From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 2 13:30:55 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i22IUtC01334; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 13:30:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 13:30:55 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403021830.i22IUtC01334@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 #101 TELECOM Digest Tue, 2 Mar 2004 13:31:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 101 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #422, March 1, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) State Looks at False Bills From AT&T (Monty Solomon) Vonage Experience - Bad! (Phil) Digital Microphones Drives Performance Next-Generation Cells (R Ward) Re: More Re the GTE Side of Verizon (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: More Re the GTE Side of Verizon (Steven J Sobol) V.17 Receiver (Alexis Deltour) Telecom Link Submit (Emox.com) 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, 02 Mar 2004 12:27:54 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #422, March 1, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 422: March 1, 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: ** BCE Calls for New Communications Policies ** Microcell Sues Over Anti-Fido Ads ** Hotels Denied Payment for Toll-Free Calls ** Bell Asks CRTC to Stop Regulating Its High-Speed Data ** Cogeco Offers Small-Business Internet Plan ** Call-Net Sales Flat, Losses Down ** Aliant Extends High-Speed Internet ** GT Builds New Brunswick Research Net ** Globalive Offers Hosted IP Telephony ** Wireless Internet in Iqualuit ** Wi-Fi Offered on Montreal-Quebec Trains ** Growth of Data Access Market Slows ** Look Raises $10.7 Million ** SR Telecom Sales Decline ** Network Management Software Compared ============================================================ BCE CALLS FOR NEW COMMUNICATIONS POLICIES: BCE CEO Michael Sabia last week called for the "re-setting of the public policy framework" for the advent of IP-based competition in Canadian communications. New policies "must provide the same rules for all service providers," he said. (See Telecom Update #411) MICROCELL SUES OVER ANTI-FIDO ADS: Microcell has asked the Quebec Superior Court to bar Telus, Bell Mobility, and Rogers Wireless from making "discriminatory offers" targeting only Microcell customers. Microcell wants the court to also block the use of "Fido trademarks" and "dogs and other Fido-related images" in its rivals' advertising. (See Telecom Update #417) HOTELS DENIED PAYMENT FOR TOLL-FREE CALLS: CRTC Telecom Decision 2004-11 rejects a hotel industry proposal to have hotels receive payment for toll-free calls made from hotel telephones. The CRTC also declined to allow hotels to block or re-route toll-free calls. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/dt2004-11.htm BELL ASKS CRTC TO STOP REGULATING ITS HIGH-SPEED DATA: Bell Canada has asked the CRTC to forbear from regulating high- speed, fibre-based digital services in some Ontario and Quebec markets, including in Montreal, Ottawa, and Toronto. Bell says it holds only about a third of the $240-million yearly high-speed data market in these two provinces. www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2004/8640/b2_200401506.htm COGECO OFFERS SMALL-BUSINESS INTERNET PLAN: Cogeco Cable's new Business Starter plan offers Ontario business customers Internet access at up to 5 Mbps (download) and 640 Kbps (upload) for $49.95/month. CALL-NET SALES FLAT, LOSSES DOWN: Call-Net Enterprises reports fourth quarter sales of $204 million, down 0.8% from the previous quarter and up 0.8% from a year earlier. Net losses were $16.2 million, compared to $24.4 million in the same period of 2002. Call-Net added 106,000 local lines in 2003, and had 12,800 wireless subscribers at year-end. ALIANT EXTENDS HIGH-SPEED INTERNET: Aliant says it is spending $12.6 million in the first half of 2004 to make high-speed Internet available to an additional 40,000 homes and 1,600 businesses in the Atlantic provinces. GT BUILDS NEW BRUNSWICK RESEARCH NET: Group Telecom has deployed C$3 million worth of equipment to expand the bandwidth of the New Brunswick/PEI Research Grid. The consortium responsible for the grid includes CANARIE, the National Research Council, the province of New Brunswick, and four universities. GLOBALIVE OFFERS HOSTED IP TELEPHONY: Toronto-based Globalive now offers hosted multimedia IP-based telephony using Nortel's MCS 5200 platform. WIRELESS INTERNET IN IQUALUIT: Nunanet Worldwide Communications and Inukshuk Internet have built a wireless broadband network for Internet access in Iqualuit, Nunavut, using Inukshuk's 2.5 GHz MCS spectrum. (See Telecom Update #420) WI-FI OFFERED ON MONTREAL-QUEBEC TRAINS: Spotnik Mobile and , Telus Mobility now offer wireless 802.11 Internet access is on selected Via Rail trains between Montreal and Quebec City. The service is free March 31. (See Telecom Update #391) GROWTH OF DATA ACCESS MARKET SLOWS: The Convergence Consulting Group says that the Canadian data/Internet access market grew by 6% in 2003 to $6.7 billion, about half the rate of growth of 2002. www.convergenceonline.com LOOK RAISES $10.7 MILLION: Look Communications says that investors have oversubscribed its offering of $10.7 million in convertible debentures. SR TELECOM SALES DECLINE: SR Telecom, a Montreal fixed wireless equipment maker, had 2003 revenue of $128 million, down 35% from the previous year. The net loss was $44.8 million, compared to $20.9 million in 2002. NETWORK MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE COMPARED: The March issue of Telemanagement includes a hands-on comparison review of six network management software packages, plus Part 2 of our in- depth report on IP telephony systems for branch offices, 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. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 12:24:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: State Looks at False Bills From AT&T Company denies telemarket scheme By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 3/2/2004 Massachusetts utility regulators said yesterday that they are investigating a pattern of AT&T Corp. allegedly sending bogus bills to people who are not customers of the company, then trying to sell them AT&T phone service when they call to complain. After similar concerns emerged in upstate New York last week, the Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications and Energy said yesterday it has received more than 30 complaints since January from Bay State residents who said they got bills from AT&T although they have never had AT&T service or canceled it months or years earlier. http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2004/03/02/state_looks_at_false_bills_from_att/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I got one of those myself last week. AT&T sent a four page statement of what services I would get if I signed up for them with AT&T 'local service'. The bill went on to say I would be paying a 'basic rate' of $16.67 per month or $50 total for three months as the 'deposit', etc. I did not have time to respond; I just tossed it out. PAT] ------------------------------ From: phil_m_palmer@yahoo.com (Phil) Subject: Vonage Experience Date: 2 Mar 2004 09:43:14 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I signed-up for Vonage Service. They charged my VISA for the startup fees -- np. I get the Motorola VT but it works only intermitantly. Support from Vonage is non-existent, at best. I called several times, mostly hanging-up after holding for 20 minutes. I emailed several times with no return emails. After a week of this crap, I called to cancel. The Vonage Rep said that he'd have to charge $41 bucks to give me an RMA and return address. I told him that is called extortion. He said both the startup fee and termination fee would be refunded when the equipment was returned. So I allowed him to charge my VISA. I am mailing the equipment back today and will followup with additional experience. ALSO, beware about Vonage's Terms of Service policy. It states that you have seven days after you recieve your credit card statement to file a dispute. And that you must notify them before you do so thru your credit card. According to VISA this total BS. Vonage cannot supercede VISA policy, it is called non-compliance. Phil VONAGE SUCKS! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am truly sorry you have had such bad experience with them. My experience has been quite good by comparison. Have you tried the various techniques presented here in recent weeks to get around some of the intermittent problems you have had? For example, since I made the adjustments in my Linksys firewall/router they recommended, I've had no further problems with loss of dialtone or non-receipt of incoming calls. I *will* agree their customer service holding queue is pretty outrageous at times as they begin to learn the business a little better also. And the Motorola box they are using now may possibly not be as good as the Cisco, I am not sure on that. If you have not yet returned the Motorola to them, consider trying some of the fixes described on the net and see if they help any. Even if you decide it is not working and you must return the equipment, *new* customers who have *not yet* sent in for/recieved an adapter box can get a free month of whatever service package they desire by using an e-coupon from me to start the process. The e-coupon gets you the *second* month of service for free. Email me and ask for it. ptownson@telecom-digest.org PAT] ------------------------------ From: rg_ward@lineone.net (R Ward) Subject: Digital Microphones Drives Performance for Next-Generation Cells Date: 2 Mar 2004 08:33:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Zarlink Semiconductor today announced that it is the first to develop advanced digital microphone technology that boosts the performance of the next generation of cellular phones. Featuring ultra low-power mixed-signal design, Zarlink's new chip is the industry's only analog-to-digital converter to meet the stringent performance specifications demanded by cell phone manufacturers. For more info, visit: http://news.zarlink.com/archive/2004/Mar/02/March2-ZL70190-English.htm ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: More Re the GTE Side of Verizon Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 05:04:38 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications I think the Palms, Springs, California area was still a GTE LATA within a LATA when Verizon gobbled it all up. Mark J Cuccia wrote: > 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 ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: More Re the GTE Side of Verizon Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 10:05:24 -0600 Mark J Cuccia wrote: > 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! That explains why Erie was part of my home area with GTE back before the Great Wireless Merger of 2000. 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: adeltour@midisystem.fr (Alexis Deltour) Subject: V.17 Receiver Date: 2 Mar 2004 00:17:57 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I'm working on V.17 fax project and I'm looking for fax training (long and short sequence of V.17 and TCF), timing, carrier recovery and trellis for rate 2/3 code on matlab ... Sincerely, Alexis Deltour Ingnieur R&D Telecoms MIDI SYSTEM 460, Avenue de la Quiera 105 Voie C, PA de l'Argile 06370 Mouans Sartoux France Tel : 04 92 92 59 09 Fax : 04 92 92 24 77 Email : adeltour@midisystem.fr ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 15:15:56 +0200 From: Emox.com Subject: Telecom Link Submit Hi, We appreciate it if you add our link. Site Name: Karabakh Telecom Site URL: http://www.karabakhtelecom.com Site Description: Exclusive communication services provider in Nagorno Karabakh. Services include GSM, fixed telephony, Internet, voice services, data services & more. Regards, Emox.com http://www.emox.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 #101 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 3 13:39:54 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i23Idrg10914; Wed, 3 Mar 2004 13:39:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 13:39:54 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403031839.i23Idrg10914@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 #102 TELECOM Digest Wed, 3 Mar 2004 13:40:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 102 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Phone Cos. to Counterattack Cable TV (Monty Solomon) Calypso's Patent Could Have an Immediate Impact on OEMs (Monty Solomon) SBC / DISH Network Rollout (Monty Solomon) Cablevision Satellite Spin-Off ; Financial Results (Monty Solomon) Comcast's Disney Bid Could Be Sign Of More Cable Deals (Monty Solomon) Court Tosses Rules for Phone Competition (Monty Solomon) PluggedIn: PC Makers Try Again With TV Computers (Monty Solomon) Re: More Re the GTE Side of Verizon (Steven J Sobol) Re: More Re the GTE Side of Verizon (John David Galt) Re: Vonage Experience (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: Vonage Experience (Pete Romfh) Roam or Not Roam, Wireless With Verizon; How do I Really Know? (Roger) Unauthorized Bogus Charges Appear on Local Phone Bill (Joe Donaldson) Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers (Name Withheld) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Michael D. Sullivan) A Quick Technical Question (Eli) Archive Addition/Correction (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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Monty Solomon Subject: Phone Cos. to Counterattack Cable TV Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 08:57:26 -0500 By BRUCE MEYERSON AP Business Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- The battle lines in the cutthroat industry known as telecommunications are about to blur even further as the nation's biggest telephone companies launch a long-promised counterattack against the cable TV industry, whose new phone services have been stealing away customers. Starting Wednesday, SBC Communications Inc. will offer DISH Network satellite cable service to all of its residential customers in the 13 states where SBC is the dominant local phone provider. Next week, Verizon Communications Inc. will begin selling DirecTV satellite cable across New England and New York state. Qwest Communications, the Denver-based local phone company for much of the Rocky Mountain and Northwest, is already selling both DISH and DirecTV. And later this month, BellSouth Corp. plans to begin selling DirecTV through its Web site in advance of a full-fledged launch in its nine-state region slated for the summer. The phone companies are betting the marketing partnerships will help them keep existing customers, while convincing them to sign up for more services. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40738871 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 09:00:23 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Calypso's Patent Could Have an Immediate Impact on OEMs Calypso's Patent Could Have an Immediate Impact on the Way OEMs Do Business MIAMI LAKES, Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 3, 2004-- New technology could dramatically boost global wireless handset sales - Calypso Wireless already in negotiations with a major OEM manufacturer Calypso Wireless, Inc. (OTC:CLYW), announced today that it is in the process of contacting all major OEMs in the wireless industry to notify them of the patent that could have a significant and immediate impact on the development of the industry, as well as major implications on the way OEM's such as Nokia (NYSE:NOK), Ericsson (Nasdaq:ERICY) and Motorola (NYSE:MOT) do business. Last week, Calypso Wireless announced it had been granted U.S. Patent #6,680,923 titled "Communication system and method", which covers the seamless roaming of voice, video and data between Wide Area Network access points, such as cellular towers (GSM/GPRS/EDGE, CDMA, WCMDA etc.) and short-range Internet access points (such as Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc.). Calypso Wireless is already in negotiations with a major OEM manufacturer to license its ASNAP(TM) technology. Due to the patent, even those OEM manufacturers that don't wish to license Calypso's technology at the time, but plan to create wireless devices that roam seamlessly between these networks, will have to obtain rights from Calypso Wireless. Calypso's patented technology enables mobile users to seamlessly switch between cellular and wireless IP networks via the WLAN, accelerating wireless broadband deployment. The technology could also provide significant savings to mobile carriers in additional frequency spectrum and infrastructure equipment by offloading capacity to the WLAN and IP networks while providing additional sources of revenues. Internet-ready devices, including wireless cellular phones, PDA's and notebooks - can seamlessly connect to either the mobile carriers cellular phone network or any wireless LAN, such as 802.11x (Wi-Fi). In other words, global connectivity of voice, video and data will be done through the most efficient connection point, at a lower cost to both the mobile carrier and the consumer. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40739162 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 08:55:29 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: SBC / DISH Network Rollout SBC Communications Adds New 'Dish' To The Menu, Launches 'Quadruple Play' Bundle With Satellite TV SAN ANTONIO & ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 3, 2004-- SBC/ DISH Network offers start at $29.99; Most complete, integrated bundle of local/long distance, wireless, broadband, TV available in SBC service area for about $125/month - a $380/year savings Tune in and stay tuned. In a move expected to reshape the telecommunications and television entertainment landscape, SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) and EchoStar Communications Corp. (NASDAQ:DISH) today launched SBC/ DISH Network satellite TV service across the SBC service area - 13 states and 55 million telephone lines - offering consumers new choices, significant values and unmatched convenience. With the SBC/ DISH Network rollout, the SBC family of companies becomes the first major telecommunications provider in the nation to offer TV, wireless, broadband and local/long distance service, all with one call and one monthly bill - a "strategic quadruple play" that significantly enhances customer benefits. In the future, SBC and EchoStar companies plan to develop set-top boxes that combine the features of satellite TV, digital video recording, broadband, home networking and telecommunications services -- moving to truly integrated telecommunications and entertainment services that will provide greater interactivity, features and functionality for consumers. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40738492 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 10:00:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cablevision Satellite Spin-Off; Financial Results Cablevision Sees Satellite Spin-Off Later This Year 2 March 2004, 1:52pm ET NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Cablevision Systems Corp. Tuesday said its audit will be completed in a few weeks and reiterated its plans to spin off Rainbow DBS later this year. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200403021852_DJB_000798 Cablevision Systems Corporation Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2003 Results http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200403021322_BWR__BW5394 VOOM'S Leadership Position In HD Content Widens With the Addition of HBO and Cinemax 26 February 2004, 12:06pm ET VOOM Lineup Now Includes over 30 HD Channels and More than 70 SD Channels Eight Turner Networks Added Including CNN, TNT, TBS, CNNfn and Boomerang http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200402261706_PRN__NYTH126 Cablevision Adds New York's WNBC and Bravo HD+ to Its Expansive High-Definition Programming Slate 23 February 2004, 12:58pm ET http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200402231758_PRN__NYM190 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 09:59:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Comcast's Disney Bid Could Be Sign Of More Cable Deals NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--The specter of Walt Disney Co. ( DIS ) merging with Comcast Corp. (CMCSA, CMCSK) is reigniting interest in cable industry consolidation. Industry insiders have long seen consolidation on the horizon. But the abundance of recent merger talk could signal that more deals may be close at hand. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200402262229_DJB_001222 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 21:55:00 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Court Tosses Rules for Phone Competition By JONATHAN D. SALANT Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal appeals court on Tuesday struck down rules designed to foster competition for local telephone service, handing a major victory to Verizon, SBC, BellSouth and Qwest. A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously overturned the rules adopted last August by the Federal Communication Commission. The judges said the FCC acted improperly by leaving it to state regulators to decide whether to spur competition between the former Bell companies and others wanting to provide local phone service. It's the third time courts have invalidated FCC attempts to write rules for local telephone service competition. The judges decried the FCC's "apparent unwillingness to adhere to prior judicial rulings." The court put its decision on hold for 60 days to hear motions to reconsider its decision. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40737618 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 22:20:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: PluggedIn: PC Makers Try Again With TV Computers By Daniel Sorid SAN FRANCISCO, March 2 (Reuters) - Despite the best marketing efforts of big technology companies, personal computers have never felt much at home in the living room. But a new PC makeover by the likes of Intel and Gateway could soon give the home computer a central role in the way consumers watch television and listen to music. The device, which Intel calls the Entertainment PC, is designed to connect directly to the television, and will look more like a souped-up DVD player than a personal computer. Entertainment PCs could be on the shelves as early as the second half of this year, starting at $799. Controlled with a remote, the Entertainment PC can flip through and record television channels, play music and movies, and even connect to the Internet to download shows and songs not available from cable or satellite TV operators. Moreover, it can stream video from the living room to a PC elsewhere in the home, or even to a wirelessly connected handheld device. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40734376 ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: More Re: the GTE Side of Verizon Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 12:45:33 -0600 Sammy@nospam.biz wrote: > I think the Palms, Springs, California area was still a GTE LATA > within a LATA when Verizon gobbled it all up. Who is responsible for Los Angeles (LATA 730)? Up here, we're all Verizon/GTE, and there are a number of GTE markets within the Los Angeles area. Anaheim, IIRC, is one of them, and I think there are some more down by LAX. 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: John David Galt Subject: Re: More Re: the GTE Side of Verizon Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 16:41:19 -0800 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Sammy@nospam.biz wrote: > I think the Palms, Springs, California area was still a GTE LATA > within a LATA when Verizon gobbled it all up. The Palm Springs area (an old GTE area that extends north and east to cover Morongo Valley, Yucca Valley, Joshua Tree, and 29 Palms) is a separate LATA (number 973, according to NANPA) and has been that way ever since LATAs have existed. It annoys me that phone books published by SBC and SureWest give the false impression that it is part of the Los Angeles LATA. ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Vonage Experience Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 03:26:16 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Too bad. I've had Vonage for almost a year and it works great. Phil wrote: > I signed-up for Vonage Service. They charged my VISA for the startup > fees -- np. > I get the Motorola VT but it works only intermitantly. Support from > Vonage is non-existent, at best. I called several times, mostly > hanging-up after holding for 20 minutes. I emailed several times with > no return emails. > After a week of this crap, I called to cancel. The Vonage Rep said > that he'd have to charge $41 bucks to give me an RMA and return > address. I told him that is called extortion. He said both the startup > fee and termination fee would be refunded when the equipment was > returned. So I allowed him to charge my VISA. > I am mailing the equipment back today and will followup with > additional experience. > ALSO, beware about Vonage's Terms of Service policy. It states that > you have seven days after you recieve your credit card statement to > file a dispute. And that you must notify them before you do so thru > your credit card. According to VISA this total BS. Vonage cannot > supercede VISA policy, it is called non-compliance. > Phil > VONAGE SUCKS! > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am truly sorry you have had such bad > experience with them. My experience has been quite good by comparison. > Have you tried the various techniques presented here in recent weeks > to get around some of the intermittent problems you have had? For > example, since I made the adjustments in my Linksys firewall/router > they recommended, I've had no further problems with loss of dialtone > or non-receipt of incoming calls. I *will* agree their customer > service holding queue is pretty outrageous at times as they begin to > learn the business a little better also. And the Motorola box they > are using now may possibly not be as good as the Cisco, I am not sure > on that. If you have not yet returned the Motorola to them, consider > trying some of the fixes described on the net and see if they help > any. Even if you decide it is not working and you must return the > equipment, *new* customers who have *not yet* sent in for/recieved > an adapter box can get a free month of whatever service package they > desire by using an e-coupon from me to start the process. The e-coupon > gets you the *second* month of service for free. Email me and ask for > it. ptownson@telecom-digest.org PAT] ------------------------------ From: Pete Romfh Subject: Re: Vonage Experience Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 07:09:12 -0600 Organization: Not Organized Phil wrote: > I signed-up for Vonage Service. They charged my VISA for > the startup fees -- np. > I get the Motorola VT but it works only intermitantly. > Support from Vonage is non-existent, at best. I called > several times, mostly hanging-up after holding for 20 > minutes. I emailed several times with no return emails. > After a week of this crap, I called to cancel. The Vonage > Rep said that he'd have to charge $41 bucks to give me an > RMA and return address. I told him that is called > extortion. He said both the startup fee and termination > fee would be refunded when the equipment was returned. So > I allowed him to charge my VISA. > I am mailing the equipment back today and will followup > with additional experience. > ALSO, beware about Vonage's Terms of Service policy. It > states that you have seven days after you recieve your > credit card statement to file a dispute. And that you > must notify them before you do so thru your credit card. > According to VISA this total BS. Vonage cannot supercede > VISA policy, it is called non-compliance. > Phil > VONAGE SUCKS! My experience with Vonage has been satisfactory for the 9 months I've had their service. I've tried calling a few times and experienced the same delays you did but my emails have been answered within a few days all three times I've sent them. I experience very few dropped calls or other interruptions mostly on international calls where the service is problematic on the non-US end of the connection. But VoIP isn't for everyone just yet. It's getting better but has a lot of growing to do before the technology and the providers are as reliable at the TDM world. Pete Romfh, Telecom Geek & Amateur Gourmet. promfh at Texas dot net ------------------------------ From: rogoflap@yahoo.com (Roger) Subject: Roam or Not Roam, Wireless With Verizon; How do I really know? Date: 2 Mar 2004 15:06:09 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I have recently went from a Sony Ericson T61 phone to a Samsung A310 to a LG VX4400B. In my house, I could use the T61 with no "Roam" showing on my screen. Extended Network showed and was used. I then upgraded to the Samsung A310. It was nice, but not color. It would also not show Roam in my house. "Extended Network" was used and shown. Now I upgraded to the LG VX4400B and when calling from in my home, it shows Extended Network while dialing the number. I then stick the phone up to the ear to talk. While talking I noticed the "Roam" showing with the time moving. Why would this be the case? Also how do I know if I am roaming if the "Extended Network" is shown while dialing and ringing, but then "Roam" is shown while talking. Thanks, Rog ------------------------------ From: tryitoz@hotmail.com (Joe Donaldson) Subject: Unauthorized Bogus Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill? Date: 2 Mar 2004 15:41:16 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com My girlfriend has AOL. I have installed a firewall (Sygate lite version), SpyBot, Ad aware, and Norton Utilities. Her kids know to not answer Yes/No to pop-up ads but to "X" out of them. However I know this could also invoke a script as well. I clean her PC regularly of any spyware/malware and also immunized her PC with Spybot and the Block list at http://www.spywareguide.com/blockfile.php So I am doing my best. Her LOCAL phone company had multiple charges on it that were not authorized nor made by her or her children. Multiple calls on multiple days. This month it was to Guyana, obviously an international call. Previous month it was somewhere else. The company that showed up on her bill was "USBI" to Guyana billed on behalf of ONE CALL COMM dba Opticom. Alltel told her that somehow her PC is authorizing these calls and someone is using her number. It does not show up on her Long Distance carrier bill but on her local bill only. She has a modem, not a cable or DSL connection. I heard this can happen but see no posts in Google/Yahoo on this (perhaps using wrong keywords.) My suggestion to my girlfriend is the following: 1. Eliminate ability to dial international calls with Alltell. Alltel can block such calls. 2. Then use an MCI or ATT card only to make long distance or European calls. Any help appreciated. Thanks so very much in advance. The charges total $120. Alltel said they would remove the charges this one time but would not do it in the future. Very strange. Alltel said they could make it so no international calls are made; but my girlfriend does need to make a few to her family and Alltel said there is no way to restrict the account. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I suggest she ask Alltel to completely restrict ALL international calls; and ALL long distance calls. In other words disallow all but purely local calls. She should also tell Alltel to put a collect/third-party billing block on the line. This means no one will able to charge anything to her phone line. She can get an 800 number from various vendors of same which is infinitly cheaper than any third party calls any time. If she has to dial '1010' plus a carrier plus the desired LD number that will help. She can also get a calling card from various carriers to use for what interna- tional calls she needs to make. Have the 800 number route into her number so if the kids are in trouble they can call home as can anyone who absolutely needs to call her on her nickel. She can use her calling card to call back from outside the house or the 1010 method to make calls at home when she is there. Combine all this with a complete cleanout of the computer looking for stealth dialers hidden it there somewhere. It also would not hurt to keep the computer unplugged from the phone line when no one is using it. Last but not least: are you *absolutely positive* the kids know nothing about any of this? What time of day/days of the week were this calls made? Any of them at a time when the kids might have been home alone? They might have very innocently (but carelessly) clicked on something going past on the screen, then forgotten about it, or been scared or embarassed to mention it later. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 23:33:58 -0600 From: Withheld at Users Request Reply-To: newsgroup Subject: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers [PAT - In the interest of privacy, please delete my .sig and email address from this post. Thanks.] I'm looking for a way to block outgoing calls to three specific phone numbers. The problem is a relative with Alzheimer's who repeatedly calls a couple of neighbors (dozens of times a day), to the point that they're threatening to call the police. I'd like to be able to simply disallow calls to those numbers. Obviously we don't want to interfere with her ability to call 911, or call friends or family members. We really only need to shut down these three specific phone numbers. And yes, we're also taking steps to get her to stop trying to call these people in the first place. I'm pretty sure telco can block _incoming_ calls _from_ a certain number, and this might be an option -- I could offer to pay for this service on the neighbors' lines. But I'd rather handle it on the originating end if possible. I plan to call telco tomorrow and see if they offer an outbound-blocking feature. Barring that, is there a piece of hardware that can do this? I didn't see anything on sandman.com. Mike's got some restrictors but they look to be too general for what I want to do; I want to allow everything EXCEPT three specific phone numbers. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think Mike has 'toll restrictor' devices which are programmable. Ask him for specific details. If they are programmable -- to a deep enough level -- at least seven or eight digits -- you can accomplish this. If they can restrict all the way, then you have it made. If they can only restrict any six digits, then percievably you could catch those three numbers but *maybe* a 'good' number she calls might get caught as well. Also, consider a mechanical dialer to set next to the phone with eight or ten or twelve or more numbers (NOT the ones she is offending) then go inside the phone and disconnect the touch tones, so she has to use the dialer device to make all her calls. I do not think telco will disallow specific local numbers. You can reach Mike's office on 630-980-7710. I'd suggest yo ask Mike in confidence for details. Ask him how to program the toll restrictors to do what you need to have done. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 05:33:59 GMT In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says: > 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. Two islands, in fact: St. Pierre and Miquelon. They are a Department of France (equivalent of a state). They are not part of the North American Numbering Plan, use the French country code and from points in North America must be dialed internationally via France, even from a few miles away in Newfoundland. > 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. Munitions test ranges, including nuclear. One stays safe and clear by staying on the public highway and not going into the "danger zone". > As to "Rhode Island and Planataions", could someone explain > that name? The official name of the state known as Rhode Island is "State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations." http://www.state.ri.us/ Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ From: elitra@rock.com (Eli) Subject: A Quick Technical Question Date: 2 Mar 2004 23:52:19 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hello all, VoIP sounds to have settled already a stable framework. A question sparkled into my mind regarding video-stream transfer: Is there or will there be blue-prints for "Video over IP" framework? I mean in terms of networking protocol and compression algorithms. Thanks in advance for throwing some ideas. Eli PS Forgive my English :-) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 15:18:10 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Archive Addition/Correction I am pleased to announce a new addition to the Telecom Archives, in the history section. Bill Caughlin, the SBC Archivist who wrote the very interesting book 'Timelines' dealing with the history of Ameritech 1876 through 1999 has contributed a paper to our archives on the Evolution of Chicago telephone numbers from the earliest days through the 2L-5D days. It is very interesting reading. It should make a valuable research tool for persons studying the history of telephone numbers/names in the earliest times. Pick up your copy from http://telecom-archives.org in the history department. Look for 'Chicago Number History'. Thanks very much Mr. Caughlin! The other item is a correction or addendum to the Western Union Tech review files, in our technical section of the Archives. In the top directory of Western-Union-Technical-Review look for the revised contents file, contents2.pdf . Mr. Haynes, who originally made the WUTR archives available to us, recently sent along this additional part which had been left behind by accident orginally. So, if you had copied this WUTR section for your own archival material, please go fetch this latest correction installed just today. And in case you did not order your copy of Caughlin's book when it was reviewed here during February (volume 23 issue 87) here is another copy of the coupon to use: 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 is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #102 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 4 02:40:16 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i247eGt15564; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 02:40:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 02:40:16 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403040740.i247eGt15564@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 #103 TELECOM Digest Thu, 4 Mar 2004 02:40:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 103 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson First Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (Walker) SBC to Sell Rural Lines to Fund Cingular Deal (Wesrock@aol.com) FCC Needs To Learn From Court Decision (Eric Friedebach) Vonage with Modem and Fax (Alex) EFFector 17.7 (Monty Solomon) Scientific-Atlanta Mulling Video Game Set-Top Box (Monty Solomon) Latest Phishing Scam Most "Devious" Ever (Monty Solomon) Re: Unauthorized Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill (dold) Re: Unauthorized Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill (Joseph) Re: A Quick Technical Question (Phil McKerracher) Re: Missouri Bell (Al Gillis) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Phone Cos. to Counterattack Cable TV (Steven J Sobol) (Claims to Be) Cellular-Phone Dealer in Nigeria (Carl Moore) The Porn-Worm Explained Further (Patrick Townson) 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, 03 Mar 2004 16:22:01 -0800 From: Alex Walker Subject: First Symposium on Networked Systems Design & Implementation (NSDI) March 29-31, 2004 San Francisco, CA, USA http://www.usenix.org/nsdi04/progb Sponsored by the USENIX Association in cooperation with ACM SIGCOMM and ACM SIGOPS Dear Colleague: We are writing to remind you that the pre-registration deadline for NSDI is approaching: if you register by March 8th you'll save $150. Visit http://www.usenix.org/events/nsdi04/progb to register today. NSDI '04 is a new conference focused on the design principles of large-scale distributed and networked systems. Our goal is to bring together researchers from across the system and networking communities to foster a cross-disciplinary approach to addressing common research challenges. We received 118 technical submissions, and from these the program committee selected 27 papers for inclusion in the conference. The resulting program includes a diverse collection of creative and well-developed papers in areas including sensor systems, network routing, peer-to-peer networks, storage systems, and security. In addition, NSDI '04 will feature a poster session where attendees can interact with researchers describing their current work in its formative stages and learn more about the leading edge of networked systems design. Finally, NSDI is pleased to feature a keynote address by Richard Lawrence, Director of Development Technology at Sony Online Entertainment, who will describe the unique systems challenges faced by builders of multiplayer online games. Please join us for this exciting new conference presenting the best of current networked systems research and practice. We look forward to seeing you there. Sincerely, Robert Morris, MIT Stefan Savage, University of California, San Diego NSDI '04 Program Chairs SAVE THE DATE! First Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI '04) March 29-31, 2004 San Francisco, CA, USA http://www.usenix.org/nsdi04/progb Sponsored by the USENIX Association in cooperation with ACM SIGCOMM and ACM SIGOPS ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 20:10:12 EST Subject: SBC to Sell Rural Lines to Fund Cingular Deal Pat: I don't remember seeing this in the digest, and if it hasn't appeared it may be of interest. Verizon is not the only one selling things off. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com NEW YORK -- SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC - News) is selling off about 650,000 telephone lines in rural Michigan and Texas, which could fetch about $1.5 billion, as it raises money to fund Cingular Wireless's planned acquisition of AT&T Wireless Services Inc. (NYSE:AWE - News) , people familiar with the matter told Monday's Wall Street Journal. SBC jointly owns Cingular Wireless with BellSouth Corp. (NYSE:BLS - News), and SBC needs to fund its share of the $41 billion in cash pledged by Cingular to buy AT&T Wireless. The lines are concentrated in Michigan's Upper Peninsula and East Texas. Potential buyers include a range of rural phone companies, such as CenturyTel Inc. (NYSE:CTL - News) , Monroe, La.; Alltel Corp. (NYSE:AT - News) , Little Rock, Ark.; or Commonwealth Telephone Enterprises Inc. (NasdaqNM:CTCO - News) , Dallas, Pa., the people familiar with the matter say. Wall Street Journal Staff Reporters Dennis K. Berman and Jesse Drucker contributed to this report. ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: FCC Needs To Learn From Court Decision Date: 3 Mar 2004 11:38:44 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Aude Lagorce, 03.03.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - If the U.S. Federal Communications Commission learns anything from yesterday's court ruling, it should be this: It's time to be a leader, not a follower. The regulatory agency has gone for years without providing the strong guidance and clear-cut decisions the telecom industry needs for investment to pick up and the pace of recovery to accelerate. In the breach, the courts have stepped in to make the FCC's decisions for it. In the latest illustration of this gradual shift in leadership, yesterday a federal appeals court handed a huge victory to the four regional Bell telephone companies--Verizon Communications, BellSouth, Qwest Communications and SBC Communications--by striking down regulation that required them to lease part of their local networks to rival companies like AT&T or Sprint at prices determined by state commissions. http://www.forbes.com/networks/2004/03/03/cx_al_0303fcc.html Eric Friedebach /No Dirty Words On The Whiteboard/ ------------------------------ From: alex@totallynerd.com (Alex) Subject: Vonage with Modem and Fax Date: 3 Mar 2004 14:23:22 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi all, I'm looking at maybe switching to Vonage for a second home line, and if it works out, switching my primary line to it as well (to have two lines). Problem is I need one line to be a modem line because I dial into my home network from work from time to time. Can anyone give comments on the quality of this? My cablemodem is Time Warner, which is 2-3 Megs down and 384K up, so this should be more then enough bandwidth. Thanks for any suggestions. Alex. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am assuming you already have a line with a modem attached for the occassions when you wish to do dial up sometimes. So do I. Vonage works on your cable modem line. Your other modem (used as a dialup on the phone line is a separate matter entirely. It rarely suits me to use dialup these days, but I can if I want to. From the keyboard I just turn on one or the other. You won't really have much luck using *two* Vonage lines on the same cable. It just stretches the limit a bit too far, IMO. But if you decide to try Vonage, you just attach the box to your cable modem right in between the cable modem and the computer. If you need to have both devices (Vonage and your dialup modem) in the line at the same time, there should be no trouble. Vonage works via the cable and your modem works via the phone line. If you decide to try TWO Vonage lines and your cable can handle it AND your computer is fast enough and sturdy enough, it still should have no affect on your dialup modem which is a separate thing entirely. One common mistake people often times make is in calling the 'cable modem' a modem. It really isn't a 'modem' in the sense a dialup thing attached to your phone line is. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:51:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 17.7 EFFector Vol. 17, No. 7 March 2, 2004 donna@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 279th Issue of EFFector: * Court Overturns Ban on Posting DVD Descrambling Code, Finds Free-Speech Violation * EFF Speaks on Privacy Perils of RFIDs in Libraries * Let the Sun Set on PATRIOT - Section 207 * 321 Studios Counts Down for Fair Use Rights * Record Companies Pay Millions for CD Price-Fixing - Send It to EFF! * Deep Links (17): Copyright Reform Goes Mainstream * Staff Calendar: 03.04.04 - Gwen Hinze speaks at Digital Divide: New Currents in Digital Downloading, Davis, CA; Kevin Bankston speaks at the Southeast Cybercrime Summit, Kennesaw, GA; Lee Tien speaks at RFID Forum, San Francisco Public Library, San Francisco, CA; 03.05.04 - Wendy Seltzer speaks at the NEA conference, Seattle, WA * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/17/7.php ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 23:47:43 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Scientific-Atlanta Mulling Video Game Set-Top Box NEW YORK, March 3 (Reuters) - Scientific-Atlanta (NYSE:SFA) on Wednesday said it is planning to develop television set-top boxes with high-performance video games capabilities, which could compete with game consoles such as Nintendo's GameCube and Sony's PlayStation 2. Scientific-Atlanta chief executive James McDonald, speaking at an investor conference in Dana Point, California, said developers are already building games for its Explorer series of set-top boxes. But he gave no timetable for when such a device might be available. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40747712 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 23:44:19 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Latest Phishing Scam Most "Devious" Ever By Andrew Colley, ZDNet Australia A prominent anti-virus vendor has described the latest e-mail fraud scheme targeted at Westpac bank customers as the most "devious" the company has ever encountered. The e-mail, distributed en-masse to Westpac customers, represents the latest example of "phishing scams," designed to catch the unwary and fool them into divulging their online banking security details. The architects of the latest scam also adopted a more insidious Web re-direction technique to bamboozle victims. Activating the link in the e-mail directs the victim to a fake version of the site but also opens an authentic copy of the site in a second browser window behind it. The fake version of the site asks for the victim's account access details but returns an error message if he or she attempts to use it. The victim is then sent to the real site unaware that they've been duped. http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/0,2000061744,39116416,00.htm ------------------------------ From: dold@Unauthoriz.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Unauthorized Bogus Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill? Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:25:43 UTC Organization: a2i network Joe Donaldson wrote: > Alltel told her that somehow her PC is authorizing these calls and > someone is using her number. It does not show up on her Long Distance > carrier bill but on her local bill only. How does Alltel know that it is the computer authorizing the calls? What does "authorizing these calls" mean? Was the PC even turned on at the time that these calls were made? Is it a separate phone line for the computer? Are regular phones connected to this phone line? Is there an answering machine on the line? Are there any cordless phones in the house? Is the access point for telco outside the house in a secure area? Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Unauthorized Bogus Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill? Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 18:48:20 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On 2 Mar 2004 15:41:16 -0800, tryitoz@hotmail.com (Joe Donaldson) wrote: > My girlfriend has AOL. I have installed a firewall (Sygate lite > version), SpyBot, Ad aware, and Norton Utilities. > Her kids know to not answer Yes/No to pop-up ads but to "X" out of > them. However I know this could also invoke a script as well. > I clean her PC regularly of any spyware/malware and also immunized her > PC with Spybot and the Block list at > http://www.spywareguide.com/blockfile.php > So I am doing my best. > Her LOCAL phone company had multiple charges on it that were not > authorized nor made by her or her children. Multiple calls on multiple > days. This month it was to Guyana, obviously an international call. > Previous month it was somewhere else. The company that showed up on > her bill was "USBI" to Guyana billed on behalf of ONE CALL COMM dba > Opticom. > Alltel told her that somehow her PC is authorizing these calls and > someone is using her number. It does not show up on her Long Distance > carrier bill but on her local bill only. > She has a modem, not a cable or DSL connection. > I heard this can happen but see no posts in Google/Yahoo on this > (perhaps using wrong keywords.) > My suggestion to my girlfriend is the following: > 1. Eliminate ability to dial international calls with Alltell. Alltel > can block such calls. > 2. Then use an MCI or ATT card only to make long distance or European > calls. > Any help appreciated. > Thanks so very much in advance. > The charges total $120. Alltel said they would remove the charges this > one time but would not do it in the future. Very strange. Alltel said > they could make it so no international calls are made; but my > girlfriend does need to make a few to her family and Alltel said there > is no way to restrict the account. This has been in the news of late and here's something I found when referencing google: "When Your Computer Makes A Call ... Without Your Okay If you use the Internet, you're probably dialing a local phone number to get online. Chances are you know exactly what you pay for that local service. However, many consumers are surprised to find they've been charged for calls to destinations that aren't remotely local, simply remote. The calls were made through their modems without their knowledge or approval. How does it happen? According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the nation's consumer protection agency, it's a scheme some Web sites use to trick consumers into paying to access "free" Internet content." Full reference: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/alerts/modmalrt.htm Also, you may want to be sure that you use programs that clean adware and malware from your computer such as Adaware or Spybot Search & Destroy and get a free program such as Zone Alarm (free version) for a software firewall remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: Phil McKerracher Subject: Re: A Quick Technical Question Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:11:57 GMT Organization: blueyonder (post doesn't reflect views of blueyonder) Eli wrote in message news:telecom23.102.16@telecom-digest.org: > VoIP sounds to have settled already a stable framework. A question > sparkled into my mind regarding video-stream transfer: > Is there or will there be blue-prints for "Video over IP" framework? I > mean in terms of networking protocol and compression algorithms. They already exist. I guess VoIP is a misleading name; it should be "multimedia over IP" or something similar. The webcam facility in MSN Messenger is an example. Phil McKerracher www.mckerracher.org ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: Missouri Bell Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 15:50:58 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Michael Chance wrote in message news:telecom23.100.8@telecom-digest.org: (Snip...) > 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. Here in Northeast Portland (Oregon) there is a smallish apartment building named "Exchange Apartments" ... It, too, was a Bell System building years and years ago. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 02:22:52 GMT In article , I shot my mouth off too soon and said: > Two islands, in fact: St. Pierre and Miquelon. They are a Department > of France (equivalent of a state). They are not part of the North > American Numbering Plan, use the French country code and from points in > North America must be dialed internationally via France, even from a few > miles away in Newfoundland. In fact, as had already been posted, they have their own country code, 508, instead of 33 (France) -- but I seem to recall that they were in France's code at some point. Also, they are a "Territorial Collectivity," one step down from being a Department. Thanks to John Levine for setting me straight in an email. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Phone Cos. to Counterattack Cable TV Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 14:05:05 -0600 Monty Solomon wrote: > Starting Wednesday, SBC Communications Inc. will offer DISH Network > satellite cable service to all of its residential customers in the 13 > states where SBC is the dominant local phone provider. Heh. That's funny. Ameritech used to offer competing cable TV services in the Cleveland area -- in certain suburbs -- but had to divest the cable services when SBC borg'd them. 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: You know, Steve, the more I read about SBC, the happier I am I got rid of them for good in my house. They seem to be less and less interested in providing good phone service and much more into becoming a media conglomerate these days. I got a piece of mail from them yesterday. Another one of their 'please, please come back to us' mailings, with all the usual cut rate deals they are offering for one year, only $25 dollars for this and only three cents per minute on that, free installation, a fifty dollar gift card, and how they have finally begun to take notice now that in their own words, sixty thousand Kansas residents have jumped ship on them and gone elsewhere. Trouble is, I just can't trust them. They seem to lie so much. I'm quite happy with Prairie Stream, thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:18:47 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: (Claims to Be) Cellular-Phone Dealer in Nigeria I have edited some headers off. I am not in the activity of trying to sell cellular phones (on or off the net), and I have no way of knowing the legitimacy of the following email (even though it gives an address in Nigeria, it's coming off a French host). Yes, I do see this is not in the familiar scam categories. From: shopcellular Reply-To: shopcellular@voila.fr To: shopcellular@voila.fr Subject: buy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:48:12 +0100 (CET) X-ARL-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ARL-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=4.054, required 5, BAYES_44 -0.00, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_11_50 0.88, RAZOR2_CHECK 1.05, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET 1.50, SUBJ_BUY 0.63, UPPERCASE_50_75 0.00) X-ARL-MailScanner-SpamScore: ssss SHOP CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS 23, LADOKE STREET, OKOTA, LAGOS-NIGERIA. TEL: 234-8033823918. E-mail: shopcellular1@yahoo.fr=20 =20 HELLO, SPECIAL/CHEAPER CELLULAR PHONES OFFER. =20 WE ARE A INTERNATIONAL DEALERS, EXPORTERS AND SUPPLIERS OF CELLULAR PHONES = AND ACCESSORIES IN NIGERIA. WE HAVE LARGE QUANTITY OF CELLULAR PHONES FOR S= ALE. ALL OUR CELL PHONES ARE TESTED WORKING AND FINAL PRICE COULD BE NEGOTI= ATED ACCORDING TO YOUR ORDER QUANTITY. THE QUOTATION BELOW INCLUDE BATTERY,= CHARGER, MANUALS, ORIGINAL BOX. IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN BUYING SOME CELLU= LAR PHONES OR ACCESSORIES FROM US, CONTACT OUR SALES DEPARTMENT @: shopcell= ular1@yahoo.fr TEL: 234-8033823918. =20 REGARDS, MRS. KATE OBY. =20 SHOP CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS. =20 =20 =20 VIEW OUR PRICE LIST BELOW -- ALL BRAND NEW: =20 UNITS: MODELS: PRICE: QUANTITY AV= AILABLE IN STOCK: NOKIA 2100-- US$55 690 pcs NOKIA 3210-- US$25 980 pcs NOKIA 3310-- US$29 1700 pcs NOKIA 3330-- US$30 840 pcs NOKIA 3410-- US$35 840 pcs NOKIA 3510-- US$40 840 pcs NOKIA 3510i-- US$45 750 pcs NOKIA 3530-- US$110 600 pcs = =20 NOKIA 3650-- US$185 990 pcs NOKIA 5100-- US$80 550 pcs NOKIA 5210-- US$55 550 pcs NOKIA 5510-- US$55 590 pcs NOKIA 6090-- US$135 400 pcs NOKIA 6100-- US$60 630 pcs NOKIA 6210-- US$60 550 pcs NOKIA 6250-- US$60 400 pcs NOKIA 6510-- US$45 350 pcs NOKIA 6310-- US$65 550 pcs NOKIA 6310i-- US$65 500 pcs NOKIA 6610-- US$65 555 pcs NOKIA 6800-- US$100 490 pcs NOKIA 7110-- US$60 300 pcs NOKIA 7210 Turquoise-- US$100 650 pcs NOKIA 7250-- US$120 650 pcs NOKIA 7650-- US$125 650 pcs NOKIA 8310-- US$90 800 pcs NOKIA 8910 Titanium-- US$95 800 pcs NOKIA 8850 SPECIAL EDITION-- US$105 450 pcs NOKIA 8850 GOLD EDITION-- US$99 400 pcs NOKIA 8910 Black-- US$100 660 pcs NOKIA 9210 Communicator-- US$195 720 pcs NOKIA 9210i Communicator-- US$195 700 pcs NOKIA 8910i-- US$190 600 pcs SONY ERICSSON T200-- US$25 450 pcs =20 SONY ERICSSON T100-- US$30 450 pcs SONY ERICSSON R600-- US$35 450 pcs SONY ERICSSON T20e-- US$35 450 pcs SONY CMD-J70-- US$40 720 pcs SONY ERICSSON T20s-- US$39 300 pcs SONY ERICSSON T28s-- US$39 780 pcs SONY ERICSSON T28 World-- US$45 780 pcs SONY ERICSSON T29s-- US$49 700 pcs SONY ERICSSON T600-- US$49 500 pcs SONY CMD-J7-- US$40 584 pcs=20 SONY CMD-J6-- US$40 250 pcs SONY ERICSSON T300-- US$45 400 pcs SONY ERICSSON T68i-- US$105 780 pcs SONY ERICSSON T65-- US$100 290 pcs SONY CMD-J5-- US$30 350 pcs SONY CMD-Z7-- US$35 350 pcs SONY ERICSSON T310-- US$40 350 pcs SONY ERICSSON T39m-- US$60 420 pcs SONY ERICSSON T66-- US$85 250 pcs SONY ERICSSON R520m-- US$100 200 pcs SONY CMD-Z5-- US$90 340 pcs =20 SONY ERICSSON R380 World-- US$90 380 pcs SONY ERICSSON R380s-- US$105 340 pcs=20 SONY ERICSSON T68m-- US$110 380 pcs=20 SONY ERICSSON T610-- US$130 440 pcs SONY CMD-MZ5-- US$155 340 pcs=20 SONY ERICSSON P800-- US$185 750 pcs MOTOROLA Talkabout 191-- US$25 555 pcs MOTOROLA C330-- US$30 555 pcs MOTOROLA V66-- US$60 640 pcs MOTOROLA v66i-- US$60 650 pcs MOTOROLA Talkabout192-- US$45 1000 pcs MOTOROLA V51-- US$50 555 pcs MOTOROLA V50-- US$50 660 pcs MOTOROLA V70-- US$70 700 pcs = =20 MOTOROLA V60-- US$70 700 pcs MOTOROLA V60i-- US$70 570 pcs MOTOROLA T720-- US$65 670 pcs MOTOROLA Accompli 008-- US$49 400 pcs MOTOROLA Timeport 280-- US$80 403 pcs SAMSUNG SGH-N620-- US$40 500 pcs SAMSUNG SGH-A800-- US$45 800 pcs=20 SAMSUNG SGH-A300-- US$45 670 pcs SAMSUNG SGH-R210-- US$45 500 pcs =20 SAMSUNG SGH-N100-- US$65 623 pcs SAMSUNG SGH-N400-- US$69 650 pcs=20 SAMSUNG SGH-T100-- US$55 650 pcs SAMSUNG SGH-A400-- US$55 650 pcs=20 SAMSUNG SGH-S100-- US$55 447 pcs SAMSUNG SGH-A200-- US$55 300 pcs=20 SAMSUNG SGH-T400-- US$39 390 pcs SAMSUNG SGH-S300-- US$60 490 pcs SAMSUNG SGH-A500-- US$105 580 pcs SAMSUNG SGH-T500 Champagne-- US$110 500 pcs SAMSUNG SGH-V200-- US$115 700 pcs =20 SAMSUNG SGH-T200-- US$125 700 pcs ALCATEL One Touch 501-- US20 450 pcs ALCATEL One Touch 311-- US$25 150 pcs ALCATEL One Touch 701-- US$30 150 pcs ALCATEL One Touch 511-- US$30 150 pcs ALCATEL OT525-- US$39 450 pcs ALCATEL One Touch 512-- US$40 686 pcs ALCATEL One Touch 715-- US$45 574 pcs PANASONIC GD35-- US$20 589 pcs PANASONIC GD52-- US$25 150 pcs PANASONIC GD67-- US$30 234 pcs PANASONIC GD92-- US$40 300 pcs PANASONIC GD90-- US$40 350 pcs PANASONIC GD93-- US$55 250 pcs PANASONIC GD75-- US$65 389 pcs PANASONIC GD55-- US$145 155 pcs PANASONIC GD95-- US$69 450 pcs=20 PANASONIC GD87-- US$70 760 pcs SIEMENS C45-- US$25 850 pcs SIEMENS C55-- US$30 578 pcs SIEMENS M35i-- US$35 345 pcs SIEMENS M50-- US$40 300 pcs SIEMENS S45i-- US$60 770 pcs SIEMENS S40-- US$85 600 pcs = =20 SIEMENS SL42-- US$90 600 pcs SIEMENS ME45-- US$65 410 pcs SIEMENS SL45-- US$45 440 pcs SIEMENS SL45i-- US$45 250 pcs SIEMENS S55-- US$55 330 pcs SIEMENS S55 Camera-- US$55 195 pcs PHILIPS Fisio 120-- US$25 350 pcs PHILIPS Fisio 311-- US$30 300 pcs PHILIPS Fisio 620-- US$35 289 pcs PHILIPS Fisio 825-- US$35 200 pcs PHILIPS Oz=E9o 8@8-- US$45 400 pcs PHILIPS X=E9nium-- US$45 400 pcs PHILIPS Fisio 820 + Kit Blue-- US$49 409 pcs =20 Nextel i90- $59 6= 70 pcs Nextel i95cl- $70 72= 0 pcs Nextel i60c- $40 72= 0 pcs Nextel 6510TM- $110 230 pcs= =20 =20 NOTE: ALL PHONES ARE IN FACTORY SEALED BOXES, WITH CHARGERS, ACCESSORIES, M= ANUALS INCLUDED. =20 SHOP CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS. ------------------------------------------ Faites un voeu et puis Voila ! www.voila.fr=20 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I didn't even bother to edit this trash, although that is what I am paid to do around here, I guess. Had this come from a name I had not recognized, it would have directly in the trash, like several of these do each day. Since Carl Moore sent it in, I guess he wanted you all to see it. Their prices look good, but I doubt you get anything for your money except grief. I do not think they fill orders or respond to inquires. The last five or six copies of this I received were all junked. And before anyone writes to me accusing me of hawking worthless cell phones through spam email using a French mail drop and a Nigerian merchant, please read the final message in this issue coming up next. Thse Nigerians have even started a Telecom Digest beleive it or not (check Google). *They* won't cease and desist copying from my stuff, but neither will the other imposters and frauds. I hope *they* run porn-worm also, so their attitudes about the 'American Satan' will be confirmed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: The Porn Worm Explained Further Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:25:38 -0500 A *nice person* from the east coast wrote to me today asking that the message be kept private and the name not be used. I will honor that request. The message, in reference to the Porn Worm program of a few days ago essentially was "why did you run that message?" I answered the person saying it was an editorial comment essentially for a reader who said to me about a year ago 'the net has gotten to be so bad, all there is left on it these days are three things, spam, porn and the TELECOM Digest'. That (first) person was obviously exagerating a little, but not, it would seem, very much. The net has gotten to be pretty awful in the past year or two. I asked the (latest) writer, "have you tried the porn worm?" "Nope", they said,"and don't intend to." The (latest) writer concluded their comments by saying "if you are going to run something like that, you should really add some editorial context to it so people do not get the wrong idea about what you are doing to the Digest." Well, fair enough ... so when I heard one of another of our readers on the radio last week talking about the generally vile condition of the net in recent times (*yes* he reads the Digest most days, and *yes* he is a sort of big shot with the American Family Association, and *yes* he wants to keep his personal life and picadillos private, just like old Joe McCarthy, the Republican from Wisconsin in the 1950's), my thought was "if its vile you want, then vile you'll get." And Porn-Worm just hit the spot! I would have thought you could all see my tongue in cheek as that message was printed, if not, then 30-45 minutes of allowing the worm to run through the internet gathering up stuff and carefully depositing it in a directory where you could later bash it all with ease would have demonstrated it, five or ten thousand .jpg and .avi files later. Literally, if you let it run for 24 hours, the porn would be spilling out all over. The nastiest of the nasty. That's how bad the net has gotten. And although there were more than ten million downloads of the worm when it was first released by AGWAC Studios Company (and in fact I have had three hundred plus downloads of it under its new resurrection in a couple of days) AGWAC went bankrupt because they could not get anyone to pay $20 or whatever they asked to 'register' it. I do not know if that fact speaks favorably for the position of the American Family Association or not. In any event, if you did not get the joke the first time around, I hope you will now. Personally, I don't think it confirms anything the AFA has to say about the net, but more about the cheapness of many of the users of the net. Oh, it was http://porn-worm.us.tf in case you forgot. Now please, no more about it. Either use it or forget about it. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #103 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 4 17:07:21 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i24M7LH22360; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 17:07:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 17:07:21 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403042207.i24M7LH22360@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 #104 TELECOM Digest Thu, 4 Mar 2004 17:07:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 104 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Unauthorized Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill? (S Cline) Re: Unauthorized Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill? (SJ Sobol) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Linc Madison) Re: Roam or Not Roam, Wireless With Verizon; How do I Know? (Stan Cline) Re: (Claims to Be) Cellular-Phone Dealer in Nigeria (Steven J Sobol) Re: (Claims to Be) Cellular-Phone Dealer in Nigeria (Joseph) Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax (Alex) Vonage 14-day Warrenty (Alex) Re: Vonage Experience (Phil) Re: Wireless / Internet Phones not Yet Reliable For 911 (Sammy@nospam) How Tiny Swiss Cellphone Chips Helped Track Global Terror Web (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: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Unauthorized Bogus Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill? Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 06:37:27 GMT On 2 Mar 2004 15:41:16 -0800, tryitoz@hotmail.com (Joe Donaldson) wrote: > Her LOCAL phone company had multiple charges on it that were not > authorized nor made by her or her children. Multiple calls on multiple > days. This month it was to Guyana, obviously an international call. > Previous month it was somewhere else. The company that showed up on > her bill was "USBI" to Guyana billed on behalf of ONE CALL COMM dba > Opticom. > Alltel told her that somehow her PC is authorizing these calls and > someone is using her number. It does not show up on her Long Distance That sounds about right ("porn dialer")...although I find the choice of carrier (Opticom is much, much better known as an operator service provider) a bit odd. The call involved was definitely a 1+/011+ call since USBI and not ZPDI, both of which are names used by Billing Concepts, billed for it on behalf of Opticom. (USBI = 1+/011+; ZPDI = 0+) > 1. Eliminate ability to dial international calls with Alltell. Alltel > can block such calls. > 2. Then use an MCI or ATT card only to make long distance or European > calls. That sounds like a good plan. I'd also suggest running anti-spyware and antivirus software on the PC involved ... :) 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 ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Unauthorized Bogus Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill? Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 10:21:54 -0600 Joseph wrote: > This has been in the news of late and here's something I found when > referencing google: Why doesn't she just block direct-dialed international calls and use a service that offers cheap international calling where you must use an 800 number and a PIN? 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 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 21:11:38 -0800 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed In article , Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com > says: >> 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 > Two islands, in fact: St. Pierre and Miquelon. They are a Department > of France (equivalent of a state). They are not part of the North > American Numbering Plan, use the French country code and from points in > North America must be dialed internationally via France, even from a few > miles away in Newfoundland. Almost, but not quite. St. Pierre and Miquelon have an international country code all to themselves, +508. When calling from within France, or other French DOM/TOMs (overseas departments and territories), or within St. Pierre et Miquelon, you dial 0508 xx xx xx, but from the rest of the world, you dial +508 5 08 xx xx xx. For example, from the USA, you would dial 011 + 508 + 5 08 xx xx xx, *not* 011 + 33 + 5 08 xx xx xx. 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: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Roam or Not Roam, Wireless With Verizon; How do I Really know? Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 06:35:30 GMT On 2 Mar 2004 15:06:09 -0800, rogoflap@yahoo.com (Roger) wrote: > Now I upgraded to the LG VX4400B and when calling from in my home, it > shows Extended Network while dialing the number. I then stick the > phone up to the ear to talk. While talking I noticed the "Roam" > showing with the time moving. Why would this be the case? This is a known bug with the 4400. > Also how do I know if I am roaming if the "Extended Network" is shown > while dialing and ringing, but then "Roam" is shown while talking. No triangle displayed = VZW network Flashing triangle = Extended Network Solid triangle = roaming 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 ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: (Claims to Be) Cellular-Phone Dealer in Nigeria Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 10:23:12 -0600 Carl Moore wrote: > I have edited some headers off. I am not in the activity of trying to > sell cellular phones (on or off the net), and I have no way of knowing > the legitimacy of the following email (even though it gives an address > in Nigeria, it's coming off a French host). Yes, I do see this is not > in the familiar scam categories. I get a lot of these, presumably because I'm active in the cellular news groups. They may be legitimate. I LART them anyway. Incidentally, I don't believe any of those phones are usable in the USA. 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: I also get a lot of them and do the same thing. You doubted the phones were usable in the USA. I doubt they even get here to the USA. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: (Claims to Be) Cellular-Phone Dealer in Nigeria Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 09:16:41 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:18:47 EST, Carl Moore wrote: > I have edited some headers off. I am not in the activity of trying to > sell cellular phones (on or off the net), and I have no way of knowing > the legitimacy of the following email (even though it gives an address > in Nigeria, it's coming off a French host). Yes, I do see this is not > in the familiar scam categories. > From: shopcellular > Reply-To: shopcellular@voila.fr > To: shopcellular@voila.fr > Subject: buy > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:48:12 +0100 (CET) > X-ARL-MailScanner: Found to be clean > X-ARL-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=4.054, required 5, > BAYES_44 -0.00, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_11_50 0.88, RAZOR2_CHECK 1.05, > RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET 1.50, SUBJ_BUY 0.63, UPPERCASE_50_75 0.00) > X-ARL-MailScanner-SpamScore: ssss > SHOP CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS > 23, LADOKE STREET, OKOTA, > LAGOS-NIGERIA. > TEL: 234-8033823918. > E-mail: shopcellular1@yahoo.fr=20 >=20 >HELLO, > SPECIAL/CHEAPER CELLULAR PHONES OFFER. >=20 >WE ARE A INTERNATIONAL DEALERS, EXPORTERS AND SUPPLIERS OF CELLULAR PHONES = >AND ACCESSORIES IN NIGERIA. WE HAVE LARGE QUANTITY OF CELLULAR [Lots of trash deleted] First of all how much faith can someone have for an ALL CAPS post. Second of all this is *obviously* a scam. Common knowledge says don't do business with Nigeria, Indonesia or Romania when dealing with mobile phones. The old addage of if it looks too good to be true it probably is. remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You may have noticed (if you use Google a lot) there is now a new 'Telecom Digest' in Nigeria although the one in Malasia took a short vacation. Telecom Digest seems to be popping up all over the globe these days. Asking them to honor copyrights is futile of course. PAT] ------------------------------ From: alex@totallynerd.com (Alex) Subject: Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax Date: 4 Mar 2004 06:27:24 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com alex@totallynerd.com (Alex) wrote in message news:: > Hi all, > I'm looking at maybe switching to Vonage for a second home line, and > if it works out, switching my primary line to it as well (to have two > lines). Problem is I need one line to be a modem line because I dial > into my home network from work from time to time. Can anyone give > comments on the quality of this? My cablemodem is Time Warner, which > is 2-3 Megs down and 384K up, so this should be more then enough > bandwidth. > Thanks for any suggestions. > Alex. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am assuming you already have a line > with a modem attached for the occassions when you wish to do dial up > sometimes. So do I. Vonage works on your cable modem line. Your other > modem (used as a dialup on the phone line is a separate matter > entirely. It rarely suits me to use dialup these days, but I can if > I want to. From the keyboard I just turn on one or the other. You > won't really have much luck using *two* Vonage lines on the same > cable. It just stretches the limit a bit too far, IMO. But if you > decide to try Vonage, you just attach the box to your cable modem > right in between the cable modem and the computer. If you need to have > both devices (Vonage and your dialup modem) in the line at the same > time, there should be no trouble. Vonage works via the cable and your > modem works via the phone line. If you decide to try TWO Vonage lines > and your cable can handle it AND your computer is fast enough and > sturdy enough, it still should have no affect on your dialup modem > which is a separate thing entirely. One common mistake people often > times make is in calling the 'cable modem' a modem. It really isn't > a 'modem' in the sense a dialup thing attached to your phone line is. > PAT] Hi Pat, I'm an old school computer user, so when I say 'modem', I'm talking about literally an analog modem that goes to an analog POTS phone line -- same technology used in BBSes for 25+ years. I called Vonage yesterday, and told them my scenario. It took four people before I got to someone 'technical' who knew what a regular ol' modem was (not a broadband cablemodem). I'm not sure if anyone is understanding my questions because they never did give me a clear answer. I'm talking about running a regular modem, such as a Zoom, USR, etc, over a Vonage phoneline. I'm assuming if a standard telephone works over the Vonage lines then a standard analog modem would as well, which uses the same basis. I understand that all 'calls' via Vonage go over my broadband cablemodem, but instead of receiving a voice telephone call, I want to dial my home number from my laptop when traveling or from work to connect into my home network via standard PPP. Though this would go over my cablemodem via Vonage, it is totally seperate. Just as now, my dialup works via my SBC line and has nothing to do with my broadband. As for PC speed, using a standard analog modem (mine's a 28.8 USRobotics), doesn't matter, even if I'm dialing into a 286 or 8088 system. This technology is the same as it's been for 25 years. You dial the phone number, computer gives a carrier 'via modem', your modem handshakes, authenticates, and you're on. Maybe my first question wasn't too clear, but basically I want to know if with compression, or whatever Vonage uses, will impeed a data carrier signal from working properly. They say Fax machines will work, but Faxes are generally 9600 bps. I need 28,800 bps for a good PPP connection. Thanks for your time, Alex. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am defining 'modem' the same way as you, and in my computers they are all built into the computer itself, at either 28.8 baud or 56K. I've never tried what I think you are suggesting (and correct me if I am still wrong) of taking the output from the Vonage adapter and plugging it *into* a 'modem' so that the 'modem' hears *Vonage* dial tone, dials against it, and then converses through the Vonage line. That should be an interesting experiment to try, but I will make sure no actual CO line (from a telco somewhere) comes in contact with the Vonage adapter in the process. Now, I have tried something similar, plugging a traditional 'modem' and computer into a cell-socket device (to use cellular phone via a regular phone instrument) and I can tell you that was pretty crappy at best. At 300 baud it barely worked (in hyperterm, pecking on a few keys and auditing the output for accuracy) but not in a more controlled BBS type setting. Higher baud rates were totally unusable. Of course, cell phones are not Vonage phones, and that *may* work. I'll try to have a report on my experience with it in the next issue. PAT] ------------------------------ From: alex@totallynerd.com (Alex) Subject: Vonage 14-day Warranty Date: 4 Mar 2004 07:49:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi all, Sorry for so many posts on this topic ... I'm kind of posting as I go :) I called Vonage to sign-up, and I had to call three times before someone answered I could understand. Do they use folks overseas to do their phones? Also, there's a bad delay, like two seconds, between when I talk and the customer service rep hears me. I can hear my echo from their ear piece (I assume), so we keep speaking on top of one another. This isn't standard with Vonage, is it? Anyway, the person I spoke with said it takes 5-7 days to receive the router, yet my 14 day trial begins today, if I sign-up today. So literally my trial is only 7-9 days (14 - shipping time). Granted this still would probably be long enough to test the router, but if for whatever reason the router is delayed for any reason, or if I have problems getting it going, I want the full 14 days of testing. I love the idea of Vonage, but they've yet to really impress me. Thanks for any info or insight. Alex. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Vonage, like a lot of companies doing business over the internet winds up with a huge amount of credit card fraud, which partly accounts for why they take such a 'tough guy' stance in dealing with potential customers. But in actual practice, your 14 day trial starts out 3-4 days *after* you place your order, or about the time you sign for the UPS/Fedex delivery. And if you keep the box a full 14 days and then return it, they are not going to say 'oops, you are a day or two days too late in the return'. They have 'customers' (I use that term loosely) who order adapters with fraud credit cards, get the box, then deny it arrived or that they had anything to do with the fraud. If you order the adapter, recieve it and sign for it without playing games, and give it a fair trial, you are not going to hear a lot out of them about returning it anytime. And you do get a free month of service with an e-coupon (mine or anyone else who offers them) which largely offsets any losses you might suffer from having supplied them a good credit card to start with. Even if I for example, decided now to quit Vonage and send them back the box I could do so, less the month of service I owed them. About that echo: Vonage does use their own system to run their customer service department. I had a case once when talking to them that the customer service person said "I cannot hear you very well", I responded I am on *your* phone system; he said obviously you need an adjustment, and walked me through it then and there, after he called my back on my landline using *his* cellular phone. Try not to be so harsh on them being as new as they are in business. PAT] ------------------------------ From: phil_m_palmer@yahoo.com (Phil) Subject: Re: Vonage Experience Date: 4 Mar 2004 10:10:04 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Sammy@nospam.biz wrote in message news:: > Too bad. I've had Vonage for almost a year and it works great. > Phil wrote: >> I signed-up for Vonage Service. They charged my VISA for the startup >> fees -- np. >> I get the Motorola VT but it works only intermitantly. Support from >> Vonage is non-existent, at best. I called several times, mostly >> hanging-up after holding for 20 minutes. I emailed several times with >> no return emails. >> After a week of this crap, I called to cancel. The Vonage Rep said >> that he'd have to charge $41 bucks to give me an RMA and return >> address. I told him that is called extortion. He said both the startup >> fee and termination fee would be refunded when the equipment was >> returned. So I allowed him to charge my VISA. >> I am mailing the equipment back today and will followup with >> additional experience. >> ALSO, beware about Vonage's Terms of Service policy. It states that >> you have seven days after you recieve your credit card statement to >> file a dispute. And that you must notify them before you do so thru >> your credit card. According to VISA this total BS. Vonage cannot >> supercede VISA policy, it is called non-compliance. >> Phil >> VONAGE SUCKS! >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am truly sorry you have had such bad >> experience with them. My experience has been quite good by comparison. >> Have you tried the various techniques presented here in recent weeks >> to get around some of the intermittent problems you have had? For >> example, since I made the adjustments in my Linksys firewall/router >> they recommended, I've had no further problems with loss of dialtone >> or non-receipt of incoming calls. I *will* agree their customer >> service holding queue is pretty outrageous at times as they begin to >> learn the business a little better also. And the Motorola box they >> are using now may possibly not be as good as the Cisco, I am not sure >> on that. If you have not yet returned the Motorola to them, consider >> trying some of the fixes described on the net and see if they help >> any. Even if you decide it is not working and you must return the >> equipment, *new* customers who have *not yet* sent in for/recieved >> an adapter box can get a free month of whatever service package they >> desire by using an e-coupon from me to start the process. The e-coupon >> gets you the *second* month of service for free. Email me and ask for >> it. ptownson@telecom-digest.org PAT] PAT -- I am paying for a service -- Vonage should be the one trying fixes found on the Net -- not me! As I said before -- VONAGE SUCKS!! And since you are selling their wares YOU SUCK TOO! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, thank you for that compliment! Actually, you are NOT 'paying for a service', you are getting a month of service for free; not paying for it. Consider it like an 'extended warranty' or extended free trial. Instead of a 14 day (give or take a day or three) warranty on the box,etc you actually getting a *month plus 14 days*. But I do not want to be an apologist for Vonage. I cannot help how they do their customer service, etc. I could make some suggestions, but they have not asked me. Because I am generally impressed with their service, and because VOIP seems to be the way telephone service is going in the future, I agreed to hand out their e-coupons, and share 'fixit' tips I know about. I am not making much of an effort to sell their wares. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Wireless and Internet Phones not Yet Reliable For 911 Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 09:48:19 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications In the case of wireless service, if the user has half a brain they should understand that 911 is a crap shoot when away from home. If they have a fully functioning brain they should realize that all local and county police have a 10-digit number that will go to emergency dispatch 24 hours a day. Most of the time such numbers are listed. If they aren't they can be found easily by calling the cop's listed business number and asking. Even though I have standard wireline service at home, I have the local cop's 10-digit emergency number programmed into my cell phone in case I have a need to call them while anywhere in town. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, Sammy. I have to wonder how the same people survived before 911 was invented (in the early 1970's). Basically, 911 is a speed dial service to reach police which may or may not work as you want it to. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 08:55:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: How Tiny Swiss Cellphone Chips Helped Track Global Terror Web By DON VAN NATTA Jr. and DESMOND BUTLER LONDON, March 2 - The terrorism investigation code-named Mont Blanc began almost by accident in April 2002, when authorities intercepted a cellphone call that lasted less than a minute and involved not a single word of conversation. Investigators, suspicious that the call was a signal between terrorists, followed the trail first to one terror suspect, then to others, and eventually to terror cells on three continents. What tied them together was a computer chip smaller than a fingernail. But before the investigation wound down in recent weeks, its global net caught dozens of suspected Qaeda members and disrupted at least three planned attacks in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, according to counterterrorism and intelligence officials in Europe and the United States. The investigation helped narrow the search for one of the most wanted men in the world, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who is accused of being the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, according to three intelligence officials based in Europe. American authorities arrested Mr. Mohammed in Pakistan last March. For two years, investigators now say, they were able to track the conversations and movements of several Qaeda leaders and dozens of operatives after determining that the suspects favored a particular brand of cellphone chip. The chips carry prepaid minutes and allow phone use around the world. Investigators said they believed that the chips, made by Swisscom of Switzerland, were popular with terrorists because they could buy the chips without giving their names. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/04/international/europe/04PHON.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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #104 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 5 02:20:05 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i257K5l25928; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 02:20:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 02:20:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403050720.i257K5l25928@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 #105 TELECOM Digest Fri, 5 Mar 2004 02:20:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 105 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Phone Cos. to Counterattack Cable TV (Tony P.) Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Laura Halliday) Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax (John Levine) Re: Wireless and Internet Phones not Yet Reliable For 911 (Griswold Jr.) Re: (Claims to Be) Cellular-Phone Dealer in Nigeria (Steven J Sobol) Re: Verizon Wireless/Verizon Airfone Offer 10 Cents/Minute (Novosielski) Re: Unauthorized Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill (Donaldson) Re: More Re: the GTE Side of Verizon (Linc Madison) 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: Phone Cos. to Counterattack Cable TV Organization: ATCC Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 20:11:10 GMT In article , TELECOM Digest Editor Noted in response to sjsobol@JustThe.net: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, Steve, the more I read about > SBC, the happier I am I got rid of them for good in my house. They > seem to be less and less interested in providing good phone service > and much more into becoming a media conglomerate these days. I got a > piece of mail from them yesterday. Another one of their 'please, > please come back to us' mailings, with all the usual cut rate deals > they are offering for one year, only $25 dollars for this and only > three cents per minute on that, free installation, a fifty dollar gift > card, and how they have finally begun to take notice now that in their > own words, sixty thousand Kansas residents have jumped ship on them > and gone elsewhere. Trouble is, I just can't trust them. They seem to > lie so much. I'm quite happy with Prairie Stream, thanks. PAT] That sounds almost like what Cox is doing here in Rhode Island. You see - I ditched them a couple months ago because of their predatory pricing model. Went DSL and Sat and spend less per month. In any case -- while I had Cox Digital cable you never saw a sat ad, only ads for Cox services. I know why -- they were putting their own ads over the sat ads. Nice huh? Now they're even blasting their ads on the local channels offering half off for the first 3 to 6 months, etc. And I'm seeing sat dishes popping up everywhere. It's a beautiful thing to see Cox running scared. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I just now realized I misquoted the letter from Southwestern Bell. They did NOT say 'sixty thousand Kansas residents had jumped ship on them. They said about sixty thousand *former* customers (who had left earlier) had decided to return. I am sure there were many others who have not returned, so the total number of ship jumpers would be how many ever jumped less the sixty thousand who had come back. That's Kansas alone. I think that Prairie Stream/Terraword got most of those. That's great! PAT] ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 12:57:21 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications The only way you can solve that problem is to pay for call rejection service for those three folks. Then, they can set the list (usually a maximum of 10 numbers) to reject calls from your number. Withheld at Users Request wrote: > [PAT - In the interest of privacy, please delete my .sig and email > address from this post. Thanks.] > I'm looking for a way to block outgoing calls to three specific phone > numbers. The problem is a relative with Alzheimer's who repeatedly > calls a couple of neighbors (dozens of times a day), to the point that > they're threatening to call the police. I'd like to be able to simply > disallow calls to those numbers. > Obviously we don't want to interfere with her ability to call 911, or > call friends or family members. We really only need to shut down > these three specific phone numbers. And yes, we're also taking steps > to get her to stop trying to call these people in the first place. > I'm pretty sure telco can block _incoming_ calls _from_ a certain > number, and this might be an option -- I could offer to pay for this > service on the neighbors' lines. But I'd rather handle it on the > originating end if possible. I plan to call telco tomorrow and see if > they offer an outbound-blocking feature. > Barring that, is there a piece of hardware that can do this? I didn't > see anything on sandman.com. Mike's got some restrictors but they look > to be too general for what I want to do; I want to allow everything > EXCEPT three specific phone numbers. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think Mike has 'toll restrictor' > devices which are programmable. Ask him for specific details. If they > are programmable -- to a deep enough level -- at least seven or eight > digits -- you can accomplish this. If they can restrict all the way, > then you have it made. If they can only restrict any six digits, then > percievably you could catch those three numbers but *maybe* a 'good' > number she calls might get caught as well. Also, consider a mechanical > dialer to set next to the phone with eight or ten or twelve or more > numbers (NOT the ones she is offending) then go inside the phone and > disconnect the touch tones, so she has to use the dialer device to > make all her calls. I do not think telco will disallow specific local > numbers. You can reach Mike's office on 630-980-7710. I'd suggest yo > ask Mike in confidence for details. Ask him how to program the toll > restrictors to do what you need to have done. PAT] ------------------------------ From: marsgal42@hotmail.com (Laura Halliday) Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers Date: 4 Mar 2004 13:40:28 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com > [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... I was recently in Costa Rica on vacation, and the entire country is one phone book. Two volumes: residential white pages in one volume, business white pages and yellow pages in the other, published by Verizon. The phone numbers are 7 digits, with no area codes. You just dial the number, with no indication of local or long distance. The white pages are divided up by province, from Alajuela to San Jose. Like much of Latin America the Costa Ricans don't use house numbers, so the addresses in the phone book tended to be cryptic. The hotel I stayed at in San Jose gave its full street address (250m west of the Escazu Country Club, old highway to Santa Ana, San Rafael de Escazu) only in the yellow pages. In B.C. we used Zenith numbers, by the way. Yes, BCTel was owned by GTE ... Laura Halliday VE7LDH "Que les nuages soient notre Grid: CN89mg pied a terre..." ICBM: 49 16.05 N 122 56.92 W - Hospital/Shafte ------------------------------ Date: 4 Mar 2004 23:05:29 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I'm talking about running a regular modem, such as a Zoom, USR, etc, > over a Vonage phoneline. I'm assuming if a standard telephone works > over the Vonage lines then a standard analog modem would as well, Forget it. > They say Fax machines will work, but Faxes are generally 9600 bps. > I need 28,800 bps for a good PPP connection. I find that faxes usually work, but their compression scheme is written with faxes in mind. If you need 28K dialup, you need a real phone. I like my Vonage phone just fine, but I wouldn't want it as the only phone in the house because it doesn't work when the power fails, and its 911 service is inferior to that on a real phone. 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. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried this experiment as I promised I would do in the last issue. When I tried plugging a fax machine directly into the Vonage adapter, it worked fine. When I plugged in one of the (computer) modems directly to the Vonage adapter, it worked mostly okay at 300-1200 baud, or even 9600 baud. But it just would not do any better. So my suggestion would be to put Vonage on for your main line and also keep one telco line as an overflow for the Vonage and for your incoming dialup sessions. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <73115.1041@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Wireless and Internet Phones not Yet Reliable For 911 Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 18:03:51 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Sammy@nospam.biz wrote: > In the case of wireless service, if the user has half a brain they > should understand that 911 is a crap shoot when away from home. If > they have a fully functioning brain they should realize that all local > and county police have a 10-digit number that will go to emergency > dispatch 24 hours a day. Most of the time such numbers are listed. > If they aren't they can be found easily by calling the cop's listed > business number and asking. It's not just 911 wireless that is a crap shoot. The shall be nameless metroplex (>500K population) I live in has a 911 center that appears to be run as a patronage make work, social services department for the local government. Articles regularly appear in the local paper about callers being hung up on and insufficient staffing. Considering that more than enough funds should be available from the 911 phone tax to support such a center, one doesn't have to wonder very hard about what is going on. A few years back, the police dispatch office was moving from one location to another. The new office was served by a different CO and thus the very easy to remember direct line to the dispatchers who knew how to handle a call was going to change. The city tried to make the argument that since the public should be using 911, dropping the old direct line number wasn't a problem. They received so much flack from the public that they ordered remote call forwarding for the old number. ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: (Claims to Be) Cellular-Phone Dealer in Nigeria Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:46:30 -0600 Joseph wrote: > [Lots of trash deleted] > First of all how much faith can someone have for an ALL CAPS post. > Second of all this is *obviously* a scam. > Common knowledge says don't do business with Nigeria, Indonesia or > Romania when dealing with mobile phones. The old addage of if it > looks too good to be true it probably is. Um, I'd like to clarify my post: I agree with this. I receive offers to buy bulk cellphones/PINs/etc from the USA, and I suspect that at least some of THEM are legitimate. Not the ones from Nigeria. 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: Gary Novosielski Subject: Re: Verizon Wireless and Verizon Airfone Offer 10 Cents-a-Minute Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 03:30:24 GMT Here's another opportunity to get ripped off by believing what the news release says. And yes, if one were inclined to be suspicious, one might conclude that the language is intentionally misleading. A quick reading (come to think of it, even a CAREFUL reading) of this news release makes it seem as though VZW customers who want the $.10/min rate must subscribe to the $10/month service, while customers who want the $.69/min rate (with no other charges) need do nothing. THIS IS NOT THE CASE! You need to "sign up" for EITHER the subscription or the non-subscription feature. If you do nothing and place a call from an AirFone handset, you'll be charged the normal ~$4/min rate. What Verizon could have stated clearly, but chose not to, but which I've managed to drag out of the customer service drones is the following: The plan has two rate levels: 10 cents per AirFone minute with a $10 monthly fee (frequent user) 69 cents per AirFone minute with no monthly fee (occasional user) To sign up for EITHER plan, you dial *611 from your VZW handset, which MUST be TXT-message compatible. Once you get a human, you tell them you want to sign up for the "AirFone for Verizon Wireless Customers" feature. If you want the $.69/min plan, you tell them you want the "Flat Rate-No Monthly Charge" option. Yes, that's a misleading name too, because it's not "Flat Rate" it's $.69/min. Just make sure you're not signing up for the $10/month plan by mistake. You should expect them to be completely unfamiliar with this feature and to have to go looking up memos or consulting with their supervisor, but they will eventually figure it out. Once they punch the proper code to add the feature to your account (it's available on all Verizon rate plans except pre-paid) you should, within seconds, receive a TXT-message to your handset containing your password (actually a four-digit PIN number). SAVE THIS NUMBER. This is the number you will need to enter on the AirFone seatback handset to avoid the ~$4/min charges, and to start forwarding your mobile number to your seatback while in flight. The forwarding lasts until you cancel it, or it times out (based on the length of the flight), or until you power on your wireless handset, whichever occurs first. This PIN will undoubtedly be different from any other PIN you have, such as voice mail or web access, and IT CANNOT BE CHANGED. Better write that puppy down and keep it in a safe place, especially if you're on the "infrequent flier" plan. AirFone minutes used will show up on your VZW bill as "roaming" minutes. =Gary Monty Solomon wrote: > 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 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So whatever happened to all the dire warnings about using your cell phone when in flight? PAT] ------------------------------ From: tryitoz@hotmail.com (Joe Donaldson) Subject: Re: Unauthorized Bogus Phone Charges Appearing on Local Phone Bill? Date: 4 Mar 2004 19:57:36 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Yes she now has blocked International calls with her local provider and is using a long distance provider via an 800 number for international calls. Thanks, Joe Steven J Sobol wrote in message news:: > Joseph wrote: >> This has been in the news of late and here's something I found when >> referencing google: > Why doesn't she just block direct-dialed international calls and use a > service that offers cheap international calling where you must use an > 800 number and a PIN? > 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 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: More Re: the GTE Side of Verizon Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 21:17:05 -0800 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed In article , John David Galt wrote: > Sammy@nospam.biz wrote: >> I think the Palms, Springs, California area was still a GTE LATA >> within a LATA when Verizon gobbled it all up. > The Palm Springs area (an old GTE area that extends north and east to > cover Morongo Valley, Yucca Valley, Joshua Tree, and 29 Palms) is a > separate LATA (number 973, according to NANPA) and has been that way > ever since LATAs have existed. It annoys me that phone books > published by SBC and SureWest give the false impression that it is > part of the Los Angeles LATA. The San Francisco area SBC directories show the Palm Springs area as a large black blob in the Los Angeles LATA, with a notation "Palm Springs Area -- Other Company." However, they incorrectly state that California has 10 LATAs. In fact, there are 11, not counting minor "border incursions" with neighboring states. Our LATA maps, even in directories that include the affected area, also make the incorrect claim that the San Francisco LATA includes all of area codes 408, 415, 510, 650, 707, and 925, plus the northern portion of 831. In fact, there is one small part of 707 that is in the Sacramento LATA. It has always been in the Sacramento LATA, although it has only much more recently become area code 707. The town of Dixon, along I-80 in Solano County, switched from 916 to 707 instead of 916 to 530, since the rest of Solano County was already 707. However, the LATA boundary was not changed. The rest of the area code information in this year's directory (Nov 2003 San Francisco) is also of embarrassingly poor quality. The maps look like they were faxed to the printer, and the text listings were obviously printed on a computer that didn't have the correct fonts. Still, it doesn't quite compare to last year's directory, on whose cover SBC actually misspelled one of the cities in the directory area! It says "San Francisco Including Brisbane, Colma, and Daily City." Umm, folks, that's DALY City, not DAILY City. They did at least get that one fixed this year. 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. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #105 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 5 18:46:22 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i25NkM604513; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 18:46:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 18:46:22 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403052346.i25NkM604513@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 #106 TELECOM Digest Fri, 5 Mar 2004 18:46:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 106 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Report on Investigation Into Improper Access to Senate (Monty Solomon) TiVo Triples Subscription Additions and Reports Positive Cash (Solomon) EchoStar May Need Partner Down Road / Comcast-Disney Union (M. Solomon) Microsoft Gadget Keeps Record of Your Life (Monty Solomon) Firms Look to Limit Liability for Online Security Breaches (M.Solomon) Document Shows SCO Prepped Lawsuit Against B of A (Monty Solomon) Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax (Hank Karl) Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax (Ray Normandeau) Re: Flexion X300 PABX (Duncan Fisken) Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers (Carl Navarro) Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers (DevilsPGD) Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Saint-P) (John R. Covert) Re: Verizon Wireless / Verizon Airfone Offer 10 Cents-a-Minute (Joseph) Avaya/Nortel Users ATTN!!! (redG) Old Pay Phones Sold as Novelty Items (Joe Wineburgh) 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, 5 Mar 2004 17:05:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Report on the Investigation Into Improper Access to the Senate REPORT ON THE INVESTIGATION INTO IMPROPER ACCESS TO THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE'S COMPUTER SYSTEM http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1085&wit_id=2514 http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1085&wit_id=3088 http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/senate/pickle30404rpt1.html http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/senate/pickle30404rpt2.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 17:36:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Triples Subscription Additions and Reports Positive Cash TiVo Triples Subscription Additions and Reports Positive Cash Flow in Q4; Raises Annual Guidance to Reflect Doubling of Subscription Base - Mar 4, 2004 04:06 PM (PR Newswire) - Subscription base grew to more than 1.3 million; Revenues 85% - higher than Q4 of last year; $143 million cash position - strongest in 3 years; Announces $50 million plan that is - expected to result in a doubling of subscription base and - enables TiVo to achieve sustainable profitability by the end of - next year. SAN JOSE, Calif., March 4 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo (Nasdaq: TIVO), the creator of and a leader in television services for digital video recorders (DVRs), reported today that it added a record 330,000 subscriptions in the fourth quarter, nearly triple the number added in Q4 of last year. The Company's total subscription base more than doubled during the fiscal year to over 1.3 million. Net revenue for the quarter increased 85% to $42.6 million, compared with $23.0 million for the three months ended January 31, 2003. Net loss for the quarter was ($12.4) million, or ($0.18) per share, an improvement from a net loss of ($32.5) million, or ($0.56) per share, for the three months ended January 31, 2003. Excluding non-cash items related to the conversion of Notes Payable during the periods, TiVo's net loss for the quarter was ($7.9) million, or ($0.12) per share, an improvement from a net loss of ($14.7) million, or ($0.25) per share, for the three months ended January 31, 2003. Cash Flow From Operations during the quarter was a positive $13.4 million, compared with $2.4 million in Q4 of last year. For the year ended January 31, 2004 net revenue was $141.1 million and net loss was ($32.0) million or ($0.48) per share. TiVo also reported its first full year of positive Adjusted EBITDA.