (Re: Verizon Plans to Sell...) Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 19:22:54 -0600 Mark J Cuccia wrote: > You'd mentioned in the earlier post that Alltel does have a few small > towns in NY. I wonder if they might consider taking over all of that > chunk of upstate NY (NYTel/NYNEX/BA/VZ)? Would make more sense. CenturyTel primarily has lines in Lorain County, Ohio, west of Cleveland. Going east on I-90 towards upstate New York, you go through large chunks of northeast Ohio that are all Western Reverse Telephone (which was bought out by Alltel). Lake County's suburbs of Cleveland are SBC, but just about everything else in Lake is Alltel; with the exception of Burton, everything in Geauga County is Alltel; and Ashtabula County, sitting on the state line, is all Alltel as far as I know. Don't know how much of the Erie PA metro is Alltel. I'd assume that Erie itself is Verizon, but don't know for sure. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 16:31:54 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: The Thread DID Continue From the Digest (was Re: Verizon Plans) Pat Townson added the following to the beginning of a (sub) thread of posts/emails between John Levine and Me (Mark J. Cuccia), those emails were cc'd to the Digest intended for publication, and Pat did publish them all ... thanks ... (this appeared in volume 23 issue 96, Sun, 29 Feb 2004 16:24:00 EST) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The next several messages in this issue > of the Digest did *not* begin here but were part of a series of > messages between John Levine and Mark J. Cuccia which were copied to > the Digest, by one or the other of them. PAT] (The first in the series started off as follows, with John quoting me) Date: 29 Feb 2004 04:17:32 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Verizon Says That Hawaii and Upstate NY Are For Sale > I read a report from the WSJ about a week ago that VeriZon is > seriously considering selling off (GTE) Hawaiian Telco and also SOME > of its NYTel/NYNEX/BA franchise area in upstate NY! (and John's reply continued, snipped for this presentation). Actually, Pat, this "spin-off" thread *DID* originate from the Digest, and simply continued as individual posts from John or me, to you/Digest, it only happened that we CC'd each other. The actual series appeared for the first time in this new issue (96), but it did "originate from" Telecom Digest. The initial text that John quoted from me, transcribed above, is from TELECOM Digest, Volume 23, issue 95, Sat, 28 Feb 2004 22:23:00 EST, in article subject "Nevada; Other BOC Oddities", about half-way down in that article, and it is as follows: > VeriZon (Bell Atlantic/NYNEX) has actually *introduced* the 1970s-era > "Bell" logo in previous *GTE/CONTEL* areas, such as on trucks, > buildings, payphone signage, etc! BTW, I read a report from the WSJ > about a week ago that VeriZon is seriously considering selling off > (GTE) Hawaiian Telco and also SOME of its NYTel/NYNEX/BA franchise > area in upstate NY! Note the second sentence in there is *EXACTLY* what John Levine quoted from me to start off his reply in this spin-off "thread" about VeriZon planning to sell-off (GTE) Hawaiian Telco, and also some of the original NYTel/NYNEX/BA franchise area of upstate New York... Just want to set the record straight! Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA CSA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well ex-cuuuuse me! PAT] ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Last Giggle/Snicker! Re: Picture, Michael Powell in a Bra Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 13:15:32 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Well, John, probably none of us wants to know WHY you're looking for this picture but go to the 1-25-04 issue of Willamette Week and click on "Volume" (or click on this: http://www.wweek.com/story.php?story=4858) Enjoy! Al John Bartley or K7AAY@ARRL.NET" wrote in message news:telecom23.94.3@telecom-digest.org: > Yes, Michael Powell in a bra. > Some telecom or computer magazine I've read within the past week had a > B&W pic of the Chair of the FCC in a bra. I'd heard he wore it at > some stag event, and wasn't surprised when I saw it; just trashed the > magazine, and forgot about it. > Now, I've read the Notice of Rulemaking for BPL (internet service over > power lines), and need that picture, because there's nothing like > sophomoric humor on the part of Powell to illustrate the cavalier way > the FCC is approaching the issue. > What issue? > Go set your tune your hi-fi to AM, pick a spot between local stations, > and turn up the vpolume about half way. Then, try to have a phone > conversation over a bad cellular connection with your ear six inches > from the speakers, and you will still have an easier time > communicating than hams will when we experience the 16 db over S9 > interference already demonstrated by BPL. > That interference explains why Austria and Japan already tried, then > abandoned, BPL. However, this is 'the best government which lobbyist > money can buy', so we get the FCC telling us in the Notice