* TiVo ended the quarter and its fiscal year with $143.2 million in cash, compared to $44.2 million a year ago. This represents TiVo's largest cash balance and strongest capital position in over three years. With retailers offering ten digital video recorder models powered by TiVo this past quarter, TiVo enjoyed its most successful holiday season ever. Of the 330,000 net new subscriptions added in the quarter, approximately 200,000 resulted from TiVo's relationship with DIRECTV, demonstrating 33% sequential growth, and five times the number of new DIRECTV subscriptions added in Q4 of last year. The remaining 130,000 net new subscription additions represented more than double the growth in TiVo Service subscriptions experienced in the previous quarter. TiVo Announces $50 million Growth Plan That is Expected to Result in Doubling of Subscription Base, 40% Higher Annual Subscription Adds Than Prior Guidance, and Sustainable Profitability by the end of Fiscal Year 2006. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40756085 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 17:31:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EchoStar May Need Partner Down Road / Comcast-Disney Union Comcast-Disney union could compel change, Ergen says By Kris Hudson Denver Post Business Writer WASHINGTON - EchoStar Communications Corp. chairman Charlie Ergen said Thursday that his company may have no choice but to consider a merger or acquisition if Comcast Corp. successfully engulfs the Walt Disney Co. http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~33~1997143,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 17:34:53 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Gadget Keeps Record of Your Life By ALLISON LINN AP Business Writer REDMOND, Wash. (AP) -- SenseCam, touted as a visual diary of sorts by Microsoft Corp., is designed to be worn around the neck and take up to 2,000 images a 12-hour day automatically. The prototype responds to changes such as bright lights and sudden movements and might one day even respond to other stimuli such as heart rate or skin temperature _ to track medical problems as easily as to record a Hawaiian vacation. And it could eventually link with other technology, such as face recognition to remind wearers when they've seen someone before. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40753831 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 09:30:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Firms Look to Limit Liability for Online Security Breaches By Jonathan Krim Washington Post Staff Writer In the face of ongoing attacks by computer hackers, some companies that store their customers' personal data are adopting a new defensive tactic: If your information is stolen, they're not legally responsible. Across the Internet, retailers and other service providers that handle consumer transactions are requiring customers to agree to waive any right to sue the companies if the businesses are hacked, regardless of how secure their systems are. The waivers are contained in lengthy terms-of-use agreements that consumers often click to accept without reading closely. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31874-2004Mar4.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How odd ... so if a company does a real schlocky job of maintaining their computer systems and the customer database all leaks out, you cannot blame the company any longer. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 09:54:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Document Shows SCO Prepped Lawsuit Against B of A By Stephen Shankland and Scott Ard Staff Writer, CNET News.com The SCO Group filed lawsuits this week against DaimlerChrysler and AutoZone, but the Unix seller's attorneys also had prepared a complaint against Bank of America, according to a document. A Microsoft Word document of SCO's suit against DaimlerChrysler, seen by CNET News.com, originally identified Bank of America as the defendant instead of the automaker. This revision and others in the document can be seen through powerful but often forgotten features in Microsoft Word known as invisible electronic ink. A feature in the word-processing software tracks changes to documents, who made those changes, and when they were made. These notations typically are invisible to someone reading a Word document. But as some lawyers, businesspeople and politicians have learned the hard way, Word can also display so-called metadata in the document -- including the original version and all subsequent changes. This information is available by viewing the document under "original showing markup" or "final showing markup." The presence of hidden text in the SCO document is just the latest example of this workplace issue. According to a study by market research firm Vanson Bourne titled "The Cost of Sharing," 90 percent of documents in circulation began as something else, but 57 percent of respondents were not aware that metadata may still exist in the their document. Microsoft addresses the issue on its Web site but adds that its 2003 version of Office provides a feature that lets users "permanently remove" the hidden text from Word. http://news.com.com/2100-7344-5170073.html ------------------------------ From: Hank Karl Subject: Re: Vonage With Modem and Fax Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 11:41:21 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried this experiment as I promised I > would do in the last issue. When I tried plugging a fax machine > directly into the Vonage adapter, it worked fine. When I plugged in > one of the (computer) modems directly to the Vonage adapter, it worked > mostly okay at 300-1200 baud, or even 9600 baud. But it just would not > do any better. So my suggestion would be to put Vonage on for your > main line and also keep one telco line as an overflow for the Vonage > and for your incoming dialup sessions. PAT Vonage uses several TAs. You may have an older Cisco ATA 186 or a newer Motorola VT1000. The capabilities of the TA and how you set the options make a major difference in the ability to send data. If you have a perfect line (no jitter, no packet loss, low end-to-end delay) you should be able to get 28.8 and possibly more on G.711. (Turn off packet loss concealment, or PLC). All codecs throw away parts of the signal, the hope is that it will sound "good enough" to the user. When sending data, you want to throw away as little as possible, or have the TA demodulate the modem output and have some other device on the other end remodulate it. Another suggestion for the OP is to set up a VPN. ------------------------------ From: rayta@msn.com (Ray Normandeau) Subject: Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax Date: 5 Mar 2004 09:31:05 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > instrument) and I can tell you that was pretty crappy at best. At 300 > baud it barely worked (in hyperterm, pecking on a few keys and > auditing the output for accuracy) but not in a more controlled BBS I am glad to see hyperterm mentioned. In my WIN ME machine I have never used it. On my DOS 386 machine I have Procomm Plus that I can set up as a mini BBS. Could I connect both computers with a null modem cable and transfer data by using hyperterm to "call into" my DOS Procmm system? MSN addy above is dead. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I guess you could, but I would use Laplink for that job instead. That is much faster if you do not have a LAN and 'Network Neighborhood' on both computers. Actually, if you have a null modem cable you would have a network neighborhood, I think, as long as you had the appropriate drivers on each end. I am a little angry with hyperterm, maybe it is my fault. I needed to induce the weather mechanicals on my roof to produce a database display so that I could tell someone (the writer of the weather station software) the protocol it was using. I thought I could use hyperterm to do the job: tell hyperterm to talk to a given COM port to which the weather station control box was attached. I did the proper events to 'tickle it' into producing a line of output but it never arrived. I went through a half-dozen baud rates, and parity settings with no success. Then at some point I discovered that hyperterm had caused the Windows 98 machine to freeze up. I never did succeed at this project, although the weather station *is* up and running okay with some other software for it (to do the FTP from me to the server), at http://weatherforecast.n3.net or http://weatherforecast.us.tf if anyone is interested in the readings for Independence, KS which I sort of doubt. A camera 'street scene' is even included during the daytime hours. PAT] ------------------------------ From: duncan.fisken@blueyonder.co.uk (Duncan Fisken) Subject: Re: Flexion X300 PABX Date: 5 Mar 2004 04:38:43 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Check out www.voxent.com - they now own BusinessGuardian. Duncan ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 07:32:39 -0500 On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 12:57:21 -0800, Sammy@nospam.biz wrote: > The only way you can solve that problem is to pay for call rejection > service for those three folks. Then, they can set the list (usually a > maximum of 10 numbers) to reject calls from your number. Sigh, I've got 5 or 6 Mitel Smar1 boxes in the warehouse that would do the trick. I might even have at least one 2 port (vs. 4 port) box. Since they've been there awhile, I can let one go pretty reasonable. I even have a full copy of the manual. The original poster may e-mail me off line for particulars. Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 22:59:14 GMT In message <> Sammy@nospam.biz did ramble: > The only way you can solve that problem is to pay for call rejection > service for those three folks. Then, they can set the list (usually a > maximum of 10 numbers) to reject calls from your number. That's not "the only way", there are telcos out there that offer flexible toll restriction, and include the ability to block specified nontoll (including local) numbers. Politicians, like diapers, have to be changed frequently, and for the very same reason. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 12:08:11 EST From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: Memories: Enterprise -vs- Zenith Numbers (Saint-Pierre) Linc Madison wrote: > from the rest of the world, you dial +508 5 08 xx xx xx. Nope. Just +508 xx xx xx. See http://www.st-pierre-et-miquelon.com/ /john ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Verizon Wireless and Verizon Airfone Offer 10 Cents-a-Minute Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 09:36:00 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 03:30:24 GMT, Gary Novosielski wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So whatever happened to all the dire > warnings about using your cell phone when in flight? PAT] You *still* can't use your mobile phone *in* flight. It's assumed that you will make arrangements for the transfer of your calls and account setup whether the "a la carte" 69 cent plan or the frequent traveler $10/month plan from your mobile phone to Airphone before the flight leaves. This is about Airphone and not about Verizon Wireless in flight. remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: dave@burr.net (redG) Subject: Avaya/Nortel Users ATTN!!! Date: 5 Mar 2004 10:03:44 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I have found this site very very useful for me. Just wanted to share. http://www.pbxtech.info/index.php?referrerid=951 ------------------------------ From: Joe Wineburgh Subject: Old Pay Phones Sold as Novelty Items Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 14:22:39 -0500 -----Original Message----- From: owner-ip@v2.listbox.com [mailto:owner-ip@v2.listbox.com]On Behalf Of Dave Farber Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 8:26 PM To: Ip Subject: [IP] : Old pay phones sold as novelty items -----Original Message----- From: Steve Barsh Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:57:04 To:dave@farber.net Cc:"'Kevin Werbach'" Subject: For [IP] if you wish: Old pay phones sold as novelty items For IP if you think others would find it of interest ... I can't remember the last time I actually used a payphone ... From http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/ptech/03/04/relic.phones.ap/index.html ATLANTA, Georgia (AP) -- Old pay phones are selling like they're going out of style. Collectors have made an online rush to buy BellSouth's boxy old pay phones that have been refurbished for home use, after the Atlanta-based company decided to pull out of a coin-operated phone business that had withered in the wireless age. "It's a novelty. You just don't usually see pay phones in people's homes," said Hugh Bowen, a retired Atlanta police officer who bought one of the 30-pound phones. "I thought it was so neat and I always wanted one. When I saw this opportunity I jumped on it." About 500 orders for the $135 phones were filled in the two months they've been for sale, and now there's a waiting list of about 300 more people. Cell phones have increasingly pushed aside the once-ubiquitous pay phones. More than six out of 10 Americans now own cell phones, said Patrick Comack, an analyst with Guzman & Co. in Miami. Pay phones have lost so much market share to wireless, it's no longer a moneymaking business, he said. So the big phones are going the way of rotary phones, crank phones and early model brick-sized cell phones. When BellSouth became the first major phone company to shutter its languishing pay phone business two years ago, volunteers with the phone company decided to refurbish the phones for home use and resell them to raise money for charity. The phones were rewired so they can plug into a wall outlet and to work without coins. About $18,000 has been raised from the $35 in profit from each phone, which will go toward groups like Habitat for Humanity and the American Red Cross. Other companies will continue to operate some pay phones, but their numbers will continue to decrease. The total number of pay phones nationwide has dropped 29.5 percent in the last five years, including a 32.9 percent drop in pay phones operated by local phone companies, according to the Federal Communications Commission. "My grandchildren and great-grandchildren won't know what it is," said Bill Ray, who bought one of the pay phones and keeps it atop a filing cabinet in his Memphis, Tennessee, BellSouth office. "I thought I'd get it for the nostalgia, and it will be a conversation piece for years to come." Thanks, Steve Barsh steve@barsh.com http://www.barsh.com 610.668.8182 Office 215.888.2101 Cell 610.668.8750 Fax Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #106 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 6 15:25:28 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i26KPRT12308; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 15:25:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 15:25:28 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403062025.i26KPRT12308@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 #107 TELECOM Digest Sat, 6 Mar 2004 15:25:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 107 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Circuit City to Carry Vonage Phones in 600 Stores (Monty Solomon) Review: Proving That a PC Can Rival TiVo (Monty Solomon) Patent Central to Microsoft Case Invalidated (Monty Solomon) TiVo to Webcast Investor/Analyst Day on March 5, 2004 (Monty Solomon) TiVo Expects to Top 10 mln Subscribers in 3-4 Years (Monty Solomon) Re: Verizon Wireless/Verizon Airfone Offer 10 Cents-a-Minute (M Solomon) Echostar, Viacom Deadlocked But Hope Seen in Dispute (Monty Solomon) Re: Saint Pierre, was Memories (John Levine) Re: Firms Look to Limit Liability for Online Security Breach (Landsberg) Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax (Alex) Voip Setup (Maxspd) A Mobile Media Mogul (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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 18:45:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Circuit City to Carry Vonage Phones in 600 Stores By Eric Auchard NEW YORK, March 4 (Reuters) - Vonage, which provides inexpensive phone service as an add-on for customers with high-speed Internet lines, on Thursday said that it has reached its first deal with a national retailer to sell its services. Vonage, of Edison, New Jersey, said that Circuit City Stores, Inc. (NYSE:CC) will begin selling its services in 600 retail outlets as well as online. Vonage, which has sold more than 100,000 of its innovative Internet phones since it began offering service two years ago, now expects upward of 300,000 customers by the end of this year, higher than its previous goal of 250,000 for 2004. Retail exposure should attract additional subscribers, founder and Chief Executive Jeffrey Citron said. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40757074 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:00:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Review: Proving That a PC Can Rival TiVo By MATTHEW FORDAHL AP Technology Writer SnapStream Media Inc.'s latest software is an excellent example of how a personal computer can improve on a TV set: It offers more choices, more information and, most important, more control over the viewing experience. The program is similar to the TV features in Microsoft Corp.'s Windows XP Media Center Edition, but SnapStream offers more features _ without the purchase of a so-called multimedia computer. It even gives the standalone personal video recorder from TiVo Inc. a run for its money. The SnapStream software has undergone some major reworking, including a name change from "Personal Video Station" to "Beyond TV 3." It's addressed past annoyances by adding much-needed support for mouse pointing devices, better program guide integration and greater reliability. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40758597 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:10:19 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Patent Central to Microsoft Case Invalidated By Reed Stevenson SEATTLE, March 5 (Reuters) - The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has invalidated a claim to Web browser technology central to a case against Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT), a move that could spare the software giant from paying more than half a billion dollars in damages, according to documents obtained on Friday. The patent agency's preliminary decision, if upheld, also means that Microsoft will not be required to make changes to its Internet Explorer Web browser that would have crippled the program's ability to work with mini-programs that work over the Internet, such as the Quicktime and Flash media players. Last year, an Illinois jury delivered a $521 million verdict against Microsoft for infringing on technology developed by a privately held firm, Eolas Technologies Inc., and the University of California. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40766065 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:02:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo to Webcast Investor/Analyst Day on March 5, 2004 NEW YORK, March 5 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo Inc. (Nasdaq: TIVO) will be webcasting its Investor/Analyst Day Presentations on Friday, March 5, 2004. The live webcast can be viewed by going to http://www.shareholder.com/TiVo/medialist.cfm . An archive of the webcast will be available within 24 hours of the end of the event and can be viewed at http://www.shareholder.com/TiVo/medialist.cfm . - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40759838 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:08:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Expects to Top 10 mln Subscribers in 3-4 Years NEW YORK, March 5 (Reuters) - TiVo Inc. (NASDAQ:TIVO) on Friday said it expects subscribers to its television recording service to increase dramatically and revenues to grow as much as 80 percent annually over the next three to four years, fueled by growing consumer acceptance of the technology. At a meeting with analysts, Chief Executive Michael Ramsey said he expects the service, which lets users customize `qtelevision viewing by recording shows on a built-in computer hard drive for playback later, to have more than 10 million subscribers -- up from its current total of 1.3 million. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40762038 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:43:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: Verizon Wireless and Verizon Airfone Offer 10 Cents-a-Minute More details are on their web site http://www22.verizon.com/airfone/vzw/vzw_airfone_service.html Monty ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 02:15:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Echostar, Viacom Deadlocked But Hope Seen in Dispute By Kenneth Li NEW YORK, March 5 (Reuters) - Viacom Inc. (NYSE:VIAb) and EchoStar Communications Corp. (NASDAQ:DISH) said on Friday they were deadlocked but held out hope of resolving a contract dispute before a Monday deadline that would leave EchoStar subscribers in major cities without CBS programming. After four months of deadlocked contract negotiations, EchoStar in January filed a lawsuit in federal court in a bid to block Viacom from pulling its broadcasts of local CBS stations from its subscribers in New York, Los Angeles and 13 other media markets. A judge last week gave EchoStar and Viacom until midnight Pacific Time on Monday to reach a pact on broadcasting the CBS stations in those markets. The dispute also affects Viacom-owned cable networks such as MTV, VH1 and Nickelodeon. The No. 2 U.S. satellite service, based in Englewood, Colorado, has balked at what it has described as Viacom's demands that it carry new additional channels such as the new Nicktoons channel in exchange for the rights to broadcast CBS. Viacom has dismissed EchoStar's legal claims and has called its lawsuit an attempt to strong-arm the broadcaster in the long-running contract talks. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40767309 ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 2004 03:53:11 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Saint Pierre, was Memories Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Nope. Just +508 xx xx xx. See http://www.st-pierre-et-miquelon.com/ Actually +508 41 xx xx, since it's a rather small exchange. The local ISP, which belongs to the telco, is at http://www.cheznoo.net. They offer all the usual stuff, dialup, cable modem (they own the cable TV network), web hosting. Near the upper right of their home page the "Annuaire" link takes you to the local phone book along with service numbers like 15 for ambulance. The spmtelecom.com site describes their Ameris mobile phone system which has good coverage but is rather pricey and has the usual politically goofy rates, e.g., E1.10 to the US, but E0.68 to French Guyana because it's domestic. By the way, a traceroute to cheznoo.net reveals that they're connected via Newfoundland, not via France. I don't know whether voice or other traffic also takes that route. 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: Nick Landsberg Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net Subject: Re: Firms Look to Limit Liability for Online Security Breaches Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 00:46:23 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Monty Solomon wrote: > By Jonathan Krim > Washington Post Staff Writer > In the face of ongoing attacks by computer hackers, some companies > that store their customers' personal data are adopting a new defensive > tactic: If your information is stolen, they're not legally > responsible. > Across the Internet, retailers and other service providers that handle > consumer transactions are requiring customers to agree to waive any > right to sue the companies if the businesses are hacked, regardless of > how secure their systems are. > The waivers are contained in lengthy terms-of-use agreements that > consumers often click to accept without reading closely. > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31874-2004Mar4.html > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How odd ... so if a company does a real > schlocky job of maintaining their computer systems and the customer > database all leaks out, you cannot blame the company any longer. PAT] I'm not a lawyer, but I believe the principle of "due diligence" would apply here. If they sat on their rumps and did nothing to prevent the information from being stolen, even with the TOU agreements, then you would probably have a case. Then again, what's with the thousand line "terms of use" (TOU) agreements? I was on a site the other day which advertised something I *might* be interested in. I clicked on the link, and up popped a page which asked me to sign up. The TOU agreement was in a 2.5 line scroll box, maybe 20 characters wide. Obviously readable only by anal-retentives. To read the whole thing you had to scroll down through well over 50 lines (I stopped at about 50). No options to open a separate page with the whole agreement there. No options to print it out, etc. I called the number and asked for a copy of the TOU agreement before signing up. The droid said ... "You have to sign up and then we will send you the terms of use agreement if you request it." Thanks but no thanks. Now, this is the same stuff that spammers do. They comply with the "letter of the law" but not the spirit. In something like real-estate contracts, I thought it was now illegal to hide the details in the small print. This is tantamount to hiding the details in the small print. "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: alex@totallynerd.com (Alex) Subject: Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax Date: 5 Mar 2004 06:03:15 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com John and Pat, Thanks for the info ... but after contacting Vonage via email, they said they don't have my area yet but should soon. So, I'll hold-off until they're around here before pursuing it further. Thanks for your time and info on this, Alex John Levine wrote in message news:: >> I'm talking about running a regular modem, such as a Zoom, USR, etc, >> over the Vonage lines then a standard analog modem would as well, > Forget it. >> They say Fax machines will work, but Faxes are generally 9600 bps. >> I need 28,800 bps for a good PPP connection. > I find that faxes usually work, but their compression scheme is written > with faxes in mind. If you need 28K dialup, you need a real phone. > I like my Vonage phone just fine, but I wouldn't want it as the only > phone in the house because it doesn't work when the power fails, and > its 911 service is inferior to that on a real phone. > 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. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried this experiment as I promised I > would do in the last issue. When I tried plugging a fax machine > directly into the Vonage adapter, it worked fine. When I plugged in > one of the (computer) modems directly to the Vonage adapter, it worked > mostly okay at 300-1200 baud, or even 9600 baud. But it just would not > do any better. So my suggestion would be to put Vonage on for your > main line and also keep one telco line as an overflow for the Vonage > and for your incoming dialup sessions. PAT] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As far as 'not having lines yet in your area', I'd not waste a lot of time, but check in every day or three and see how long it takes them to get in your area. When I first started with Vonage (last April), they were only serving basically the west and east coasts with scattered 'pops' in the middle west, but nothing I could use. They did not send out any special announcements about moving into the central states area, but one day I decided to check (assuming I would still find nothing useful in the midwest), but lo-and-behold, this time they had 'pops' all over Missouri, Kansas and Oklahoma, so I swapped out my San Francisco line for a much closer one in Winfield, Kansas (620 area, same as myself). They seem to be very rapidly expanding, just as MCI/Sprint did in the early part of the 1970's. So keep watching. They also offer 800 numbers now. If you have any line of theirs, you can get a 'virtual' 800 number for five dollars per month with a hundred minutes of talk time per month included. So something like that might work for you also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: maxspd01@hotmail.com (Maxspd) Subject: Voip Setup Date: 5 Mar 2004 15:27:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I was wondering what it take to setup a phone company like Vonage? (Highly technical description is fine). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, let's start with the money. You'll need a lot of it, maybe a bank can help you on that. You will need a truckload of DID lines, preferably in every single phone exchange everywhere, unless you were planning to build your own exchanges. Until/unless/ever you get to the point where all your traffic stays on your own network, you'll need to have good credit with the various telcos to pay some humongous billings for your off-net traffic (both in and out) which will be 90 percent or more of it. You'll need a vendor for your VOIP boxes, such as Cisco or Motorola, and have enough money to get your way with them regards how the adapter boxes are to be programmed, etc. Assume all the above will actually have to happen months or even a year before you are actually in a position to begin selling your service. That's for starters. PAT] ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: A Mobile Media Mogul Date: 5 Mar 2004 16:01:52 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Arik Hesseldahl, 03.05.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - Mobile phones are quickly turning into something more than what you use to talk to other people. They are increasingly becoming a source of entertainment. They're taking pictures. They're playing music. They're displaying video. And they're becoming an ever-more-popular platform for playing video games. All these new features are intended to boost the number that wireless carriers live by, known as ARPU -- average revenue per user. The trick is to convince customers to use their phones for a lot more than talking. In Europe and Japan this has worked out a lot better than in the United States, at least so far. Americans still like to spend most of their time talking on their phones, and aren't as likely to use them to send messages with pictures attached. http://www.forbes.com/technology/2004/03/05/cx_ah_0305tentech.html Note from Eric: I've received something new on my mobile handset this past week; spam. I think they knew what they were sending *to* since the character limit was not exceeded. Just a quick note saying I could have the figure of a supermodel if I called an 800 number. Eric Friedebach /No Dirty Words On The Whiteboard/ ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #107 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 7 19:34:31 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i280YUi20795; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 19:34:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 19:34:31 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403080034.i280YUi20795@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 #108 TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Mar 2004 19:35:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 108 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance (Rob Slade) Spam Going Out Under My Name (TELECOM Digest Editor) Compensation For Telephones Sold Programmed to Call my Phone (MLM List) Should I Use 66-block (John) Re: Verizon Wireless/Verizon Airfone Offer 10 Cents-Minute (Novosielski) Re: Verizon Wireless/Verizon Airfone Offer 10 Cents-Minute (Steve Sobol) Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax (John Levine) Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers (name withheld) Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" (David S. Roland) 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: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 16:37:19 -0800 Subject: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance Peter Wilson's article on spam and viruses (on Saturday, March 6, 2004) lists a number of antispam measures that are currently being promoted. He also retails Bill Gates' confident prediction that spam will be a thing of the past by 2006. Remember that prophecy, because Bill Gates is going to be proven wrong. An examination of the measures listed in the article demonstrates why. SPF (sender-permitted format) is currently garnering the greatest interest. The description of SPF as a kind of caller-ID is not quite correct. All email carries caller-ID in the form of the information about who the message is from, and information about the Internet Protocol (IP) address that originated the message. SPF is actually an attempt to contact the site that is supposed to have originated the message, and verify that these two pieces of information match, or, at least, are likely. Spammers, when creating spoofed addresses, don't bother to make sure that they do. Or, at least, they haven't up until now. Microsoft's own version seems to be either an attempt to compete or an attempt to derail SPF: SPF is primarily promoted by AOL, and the two companies have never played particularly well together. Microsoft's plan is derided by the SPF camp for being proprietary. It is true that SPF uses features and functions that make more effective use of the email protocols that are currently in use on the Internet. The configuration of factors is not universal, though, and some of the activities will require new programming for everyone who participates in SPF. Which may mean that the Internet might become split into the camp of those who use SPF, and those who don't. I have seen this in action already. I have a number of accounts. (And, of course, get tons of spam.) One is through Vancouver CommunityNet, which does not have very much in the way of spam detection or prevention. Because of the volume of spam this account receives (particularly during the Sobig flood last summer), I forwarded the account to a service that does spam and virus filtering. One of the functions that the service uses is similar to the SPF protocol. A great deal of the spam that was being forwarded was unverifiable, and so the service simply refused to accept it. This meant that a volume of email built up on Vancouver CommunityNet, to the point that it affected the mail system as a whole. (Vancouver CommunityNet, despite being informed of all the details, and my own actions to rectify the situation, has handled the whole matter in a very sloppy manner.) SPF has promise, and it may be possible (unlike the Microsoft proposal) to provide workarounds for a variety of systems, platforms, and applications. However, there are a number of issues that still have to resolved, such as email aliases, third-party services, and applications such as mailing lists, which operate in a wide variety of forms. The difficulties are not insurmountable, but an enormous amount of work still has to be done. Microsoft's micropayments strategy is apparently the most recent one, but has been raised many times over the history of the nets. (One of the popular programs providing Usenet news, a type of topical discussion, used to remind anyone who attempted to post a message that it would possibly cost thousands of dollars to send this to everyone: did they really want to do that?) Unfortunately, the issue of mailing lists comes up almost immediately. Even if we assume one cent per message, if I send a message to a popular list such as the RISKS-FORUM Digest, with a possible hundred thousand subscribers, am I charged a thousand dollars for that message? Is the list moderator charged? In the case of RISKS, it is also redistributed by a number of sub-mailing lists: do those costs get charged to the accounts of the local administrators? The list moderator? Me? (The obvious second question is: who *gets* the money? The Internet Engineering Task Force? Some bloated bureaucracy parcelling out the cash to the various national telecom carriers? Charity? Microsoft? The recipient? Hmmm. Maybe I should rethink my objection to the micropayment system. At one point I was getting 8,000 [yes, eight thousand] copies of spam from one system in China. Per hour. Same message.) And, of course, in order to provide for such a micropayment system, everybody is going to have to use a Microsoft mailer. With a Microsoft payment system. And a Microsoft account. This sounds like an attempt to resurrect the (justly derided and roundly condemned) Passport and Palladium systems. The challenge-response system is already being used by a number of outfits providing spam filtering and other services. It is a nuisance. It can create a great deal of annoyance in a number of situations, not least being mailing lists. It also doesn't work. The most common challenge response systems present a graphical image of a word. This word is supposed to be entered in a field on a web page in order to create permission for the message to go through. People can read the word easily, but machines have difficulty with this type of task, so this makes it impossible for spammers to automate the sending of email: they have to read and respond to every challenge. That's the theory. In fact, spammers have already been found to be "automating" the process -- using Internet web surfers. A number of web pages have been set up promising access to pornography. In order to access the files, you have to respond to a challenge. The challenges are, of course, those that are being presented on the antispam filtering sites. Those challenges are simply extracted, presented to the surfers wanting access to pornographic images, solved by the user, and the solution fed back to the antispam site. The same problems apply to computational puzzles: they are simply another form of challenge-response. In fact, most of these antispam technologies fail in the face of the problem of spam nets set up by viruses. Spam sent from infected machines could simply use the name of the owner, thus verifying the identity. Spam sent from infected machines could use the micropayment "wallet" on the infected machine, thus creating not only problems of clean-up for the owner, but also a real cost. Infected machines could be used to crack computational puzzles, or the owner could be presented with challenges to respond to, in a variety of ways. Spam has passed the stage of being a nuisance. Email is a means of communication that is starting to rival the phone, and spam is seriously degrading the effectiveness and utility of email. Antispam measures are badly needed, but we cannot accept any proposed solution uncritically. Dividing the Internet into isolated camps of incompatible (and rival) antispam technologies takes us back to the early days of online systems, when lots of people had email, but nobody could talk to each other. There is no easy fix, and there is no easy answer. Administrators have to ensure that they are not providing open relays that can be used for spam. Email filtering services are checking for inappropriate inbound email, but must also check what is going out. ISPs (Internet Service Providers) must be more vigilant in regard to the use being made of the net to which they provide access. Computer users at all levels have to check for malicious software, unpatched vulnerabilities, open ports and services, and what is going out of their systems as well as what is coming in. Everybody needs to become more aware of what is going on, and keep up with the changes in threats around us all. And anyone who tells you it is not going to be painful is selling something. ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca rslade@sun.soci.niu.edu If you like laws and sausage, you should never watch either being made. - Otto von Bismarck http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 18:00:44 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Spam Going Out Under My Name I had pretty much (foolishly) assumed my name (Patrick A. Townson) and Editor, both e-residing @telecom-digest.org was immune from being used in outgoing spam and virii attacks. I found out yesterday and today that was *not* the case, when I began receiving here at telecom a ton of spam sent here from 'Patrick_A_Townson@telecom-digest.org' and/or 'ptownson@telecom-digest.org' addressed to the same name and/or Editor. I am sure many of you have recieved the same baloney in your own email. Some virii likewise is being sent around the net claiming to be from 'editor@telecom-digest.org' I guess one way of getting someone out of business you dislike is by sending a load of trash under their name, and hope that most readers do not take the trouble to investigate it. I suppose I should get a signature encryption, slap an 'iron clad' (as that goes) copyright on all my work, including this Digest, etc, but I just do not have the energy to go to all that work. I do have a good idea where much of the trash is coming from originally, but proving it of course, is another thing entirely. Those of you who have been annoyed by the same trash bearing my name please be assured it is NOT coming from me, even as clever as the forger seems to be. The spam has dealt with everything from work at home schemes through other get rich on the net plans and penis enlargement plans. I do hope the two people (primarily) who raised the biggest stink about the Porn Worm thing and claimed it (porn) was the 'direction the Digest was going' won't wind up getting this other stuff and get hysterical about it also. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: MLM Moderator Subject: Compensation For Telephones Sold Programmed to Call my Telephone Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 15:14:09 -0500 Approved for misc.legal.moderated Bernie Cosell moderator: misc.legal.moderated From: ConsultingServices2004@yahoo.com (Consultant) Subject: Compensation for telephones sold programmed to call my mobile telephone. Date: 5 Mar 2004 18:46:54 -0800 What do you think of this? A USA Telecom company sold phones that were programmed wrong so they call my mobile phone instead of voicemail. The problem is the number that was programmed in was only valid for one place in the USA. When that phone is used in my state, people call my business mobile phone (instead of their voicemail). I have had HUNDREDS of these calls to my mobile phone. It took me some time to get one of the callers from these seemingly random numbers to let me know they were trying to reach voicemail. I put enough pieces of information together that I called the telecom company and spent several hours getting to the right person who would understand what I was saying. I had to ask callers who called me for more information before I diagnosed exactly what was happening. Today someone from the company called and said they would like to compensate me. The people I've dealt with at the company have been nice. I don't want to be unfair in dealing with them, but I'm wondering what should reasonably request as remuneration. Is what they did illegal? Would the FCC consider this any sort of violation? Could this be considered harrassing calls (even though the telecom company didn't actually place the calls, simply provided the incorrectly programmed equipment)? What do YOU think? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: After dealing with this situation first hand on one occassion (but thank God, in the early 1970's when there was still a legitimate phone company [Illinois Bell] with reasonably intelligent people working for it who had genuine concerns about service) in the Chicago-Beverly ESS cutover when I spend a day getting bombed with calls for Sears, Roebuck, and seeing a few anecdotal cases where a bank (First National of Chicago) misprogrammed their auto-dial Fax machine and other cases, it is very hard for me to approach this without some bias. On the one hand, I would say take them to Small Claims Court (telcos [and banks] absolutely despise that place, and the people who resort to using those places) but you can get very good satisfaction from it. What they did to you is not illegal, unless being a stupid person is against the law (I sometimes think it should be) and any court would resent being asked to function as your collection agency. You would definitly need to document exactly how much inconvenience you suffered. You might be able to sue for negligence on the telco's part, in not properly supervising the employee who programmed the phone. But if telco is being nice about it, and has ended the problem, then I would think a new cellphone for free, and a few hundred dollars would suffice. Are *they* asking you to name the amount? Have they hinted at any amount they think is fair? PAT] ------------------------------ From: johnfofawn@hotmail.com (John) Subject: Should I Use 66-Block? Date: 7 Mar 2004 11:20:18 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I only have one POTS phone line. I just re-wired my basement and I used CAT5 wire in running all my POTS lines. I now have 8 POTS jacks in the basement that I need to connect to the phone system. I bought a 66-block (Leviton 4066-M50) at Home Depot and I assumed (incorrectly) that I could put the red, green, yellow, and black on each column and then wire the extensions (TIA 568A) to each of the rows. I now understand a 66-block doesn't work this way. Is there something better I can do other than twisting 8 wires together for each of the 4 colors? I looked at a Leviton catalog and I understand how patch panels work, but it's just too expensive. Advice? Thanks, John ------------------------------ From: Gary Novosielski Subject: Re: Verizon Wireless and Verizon Airfone Offer 10 Cents-a-Minute Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 03:02:57 GMT Joseph wrote: > You *still* can't use your mobile phone *in* flight. Correct. > It's assumed that you will make arrangements for the transfer of > your calls and account setup whether the "a la carte" 69 cent plan > or the frequent traveler $10/month plan from your mobile phone to > Airphone before the flight leaves. This is about Airphone and not > about Verizon Wireless in flight. As long as you have an assigned AirFone/VZW PIN number, you don't need to do anything with the mobile handset before the flight leaves. Once you're onboard the plane, before or after takeoff, you can program the seatback AirFone handset with your special PIN number. At that point your wireless number will begin to forward to the AirFone at your seat, using the "roaming" rate you've signed up for. When you land, you turn your mobile phone back on. The forwarding is cancelled as soon as the network sees your mobile handset checking back into the net. ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Verizon Wireless and Verizon Airfone Offer 10 Cents-a-Minute Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 09:56:45 -0600 Gary Novosielski wrote: > THIS IS NOT THE CASE! You need to "sign up" for EITHER the > subscription or the non-subscription feature. If you do nothing and > place a call from an AirFone handset, you'll be charged the normal > ~$4/min rate. The press release is just a press release. I'm sure whatever literature the company releases will state that ... VZW is pretty good about disclosing everything. 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 Domain Names, $9.95/yr, great service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 2004 22:30:54 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Vonage with Modem and Fax Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Thanks for the info ... but after contacting Vonage via email, they > said they don't have my area yet but should soon. That means they don't have local numbers in your area. They work fine on any broadband connection. For a second line that's used mostly for outgoing calls, the number doesn't much matter. If you have friends or relatives somewhere else, get a number there and they can call you for free. If you tell them where you want a number, they'll let you know when they have numbers there and let you change your number at that time for free. By the way, I see that Vonage just adjusted their international rates downward by quite a lot. Calls to the UK, France, and Hong Kong are 2 cpm, Mexico City is 5 cpm, etc. Regards, 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 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 22:26:07 -0600 From: Name Withheld at Users Request Subject: Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers Earlier, I wrote: > [PAT - In the interest of privacy, please delete my .sig and email > address from this post. Thanks.] Do it again, please? > I'm looking for a way to block outgoing calls to three specific phone > numbers. > I'm pretty sure telco can block _incoming_ calls _from_ a certain > number, and this might be an option -- I could offer to pay for this > service on the neighbors' lines. But I'd rather handle it on the > originating end if possible. I plan to call telco tomorrow and see if > they offer an outbound-blocking feature. Lo and behold, they do! There's a service called "Call Control" that allows blocking of specific numbers, even local numbers. So we've ordered that. We also ordered "Call Screening" to block incoming calls from some "charities" who solicit her for cash donations weekly. I'll also be contacting Carl and Mike, in case the Telco solution doesn't work out for some reason ... Thanks, folks. ------------------------------ From: David S. Roland Subject: Re: Quest to Offer "Naked DSL" Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 14:39:31 -0700 This may have been dealt ... distance as the crow flies, is not the same as wire length especially, when the provider tries to find an open cable pair. maybe the only way to get a pair to you is by way of a backup cable coming from the other direction. We got a dry copper pair installed which came out initially at 13,000ft. after the sdsl modems came in ... we tested out at 27,000ft. that was 30 days later. Tony P. wrote: > 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. <<--Ask me about the Residential (ISDN based) Information Appliance -->> Roland Projects, Inc. P.O. Box 370745 Denver, Colorado 80237-0745 Telecommunication Application and System Software Office: (303) 340-3090 ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #108 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 8 02:09:58 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2879vN23231; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 02:09:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 02:09:58 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403080709.i2879vN23231@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 #109 TELECOM Digest Mon, 8 Mar 2004 02:10:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 109 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Earthlink to Test Caller ID for E-Mail (Monty Solomon) Experts Question Microsoft's Caller ID Plans (Monty Solomon) "Preventing the Internet Meltdown" (Monty Solomon) Liberty May be Weighing Break-Up - Barron's (Monty Solomon) Snapshots in Time ... (Al Gillis) Re: Should I Use 66-Block? (Carl Navarro) Re: Compensation For Telephones Sold Incorrectly Programmed (Berkowitz) Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name (jmayson@nyx.net) Re: Spam (Allen McIntosh) Last Laugh! What a Deal! (zxe@hotmail.com) 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, 8 Mar 2004 00:29:25 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Earthlink to Test Caller ID for E-Mail New systems could fight spam and Internet scams, company says. Paul Roberts, IDG News Service ISP Earthlink will soon begin testing new e-mail security technology, including Microsoft's recently released Caller ID technology, a company executive says. Earthlink will be experimenting "very soon," with "sender authentication" technology including Caller ID and a similar plan called Sender Policy Framework (SPF). The Atlanta-based ISP will be evaluating other e-mail security proposals as well, but is not backing any specific technology, says Robert Sanders, chief architect at Earthlink. Plans to secure e-mail by verifying the source of e-mail messages have garnered much attention in recent months, as the volume of spam has swelled and the number of Internet scams has increased. Spammers and Internet-based criminals often fake, or "spoof," the origin of e-mail messages to trick recipients into opening them and trusting their content. Sender authentication technologies attempt to stop spoofing by matching the source of e-mail messages with a specific user or an approved e-mail server for the Internet domain that the message purports to come from. http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,115094,00.asp ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 00:31:17 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Experts Question Microsoft's Caller ID Plans Is the software giant trying to profit from the proposed e-mail security system? Paul Roberts, IDG News Service Just a week after Microsoft's Chairman and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates unveiled a plan for securing e-mail communications, leading e-mail authorities, legal experts, and at least one Internet service provider are expressing concerns about the e-mail sender authentication plan, known as Caller ID. Some experts agree that the technology is promising. However, Microsoft's claim that it owns patents around Caller ID and its decision to license the technology to third parties, rather than submit it to an Internet standards body, have riled e-mail experts and domain owners, some of whom say they worry about a power grab by the Redmond, Washington, company and are wary of signing on to the new system. Caller ID allows Internet domain owners to publish the IP (Internet Protocol) address of their outgoing e-mail servers in an XML format e-mail "policy" in the DNS (Domain Name System) record for their domain. E-mail servers can query the DNS record and match the source IP address of incoming e-mail messages to the address of the approved sending servers, Microsoft says. The goal is to reduce spam for end users. Speaking at the RSA Conference last month in San Francisco, Gates set out an ambitious agenda for deploying Caller ID, saying it would be "very easy for people to apply," and that Microsoft hoped to have Caller ID in place by the third quarter, provided it could reach "the right agreements" with ISPs and e-mail providers. Gates did not elaborate on what those agreements might involve, but said that Microsoft had some patents related to "the fundamentals" of Caller ID which is "royalty free, available for everyone to use," according to a transcript of his RSA speech. http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,115095,00.asp ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 22:49:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: "Preventing the Internet Meltdown" PFIR Conference Announcement "Preventing the Internet Meltdown" Spring/Summer 2004 Los Angeles, California, USA --------------------------------- March 6, 2004 People For Internet Responsibility (PFIR) is pleased to preliminarily announce an "emergency" conference aimed at preventing the "meltdown" of the Internet -- the risks of imminent disruption, degradation, unfair manipulation, and other negative impacts on critical Internet services and systems in ways that will have a profound impact on the Net and its users around the world. http://www.pfir.org/meltdown ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 22:40:23 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Liberty May be Weighing Break-up - Barron's NEW YORK, March 7 (Reuters) - Liberty Media Corp. (NYSE:L), could be weighing a break-up amid renewed speculation the company may be nearing a financial restructuring that could unlock some of its value, Barron's reported in its online edition on Sunday. Barron's said there is a growing sense on Wall Street that the company has become too complex, with dozens of media- and telecom-related properties. Liberty's Class A shares, at around $11.60, are well below their peak of $30 in early 2000 and currently stand no higher than they did in late 1998. Liberty, a holding company, now trades at a nearly 25 percent discount to its asset value, Barron's said. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40771644 ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Snapshots in Time ... Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 19:44:00 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Well, On Friday a Uniformed Agent of the United States Government came to my home to deliver my new copy of Snapshots in Time, A Photographic History of Ameritech. As Pat promised it's quite a nice book with few words and lots of photos of Bell System history from the five states that made up Ameritech. Those companies are Illinois Bell, Indiana Bell, Michigan Bell, Ohio Bell and Wisconsin Telephone (their corresponding states of operation should be obvious to the casual observer). I would have liked to see a little more on the technology, particularly Step by Step, which was so pervasive across America (and the world, too) as well as Crossbar systems. Do you suppose Mr. Caughlin has another book in him? The people made a lot of the book more interesting, especially their manner of dress (compare the operators on pages 58 and 138, for example) and the hair styles (Boy! Those sideburns in the middle 1970s!). Vehicles also changed substantially, of course. An oddity that would probably never happen in this age is reviewed on pages 83-85. Moving the Indianapolis headquarters building of Indiana Bell WHILE IT'S STILL IN OPERATION as an office and Central Office building! Those guys were gutsy! Anyway, thanks again Pat for pointing this book out to us. If you're interested in Bell System history you should have this book. Oh, does anyone know if other Bell entities have published similar books? Al [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's ask Mr. Caughlin right now ... is there a possibility of another book of pictures like your last one anytime soon ? In case you did not order your copy and want to do so now, here is the address and an order coupon once again: 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 ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Should I Use 66-Block? Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 20:31:29 -0500 Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America On 7 Mar 2004 11:20:18 -0800, johnfofawn@hotmail.com (John) wrote: > I only have one POTS phone line. I just re-wired my basement and I > used CAT5 wire in running all my POTS lines. I now have 8 POTS jacks > in the basement that I need to connect to the phone system. > I bought a 66-block (Leviton 4066-M50) at Home Depot and I assumed > (incorrectly) that I could put the red, green, yellow, and black on > each column and then wire the extensions (TIA 568A) to each of the > rows. I now understand a 66-block doesn't work this way. > Is there something better I can do other than twisting 8 wires > together for each of the 4 colors? I looked at a Leviton catalog and I > understand how patch panels work, but it's just too expensive. ^^^^^^^^ The 66 block you are holding is the least expensive solution. There's always something better. For about $25 (Leviton 47603-110) you can buy the residential module that will accept 10 Cat-5 cables in a bunching block. You might have to go across the street to Lowes for their brand of Home Center stuff and/or mount it with some ummm good old fashioned engineering. If you leave the cables a bit longer for when you change your mind and want to put in a real patch panel, you can always terminate the cables on the 66 block. You keep the cable jacket together and terminate all cables on the A or D row (6 cables on one side and 2 cables on the other). You bring out the first pair, fan it between pins 1 and 2 and terminate the white/blue up and the blue/white down. Then you fan the orange pair between pins 3 & 4 and do the same thing and so on down the line. I'd like to tell you that I can e-mail examples to you, but the truth is I have only terminaed Cat-5 on a 66 block once :-) After you get your 8 cables on the 66 block, the looping part of the tool can be used to get the wiring to the first pairs of each cable. Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: Gene S. Berkowitz Subject: Re: Compensation For Telephones Sold Incorrectly Programmed Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 22:14:04 -0500 In article , mlmmod@rev.net says: > Approved for misc.legal.moderated > Bernie Cosell > moderator: misc.legal.moderated > From: ConsultingServices2004@yahoo.com (Consultant) > Subject: Compensation for telephones sold programmed to call my > mobile telephone. > Date: 5 Mar 2004 18:46:54 -0800 > What do you think of this? > A USA Telecom company sold phones that were programmed wrong so they > call my mobile phone instead of voicemail. > The problem is the number that was programmed in was only valid for > one place in the USA. When that phone is used in my state, people > call my business mobile phone (instead of their voicemail). I have > had HUNDREDS of these calls to my mobile phone. > It took me some time to get one of the callers from these seemingly > random numbers to let me know they were trying to reach voicemail. I > put enough pieces of information together that I called the telecom > company and spent several hours getting to the right person who would > understand what I was saying. I had to ask callers who called me for > more information before I diagnosed exactly what was happening. > Today someone from the company called and said they would like to > compensate me. The people I've dealt with at the company have been > nice. I don't want to be unfair in dealing with them, but I'm > wondering what should reasonably request as remuneration. > Is what they did illegal? > Would the FCC consider this any sort of violation? > Could this be considered harrassing calls (even though the telecom > company didn't actually place the calls, simply provided the > incorrectly programmed equipment)? > What do YOU think? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: After dealing with this situation first > hand on one occassion (but thank God, in the early 1970's when there was > still a legitimate phone company [Illinois Bell] with reasonably > intelligent people working for it who had genuine concerns about service) > in the Chicago-Beverly ESS cutover when I spend a day getting bombed > with calls for Sears, Roebuck, and seeing a few anecdotal cases where > a bank (First National of Chicago) misprogrammed their auto-dial Fax > machine and other cases, it is very hard for me to approach this > without some bias. On the one hand, I would say take them to Small > Claims Court (telcos [and banks] absolutely despise that place, and > the people who resort to using those places) but you can get very > good satisfaction from it. > What they did to you is not illegal, unless being a stupid person is > against the law (I sometimes think it should be) and any court would > resent being asked to function as your collection agency. You would > definitly need to document exactly how much inconvenience you > suffered. You might be able to sue for negligence on the telco's part, > in not properly supervising the employee who programmed the phone. > But if telco is being nice about it, and has ended the problem, then > I would think a new cellphone for free, and a few hundred dollars > would suffice. Are *they* asking you to name the amount? Have they > hinted at any amount they think is fair? PAT] I would: Add up the airtime minutes used handling these calls. Add in the time spent identifying and attempting to correct the problem. Multiply by your per-minute salary (i.e. your hourly rate $ / 60). Round up to the nearest hundred $. And, like Pat said, ask for a phone, and a year's paid up service. --Gene ------------------------------ From: jmayson@nyx.net Subject: Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 01:58:45 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com > I guess one way of getting someone out of business you dislike is by > sending a load of trash under their name, and hope that most readers > do not take the trouble to investigate it. I suppose I should get a > signature encryption, slap an 'iron clad' (as that goes) copyright on > all my work, including this Digest, etc, but I just do not have the > energy to go to all that work. I started GnuPG signing all of my outgoing messages because of people forging messages to appear to come from me. A few years ago I had to argue with Yahoo! and my ISP not to yank my accounts over messages I did not send. Mindspring (my ISP at the time) was very professional about it and actually took the time to review the mail headers and confirmed they had originated with another ISP in a different part of the country. The complainants' ISPs didn't bother looking at the header and turned me over to Mindspring. :-/ Today I can tell people if the message isn't signed, it probably did not originate with me. And don't worry Pat, I know you wouldn't spam anyone, so if I get any from you (though I use procmail and never see any), I'll ignore it immediately! John Mayson Austin, Texas, USA ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 21:33:53 -0500 From: Allen McIntosh Subject: Re: Spam You have just experienced firsthand the reason why I no longer post to netnews under my own name. (I know I'm not alone in this.) After one weekend where our computer staff deleted five *thousand* spam e-mails to me, I decided it wasn't worth it. I can do this because I don't edit anything online. You can't, unfortunately ... [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, I cannot do that, and I am not sure if I would want to anyway. I am thinking however about doing something like PGP on my signature, then disavowing anything that does not have my encrypted mark on it. But I am getting so many requests to hide email addresses these days in the Digest, I am giving serious consid- eration to **removing all email addresses** in the Digest, something I would have been horrified by a few years ago. I *like* the idea of having open addressing here so readers can contact one another with questions, solutions, etc. It is not up to me to control the flow of mail here, or require everyone to come through here with comments and answers, etc. But there really is not going to be much of a choice very soon. I am also thinking about installing a 'challenge/white list' approach on incoming mail. Everyone will *have* to use a valid address to reach me and 'good' for-real correspondents will go on a 'white list' for future incoming mail, however I will automatically strip off the email addresses on everything before it leaves here and goes back out. No good answer to the challenge, I won't even see the mail; not that it will fall in an overflowing spam bucket; it will just get bashed on the way in the door. Nothing definite on this yet, but I have to do something. The spam count is now higher than ever. PAT] ------------------------------ From: zxe@hotmail.com Subject: Last Laugh! What a Deal! Reply-To: zxe@hotmail.com Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 14:09:20 +0800 Email Marketing ! We offer you e-mail addresses databases for advertisement mailing; we sell databases also carry out mailing and hosting for the advertising projects. Products: World Email Lists . Their validity and originality are verified. Country or area total emails and price: America 175 Million Email Address $220 US Europe 156 Million Email Address $250 US Asia 168 Million Email Address $150 US China(PRC) 80 Million Email Address $200 US HongKong 3.25 Million Email Address $200 US TaiWan 2.25 Million Email Address $200 US Japan 27 Million Email Address $200 US Australia 6 Million Email Address $150 US Canda 10 Million Email Address $150 US Russia 38 Million Email Address $120 US England 3.2 Million Email Address $200 US German 20 Million Email Address $200 US France 38 Million Email Address $150 US India 12 Million Email Address $120 US CENTRAL & SOUTH AMERICAN AREA 40 Million Email Address $220 US MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA 45 million Email Address $220 US SOUTH EAST AREA 32 million Email Address $220 US other Country or Area ¡­¡­¡­¡­¡­¡­ order email : emailwd3@tom.com ----------------------------------------------- Category Name total emails total price Apparel, Fashion, Textiles and Leather 4,654,565 $150 $100 US Automobile & Transportation 6,547,845 Business Services 6,366,344 Chemicals 3,445,565 Computer & Telecommunications 654,655 Construction & Real Estate 3,443,544 Consumer Electronics 1,333,443 Energy, Minerals & Metals 6,765,683 Environment 656,533 All Email Total: $150 U.S Food & Agriculture 1,235,354 Gems & Jewellery 565,438 Health & Beauty 804,654 Home Supplies 323,232 Industrial Supplies 415,668 Office Supplies 1,559,892 Packaging & Paper 5,675,648 Printing & Publishing 6,563,445 Security & Protection 5,653,494 Sports & Entertainment 3,488,455 Toys, Gifts and Handicrafts 2,135,654 ¡¤All 136 nations , 40 trades email lists total price $500 US $100 US V4.03 $200 US V3.0 $200 US $100 US All of Country email lists + email sender express +add url express + etrae express =$600 US Details and order Click Here to web site: http://vod.xzdvd.com/www/wd/wd3.htm There are some sample download. order email : emailwd3@tom.com If you can't see website, please email us contact: emailwd3@tom.com Thank you! the silver star internet information company copyright 2004-2005 all reserved [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder if these gentlemen would like a little spam email of their own? Nah, its probably useless to try and fight with them any longer. But just imagine, you can spend a mere $600 and get enough lists to never quit sending email. 