they expect > power companies to fix the problems, the same power companies who > already take *months* to resolve RFI (radio frequency interference) > problems with existing tech. > The burden of proof of the problem will be on the *ham*. How easy is > it to talk to your power company? Hams know it gets much harder when > interference problems arise. > Hams have to buy all of our own gear to equip ourselves to be able to > communicate in emergencies, and we're a part of just about every > emergency plan there is. > How many hams will learn the special skills needed for shortwave and > longwave and make the investment of $$$$ to buy the gear, if all we > get is static from BPL? You have to practice just like it's for real > to be competent in something so demanding as passing radio traffic, > and longwave and shortwave require very different skills than the VHF > and UHF short-range frequencies which are unaffected by BPL. > Folks, I need this pic to help me prove my point. Anyone remember what > magazine that picture was in? > Thanks, 73s and best regards, > John E. Bartley, III K7AAY telcom admin, PDX - Views mine. > celdata cjb net - Handheld Cellular Data FAQ > *This post quad-ROT13 encrypted. Reading it violates the DMCA.* ------------------------------ 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 #97 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 1 13:26:19 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i21IQJF20604; Mon, 1 Mar 2004 13:26:19 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 13:26:19 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403011826.i21IQJF20604@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 #98 TELECOM Digest Mon, 1 Mar 2004 13:26:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 98 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AOL Reverses Course on Broadband (Lisa Minter) Qwest Communications Introduces Nationwide Wireless Calling (M Solomon) InterActiveCorp Buys ZeroDegrees (Monty Solomon) CRYPTOCard's CRYPTO-Server X: First Authentication Solution (M Solomon) Verizon/NYNEX/NYTel Upstate NY (Mark J Cuccia) Re: "Upstate NY" (Re: Verizon Plans to Sell ...) (Tony P.) Re: Technology Triumphs Do Not Call List; Block ALL Unwanted (Ken Chase) Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates (Bob Goudreau) 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 00:07:54 EST From: Lisa Minter Subject: AOL Reverses Course on Broadband This appeared in the Independence, KS Sunday Reporter Business News, February 29, 2004: America Online, Inc. has quietly stopped offering a complete broadband package, requiring subscribers to instead obtain their high-speed Internet connections directly from a cable company or a DSL provider, such as Cable One, or TerraWorld here locally, or SBC which also offers DSL service. The reversal in strategy stands as another black mark against the purported wisdom of the $160-billion merger between Amerrica Online and Time Warner the former owner of the cable franchise here in Independence until last year. The merger between the two, widely touted as a'perfect marriage' of old and new style media 'with the means to deliver it' occurred at the height of the internet boom during the 1990's. The decision to stop selling bundled service -- an AOL branded cable or DSL connection combined with AOL's walled garden of content -- follows a strategic realignment that began in December, 2002, according to AOL spokeswoman Anne Bentley said Friday. The change, which took effect late in January does not affect customers who bought the package before then. Those customers will continue to be 'grandfathered' unless/until they either change the terms of their service, for example with Cable One or TerraWorld, or move to a different address requiring a service change. Although AOL would not provide a detailed breakdown, we found that relatively few of the company's 3 million broadband customers had the $54.95 per month package, preferring locally instead to use Terra World's DSL service combined with AOL's 'bring your own access' for $14.95 per month or Cable One (Independence)/Cox Cable (Coffeyville) services to access the same 'BYOA' service, as AOL called it. Both TerraWorld and Cable One/Cox Cable offer much less expensive service, as does HIT.net (Horizon Internet Technologies), another local provider in southeast Kansas. The DSL service offered through SBC is different, since that company requires its DSL subscribers to also use its phone service, so a comparison on prices could not be made as easily. In addition to the broadband customers, AOL has about 21 million dial-up subscribers in the United States. Dave Burstein, editor of the online DSL Prime newsletter termed AOL's termination of the bundled service an admission of defeat for AOL. Lisa Minter *** 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 owners, in this instance Associated Press and Independence Reporter Publishing Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:46:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Qwest Communications Introduces Nationwide Wireless Calling Qwest Communications Introduces Nationwide Wireless Calling - Mar 1, 2004 06:01 AM (PR Newswire) New Plans Offer Customers Greater Flexibility and Choice with Wireless Calling Across the United States DENVER, March 1 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Qwest Communications International Inc. (NYSE:Q) today introduced its nationwide wireless voice service for residential and small business customers. For the first time, Qwest wireless customers can choose competitive national or state service plans. Qwest's nationwide calling plans start as low as $24.99 for 200 minutes when customers combine wireless with any other Qwest service on a single bill. More information about these new plans is available at www.qwest.com. In addition, the company today will begin promoting the plans in television and print advertising featuring Qwest employees and customers, including hockey great Wayne Gretzky. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40719658 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 09:49:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: InterActiveCorp Buys ZeroDegrees InterActiveCorp Buys ZeroDegrees By REUTERS NEW YORK/LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - InterActiveCorp . (IACI.O), media mogul Barry Diller's conglomerate of enterprises ranging from online dating to home loans, has agreed to acquire business networking site ZeroDegrees, the company said on Monday. ZeroDegrees of Hollywood is one of more than a dozen start-ups that have been launched over the past year in the hope of cashing in on the trend popularized by dating site Friendster, which has drawn millions to seek connections via online social networks. Friendster is the leading example of personal/dating sites, along with Tribe Networks and CraigsList. Last month, Google Inc. introduced Orkut, its own personal referral service. In contrast, ZeroDegrees focuses on business contacts. Potential rivals include LinkedIn, Contact Networks, Socialtext, Spoke Software, Ryze, Visible Path and Eliyon. These sites are versions of the concept of ``Six Degrees of Separation,'' the title of a Broadway play and a movie that has become a phrase embedded in the popular culture and refers to the web of connections that tie together seemingly remote people via friends of friends and so on. http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/business/business-tech-diller-zerodegrees.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 09:52:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CRYPTOCard's CRYPTO-Server X: The First Authentication Solution CRYPTOCard's CRYPTO-Server X: The First Authentication Solution to Provide SSH Connection for Mac OS X 'Panther' OTTAWA, Ontario--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 1, 2004-- CRYPTOCard's CRYPTO-Server X Follows Up Macworld 2004 "Best of Show" Award By Wowing Renowned Apple Security Expert CRYPTOCard's (www.cryptocard.com) "Best of Show" award winner at Macworld 2004, CRYPTO-Server X, the first authentication solution for the Mac, has received high praise from the former leader of Apple's IT Security Department, and one of the foremost experts in Macintosh forensic analysis, Derrick Donnelly, CTO, BlackBag Technologies, for making it simple to positively authenticate remote Mac users attempting to access a system via a Secure Socket Shell (SSH) connection. SSH, an internet protocol that increases remote security by encrypting passwords and authenticating both ends of the client/server connection using a digital certificate, effectively eliminates eavesdropping, connection hijacking, and other network-level attacks. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40721583 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 07:13:24 -0600 (CST) From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: More, Verizon/NYNEX/NYTel Upstate NY ***IN TELECOM DIGEST***, John Levine earlier posted: > Mark J. Cuccia asked: >> John, what does your local media (radio/TV/newspapers) say? > http://www.syracuse.com/business/poststandard/index.ssf?/base/business-4/1078047320315550.xml > I found an article in today's Syracuse Post-Standard. They reiterate > the reasons VZ would want to sell the upstate NY territory, lower > profits than downstate, hostile regulators who are about to fine them > yet again for lousy service, etc. But they can't figure out who'd want > to buy it, either. The article also mentions Citizens/Frontier/Rochester (I guess Global Crossing has entirely vacated the LEC side of Frontier and Rochester? Whatever became of 101-0444 Frontier LD which I think Global Crossing also acquired?) But from that Syracuse Post-Standard article are the following two quotes: "Verizon officials have let it be known they are thinking about breaking up their New York telephone business and selling off the least profitable part, which is everything north and west of Westchester County." and "The Upstate network Verizon might sell comprises about 2.5 million customer lines, from Buffalo to the northern border of Westchester County." 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. There seem to be more 845-NXX c.o.codes in LATA 133 "Poukeepsie" rather than in LATA 132 "NY City Metro". 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! Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA CSA ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: "Upstate NY" (Re: Verizon Plans to Sell ...) Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 06:52:44 GMT In article , Wesrock@aol.com says: > In a message dated Sun, 29 Feb 2004 13:00:06 CST Mark J Cuccia > writes: >> What would be interesting is if Qwest-LEC or SBC (or even BellSouth) >> would take it over! If BellSouth were to take it over, what *NAME* >> would BellSouth Corporation use for marketing and as the local >> operating company, as this area is *NOT* "south"! :-) > Southwest Airlines seems to be operating profitably in Providence, > Albany and Baltimore without changings its name, not to mention > Northwest Airlines operations in the South and Southeast and indeed in > many parts of the world. Yes but if they don't extend the runway at PVD we can pretty much kiss our airport goodbye. PVD will become a backwater, great. > Wes Leatherock > wesrock@aol.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, but ... the objective of Southwest > Airlines is for the carriage of passengers and freight to somewhere > in the southwest, is it not? Or does Southwest Airlines have much or > any 'local' traffic around New England and New York City? PAT] Soutwest flies to Tier 2 cities -- like Providence, Islip, etc. On the other end they fly to destination cities like Orlando etc. Works well for me. Inter-region there is Bonanza and Greyhound, or Acela/Acela Regional. For travel between RI and MA there's always the MBTA commuter rail. And of course if they ever get their crap together the MBTA will service the PVD airport. Makes expansion of that airport an absolute necessity now. ------------------------------ From: Ken@Privacy-Call.com (Ken Chase) Subject: Re: Technology Triumphs Do Not Call List; Block ALL Unwanted Calls Date: 1 Mar 2004 06:51:06 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Ken@Privacy-Call.com (Ken Chase) wrote in message news:: > In response to numerous questions about the 'Do Not Call' List and > blocking unwanted calls, we are posting information about the latest > release, the http://privacycall.com/pages/caller-id-screener-intro.htm > TECHNOLOGY TRIUMPHS OVER FTC'S "DO NOT CALL" LIST > New Caller ID Screener Allows Only 'Invited' Callers to Ring - Free of > Fees > (SCOTTSDALE, AZ) Telemarketing companies and exempted groups may have > found loopholes in the new National Do Not Call List, but > telecom automation groundbreaker Bill Sasso of Digitone Communications > thwarts them again with his latest invention, the > http://privacycall.com/pages/id-screener-3.htm Privacy Call ID > Screener > A small, tabletop device designed for customers who subscribe to > Caller ID, the Privacy Call ID Screener allows only 'Invited' callers > to ring their phone. All other callers are handled as the consumer > chooses. > Although the device is customizable, its use is simple. Callers on the > consumer's 'Invited' list ring through without interference, while > anonymous or unfamiliar callers are asked to identify themselves or > leave a message, without ringing the phone. Callers on the consumer's > 'Excluded' list cannot ring the phone or leave a message, including > cell phone, out-of-state, and international callers. > "We call it 'Caller ID with attitude!'" says Sasso. "Now consumers can > choose who can ring their phone, and when, without the limits and > extra monthly charges from your telephone service provider. Using the > unit's Caller ID screen, it only takes a push of a button to add > callers to your 'Included' or 'Excluded' list. And, using the > 'Wildcard' feature, the consumer can 'Invite' or 'Exclude' entire area > codes, prefixes or number sets. With the ID Screener, exemptions like > those to the National 'Do Not Call' List simply do not exist." > A snap to install, the Privacy Call ID Screener prevents telemarketing > calls, predictive dialers, misdialed numbers, hang-up calls, false > faxes, pollsters, political organizations, exes, creditors and anyone > else the consumer doesn't want to talk to ... ever again. > Additional benefits include a call-forwarding feature that, on a > single line, seamlessly connects 'Invited' callers to a cell phone or > alternate location, as well as a 'Do Not Disturb' mode. This feature > prevents all callers from ringing the phone during set hours, such as > bedtime and study time, either on a one-time or daily basis. > "The ID Screener is particularly useful for people who keep unusual > hours, such as those working the graveyard or swing shifts," says > Sasso. "During 'Do Not Disturb' hours, 'Invited' callers can leave a > message, but the phone will not ring, ensuring total privacy." A > secret emergency code is provided in case of emergencies. > The Privacy Call ID Screener is the latest addition to the Privacy > Call series, designed to help residential consumers and business > owners better manage their telephone communications and reduce monthly > telephone charges. Consisting of six different models, Privacy Call > Series products are available at the Privacy Call website > www.Privacy-Call.com or by > calling (888) 833-5333. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This sounds a great deal to me like the > old Privcode machine, which was popular back in the 1970's. It was > attached to the phone line, and was sensitive enough to go off hook at > the slightest hint of a change in voltage, so the phones seldom if > ever actually rang. Instead, this machine -- the Privcode -- would > announce its intentions and demand that the caller enter or speak his > Privcode ID number (actually, it was referred to as the 'extension' > number desired by the caller. The proper three digit 'extension' > allowed the phones to ring. Otherwise, the caller got transferred to > an answering machine. Really a great device, and manufactured in those > days by IMM (International Mobile Machines) of Bala Cynwyd, PA. It > is no longer available I don't think. Perhaps this new machine which > Ken Chase describes is a good replacement. PAT] Thanks for your comment. Indeed, there have been a number of attempts to create devices that can eliminate unwanted calls. Over the years, what the public has most often requested from us is a device that allows only 'Invited' callers unimpeded access while blocking or pre-screening all others. A number of devices introduced in the last couple of years have attempted to stop telemarketers, but have been only mildly successful at actually controlling the increasing number of annoyances that ring the phone and interupt privacy. These calls include misdialed numbers, false faxes, predictive dialers calling to harvest working voice and fax numbers, prank and harassment calls, etc. And of course, those exempt from the rules of the FTC's National Do Not Call List, and there are many, have continued to call. The Privacy Call series addresses all of these problems with simple solutions, whether the consumer subscribes to Caller ID or not. With our latest introduction, the Privacy Call ID Screener, consumers can either screen all calls and invite some, or use the built-in 'Wildcard' feature to invite everyone with Caller ID information and exclude the numbers they choose. Either way, the phone doesn't ring until it's a welcome caller. ------------------------------ Reply-To: BobGoudreau@newsgroup From: BobGoudreau Subject: Re: Verizon Land Line International Rates Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 10:16:36 -0500 [Please continue to despammify my email address. Thanks.] Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: > [re charging $3.00 or so per minute for overseas calls made without a > calling plan] > This is but one more example of the drawbacks of privatizing the phone > system. If companies can still make money charging $0.15/minute to > Europe, what in the world makes anyone think it's better for consumers > to have companies charging 20 times that? Several decades of empirical economic data, that's what. Turns out that the costs of having Gosplan centrally micromanage the operation of a particular consumer market end up far exceeding the benefits to the country at large. I have a limited amount of sympathy for the original poster, given that he incurred costs due to his own carelessness. But my sympathy does not extend to the notion that I should have to pay extra to fund some government agency that will protect him from his carelessness. To draw an analogy, consider bottled water. You can walk into any supermarket and buy a generic or store-brand bottle of drinking water for a few tens of cents. You can also pay far more for a bottle of Perrier or Evian or some other premium brand. And there are no doubt various "super-premium" brands of bottled water available in rich shopping zones like Rodeo Drive that cost far more still. But all of these are essentially the same product. If companies can make money selling water for a few dimes a bottle, what in the world makes anyone think it's better for consumers to have companies charging 20 times that? Bob Goudreau Cary, NC ------------------------------ 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 #98 ***************************** 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 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 2 03:12:26 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i228CQd26386; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 03:12:26 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 03:12:26 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403020812.i228CQd26386@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 #100 TELECOM Digest Tue, 2 Mar 2004 03:11:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 100 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Anti-Spam Solutions and Security (Monty Solomon) Alleged WebTV 911 Hacker Charged With Cyberterrorism (Monty Solomon) Maxtor Champions 6 Stream DVRs (Monty Solomon) Lawsuit Over Fake Sony Critic Survives Challenge (Monty Solomon) Is Password-Lending a Cybercrime? (Monty Solomon) Re: Sharing Passwords (Bit Twister) Re: Nevada Bell (Michael Chance) Re: Missouri Bell (Michael Chance) Re: RI & Providence Plantations; St. Pierre/Miquelon/Newfoundland (Tony) More Re: The GTE Side of Verizon (Mark J. Cuccia) I Found Something You May Like (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 00:47:23 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Anti-Spam Solutions and Security by Dr. Neal Krawetz SecurityFocus 1. Overview In a recent survey, 93% of respondents reported dissatisfaction with the large volume of unsolicited email (spam) they receive. [ref 1] The problem has grown to the point where nearly 50% of the world's email is spam [ref 2], yet only a few hundred groups are responsible. [ref 3] Many anti-spam solutions have been proposed and a few have been implemented. Unfortunately, these solutions do not prevent spam as much as they interfere with every-day email communications. The problems posed by spam have grown from simple annoyances to significant security issues. The deluge of spam costs up to an estimated $20 billion each year in lost productivity -- according to the same document, spam within a company can cost between $600 and $1,000 per year for every user.[ref 4] http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1763 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 00:53:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Alleged WebTV 911 Hacker Charged With Cyberterrorism By Kevin Poulsen SecurityFocus FBI agents arrested a Louisiana man last week under the cyberterrorism provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act for allegedly tricking a handful of MSN TV users into running a malicious e-mail attachment that reprogrammed their set-top boxes to dial 9-1-1 emergency response. According to prosecutors, David Jeansonne, 43, was targeting 18 specific MSN TV users in an online squabble when he crafted the script in July 2002, and sent it out disguised as a tool to change the colors on MSN TV's user interface. Though the code didn't mass-mail itself to others, some of the recipients were sufficiently fooled that they forwarded it to friends, for a total of 21 victims. Known as WebTV before it was acquired by Microsoft, MSN TV works with television set-top boxes to allow users to surf the Web and send and receive e-mail without using a PC. The boxes connect to the Internet through a local dial-up number. The malicious script changed the dial-up to 9-1-1. If a victim didn't go online again after being infected, the box would summon help anyway when it tried to make an automatic daily call to the network at midnight. http://www.securityfocus.com/news/8136 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is absolutely DUMB! I have to wonder why David Jeansonne that would hurt anyone but eventually himself. Dumb, dumb, dumb! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 01:00:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Maxtor Champions 6 Stream DVRs http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/35932.html By Faultline Maxtor and Scientific Atlanta last week attracted column inches on their plans for the next generation of DVRs, due for release in about 18 months. But what exactly are they talking about when they boast of 6 stream technology? To date, pegging the price of DVRs and VCRs meant that they could feature a limited number of tuners. A tuner sorts through the signals on a TV network - digital or analogue - and selects the wavelength carrying the required programme. The tuner then unscrambles it and readies it for viewing pleasure. In the past, including two tuners was thought to be an extravagance, and any more than that completely unnecessary. The rationale behind this was that the single-TV consumer would be unlikely to want to record more than two programs at a time, while either watching one of them or watching a third recorded program. http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/35932.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 22:33:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Lawsuit Over Fake Sony Critic Survives Challenge - Mar 1, 2004 09:48 PM (Reuters) By Gina Keating LOS ANGELES, March 1 (Reuters) - The fictitious movie critic David Manning may still end up in court over all the nice things he had to say about "Hollow Man" and "The Animal." A California appeals court on Thursday ruled that a proposed class action filed by filmgoers against Sony Pictures Entertainment could go to trial over the studio's admission that it had created a fake critic to plug its movies. But in a scathing dissent, Justice Reuben Ortega called the lawsuit "a farce" and "the most frivolous case with which I have ever had to deal." Sony's lawyers had asked a Los Angeles trial judge to throw out the lawsuit, which accuses Sony of false advertising and deceptive business practices for creating Manning and then using his laudatory blurbs in ads that ran in U.S. newspapers in 2000 and 2001. But the Los Angeles trial judge rejected Sony's argument that the ads were protected by the state's free speech guarantees. The Second District Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge, saying the case could proceed to trial. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40729094 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 00:39:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Is Password-Lending a Cybercrime? A judge's wrongheaded interpretation of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act illustrates the problems of allowing civil enforcement of a criminal law. By Mark Rasch SecurityFocus In a little-observed civil lawsuit involving tracking of magazine subscriptions, a federal court in Manhattan issued a ruling last week that could theoretically result in prosecutors going after people who use another person's password and userid with their permission, but without the permission of the issuer. The case, decided last Monday, arose out of a dispute between two competing companies, Inquiry Management Systems (IMS), and Berkshire Information Systems, both of whom tracked magazine advertisements for their clients. Employees of Berkshire obtained a userid and password from a client of IMS, and used them to access IMS's website and tracking service. This act violated the customer's agreement with IMS. From there, the Berkshire employees either read, or downloaded (or both) certain copyrighted information about the tracking of magazine advertisements, which of course, they used to compete with IMS. Is this an unfair and deceptive trade practice? Sure! Inducing a breach of contract between IMS and its customer? Absolutely! Fraud? Sure, why not. But IMS sued Berkshire for computer crime, and a violation of the DMCA. http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/222 ------------------------------ From: Bit Twister Subject: Re: Sharing Passwords Organization: home user Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 03:48:07 GMT On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 01:36:59 GMT, Bit Twister wrote: > 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 > yourself 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] I was thinking about a nytimes.com telecomdigest1 account. :( [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, think about it if you wish. There are some substantial differences in the cases. In the original report presented in this issue by Monty Solomon, a fellow had been given a secret password as a condition of his employment. I presume his pass- word enabled him to make some changes on the computer. In my case, I don't honestly know who first created the telecomdigest account on the New York Times, only that it was later reported to me here that the 'group password' for Digest readers was not working correctly, so I made changes as needed to make it work. It was never known as anything other than a 'group password', there was never any secret about it, nor was it a condition of employment, etc. In addition, it was not a password with sufficient ability to make any changes in the records of NYT or do anything other than read news. If NYT wants to sue me as a result, or refer to me as a 'cyberterrorist' they are welcome to do so, but I can't really see it happening. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael Chance Subject: Re: Nevada Bell Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 04:53:43 GMT In article , Wesrock@aol.com says: > The largest city in Nevada, Las Vegas, was not and is not served by > Bell. Actually, it is. SBC Telecom (the SBC subsidiary that acts as a CLEC in non-SBC ILEC territory) provides local service to Las Vegas. It's not widely advertised, but if you ask, they'll provide service. Michael Chance ------------------------------ From: Michael Chance Subject: Re: Missouri Bell Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 05:02:24 GMT In article , Wesrock@aol.com says... > As I recall, M & K did not include the eastern part of Missouri > (St.Louis area), but I don't remember the name of the company that > operated there. Here's the history: St. Louis Telephonic Exchange, April 1878-1879 became The Bell Telephone Company of Missouri,1879-1913 [primarily St. Louis area] renamed The Southwestern Telegraph and Telephone Company (of Missouri), 1913-1917 and sister company The Missouri and Kansas Telephone Company,1882-1917 [chiefly Kansas and Western Missouri] merged to form Southwestern Bell Telephone Company (of Missouri),1917-1920 [Kansas, Missouri and Arkansas]. The headquarters building that Missouri Bell built in the 1890s is still standing at the corner of 10th and Olive in downtown St. Louis, and is currently being renovated into loft condos named, appropriately, The Bell Lofts. The Southwestern Bell headquarters building that was built in the early 1920s at 1010 Pine in downtown St. Louis (a fine example of art deco architecture) is still owned by SBC, and is used for a variety of corporate offices, and still houses the Chestnut central office, serving the downtown area. Michael Chance ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: RI & Providence Plantations; St. Pierre/Miquelon, Newfoundland Organization: ATCC Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 04:03:41 GMT In article , msb@vex.net says: > 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. In essence that's part of the story. Roger Williams landed in what is now Providence. Newport only became prominent because of it's strategic location at the mouth of Narragansett Bay. In fact, sandwiched between Canal Street and North Main Street in Providence is the Roger Williams National Memorial -- built on what was once the site of his home in Providence. But you're correct about the plantations part -- the urban core of Providence was ringed with farmlands up until the 40's. Now it's one huge strip mall. More interesting is that while Newport pretty much bulldozed most of it's historic properties, Providence managed to preserve quite a bit on the east side of the city. That has to do with the efforts of this group: http://www.ppsri.org/ As of this year the settlement of that State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations is 368 years in the past. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 22:28:32 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: More Re the GTE Side of Verizon Steven Sobol wrote (in the thread of upstate-NY, Alltel, Centurytel, etc): > Don't know how much of the Erie PA metro is Alltel. I'd assume that Erie > itself is Verizon, but don't know for sure. Erie PA is indeed Verizon, but not from Bell Atlantic. Erie PA (and surrounding territory) is old GT&E and is actually a "LATA" unto itself! In the old BA states, at the time of the merger between GTE/Contel and BA/NYNEX to form VeriZon, only PA and VA were states with old GTE (some inlcuding old Contel). In addition to the Erie PA and surrounding area being GTE and actually a *LATA* of its own, there are other GTE areas in PA (and VA) which are simply within (legacy) Bell Atlantic LATAs. Erie PA and vicinity is the only GTE area that is also a GTE LATA, that exists in PA (or VA). West Virginia (a legacy BA state) used to have some GTE (which was also associated with GTE bordering in Virginia), but when GTE bought out Contel in the early 1990s, they sold off the West Virginia operations to Citizens' Telephone/Utilities. None of the old NYNEX states had any remaining GTE. There seems to have been some GT&E up there in the later 1950s, 1960s and even 1970s, but it was all sold off, probably well before GTE took over Contel in the early 1990s. Large amounts of old GTE and old Contel was sold to Citizens' and Alltel in the early 1990s when GTE took over Contel, probably to comply with FTC/DOJ "antitrust". mjc ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 23:06:35 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: I Found Something You May Like I have something here you may enjoy. I call it the perpetual porn maker machine. Actually, what it does is goes about the entire net, like a hungry worm, looking for all the porn it can find. It never goes hungry! Its for any flavor of Windows It simply starts out with some well-known sites, traverses them one by one crawling around, and exploring every link it finds therein, and because it has been taught what 'porn looks like' it brings back all it can find, like several thousand jpg files every hour more or less. It takes a while, maybe a couple minutes to get started, but once the results start coming in, they pour in heavily. More porn than anyone can ever deal with. In an experiment, I turned it on one night before going to bed, and had *eighteen thousand* porn images (.jpg) on my computer the next morning. It neatly puts all the results in a file of whatever size, subject to the limits of your hard drive in c:/my thumb gallery. It helps to have a huge hard drive! Be careful, don't let the worm run unsupervised or uncontrolled for very long at a time. And there is no front door or cashier's window to go past. Why should guys have to pay for porn? It just goes in deep and takes it all out and brings it to you. No advertising, no pop ups, no spy-cookies installed on your computer, etc. If you click on the picture of the camera, then you get to see the work that is going on in the background. My suggestion would be if you like that sort of thing is to run it in the background, let little pictures pop up on your screen and periodically clean out the c://my thumbgal gallery file. You can run it all the time, but the storage file gets to be so big and unwieldy, and frankly, boring. You can rename the directory and restart the program; the worm just recreates a new directory with the same name and starts filling it with porn again, by the truckful. I did NOT invent this worm, but the company which did is now long since out of business. One of the options available once it is loaded and running is to 'register' the program; that would give you access to movies, etc but that function does not work; I think the company which invented the porn-worm was too trusting in thinking all the dirty old men around here would be willing to pay for at least that much. I've renamed my version of it 'Porn Worm'. Let me know how you like it. http://porn-worm.us.tf PAT ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #100 ******************************