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #109 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 8 13:49:40 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i28IneM28962; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 13:49:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 13:49:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403081849.i28IneM28962@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 #110 TELECOM Digest Mon, 8 Mar 2004 13:50:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 110 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #423, March 8, 2004 (Angus Telemanagement) Ergen Waiting Out Viacom/EchoStar Chief Discusses Future (Monty Solomon) BellSouth to Sell Latin America Operations to Telefonica (Monty Solomon) Re: Should I Use 66-Block? (Monty Solomon) TiVo Challenges Give Analysts Pause (Monty Solomon) Nielsen PVR Plan Gives Agencies Pause (Monty Solomon) TiVo Zips Ahead, Will Record 3 Million By Year-End, 10 Million (Solomon) AT&T Expands 'City Savings' for International Calling (Monty Solomon) Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name (Linus Surguy) FREE Personal SMS Software & Interactive SMS Shareware (touchring) Re: Snapshots in Time (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers (Sammy@nospam.biz) 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, 08 Mar 2004 11:31:59 -0500 From: Angus Telemanagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #423, March 8, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 423: March 8, 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: ** Wireless Broadband Net Launched in B.C. ** Telus to Manage Ontario-Owned Telco ** Carriers Reach Wi-Fi Roaming Deal ** CRTC to Seek Input on VoIP Rules ** Ebbers Charged With Fraud ** Ottawa Utelco to Use Meriton Technology ** Bell Local Link Rates to Increase ** Onlinetel Expands Call Zone Coverage ** Sympatico Offers Wireless Home LAN ** Rogers Drops AT&T Brand ** CRTC Suspends Bell Forbearance Application ** Competitors Assail Telco Ethernet Tariffs ** CRTC to Expedite Three Disputes ** Call-Net Withdraws Part VII Against Bell & RBC ** Ottawa 911 Service Crashes ** McCaw to Invest in Microcell ** Call-Net Redeems Debt ** Moody's Upgrades Telus ** Embree Joins Fraser Milner ** Rogers Exec Quits ** User-Focused Telecom Conference Planned ** Charter Offer for Telemanagement Online ============================================================ WIRELESS BROADBAND NET LAUNCHED IN B.C.: Allstream, Microcell subsidiary Inukshuk, and NR Communications have launched their wholesale wireless Internet access network in Richmond, B.C. (See Telecom Update #409) The service uses NextNet Wireless technology to provide non-line-of-sight connections within 2.5 km of any network base station. The companies say they will begin service in another city "in the coming weeks," and will finalize national deployment plans by mid- year. Microcell and Allstream announced retail services using the new net: ** Microcell's iFido provides 2.2 Mbps Internet access for $40/month -- $20/month for the first six months. Microcell will offer a 20% discount to customers who take both iFido and City Fido service. ** Allstream's 2.1 Mbps service for business customers is $59.95/month. It includes roaming wireless and wireline access in thousands of locations worldwide. TELUS TO MANAGE ONTARIO-OWNED TELCO: Announcing its decision to abandon efforts to privatize the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission, the Ontario Government last week Instructed ONTC to finalize an agreement under which Telus Corporation will provide "enhanced telecommunications management services and expertise" to O.N.Telcom, the ONTC-owned telco that serves northeastern Ontario. CARRIERS REACH WI-FI ROAMING DEAL: The four national wireless carriers have signed an inter-carrier agreement establishing common standards for roaming and interoperability of their public Wi-Fi hotspots. The standards include a common brand identifier, a standard user interface, and a payment process for roaming. ** The four carriers say that roaming will begin this fall, and that they will deploy more than 500 new hotspots in the coming year. CRTC TO SEEK INPUT ON VoIP RULES: In an interview with Bloomberg News last week, CRTC Chairman Charles Dalfen said the Commission will this month invite comments on regulation of VoIP services provided by incumbent telcos and other service providers. EBBERS CHARGED WITH FRAUD: Bernard Ebbers, the Canadian-born executive who led WorldCom into the largest-ever U.S. bankruptcy, has been charged with securities fraud, conspiracy, and making a false filing to the SEC. Ebbers pleaded not guilty. ** WorldCom's former CFO, Scott Sullivan, last week pleaded guilty to criminal charges related to the multi-billion dollar accounting scandal. OTTAWA UTELCO TO USE MERITON TECHNOLOGY: Meriton Networks, an Ottawa-based developer of optical wavelength networking systems, says that Telecom Ottawa has agreed to use Meriton's managed High-Speed Metro architecture to deliver Gigabit Ethernet services. The value of the contract was not announced. BELL LOCAL LINK RATES TO INCREASE: CRTC Telecom Order 2004-61 approves a $1/month increase in the monthly rate for uncontracted and one- or three-year contracted Bell Canada Local Link lines, effective April 1. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2004/o2004-61.htm ONLINETEL EXPANDS CALL ZONE COVERAGE: Onlinetel has expanded its Quebec service to include Trois Rivieres, Chicoutimi, and Sherbrooke. Call Zone offers customers 200 calls per month within a provincial zone for $20 a year. Call Zone is currently offered in Quebec, Ontario, and Alberta; the company says it will add B.C. "in the near future." SYMPATICO OFFERS WIRELESS HOME LAN: Sympatico now offers its residential High Speed and High Speed Ultra customers a Siemens integrated modem and wireless router, in place of its standard modem, for a one-time fee of $69.95. Installation is available for $99.00. ROGERS DROPS AT&T BRAND: Effective today, the name Rogers AT&T Wireless becomes Rogers Wireless. CRTC SUSPENDS BELL FORBEARANCE APPLICATION: On March 5, the CRTC suspended "until further notice" Bell Canada's application to deregulate its high-speed digital access services in some markets (see Telecom Update #422). The Commission gave no reason for the suspension, but likely intends to address the issue through a public notice. COMPETITORS ASSAIL TELCO ETHERNET TARIFFS: Call-Net and Allstream say that Ethernet Interface Service tariffs filed by Bell Canada and Telus in response to a CRTC order are unduly restrictive. The competitors also note that the telcos say they can't offer the service yet, and will submit timing information on March 12 (Bell) and March 26 (Telus). Call-Net and Allstream say the telcos should be required to offer their complete retail Ethernet Access service under general tariff, until all the unbundled components are available. ** Call-Net also questions why Telus's proposed rates are much higher than Bell Canada's. www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2003/b2-6726.htm www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2004/t66_138.htm CRTC TO EXPEDITE THREE DISPUTES: The CRTC has begun using its new procedure for expediting competitive disputes (see Telecom Update #420). It has referred three issues to a three-Commissioner panel; an oral hearing will be held March 26. The disputes to be adjudicated are: ** Cybersurf's dispute with Shaw Cablesystems about third party Internet access (see Telecom Update #388, 414, 419). ** Shaw's challenge to Telus's student bundle (see Telecom Update #401). ** Rogers and Call-Net's challenge to Bell Canada's consumer bundles (see Telecom Update #410). CALL-NET WITHDRAWS PART VII AGAINST BELL & RBC: Bell Canada says it will not "mass transfer" Sprint long distance customers served under a "Talk and Save" program available to Royal Bank Visa users. RBC will use rebiller CD Tel to attempt to convert the customers on an individual basis. (See Telecom Update #419) ** In response, Call-Net has withdrawn its Part VII application against the transfer, but says it believes CD Tel is misleading customers and violating privacy regulations. www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2004/8622/c25_200400812.htm OTTAWA 911 SERVICE CRASHES: An unexplained system failure left the Ottawa area with no 911 access for about 30 minutes on March 1, and an automated back-up system also failed. Bell Canada restored service by manually activating the system, which rerouted Ottawa 911 calls through Kingston and back. McCAW TO INVEST IN MICROCELL: Microcell Telecommunications says that U.S. telecom entrepreneur Craig McCaw will act as "standby purchaser" for any of the rights not taken up in its current C$100 million offering, and may also invest up to $50 million through a private holding company, COM Canada. CALL-NET REDEEMS DEBT: Call-Net Enterprises, parent of Sprint Canada, has purchased for cancellation US$76.4 million worth of senior secured notes. The purchase will reduce the company's annual interest payments by US$8.1 million. MOODY'S UPGRADES TELUS: Moody's Investors Services has upgraded Telus Corp.'s credit from Ba1 (junk) to Baa3 (investment grade). Moody's downgraded the company's debt in July 2002. EMBREE JOINS FRASER MILNER: Kirsten Embree has left Osler Hoskin & Harcourt to become a partner in the federal regulatory practice of Fraser Milner Casgrain. Before joining Osler Hoskin, she was director of regulatory matters at AT&T Canada. ROGERS EXEC QUITS: Dean Macdonald, Executive Vice-President and Chief Operating Officer of Rogers Cable, has resigned effective March 2004. Macdonald, who is rumored to be joining an east coast cable company, came to Rogers when it acquired Cable Atlantic in 2001. USER-FOCUSED TELECOM CONFERENCE PLANNED: Angus Dortmans Associates and PW Ritchie & Associates have scheduled TELEMANAGEMENT LIVE 2004, a two-day conference on enterprise telecom and networking, for October 20-21, 2004, in Toronto. ** Some exhibit spaces and sponsorships are available on a first-come, first-served basis: for information, e-mail itsabouttime@telemanagementlive.com. CHARTER OFFER FOR TELEMANAGEMENT ONLINE: Special Charter Subscription rates for Telemanagement Online expire soon. Subscribe now, or add online access to your print subscription, at www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub-online.html ** Telemanagement #213 includes a special feature proposing ways to simplify and streamline CRTC procedures, prepared by three of Canada's most-respected regulatory lawyers, Lorne Abugov, Philip Rogers and Jennifer Crowe. ** Also in this issue: Henry Dortmans on How Suppliers View Your RFPs; John Riddell's survey of IP Telephony Systems for Branch Offices; and a hands-on review of six software packages for network monitoring and control. ============================================================ 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 warran- ties 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. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 01:29:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Ergen Waiting Out Viacom / EchoStar Chief Discusses Future By Kris Hudson Denver Post Business Writer WASHINGTON - Charlie Ergen rarely picks a small fight. Ergen's EchoStar Communications Corp., which delivers satellite TV to 9 million subscribers under the Dish Network brand, has taken on CBS parent Viacom in a bitter legal battle. On Thursday, Ergen accused Viacom of "extortion at the highest level." He claims that for EchoStar to carry CBS, Viacom is pressuring EchoStar to pay for and carry many other Viacom-owned channels. Viacom has declined to comment. Midnight Monday is the deadline for expiration of an injunction that bars Viacom from pulling its channels off Dish Network. If Viacom pulls the plug, Dish viewers could be missing 20 channels, including CBS, MTV, VH1 and Nickelodeon. The uncertainty has trimmed EchoStar's stock price, which closed Friday at $34.55, down 4 percent. An even bigger strategic issue looms for the company Ergen co-founded in Colorado two decades ago. EchoStar, based in Douglas County, may need to find a merger or acquisition partner as programming and distribution companies merge into bigger and bigger entities. http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~33~1999715,00.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So this explains why so many shows on TV Land (Channel 56 on our local cable (Cable One) have had subscripts or 'ticker messages' running over and over through the shows asking people to call Viacom and raise hell about it. This morning on 'I Love Lucy' at 10:00 AM followed by 'Leave it to Beaver' at 10:30 every five minutes more or less a little message on the screen said 'DISH Network will be dropping this show unless you call (some 800 number) and tell them to leave the programs alone.' I get it from cable, but I suppose cable gets it from satellite. That's been going on now for several days. They always begin these 'ticker messages' scrolling on the bottom of the screen with a little beep tone and in large letters the word EMERGENCY MESSAGE FROM YOUR OPERATOR! ('your operator' is a generic term I guess). The first time I heard that tone and saw the 'emergency message' come scrolling across the screen my thought was maybe there is some bad weather (tornado, etc) coming since that is the way City of Independence lets us know about trouble; that and blowing the loud horn on top of city hall; they take over the cable to make their announcements. Then the 'Emergency Message' was that DISH is going to lose a lot of channels and shows. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 02:15:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: BellSouth to Sell Latin America Operations to Telefonica Moviles BellSouth Signs Definitive Agreement to Sell Its Latin America Operations to Telefonica Moviles - BellSouth to receive $4.2 billion in cash - BellSouth consolidated debt to be reduced by $1.5 billion ATLANTA, March 8 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- BellSouth Corp. (NYSE:BLS) has signed a definitive agreement with Telefonica Moviles, the wireless affiliate of Telefonica, S.A. (NYSE:TEM) to sell its interests in its 10 Latin American operations. The purchase price is based on a total enterprise value of the 10 Latin American companies of $5.85 billion. BellSouth will receive after tax cash proceeds of approximately $4.2 billion and reduce consolidated debt by $1.5 billion. BellSouth and its partners operate 10 wireless companies in Latin America (Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela). Telefonica has operations in seven Latin American countries (Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Peru, Chile, El Salvador and Guatemala). With the acquisition, Telefonica will add six additional countries to its footprint and 10.5 million new customers. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40772305 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 02:31:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: Should I Use 66-Block? At 7:34 PM -0500 3/7/04, johnfofawn@hotmail.com (John) wrote: > Is there something better I can do other than twisting 8 wires > together for each of the 4 colors? I looked at a Leviton catalog and I > understand how patch panels work, but it's just too expensive. PhoneGeeks.com should have some useful solutions for you. Some possibilities include: http://www.phonegeeks.com/nonphonwirbl.html http://www.phonegeeks.com/66blocwit1241.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 09:30:00 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Challenges Give Analysts Pause By Marla Matzer Rose LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - TiVo is the HBO of entertainment tech companies: It gets fawning write-ups beyond all reason, if you look at it based on how many eyeballs are actually watching. It's also a little unusual that a product with so few subscribers -- well under 1 million until the quarter just ended Jan. 31 -- has had marketers and advertising agencies so spooked for the past several years about the technology undermining viewership for their commercials. Although TiVo is a "story stock" with an advancing share price recently, the company is still losing money and faces a number of challenges including stiff competition in the digital video recorder market, leading many analysts to remain cautious about buying in. http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=industryNews&storyID=4517644 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 09:41:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nielsen PVR Plan Gives Agencies Pause By Joe Mandese Editor, MediaPost Madison Avenue would like to hit the rewind button on Nielsen's plans to measure households with digital video recorders (DVRs), and see Nielsen replay the announcement with one additional element: a plan to provide TV commercial ratings. Without them, say media agency executives, the time- shifted viewing data from DVR users would be interesting -- but almost meaningless from a media planning point of view. http://www.mediapost.com/dtls_dsp_news.cfm?newsID=240854&newsDate=03/05/2004 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 09:42:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Zips Ahead, Will Record 3 Million By Year-End, 10 Million By By Paul J. Gough Staff Writer Just a day after Nielsen unveiled plans to speed up measurement of digital video recorders due to faster-than-expected deployment by cable and satellite TV operators, TiVo the top consumer electronics marketer in the space, told shareholders it will reach 3 million subscribers by the end of the year and 10 million in four years. The number of subscribers long ago passed 600,000, the tipping point against outhouses. It stood at 1.3 million on Jan. 31, the last day of the company's fiscal year. During a conference call with analysts late Thursday, Chief Executive Officer Mike Ramsay said TiVo's goal is to top 10 million subscribers in the next three or four years. http://www.mediapost.com/dtls_dsp_news.cfm?newsID=240852 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 09:17:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Expands 'City Savings' for International Calling Enhanced Offer Provides Lower International Long-Distance Rates to 57 Cities in 25 Countries. Rates to 32 other countries also reduced. MORRISTOWN, N.J., March 8 /PRNewswire/ -- AT&T today announced that it has expanded the number of cities included in its lead international calling plan, the AT&T AnyHour Advantage Plan with City Savings(SM). Introduced in September 2003, the City Savings offer has been enhanced to include reduced-rate calling to 57 cities in 25 countries, all for a monthly plan fee of $3.95. In addition, AT&T will lower the rates for 32 countries to which consumers call from home, including the Philippines and countries throughout Western Europe and Latin America. In Western Europe, the reduced country rate of only 10 cents a minute is welcome news to all international callers, but especially those with family and loved-ones in countries such as Germany, Spain and Italy, which have a sizeable presence of American military personnel stationed there. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40774361 ------------------------------ From: usenet@linus.me.uk (Linus Surguy) Subject: Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 07:44:50 GMT Organization: Magrathea Systems Ltd. Dear Patrick, On Sun, 7 Mar 2004 18:00:44 EST, you wrote: > I had pretty much (foolishly) assumed my name (Patrick A. Townson) and > Editor, both e-residing @telecom-digest.org was immune from being used > in outgoing spam and virii attacks. I found out yesterday and today > that was *not* the case, when I began receiving here at telecom a ton > of spam sent here from 'Patrick_A_Townson@telecom-digest.org' and/or > 'ptownson@telecom-digest.org' addressed to the same name and/or > Editor. I am sure many of you have recieved the same baloney in your > own email. Some virii likewise is being sent around the net claiming > to be from 'editor@telecom-digest.org' You might not be aware, and the above post tends to support this, that a lot of spam software actually picks the 'from' address at random from the pool of people that the email is going to be mailed to. Also, many pieces of spam software will now use the receipents name as the sender as well -- so don't worry your email address isn't as widepread as you think! By the way, the plural of virus is viruses, not viri[i] - this is a reoccuring thread on anti-virus newsgroups, and apparantly is because virus is an 'air noun' in Latin and therefore cannot have an 'ii' form -- or something like that! Linus Surguy - Magrathea Telecommunications Ltd. Wholesale and retail telephone services. www.magrathea-telecom.co.uk www.uknumber.co.uk www.callthrough.co.uk www.telesave.co.uk: UK 2.5p/1.5p South Africa 8p US, France, Germany Italy 3p Looking for VoIP? We will gateway SIP & IAX to and from the PSTN. ------------------------------ From: touchring@yahoo.com (touchring) Subject: FREE Personal SMS Software & Interactive SMS Shareware For Download Date: 8 Mar 2004 05:01:23 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hello, for those looking for SMS utilities/solutions, I'm releasing two very interesting messaging middlewares. Welcome all suggestions, enquiries, and biz proposals. VisualGSM Lite (Freeware) Description on CNET download ... From the developer: "The VisualGSM Lite edition allows personalized broadcast of text/flash SMS messages using GSM modems or compatible GSM mobile phones via serial data cable or infrared link. Features include the ability to send unicode/Chinese SMS messages, send log, import/export addressbook, auto-detect function allows automatic detection of your device setup configurations, API to integrate to 3rd party applications and web portals using HTTP. Users can make use of VisualGSM Lite to build various innovative messaging applications such network resource monitoring, and SMS marketing applications." CNET download (Popular download) - http://download.com.com/3000-2349-8359870.html?tag=lst-0-1 Tucows download (ranked 4 cows) - http://www.tucows.com/preview/232179.html VisualGSM Enterprise (Shareware) From the developer: "VisualGSM Enterprise Server is an open-platform SQL database driven communication application suite, that empowers corporate managers to self-deploy interactive SMS, or Short Message Service applications, rapidly throughout their organization. It has an easy-to-use real-time configurator to connect enterprise applications to the GSM network via built-in APIs. Provides a built-in application testing environment to allow Rapid Application Deployment. Integration components include email2sms, sms2fax, sms2email, sms2sql, sms2http, etc." Download: http://www.visualtron.com/download.htm More information available at http://www.visualgsm.com or http://www.visualtron.com. I will also answer all GSM, SMS related questions at http://www.visualgsm.com/forums/ Best Regards, Joshua Lim Co-Founder (Visualtron Software) Email: joshua@visualtron.com. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 10:12:47 EST Subject: Re: Snapshots in Time In a message dated Sun, 7 Mar 2004 19:44:00 -0800 Al Gillis writes: > An oddity that would probably never happen in this age is reviewed on > pages 83-85. Moving the Indianapolis headquarters building of Indiana > Bell WHILE IT'S STILL IN OPERATION as an office and Central Office > building! Those guys were gutsy! The Dallas Automatic Telephone Company building, full of step equipment, was moved while still in service to accomodate a street widening project. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 09:22:57 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications DevilsPGD wrote: > In message <> Sammy@nospam.biz did > ramble: >> The only way you can solve that problem is to pay for call rejection >> service for those three folks. Then, they can set the list (usually a >> maximum of 10 numbers) to reject calls from your number. Oh, I would like to see that tariff. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have that service myself. Dial *60 then listen to the announcement. Dial #01# to reject the last call received, whether or not you know the number. Or dial #(the number) to reject further calls from any number. Its a very convenient service. Prairie Stream has offered it since they started business 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #110 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 8 23:59:11 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i294xBE03089; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 23:59:11 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 23:59:11 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403090459.i294xBE03089@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 #111 TELECOM Digest Mon, 8 Mar 2004 23:59:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 111 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Wireless Introduces Early Evenings; New Options (Monty Solomon) Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance (Fred Goldstein) Re: Should I Use 66-Block? (Scott Dorsey) Re: Should I Use 66-Block? (lawrence.jones@ugsplm.com) Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers (Withheld) Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers (DevilsPGD) Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name (Withheld) Re: Vonage Troubles (pop3svr@netscape.net) Re: Compensation For Telephones Sold Mis-Programmed (Consultant) Re: Nielsen PVR Plan Gives Agencies Pause (Thomas A. Horsley) Re: Snapshots in Time (Al Gillis) Last Laugh! Speaking of TV-Land (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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 23:18:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Wireless Introduces Early Evenings; New Options AT&T Wireless Introduces Early Evenings; New Option Offers Unlimited Night and Weekend Minutes Beginning at 7 p.m. Instead of 9 p.m. - Mar 8, 2004 11:00 AM (BusinessWire) REDMOND, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 8, 2004--AT&T Wireless (NYSE:AWE) has introduced an option called Early Evenings that makes available to new and current customers on qualifying plans unlimited night and weekend minutes beginning at 7 p.m. instead of the usual 9 p.m. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40775325 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 13:22:41 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 16:37:19 -0800, Rob Slade wrote: > Peter Wilson's article on spam and viruses (on Saturday, March 6, > 2004) lists a number of antispam measures that are currently being > promoted. He also retails Bill Gates' confident prediction that spam > will be a thing of the past by 2006. Remember that prophecy, because > Bill Gates is going to be proven wrong. An examination of the > measures listed in the article demonstrates why. That's certainly true ... > SPF (sender-permitted format) is currently garnering the greatest > interest. [It checks to see that the address isn't spoofed]... > Spammers, when creating spoofed addresses, don't bother to make > sure that they do. Or, at least, they haven't up until now. Bayesian filtering was a nice idea, too, but spammers retaliated by misspelling everything and using all sorts of tricks to break up filterable tokens (like words) and add noise. The result is bigger spams. SPF and CIDM would lead spammers to use non-spoofed domains. Big deal -- the can create throwaway domains (with phoney IDm and if necessary use anonymous or stolen credit or debit card numbers to pay for them) for a few bucks, run them on hijacked machines, and move on, all before being caught. They'd pass muster, because they're not spoofed, just not meaningful either. > SPF has promise, and it may be possible (unlike the Microsoft > proposal) to provide workarounds for a variety of systems, platforms, > and applications. However, there are a number of issues that still > have to resolved, such as email aliases, third-party services, and > applications such as mailing lists, which operate in a wide variety of > forms. The difficulties are not insurmountable, but an enormous > amount of work still has to be done. Indeed ... SPF probably won't stop spammers, but it will make it really hard to use your email while at a hotel, or at a hotspot, or at the office. You'll be sending from a domain not normally your own. And it could make "vanity" and small-business domains harder to use. One problem with email today is that unless you own your domain, you're tied to a provider -- there's no postal-like forwarding once you leave (unless your provider is particularly nice about it). SPF/CIDM could make it worse, if it makes private domains harder to use. > Microsoft's micropayments strategy is apparently the most recent one, > but has been raised many times over the history of the nets. (One of > the popular programs providing Usenet news, a type of topical > discussion, used to remind anyone who attempted to post a message that > it would possibly cost thousands of dollars to send this to everyone: > did they really want to do that?) Unfortunately, the issue of mailing > lists comes up almost immediately. Even if we assume one cent per > message, if I send a message to a popular list such as the RISKS-FORUM > Digest, with a possible hundred thousand subscribers, am I charged a > thousand dollars for that message? Is the list moderator charged? In > the case of RISKS, it is also redistributed by a number of sub-mailing > lists: do those costs get charged to the accounts of the local > administrators? The list moderator? Me? While others have diagreed with me on this and I respect their opinions, I'm still convinced that the *only* solution is to have micropayments. However, they need only apply to mail from *strangers*. The system should allow me to subscriber to a mailing list and, by doing so, grant that list "free" access to my mail receipt agent. Likewise, users should be able to put their normal correspondents, individual or a whole domain, into their whitelists. Micropayment would thus be limited in applicability, and not cost much to anyone but a spammer, for whom it would be prohibitive. > (The obvious second question is: who *gets* the money? The Internet > Engineering Task Force? Some bloated bureaucracy parcelling out the > cash to the various national telecom carriers? Charity? Microsoft? > The recipient? Hmmm. Maybe I should rethink my objection to the > micropayment system. At one point I was getting 8,000 [yes, eight > thousand] copies of spam from one system in China. Per hour. Same > message.) Micropayment infrastructure will cost money to operate. So whoever runs a micropostage service (essentially a certificate authority, granting one-time certificates that require real-time validation to prevent duplicate use) should keep the money. Of course if their price is too low, a spammer might use it, but then users need to be able to whitelist/blacklist micropostage issuers to prevent that. If the price is too high, somebody else will get in the business. (See Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations.) I see this as being in the private sector, though of course a post office is free to compete if they wish to. > And, of course, in order to provide for such a micropayment system, > everybody is going to have to use a Microsoft mailer. With a > Microsoft payment system. And a Microsoft account. This sounds like > an attempt to resurrect the (justly derided and roundly condemned) > Passport and Palladium systems. Which is precisely why there needs to be a micropostage system created without patent encumberance, not designed to be MS-specific! > In fact, most of these antispam technologies fail in the face of the > problem of spam nets set up by viruses. Spam sent from infected > machines could simply use the name of the owner, thus verifying the > identity. Spam sent from infected machines could use the micropayment > "wallet" on the infected machine, thus creating not only problems of > clean-up for the owner, but also a real cost. Infected machines could > be used to crack computational puzzles, or the owner could be > presented with challenges to respond to, in a variety of ways. Indeed that is a potential problem for micropayments; however, with end users getting only a certain ration per month via their ISP (since it's only used for contacting strangers, an individual would only need what, a few hundred?), the bounty from an infected computer wouldn't be huge. It would probably be a good idea for the "wallet" to require some kind of human input, like a password, before releasing a stamp, that a virus wouldn't be able to get. I don't foresee any end user's wallet having more than a dollar's worth of micropostage in it at a time. > There is no easy fix, and there is no easy answer. Administrators > have to ensure that they are not providing open relays that can be > used for spam. Email filtering services are checking for > inappropriate inbound email, but must also check what is going out. > ISPs (Internet Service Providers) must be more vigilant in regard to > the use being made of the net to which they provide access. Computer > users at all levels have to check for malicious software, unpatched > vulnerabilities, open ports and services, and what is going out of > their systems as well as what is coming in. Everybody needs to become > more aware of what is going on, and keep up with the changes in > threats around us all. > And anyone who tells you it is not going to be painful is selling > something. Well said. I note that there are a lot of problems around email, spam and worms being paramount. Rob Slade, whose post I am quoting above, was himself quoted in this week's eWeek. A couple of columns later, another person was quoted as saying, "E-mail was never designed to be a file transfer mechanism, and it is time to stop using it that way." It is going to be painful, and I think that the best way to fix it, once we accept that there's no simple fix, is to design an *entirely* new email machanism. SMTP is 32 years old. A new from-scratch email system can incorporate all of the requirements that have been clumsily overlaid on top of SMTP, which was after all designed to pass short text messages between timesharing computers on a closed network. Until a new system is in place, email will be a mess of spam and worms, growing less useful as countermeasures interfere with legitimate usage. ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Should I Use 66-Block? Date: 8 Mar 2004 12:37:44 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) John wrote: > I bought a 66-block (Leviton 4066-M50) at Home Depot and I assumed > (incorrectly) that I could put the red, green, yellow, and black on > each column and then wire the extensions (TIA 568A) to each of the > rows. I now understand a 66-block doesn't work this way. It can. You punch the wires down on each row, so that from top to bottom, you see red, green, yellow, black, red, green, yellow, black, and so forth for all the extensions going down the first column of the block. You then punch down the pair coming from your service entry at the bottom of the block. NOW, you take one long piece of cross-connect wire, and you punch it down on the service entry line. Then you loop it up to the second column of the two rows carrying the red/green for the last phone, and punch it down without cutting it. Then you loop it again up to the next extension, and then to the next extension, and then up the line. Now you have one pair going to all eight phones. If you get a second incoming line, you can pop the wires off the panel for one of those phone, and run the second line to it. Or you can run the second line to the yellow/black pair of some two-line phones. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: lawrence.jones@ugsplm.com Subject: Re: Should I Use 66-Block? Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 21:13:02 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com John wrote: > I bought a 66-block (Leviton 4066-M50) at Home Depot and I assumed > (incorrectly) that I could put the red, green, yellow, and black on > each column and then wire the extensions (TIA 568A) to each of the > rows. I now understand a 66-block doesn't work this way. No, but you can use it in a similar way -- just daisy-chain your incoming line(s) to as many rows as you need down one side of the block (punch down using the non-cutting bit then route the wire back out of the block and back in again 8 rows down and repeat). Punch your extensions down on the other side and cross connect as desired. You might find a bridged distribution patch panel such as the Leviton 47603-110 (which you can also get at Home Depot) more convenient, though. -Larry Jones It must be sad being a species with so little imagination. -- Calvin ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers From: Withheld Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 13:14:31 -0600 (Patrick - please omit my name and e-mail address - Thanks.) In response to: > From: Sammy@nospam.biz > Subject: Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers > Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 09:22:57 -0800 > Organization: Cox Communications > DevilsPGD wrote: >> In message <> Sammy@nospam.biz did >> ramble: >>> The only way you can solve that problem is to pay for call rejection >>> service for those three folks. Then, they can set the list (usually a >>> maximum of 10 numbers) to reject calls from your number. > Oh, I would like to see that tariff. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have that service myself. Dial *60 > then listen to the announcement. Dial #01# to reject the last call > received, whether or not you know the number. Or dial #(the number) to > reject further calls from any number. Its a very convenient service. > Prairie Stream has offered it since they started business here. PAT] Patrick -- I also have that service through Qwest and found out something just this past week. If the number you are trying to block is not on the Qwest (or any LEC, I suppose) network, the number cannot be accepted for blocking -- you get some type of error message/recording "the number you have entered is incorrect". I confirmed this with a tech when trying to report this scenario as a trouble. Pretty useless feature in such cases. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy! Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 02:19:38 GMT In message <> Sammy@nospam.biz did ramble: >>> The only way you can solve that problem is to pay for call rejection >>> service for those three folks. Then, they can set the list (usually a >>> maximum of 10 numbers) to reject calls from your number. > Oh, I would like to see that tariff. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have that service myself. Dial *60 > then listen to the announcement. Dial #01# to reject the last call > received, whether or not you know the number. Or dial #(the number) to > reject further calls from any number. Its a very convenient service. > Prairie Stream has offered it since they started business here. PAT] That rejects calls FROM a given number, not TO a given number. Similar, but it needs to be implemented on the other end. However, it might just work in this situation. 'Tis far better to have snipped too much than to never have snipped at all. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The original writer (wrote back and) said the telco had offered to provide a service known as 'Call Control'. It has to be programmed through the central office (otherwise, of what value would there be if a 'star code' could turn it off and on?) The original writer said -- if I quote correctly -- the central office would implement it at that level. I've never heard of that service option before; maybe it is a 'customer specific tariff'; they still have those around as needed. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:51:02 +0000 From: Withheld Subject: Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name In article , Linus Surguy writes: > By the way, the plural of virus is viruses, not viri[i] - this is a > reoccuring thread on anti-virus newsgroups, and apparantly is because > virus is an 'air noun' in Latin and therefore cannot have an 'ii' form > -- or something like that! [ Pat: If you feel it ought to be broadcast, please remove my email address; thanks. ] Nouns in Latin come in 5 categories, called declensions. The commonest has a singular ending in -us, with plural -i; an example is "cactus", forming "cacti". If "virus" was from that class, its plural would be "viri", but it isn't. A rare declension (the 5th) also has words ending -us, with the plural also in -us; an example is "status". (The u is short in the singular, and long in the plural.) But "virus" doesn't come from that declension either. The 3rd declension is a bit of a random collection. Two examples are opus (work), forming the plural opera, and corpus/corpora (body). Plausible plurals for "virus", then, are "virera" or "virora". Maybe. The Romans never wrote down the plural, so we don't know exactly what it was. And we have evidence that "virus" was odd in other ways. (It's neuter, which 3rd declension nouns aren't supposed to be. Perhaps it's like "pelagus/pelage" (sea).) The best plural, then, ignores the Latin, and is "viruses". Graeme ------------------------------ From: pop3svr@netscape.net (pop3svr@netscape.net) Subject: Re: Vonage Troubles Date: 8 Mar 2004 17:22:07 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com If you want cheap, and poor service, Vonage is your company. If you want to test your patience, and keep making excuses why you are using that phone service, and want to keep explaining to your relatives why they need to call you back again and again and again, sure sign on up. If you want really crappy customer service, sign right up. Then, that is really magnified when you want to cancel the service. That is when they are at their very worst. But, yes, by all means, if the only thing you care about is cheap, Vonage has that down pretty well. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am sorry your experience with Vonage has been so negative. Vonage is, IMO, a very good, very inexpensive alternate to conventional phone service. Some people say their service has been quite good, and although I do not use it often enough to make a really definitive statement, it has never been totally awful for me, as it seems to have been for you. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ConsultingServices2004@yahoo.com (Consultant) Subject: Re: Compensation For Telephones Sold Programmed to Call my Phone Date: 8 Mar 2004 17:31:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com (continuing the earlier account): They have asked me to name the amount. They have offered to pay me in the method of my choosing. They have offered to compensate for airtime costs. I told them the main issue was my time & the interuptions (hundreds or hundreds per day over what is becoming weeks). I told the telecom manager that called that I thought they were being nice to me. They said I had been nice to them (I have been). I want to be reasonable, but the calls have not stopped. I was called to work early early in the morning today to handle an emergency call. I didn't take time (due to the emergency nature) to brush my hair (wore hat all day) or even my teeth (used gum). I didn't even stop to eat "breakfast" for 12 hours. HOWEVER, I had several of calls from the misprogrammed home phones. I had to take the calls because I didn't know if these may be related to the many people we had to pull in to address the emergency problem. In addition to the number being preprogrammed into the telephone, the INSTRUCTION MANUAL even gives them directions on how to program the phone. The INSTRUCTION MANUAL gives them directions that makes the phone call my mobile phone! Again, I am a reasonable person. I understand mistakes happen. I apperciate the effort they are making. However, I continue to get these calls even after they say they have called all of their customers in my area that have these phones. Thank you to you for your advice & input. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In your first report on this, you said the number the phones were (mis)programmed to dial for voicemail would only work in one state, and that when those phone customers were in *your* state (or did you say *any* state other than the one where it works?) the result was the calls came to you. It sounds to me now like the toll free (?) number used to call into the voice mail needs to be an *interstate* rather than an *intrastate* number. If that is the case, is the company going to get the number adjusted to a wider area? You also note the instruction manual appears to have typographical errors. Is the company going to reprint their instruction book or at least distribute an errata sheet to their customers? If the company is going to do either/both of these things, then there is still nothing illegal except perhaps some negligence on their part. Or, worst case scenario, is the company going to do nothing, except buy you off this one time, then (after you sign their release which I am sure they will require) say 'sorry, but you settled with us' when the problem rears its head again in the future. You say they seem to be offering a generous settlement on your terms. That alone would make *me* suspicious of anything but this eventually reaching 'worst case scenario' status. I think I would under the circumstances want to get an entirely new (lastest generics of course) cell phone and a new number. Naturally you will need new business cards for associates, etc. By all means, take them up on their generosity **as long as you get a new phone/new number/business cards out of them first.** PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Nielsen PVR Plan Gives Agencies Pause From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 01:57:41 GMT > Madison Avenue would like to hit the rewind button on Nielsen's plans > to measure households with digital video recorders (DVRs), and see > Nielsen replay the announcement with one additional element: a plan to > provide TV commercial ratings. Without them, say media agency > executives, the time- shifted viewing data from DVR users would be > interesting -- but almost meaningless from a media planning point of > view. It is interesting that an industry that bases ad prices for the whole season in large part on ratings generated by "sweeps" where the networks don't even broadcast their normal programming could deride anything as "meaningless" :-). However, without getting Nielsen involved, I can tell them the precise and exact ratings for commercials for PVR owners: zero. (That's why we own PVRs for cripes sake :-). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: Snapshots in Time Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 19:27:24 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com wrote in message news:telecom23.110.11@telecom-digest.org: > In a message dated Sun, 7 Mar 2004 19:44:00 -0800 Al Gillis > writes: >> An oddity that would probably never happen in this age is reviewed on >> pages 83-85. Moving the Indianapolis headquarters building of Indiana >> Bell WHILE IT'S STILL IN OPERATION as an office and Central Office >> building! Those guys were gutsy! > The Dallas Automatic Telephone Company building, full of step > equipment, was moved while still in service to accomodate a street > widening project. > Wes Leatherock > wesrock@aol.com > wleathus@yahoo.com That's interesting, Wes ... First, I couldn't even imagine such a feat, then I hear it's not unique! Well, I guess those Texans were gutsy, too! Do you have any additional information about this move? About when did it take place? Where in Dallas was the building located? Any web resources available to see photos or read accounts of the move? Thanks!! Al ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Last Laugh! Speaking of TV Land (Was Ergen Waiting Out Viacom) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 19:22:48 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Pat said: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This morning on 'I Love > Lucy' at 10:00 AM followed by 'Leave it to Beaver' at 10:30 every five (Some Snipage...) Speaking of TV Land ... where is Brodrick Crawford and "Highway Patrol"? Who could forget his plantive calls over the squad car radio: "2150 to Headquarters ... Come In, Headquarters!" Al [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What I am getting rather annoyed by lately is the thing on TV-Land where they do 'marathons' of one par- ticular show for hours or days at a time. They've been running "Leave it to Beaver" for several hours now; one thirty-minute episode after another, in sequence. I think they are up to installment 115 now, and sometimes they run the same installment two or three times in the same day. They *surely* must have other shows around in addition to 'Beaver' they could run. 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #111 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 9 15:17:59 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i29KHw608750; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:17:59 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:17:59 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403092017.i29KHw608750@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 #112 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:18:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 112 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson PFIR Conference: "Preventing the Internet Meltdown" (PFIR Organization) Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance (William Warren) Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance (Mark Crispin) Spam and the Law (was Re: The Price of Email is)(Danny Burstein) Re: AT&T Expands 'City Savings' for International Calling (Joseph) Re: AT&T Wireless Introduces Early Evenings; New Options (Joseph) Re: Snapshots in Time (Nick Landsberg) Curious Plurals (was Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name) (Michael Quinn) DISH Network to Lose CBS in 16 Markets (Monty Solomon) EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS (J Kelly) 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, 8 Mar 2004 23:56:49 PST From: PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility Subject: PFIR Conference Announcement: "Preventing the Internet Meltdown" PFIR Conference Announcement "Preventing the Internet Meltdown" Spring/Summer 2004 Los Angeles, California, USA --------------------------------- March 6, 2004 PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org [ To subscribe or unsubscribe to/from this list, please send the command "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" respectively (without the quotes) in the body of an e-mail to "pfir-request@pfir.org". ] ================================== --- Please Distribute Widely --- PFIR Conference Announcement "Preventing the Internet Meltdown" Spring/Summer 2004 Los Angeles, California, USA http://www.pfir.org/meltdown People For Internet Responsibility (PFIR) is pleased to preliminarily announce an "emergency" conference aimed at preventing the "meltdown" of the Internet -- the risks of imminent disruption, degradation, unfair manipulation, and other negative impacts on critical Internet services and systems in ways that will have a profound impact on the Net and its users around the world. We are planning for this conference (lasting two or three days) to take place as soon as possible, ideally as early as this coming June, with all sessions and working groups at a hotel in convenient proximity to Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). A continuing and rapidly escalating series of alarming events suggest that immediate cooperative, specific planning is necessary if we are to have any chance of avoiding the meltdown. "Red flag" warning signs are many. A merely partial list includes attempts to manipulate key network infrastructures such as the domain name system; lawsuits over Internet regulatory issues (e.g. VeriSign and domain registrars vs. ICANN); serious issues of privacy and security; and ever-increasing spam, virus, and related problems, along with largely ad hoc or non-coordinated "anti-spam" systems that may do more harm than good and may cause serious collateral damage. All facets of Internet users and a vast range of critical applications are at risk from the meltdown. Commercial firms, schools, nonprofit and governmental organizations, home users, and everybody else around the world whose lives are touched in some way by the Internet (and that's practically everyone) are likely to be seriously and negatively impacted. Most of these problems are either directly or indirectly the result of the Internet's lack of responsible and fair planning related to Internet operations and oversight. A perceived historical desire for a "hands off" attitude regarding Internet "governance" has now resulted not only in commercial abuses, and the specter of lawsuits and courts dictating key technical issues relating to the Net, but has also invited unilateral actions by organizations such as the United Nations (UN) and International Telecommunications Union (ITU) that could profoundly affect the Internet and its users in unpredictable ways. Representatives from commercial firms, educational institutions, governmental entities, nonprofit and other organizations, and any other interested parties are invited to participate at this conference. International participation is most definitely encouraged. The ultimate goal of the conference is to establish a set of *specific* actions and contingency plans for the Internet-related problems that could lead to the meltdown. These may include (but are not limited to) technical, governance, regulatory, political, and legal actions and plans. Scenarios to consider may also include more "radical" technical approaches such as "alternate root" domain systems, technologies to bypass unreasonable ISP restrictions, and a wide range of other practical possibilities. It is anticipated that the conference will include a variety of panels focused on illuminating specific aspects of these problems, along with potential reactions, solutions, and contingency planning for worst-case scenarios. Breakout working groups will be available for detailed discussion and planning efforts. Formal papers will not be required, but panel members may be asked to submit brief abstracts of prepared remarks in advance to assist in organizing the sessions. The ability of this conference to take place, and necessary conference details such as the specific program, costs, etc. will depend largely on the response to this announcement and particularly on the number of persons and organizations who express a potential interest in attending. If you may be interested in participating (no obligation at this point, of course) or have any questions, please send an e-mail as soon as possible to: meltdown@pfir.org or feel free to contact Lauren at the phone number below. As appropriate, please be sure to mention how many people from your organization may be interested in attending. If you express an interest in attending, you will be added to a private mailing list for upcoming announcements regarding this conference unless you ask not to be so notified. Together, we may be able to stop the Internet meltdown. But we need to act now. Thank you for your consideration. - - - Lauren Weinstein lauren@pfir.org or lauren@vortex.com or lauren@privacyforum.org Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 Co-Founder, PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org Co-Founder, Fact Squad - http://www.factsquad.org Co-Founder, URIICA - Union for Representative International Internet Cooperation and Analysis - http://www.uriica.org Moderator, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy http://www.pfir.org/lauren Peter G. Neumann neumann@pfir.org or neumann@csl.sri.com or neumann@risks.org Tel: +1 (650) 859-2375 Co-Founder, PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org Co-Founder, Fact Squad - http://www.factsquad.org Co-Founder, URIICA - Union for Representative International Internet Cooperation and Analysis - http://www.uriica.org Moderator, RISKS Forum - http://risks.org Chairman, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy http://www.csl.sri.com/neumann David J. Farber dave@farber.net Tel: +1 (412) 726-9889 Distinguished Career Professor of Computer Science and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, School of Computer Science Member of the Board of Trustees EFF - http://www.eff.org Member of the Advisory Board -- EPIC - http://www.epic.org Member of the Advisory Board -- CDT - http://www.cdt.org Member of Board of Directors -- PFIR - http://www.pfir.org Co-Founder, URIICA - Union for Representative International Internet Cooperation and Analysis - http://www.uriica.org Member of the Executive Committee USACM http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~farber (Affiliations shown for identification only.) ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance Organization: Comcast Online Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 13:47:51 GMT Fred Goldstein wrote in message news:telecom23.111.2@telecom-digest.org: > On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 16:37:19 -0800, Rob Slade wrote: >> Peter Wilson's article on spam and viruses (on Saturday, March 6, >> 2004) lists a number of antispam measures that are currently being >> promoted. [big snip] > It is going to be painful, and I think that the best way to fix it, > once we accept that there's no simple fix, is to design an *entirely* > new email machanism. SMTP is 32 years old. A new from-scratch email > system can incorporate all of the requirements that have been clumsily > overlaid on top of SMTP, which was after all designed to pass short > text messages between timesharing computers on a closed network. > Until a new system is in place, email will be a mess of spam and > worms, growing less useful as countermeasures interfere with > legitimate usage. Fred, I disagree: the problem cannot be solved by technical means, because no matter what software and/or hardware we throw at it, spammers can find a way around it and keep going. Remeber that spammers don't care about someone else's costs: they'll just send 10xE10 messages instead of 10xE5, and adjust their sending as needed to get a profitable response. Spam _can_ be stopped, and it doesn't take technology to do it -- just a small percentage of recipients whom are willing to take action. There's no mystery to why spam is profitable: it's because the only responses are usually from those willing to buy the product, and all the non-response and other costs have been externalized. If a small percentage of spam recipients take the time to answer the pitches, track down those whom have started the spew, and make their feelings known, the human costs to the spammers will quickly overwhelm their profit margins. When I get a mortgage pitch, I fill it out and send it back. If someone is pitching a weigh-loss product, I demand details via postal mail. For "herbal viagra", I ram my complaints right down the throat of the distribution center. When the guy from the bank/finance company/drug company/whatever calls, I tell him to go back to whomever sold him the lead and get his money back, and I make it clear that I don't do business with spammers and I don't do business with anyone spammers do business with. We don't need more software: we need to fight back. FWIW. YMMV. Bill Warren ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 07:14:04 -0800 Organization: University of Washington On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, Fred Goldstein wrote: > SMTP is 32 years old. More like 22 or so years old. Until the TCP/IP transition on January 1983, the primary means of conveying mail was via the MAIL command in FTP. I wrote one of the first widely-distributed SMTP servers in 1982. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email is Constant Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 06:51:43 +0000 (UTC) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Fred Goldstein writes: [ snip ] > While others have diagreed with me on this and I respect their > opinions, I'm still convinced that the *only* solution is to have > micropayments. Once again I'll disagree with this whole concept. The only thing necessary is to acknowledge that ISPs and their customers only have connectivity to others because of the kindness of strangers. And to take action based on that. Each and every ISP, in order to gain continued connectivity, simply has to establish terms of service (and enforce them) in a way so as to prevent its customers from spamming. (see below for my suggestion) If the East Cupcake Bakery and Internet Service allows its customers to spam, then we cut it off. Pure and Simple. It and its spammers can cheerfully wallow in the smelly pit of their own putrid intranet. Yes, some non spamming customers will get hurt. But that is NOT my problem. It's the same way, to use my favorite analogy, of what would happen to a supermarket using (because it's cheaper) an unrefrigerated meat supplier. Sure they'd make more money for the first couple of hours. But then they'd see a huge dropoff in customers. And pretty soon not only wouldn't they sell any of the rotten meat, but they also wouldn't sell any milk. Or chocolate. Or toilet paper. Those other companies do NOT have the right to demand that I hold my nose and purchase their products from a rotten meat supermarket. And similarly, the non-spamming customers of East Cupcake do NOT have any unalienable right to access my ISP or my mailspool. The *only* change in law might (and that's a might) be a clarification that ISPs could act in concert so as to jointly set up these quarantines. As to what would be a good Term of Service? The following is my rec: Any customer of the ISP agrees that the ISP acts as its correspondence agent. Any and all notes, letters, e-mails, faxen, etc. that the ISP has to respond to as a result of the customer's actions may be charged for at the following rates: first five per month: no charge sixth through tenth: $10 apiece 11th on up: $50 apiece, beginning with first. (adjust the numbers as appropriate, and add a similar modified rate chart for yearly counts). If an ISP chooses not to have such a policy, then I don't want to hear from it. Or its customers. Anymore than I want to go to a shopping mall where the supermarket has tons of rotting meat in the aisles and roadway. 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: I think Danny makes an excellent suggestion. Wouldn't it be far easier to control a few dozen errant ISP's than track down and deal with several million users? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: AT&T Expands 'City Savings' for International Calling Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 04:01:46 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 09:17:33 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > In Western Europe, the reduced country rate of only 10 cents a > minute is welcome news to all international callers, but especially > those with family and loved-ones in countries such as Germany, Spain > and Italy, which have a sizeable presence of American military > personnel stationed there. "Only" 10 cents a minute is supposed to be a bargain? I've shopped international plans and it's quite possible to get rates to the UK for 5 cents per minute or 6 cents per minute to call continental Europe and also without paying a $4 per month "privilege" fee to use the plan. That "bargain" rate is further diluted by the monthly charge. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: AT&T Wireless Introduces Early Evenings; New Options Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 04:06:33 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 23:18:24 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > AT&T Wireless Introduces Early Evenings; New Option Offers > Unlimited Night and Weekend Minutes Beginning at 7 p.m. Instead > of 9 p.m. > - Mar 8, 2004 11:00 AM (BusinessWire) Woohoo! And how long will this last? Perhaps the article doesn't mention it, but 7:00 p.m. night minutes were the norm until the wireless companies decided to change start of night time to 9:00 p.m. People are naive if they think that any particular market condition won't make night minutes change again. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net Subject: Re: Snapshots in Time Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 05:30:37 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Al Gillis wrote: > wrote in message > news:telecom23.110.11@telecom-digest.org: >> In a message dated Sun, 7 Mar 2004 19:44:00 -0800 Al Gillis >> writes: >>> An oddity that would probably never happen in this age is reviewed >>> on pages 83-85. Moving the Indianapolis headquarters building of >>> Indiana Bell WHILE IT'S STILL IN OPERATION as an office and >>> Central Office building! Those guys were gutsy! >> The Dallas Automatic Telephone Company building, full of step >> equipment, was moved while still in service to accomodate a street >> widening project. >> Wes Leatherock >> wesrock@aol.com >> wleathus@yahoo.com > That's interesting, Wes ... First, I couldn't even imagine such a > feat, then I hear it's not unique! Well, I guess those Texans were > gutsy, too! > Do you have any additional information about this move? About when > did it take place? Where in Dallas was the building located? Any web > resources available to see photos or read accounts of the move? > Thanks!! > Al I have heard of (but never witnessed) cutovers happening in the same building, like going from a Cross-Bar to an electronic switch. All the wires from the main distributing frame (MDF) were bridged to both switches and the "new" switch was programmed to do everything EXCEPT complete the outgoing call. Similarly for trunks, do everyting except make the final connection. Once the "magic moment" hit, the new switch would go live with a console command, and at the same time, a technician with a BIG set of wire cutters would cut the cables to the old switch. This would usuallly create a spark, hence the term "flash cut." Trying to pull off this trick on the other side of the MDF is walking where angels fear to tread. My hat is off to the folks with the brass to even try it, much less make it work! "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I remember very well three such 'cuts' in my life. In 1954, Hammond, Indiana went from manual to dial service. The old 'Sheffield' and 'Russell' exchanges were no more, with WEstmore-1,2,3 and TIlden-4 taking their place. At 2 AM that Saturday morning, the operators disappeared and the dial tone took their place. But the Whiting, Indiana and the East Chicago, Indiana exchanges were to remain manual for a couple years. So telephone users in Hammond were told to dial '711' and wait for an operator to respond who would connect with East Chicago numbers and users were told to dial '911' for Whiting numbers. For a L-o-n-g time (several years went by in fact), before 312 (Chicago) had any 931-932-933 or 844 numbers, since those were assigned in 219 right across the state line. I don't really remember East Chicago cutting over to EXport-7 and EXport-8 and losing the need for '711' from Chicago/Hammond but Whiting I recall. To call Whiting from Chicago/Hammond/East Chicago (later on) or Gary, Indiana, one dialed '911' and spoke to the operator. That was at least 10-15 years before 911 was given its more well known assignment. About 1958-59 Whiting was cut. I remember when I was in high school although the other places had to call 911 and ask for our number at the school, when we wanted to call one of those places we did ask the operator for the number, but then in the background we would hear a series (of seven) very rapid 'chirps' as the operator pulsed out the number on her keypad. Whiting was cut to '659' instead of 2-L/5-D and (I do not think it was a coincidence) in 312 there was no 659 either for many years; in fact when Cellular One first went into business in 1983 (or maybe 1982?) they were assigned 312-659 as their very first prefix. The third such 'cut' I remember was the University of Chicago. Originally one 'exchange' (or group of manual cord boards) back in the 1920-30's era, by the time I started working there (part time, while in high school in the telecom room) they were up to three 'exchanges' (or groups of manual cord boards) labled 'University boards' (eight positions along one wall), 'Hospital boards' (six or eight position along the opposite wall), and 'computation center boards' (a two or three position cord board perpendicular to the other switchboards). At the opposite end of the room was the clerk's desk, where there were also a teletype machine, bunches of directory books, and 'Telepage' was there also. Actually there were two or three teletype machines, but one was 'hot wired' directly into 'long distance' where Bell operators would send messages giving time and charges on long distance calls. The so-called 'university boards' were MIDway 3-0800 (with extensions 2000 through 4999), the 'hospital boards' were MUseum-4-6100 (with extensions 5000 through 6999) and the 'computation center' boards were NORmal-7-4700, with extensions 8000 through 8999.) The extensions could all dial each other, or dial 9 for an outside line. If they dialed '7' they reached Telepage. Campus police/fire was on extension 2111. Then one day Illinois Bell and UC officials decided to cut over to 'centrex' (gee, I wonder why!) and UC agreed with Bell to split with them the cost of a new central office building, located on 61st and Kenwood Streets, right across the alley from the existing central office building serving the Hyde Park neighborhood. After about six or eight months, the new addition to the telephone exchange was built and ready to be cut over. All the existing UC extensions were assigned '753' and their existing four digit extension number, except the 'hospital board' extensions were put on '951' with their existing extensions. They could call each other now with a '1' plus four digits or a '3' plus four digits, and they could get calls directly from the outside world! This was in 1965 I think, or about three years after I was no longer employed by U of C. The cutover was scheduled for a Saturday at 2 AM and being curious, I wondered what would happen if I dialed 753-anyfour on Thursday or Friday before. The numbers rang, but when the person picked up the phone, before we could start talking, *dial tone* came on the person's line I was calling. We could talk over the dial tone, but it was there. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 07:41:16 -0500 From: Michael Quinn Organization: Booz Allen Hamilton Subject: Curious Plurals (was Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name) This discussion of latinate plurals reminds me of one I saw some sometime back ago in a handbook on shipboard radio antenna systems - it went to some length to argue that that the plural of (radio) antenna was "antennas", not "antennae", the latter being reserved for insects (or as I later read, politicians, as in "political antennae", which may invite a debate over the distinctions between the two species.) Never came across it again, but I think of it when I occasionally hear someone refer to "radio antennae". Regards, Mike [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So are there any real differences between politicians and insects, or spammers for that matter. Or did spammers (a low specie of life) evolve from insects? PAT] > Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:51:02 +0000 > From: Withheld > Subject: Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name > Nouns in Latin come in 5 categories, called declensions. The > commonest has a singular ending in -us, with plural -i; an example is > "cactus", forming "cacti". If "virus" was from that class, its plural > would be "viri", but it isn't. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 08:19:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DISH Network to Lose CBS in 16 Markets EchoStar to Yank Viacom Channels - Mar 9, 2004 01:46 AM (AP Online) By CATHERINE TSAI AP Business Writer ENGLEWOOD, Colo. (AP) -- EchoStar Communications Corp. plans to remove channels from Viacom Inc., including local CBS affiliates, Comedy Central, MTV and Nickelodeon, from its DISH Network satellite system in 16 markets because of an unresolved dispute over programming fees. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40781000 Viacom's Demands Create Impasse in Negotiations For Rights to Carry Channels; DISH Network to Lose CBS in 16 Markets - Mar 9, 2004 12:38 AM (BusinessWire) ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 9, 2004--EchoStar Communications Corporation (Nasdaq:DISH) confirmed today that Viacom Inc.'s demands for rate increases and other terms had left EchoStar's DISH Network satellite TV service with no choice other than to remove 16 of Viacom's owned-and-operated CBS local stations and 10 of its nationally distributed channels as of midnight (PT). Among Viacom's strong-arm tactics is the demand that DISH Network carry Viacom-owned channels of little or no measurable appeal to viewers in exchange for the rights to carry the 16 owned-and-operated CBS stations. Viacom also threatened to withhold the Super Bowl from DISH Network customers until a federal judge intervened. EchoStar has challenged Viacom in court on these antitrust issues, noting that Viacom is leveraging its control of the public airwaves -- acquired by Viacom for free. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40780861 UPDATE 1-Echostar pulls Viacom channels from its service - Mar 9, 2004 05:40 AM (Reuters) (Adds details, Viacom, Echostar quotes) NEW YORK, March 9 (Reuters) - EchoStar Communications Corp (NASDAQ:DISH) on Tuesday pulled from service 16 of Viacom's (NYSE:VIAb) local CBS stations and 10 of its national channels after the companies failed to agree on contract terms and prices. Viacom said in a statement it was "dismayed and disappointed" by the action, which affected channels like MTV and Nickelodeon, after a deadline expired early on Tuesday. Satellite company EchoStar said it would like to transmit CBS programming on its DISH network again, but both parties stood their ground in the dispute. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40781456 ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS Date: 9 Mar 2004 07:54:17 -0800 Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://newsguy.com] EchoStar Communications Corp. Chief Executive Charles Ergen, who today dropped Viacom Inc.'s television networks including CBS from his Dish satellite-TV service, may lose sales in the standoff. EchoStar at midnight California time stopped broadcasting the signals of Viacom-owned CBS stations, including those in New York and Los Angeles, and will stop showing its cable networks, including MTV and Nickelodeon. A court order requiring Viacom to let EchoStar broadcast the 16 stations expired today. EchoStar failed to reach terms on a new contract with Viacom, the third-largest U.S. media company. EchoStar has said Viacom is demanding rates that are too high and forcing EchoStar to carry networks it doesn't want. EchoStar's Dish Network may lose sales if the dispute isn't resolved soon. "This is a game of chicken -- who will blink first is the question," Richard Greenfield, an analyst at New York-based Fulcrum Global Partners, wrote in a note to clients this morning. EchoStar may lose "a meaningful number of subscribers if this battle takes too long to conclude," he said. He has a 'neutral' rating on Viacom and doesn't cover EchoStar. http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a5_2i6CLuzDg&refer=news_index [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And indeed, they did yank them off at midnight Pacific time last night, after a couple hours of warning beginning about midnight Eastern and for the next three or four hours. The first time last night I saw the announcement was on TV-Land during their 11 PM showing of 'Beaver'. Right at the stroke of 11 PM central that chirp was heard on the cable and an audible/visual message was heard. No, it was not a notice of a tornado or anything like that. It was telling us that (the satellite viewers) will be disconnected in about three hours, then a list of all the channels and shows that would be taken away from DISH which seemed to go on and on and on ... MTV-2 is one of the victims, many other channels, as well and 'the show in progress now' will not be available any longer either. They repeated it again at midnight and 1 AM central time. You readers who subscribe to satellite: tell us more about it. What is on all of those dark channels today? Anything, or old re-runs of shows the satellite operators had in stock or what? 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #112 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 10 03:50:54 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2A8osV13511; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 03:50:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 03:50:54 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403100850.i2A8osV13511@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 #113 TELECOM Digest Wed, 10 Mar 2004 03:51:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 113 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T Wireless Introduces Early Evenings; New Options (Steven Sobol) Re: AT&T Wireless Introduces Early Evenings; New Options (Justin Time) Re: Nielsen PVR Plan Gives Agencies Pause (Linc Madison) Strange Phone Number (Adam) Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers (Withheld) Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS (Sammy@nospam) Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: Spam (jmayson@nyx.net) Re: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email (Barry Margolin) Re: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email (Thomas A. Horsley) Inflection of "Virus" (was Re: Spam Going Under My Name) (Mark Brader) Re: Curious Plurals (was Re: Spam Going Under My Name) (Nick Landsberg) 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: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: AT&T Wireless Introduces Early Evenings; New Options Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 14:24:54 -0600 Joseph wrote: > Woohoo! And how long will this last? Perhaps the article doesn't > mention it, but 7:00 p.m. night minutes were the norm until the > wireless companies decided to change start of night time to 9:00 p.m. > People are naive if they think that any particular market condition > won't make night minutes change again. It's triage. That's all it is. They want to stop hemorrhaging customers. 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 Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: AT&T Wireless Introduces Early Evenings; New Options Date: 9 Mar 2004 13:06:54 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Monty Solomon wrote in message news:: > AT&T Wireless Introduces Early Evenings; New Option Offers > Unlimited Night and Weekend Minutes Beginning at 7 p.m. Instead > of 9 p.m. > - Mar 8, 2004 11:00 AM (BusinessWire) > REDMOND, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 8, 2004--AT&T Wireless > (NYSE:AWE) has introduced an option called Early Evenings that makes > available to new and current customers on qualifying plans unlimited > night and weekend minutes beginning at 7 p.m. instead of the usual 9 > p.m. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40775325 Just talked to my AT&T Account Manager. The only plans that qualify are those billing $59.00 per month and up. So, those of us with cheap(?) plans can only wait - which is one reason I can't ever upgrade the plan I'm on. 60 minutes a month, free long distance from my home area and no roaming between North Carolina and Maine for only $14.99 a month. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Nielsen PVR Plan Gives Agencies Pause Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 13:44:11 -0800 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed In article , Thomas A. Horsley wrote: > It is interesting that an industry that bases ad prices for the whole > season in large part on ratings generated by "sweeps" where the > networks don't even broadcast their normal programming could deride > anything as "meaningless" :-). You are getting VERRRRRY SLEEEEEPY. That is NOT an elephant in your living room. I repeat, that is NOT an elephant in your living room. At least they did get wise to the idea that the networks might try to offer programming specifically to appeal to Nielsen households during sweeps. > However, without getting Nielsen involved, I can tell them the precise > and exact ratings for commercials for PVR owners: zero. Well, no, actually. Yes, I usually pick up the remote and zip through the commercials. In fact, when I'm watching "live TV" I often pause the show for a few minutes just in order to be able to zip through the commercials later. However, if I catch a glimpse of an ad that interests me, I will rewind and watch the ad. Being able to rewind also means I never have to scramble for a pen to jot down the phone number or web address. That is absolutely a small percentage of all the ads that my TiVo records, but not zero. 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: Adam Subject: Strange Phone Number Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 22:31:23 GMT Anyone know what type of phone number this is: 646-539-9007 ? I keep getting calls from this number but when I return the call, I am asked for a pin. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 00:16:03 -0600 From: Withheld Reply-To: the Digest Subject: Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers [Hi, PAT -- privacy mode again, please...] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The original writer (wrote back and) > said the telco had offered to provide a service known as 'Call > Control'. It has to be programmed through the central office > (otherwise, of what value would there be if a 'star code' could turn > it off and on?) Hi, OP again ... (Refresher: An Alzheimer's patient is making dozens of calls daily to a couple of neighbors; the neighbors are threatening harassment action. I'm looking for a way to block outbound calls to a handful of local numbers.) Call Control is programmed from the customer premises, through the touchtone keypad. You must first set a password, thereafter a "star code" accesses a menu but the first thing you must do on that menu is enter the password. I'll provide details after the service is actually running and I've had a chance to play with it. There is a chink in the armor, though -- and I don't see any way to secure it. That chink is call completion through Directory Assistance, calling cards, or similar companies. Whether using Call Control from Telco, or some kind of CPE, once the call has been put through there is no more filtering. So it's possible to call DA, have them look up a blocked number, and then connect the call. Since that interaction is all by voice, there's no opportunity to filter it. Telco could conceivably maintain a database of blocked numbers that DA would dip into, but this is not really practical. Even if such a database existed, it would probably not be accessible to third-party providers (e.g. Infone) without some kind of regulatory action. So the next solution is to block DA, except that this lady uses DA because she can't read the phone book due to cataracts. And she does have legitimate needs to look up numbers. Now the way we've been keeping her from calling the offended neighbors is by removing their phone numbers from her handwritten book. However she's also got them written down in other places so we've been discovering those one by one and taking them out as well. But the other day I watched her make a call to a local business; she called 411 (yes, 95 cents per call), asked them for the number, then pressed "1" (or whatever) to have DA connect the call for her. It occurred to me that if we successfully removed every copy of the banned phone numbers from her house, this is how she would call these people. So I called Repairs and asked if Call Control would block calls completed through DA. Asking about Call Control was novel enough, but this question really threw them :-) I was put back on hold for several minutes, after which the rep came back on and said that the blocking was only effective on direct-dialed calls. So we're going ahead with Call Control, but will _leave_ the forbidden phone number for her to find, so she won't call DA for it. We also have someone in the house with her 4 hours a day, Monday through Friday, to help with meals, medication, pet care, housekeeping, and so on. Family members "drop in" to visit on weekends. Hopefully this will give her enough companionship that she won't feel the need to bug the neighbors any more. But she won't tolerate live-in help, so we need to do something to cover the parts of the day when she's unsupervised. She's a great lady, and it bugs me that I have to sneak around and mess with her freedoms like this. But it's necessary if she's going to be allowed to remain living "independently" in her own home. ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 18:24:17 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications > You readers who subscribe to satellite: tell us more about it. What > is on all of those dark channels today? Anything, or old re-runs of > shows the satellite operators had in stock or what? PAT] I guess it makes a good case for staying with cable. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I turned on the television today more out of curiosity than anything else. Of course I am on cable, not satellite, and it appears to me they didn't miss a single beat. All the usual crummy day time stuff. Jerry Springer (is that Fox? I dunno for sure) had one of his 'confessions' programs on today. That's where some poor sap comes out on the stage, tells his life story, Jerry tells him his wife heard it all backstage, then she marches out and clobbers the guy (who either had secret mistresses, was secretly gay, or had some picadillo or another of which she did not approve). While the wife is 'counseling' her husband there on the stage, another guest whose claim to fame is his lust for indecent exposure is busily running amok through the audience and back to the stage, with all his clothes off. That show is such a riot! And imagine how the authorities were complaining about Janet Jackson. Sort of hypocritcal IMO ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 18:21:17 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications William Warren wrote: > We don't need more software: we need to fight back. Oh, please. Who has time to do that?! What we need is an authentication system, not software. ------------------------------ From: jmayson@nyx.net Subject: Re: Spam Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 03:14:04 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com > You have just experienced firsthand the reason why I no longer post to > netnews under my own name. (I know I'm not alone in this.) After one > weekend where our computer staff deleted five *thousand* spam e-mails > to me, I decided it wasn't worth it. This is something I have gone back and forth on for the past couple of years. I have been on USENET since 1987 when I started college. I had no idea what it was or that everything I posted was being archived. It was rather amusing to go back in 2002 or so and see things I wrote a decade and a half earlier. But I got a little nervous about it too. I don't *THINK* I ever said anything too stupid/inflamatory/idiotic/ off-color, but who knows. I usually tell people when they send an email or post to USENET that they're not only effectively sending a postcard that anyone can see, but everyone who touches the postcard is making a photocopy of it and pasting the photocopy on their front door. I started using an assumed identity (my first and middle names only, as my middle name is more common than my last name). I did not do this to defraud, fool, slander, or otherwise participate in inappropriate conduct, but I was protecting my identity. However, I just felt odd pretending to be someone else. So I've gone back to being myself online. > I can do this because I don't edit anything online. You can't, > unfortunately ... (comment was addressed to TELECOM Digest Editor). I'm active in the radio monitoring community, even writing periodically for Monitoring Times magazine. It'd be sort of hard for me to "disappear" online then have a guy who sounds just like me show up the next day. My solution now is I mostly lurk and respond to people personally as much as possible. I ask myself: 1. Is this posting necessary? 2. Will people care about it? 3. Will it embarrass me next week? Next year? Next decade? I often don't get past #1 before I kill the message or decide to send it just to the sender and not the mailing list. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, I cannot do that, and I am not sure > if I would want to anyway. I am thinking however about doing something > like PGP on my signature, then disavowing anything that does not have > my encrypted mark on it. But I am getting so many requests to hide > email addresses these days in the Digest, I am giving serious consid- > eration to **removing all email addresses** in the Digest, something > I would have been horrified by a few years ago. I *like* the idea of > having open addressing here so readers can contact one another with > questions, solutions, etc. It is not up to me to control the flow of > mail here, or require everyone to come through here with comments and > answers, etc. But there really is not going to be much of a choice > very soon. I am also thinking about installing a 'challenge/white list' > approach on incoming mail. Everyone will *have* to use a valid > address to reach me and 'good' for-real correspondents will go on a > 'white list' for future incoming mail, however I will automatically > strip off the email addresses on everything before it leaves here and > goes back out. No good answer to the challenge, I won't even see the > mail; not that it will fall in an overflowing spam bucket; it will > just get bashed on the way in the door. Nothing definite on this yet, > but I have to do something. The spam count is now higher than ever. > PAT] I chuckle when I read about the latest virus or the volume of spam people receive. I have a heavy-duty procmail recipe (see http://handsonhowto.com/pmail101.html for more information) plus I have spamassassin available to me on Nyx (http://www.nyx.net). I stand there with my shining armor saying in a deep voice, "I laugh in the face of spam!" then offer a hardy chuckle. I really don't care if my email address gets out because it's not going to cause me any worries. Knock on wood. I was a strong supporter of the Do Not Call list, but I am totally against the Do Not Spam list. I don't see this as a contradiction. I have positive control of my email. I decide when I check it. I can decide from whom I will receive messages. I simply don't have that kind of control over my phone. Well, I'll close this before this posting embarrasses me. ;-) John Mayson Austin, Texas, USA ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email is Constant Organization: Looking for work Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 16:13:38 -0500 In article , Danny Burstein wrote: > Each and every ISP, in order to gain continued connectivity, simply > has to establish terms of service (and enforce them) in a way so as to > prevent its customers from spamming. (see below for my suggestion) > If the East Cupcake Bakery and Internet Service allows its customers > to spam, then we cut it off. Pure and Simple. It and its spammers can > cheerfully wallow in the smelly pit of their own putrid intranet. Yes, > some non spamming customers will get hurt. But that is NOT my problem. Your *own* customers also get hurt, since they can't communicate with all the other customers of ECBIS. If the ISP that you cut off is much bigger than you, your customers will be more inconvenienced than the other ISP is by your boycott. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not really, Barry. Yes, there would be some disruptions for a short time as people migrated off of non- complying ISPs to the ones who complied, but that would not take too long to get resolved. Take for example AOHell, one of the biggest ISPs. If they chose not to go along, most of their customers would raise a lot of hell about not being able to get 'internet' any longer. Consider a couple years ago when the German government cracked down on 'internet pornography' and the various alt newsgroups for sex forcing Compuserve to quit providing the alt newsgroups. CIS subscribers just about went crazy. Same thing would happen with any of the *big* ISPs whose output to the net was no longer accepted. So you would not be able to 'talk' with your friends on that parti- cular ISP for a couple weeks while *they* scrambled around to find a new ISP to use. That's all. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email is Constant From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 00:00:38 GMT > Each and every ISP, in order to gain continued connectivity, simply > has to establish terms of service (and enforce them) in a way so as to > prevent its customers from spamming. (see below for my suggestion) I've been an advocate of this kind of thing for a long time now. I'd love to see "two internets" the one where spammers can freely spam each other and support the ISPs that won't agree to reasonable standards, and the other one where everyone else can exist in peace, and never the two shall meet :-). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ Subject: Inflection of "Virus" (was Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 01:49:36 EST From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) "Graeme" writes: > Nouns in Latin come in 5 categories, called declensions. However, there are also some subcategories and special cases. > The commonest has a singular ending in -us, with plural -i; an example is > "cactus", forming "cacti". If "virus" was from that class, its plural > would be "viri", but it isn't. Right. These are 2nd declension masculine nouns. There are also 2nd declension neuter nouns, which resemble the 2nd declension masculine nouns in many inflections, but the basic (nominative) forms have singular -um and plural -a. For example, "medium" and "media". (Note that the I in this example is part of the stem, not the ending. Similarly, the first I in "radii" is part of the stem; the singular is "radius". So even if "virus" was 2nd declension masculine, its plural still would not be "virii", which people who don't know better use sometimes; it'd be "viri", as stated above.) > A rare declension (the 5th) also has words ending -us, with the plural > also in -us; an example is "status". (The u is short in the singular, > and long in the plural.) But "virus" doesn't come from that > declension either. Actually that's 4th declension. 5th declension nouns end in -es in both singular and plural; "species" is one example. > The 3rd declension is a bit of a random collection. Two examples are > opus (work), forming the plural opera, and corpus/corpora (body). > Plausible plurals for "virus", then, are "virera" or "virora". Maybe. But if "virus" was 3rd declension and one of those was the nominative plural, the accusative singular would be "virerem" or "virorem". In fact this form is known to be "virus". But that's odd, because accusative singulars in all declensions end in M, not S. > The Romans never wrote down the plural, so we don't know exactly what > it was. It probably was strictly a mass noun and didn't have one, like its approximate translation "slime" in its normal usage. > And we have evidence that "virus" was odd in other ways. See above. > (It's neuter, which 3rd declension nouns aren't supposed to be. No, there are lots of 3rd declension neuters. What we're looking at here is a special case -- a 2nd declension neuter *without* the normal -um ending. That isn't "supposed to be" either. Perhaps it's better to just describe the thing as irregular, no declension. > Perhaps it's like "pelagus/pelage" (sea).) This is also 2nd declension neuter. Normally all neuter nouns have plurals that end in A, but this one doesn't. "Vire", by analogy, is a plausible choice; so also is "vira". > The best plural, then, ignores the Latin, and is "viruses". For sure. For those who've read this far and are now wondering about the 1st declension: those have singular -a and plural -ae, and are usually feminine. An example is "nebula". Mark Brader, Toronto | The plural of "virus" is "ad nauseam". msb@vex.net | --Fred Bambrough My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net Subject: Re: Curious Plurals (was Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name) Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 21:02:54 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Michael Quinn wrote: > This discussion of latinate plurals reminds me of one I saw some > sometime back ago in a handbook on shipboard radio antenna systems - > it went to some length to argue that that the plural of (radio) > antenna was "antennas", not "antennae", the latter being reserved for > insects (or as I later read, politicians, as in "political antennae", > which may invite a debate over the distinctions between the two > species.) Never came across it again, but I think of it when I > occasionally hear someone refer to "radio antennae". > Regards, > Mike > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So are there any real differences > between politicians and insects, or spammers for that matter. Or > did spammers (a low specie of life) evolve from insects? PAT] No Patrick, the spammers are a by-product of "whale s*it". Stuff that drifts to the bottom of the ocean and is the lowest known form of life. :) >> Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:51:02 +0000 >> From: Withheld >> Subject: Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name >> Nouns in Latin come in 5 categories, called declensions. The >> commonest has a singular ending in -us, with plural -i; an example is >> "cactus", forming "cacti". If "virus" was from that class, its plural >> would be "viri", but it isn't. "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #113 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 10 14:03:52 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2AJ3po19527; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 14:03:52 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 14:03:52 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403101903.i2AJ3po19527@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 #114 TELECOM Digest Wed, 10 Mar 2004 14:04:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 114 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Comcast to Carry NBA TV; NBA's 24-Hour Television Channel (M Solomon) EPIC Alert 11.05 (Monty Solomon) Nextel Seen Having to Pay For New Airwaves - Sources (Monty Solomon) Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance (Fred Goldstein) Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance (Scott Dorsey) Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance (William Warren) Re: Snapshots in Time (Sammy@nospam.biz) Cell Number Portability: An Update (Eric Friedebach) Directory Assist Charges, was Re: Need to Block Out (Danny Burstein) Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers (AES/newspost) Data and Clock Synchronization (Martin) Re: Strange Phone Number (Joseph) Re: EchoStar May Lose (James Bellaire) 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, 10 Mar 2004 09:37:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Comcast to Carry NBA TV; NBA's 24-Hour Television Channel Comcast to Carry NBA TV; NBA's 24-Hour Television Channel Will Be Available to Comcast's 21 Million Customers PHILADELPHIA & NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 9, 2004-- Separate Initiative to Provide NBA VOD Programming to Comcast Customers Comcast Cable and the National Basketball Association today announced a comprehensive multi-year agreement through which NBA TV will be made available to Digital Cable customers on Comcast systems serving more than 21 million customers. With this agreement, NBA TV will be available to 66 million U.S. homes. Beginning in April, Comcast, the nation's leading cable and broadband communications provider, will make NBA TV, the league's 24-hour television channel, available as part of its Digital Cable service in major markets - including Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, San Francisco and Seattle -- with plans to launch to most markets later this year. Customers who subscribe to Comcast's HDTV service also will be able to enjoy select NBA TV programming in crystal-clear high-definition. In addition, through a separate agreement with NBA Entertainment, Comcast will provide customers with access to NBA video-on-demand programming as part of its ON DEMAND service. On-demand content will include game highlight packages as well as popular programs such as NBA Inside Stuff. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40787951 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 09:56:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EPIC Alert 11.05 ======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 11.05 March 9, 2004 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_11.05.html ====================================================================== Table of Contents ====================================================================== [1] EPIC Files Brief in National DNA Database Case [2] International Privacy Framework Almost Final [3] EPIC Replies to Northwest's Defense of Privacy Policy Breach [4] Electronic Voting Problems Plague Super Tuesday [5] Gov't Seeks Public Comment on Important Privacy Regulations [6] News in Brief [7] EPIC Bookstore: Beyond Genetics [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_11.05.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 09:32:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nextel Seen Having to Pay For New Airwaves - Sources By Jeremy Pelofsky WASHINGTON, March 9 (Reuters) - Nextel Communications Inc. (NASDAQ:NXTL) will likely have to pay more for airwaves it wants in a spectrum swap aimed at resolving interference with emergency service users, officials close to the matter said on Tuesday. The Federal Communications Commission has developed a plan to let Nextel move operations to the 1.9 gigahertz band from three lower bands while paying $850 million to reorganize the 800 megahertz band and upgrade public safety communications, they said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. Nextel would have to pay the overall difference between the valuation of the airwaves swapped, the costs incurred for moving its operations and to reorganize the 800 Mhz band, the officials said. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40789188 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 10:05:27 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance William Warren replied to my suggestion thusly, > If a small percentage of spam recipients take the time to answer the > pitches, track down those whom have started the spew, and make their > feelings known, the human costs to the spammers will quickly overwhelm > their profit margins. > When I get a mortgage pitch, I fill it out and send it back. If > someone is pitching a weigh-loss product, I demand details via postal > mail. For "herbal viagra", I ram my complaints right down the throat > of the distribution center. ... Those are, of course, labor-intensive. And they can expose the victim's identity to the spammer. Bad. I understand the old "fill the business reply envelope with junk and stick it in a maibox" trick, but I have doubts that it would be safe with spammers, who, after all, are by definition criminals. > Mark Crispin says, >> SMTP is 32 years old. > More like 22 or so years old. > Until the TCP/IP transition on January 1983, the primary means of > conveying mail was via the MAIL command in FTP. > I wrote one of the first widely-distributed SMTP servers in 1982. Well, yes; I was taking some liberties by going back to the 1972 predecessor of SMTP, when IIRC two commands were added to FTP in order to transfer mail. SMTP redid the syntax and made some tweaks, but stayed with the host-to-host realtime transfer model. In contrast, FIPS98 and X.400 are very different mail systems. Not that I'm recommending X.400! (FIPS98 was probably better, but lost out to the CCITT's might. I think we used it inside DEC for a while, in the DECmail MTA.) > Danny Burstein says, >> While others have diagreed with me on this and I respect their >> opinions, I'm still convinced that the *only* solution is to have >> micropayments. > Once again I'll disagree with this whole concept. The only thing > necessary is to acknowledge that ISPs and their customers only have > connectivity to others because of the kindness of strangers. And to > take action based on that. > Each and every ISP, in order to gain continued connectivity, simply > has to establish terms of service (and enforce them) in a way so as to > prevent its customers from spamming. (see below for my suggestion) Impossible. Period. We've had blacklists (RBLs) for years. We've had terms of service for years. But the Internet is global, with open entry for new ISPs. It's not possible to shut down every possible entry point for spam before the damage is done. It's a common misperception that if 90% of foo comes by way of path X, that if path X is closed, the arrival rate of foo will drop by 90%. This gets used in a lot of public policy debates -- for instance, if country X produces Y% of drug Z, then shutting down country X's export of drug Z will reduce the amount on the street by Y%. It ignores the fact that countries T, U, V and W will happily fill the gap. It's more like fluids -- if something is not absolutely airtight, gas or liquid will find an opening. Spam is like noxious, corrosive gas. It finds the smallest holes and blasts an opening through. One opening might be shut, but the spammer will find another one, if it possibly exists, or even create one. Today, mail worms (viruses) are being used by spammers to create proxies on innocent ISPs' networks. That joins the established "open a temporary account" trick, whereby the spammer remotely signs up (via free trial, stolen credit card, whatever) for an ISP service and blasts through it for as long as it takes for the ISP to catch on. Even a few hours of that can cause a lot of spam. It doesn't much come from the Spam King's IP address block any more. I'm differentiating here between "policing" and "enforcement". Danny is calling for a "policing" approach, whereby misbehavior is noted, stopped, and punished after the fact. Spammers *will* get around that -- there's too much money involved, and the protocols are too inviting. I'm saying that *enforcement* is necessary, which means that certain actions are monitored in real time and blocked before misbehavior occurs. Micropostage is an enforcement mechanism. The Postal Service doesn't come around annually and ask you how many letters you sent, please pay up. They don't deliver the letter without the stamp. That's enforcement. ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance Date: 10 Mar 2004 10:23:59 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , wrote: > William Warren wrote: >> We don't need more software: we need to fight back. > Oh, please. Who has time to do that?! If you don't have time to fight back, you don't have time to use mail. The reason that e-mail has become almost completely useless for legitimate work is that admins running major sites didn't take care of their problems when the spam problem began almost a decade ago. If the folks at uunet had actually disconnected spamming customers when they got complaints in 1996, instead of finding excuses, the problem would never have got out of hand the way it is now. Until major backbone sites actual take spamming seriously, until folks refuse to peer with spam sources and refuse to sell service to spam sources or buy connectivity from spam sources, we will have spam. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: The Price of Email is Constant Vigilance Organization: Comcast Online Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 13:08:51 GMT wrote in message news:telecom23.113.7@telecom-digest.org: > William Warren wrote: >> We don't need more software: we need to fight back. > Oh, please. Who has time to do that?! > What we need is an authentication system, not software. Who has time to do that? YOU DO! As soon as you poison a list, they'll stop sending you their sleeze! Think of it as a front-loaded mutual fund. The pain is only at the start, and then it's payoff. Bill ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Snapshots in Time Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 05:31:33 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I remember very well three such 'cuts' > in my life. In 1986, I knew the cut time for my local Pacific Telephone Crossbar to DMS-100. I had two lines at the time, with one connected to the other, and one on speaker phone at the designated time (2:00 AM Saturday). They were about 20 minutes late but there was no doubt when the connection dropped. Interesting bit of trivia: Why are cuts at 2:00 AM on Saturday rather than Sunday? Answer: it gives them 24 additional weekend hours to repair a cut gone bad. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Also, (at least many years ago when the theory was first developed) [1] Saturday was the slowest day, traffic wise and [2] 2:00 AM was the least amount of traffic on Saturday. I do not know if those satistics are still true or not, but old habits are hard to get rid of. PAT] ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Cell Number Portability: An Update Date: 10 Mar 2004 09:17:48 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Aude Lagorce, 03.09.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - As corporate doomsday scenarios go, it was right up there with the biggies. Millions of Americans would dump their cell phone providers, we were told last fall, when wireless number portability came into effect. Oops. Between Nov. 24 and mid-January, just slightly more than one million Americans switched providers, far fewer than originally predicted. But number portability hasn't been all good news for the carriers. A very large percentage of switches couldn't be completed and complaints were far greater than had been anticipated. While some of those problems have been fixed, a second round of number portability looms. "It was a tempest in a glass of water," concedes Roger Entner, a program manager at the technology research firm the Yankee Group, of the switching hubbub. Entner, who had expected that up to five million users would change carriers, puts the actual tally at 1,015,000 as of Jan. 12, the latest period for which statistics are available. Gartner analyst Tole Hart writes in a report that "the amount of porting was generally lighter than the industry expected." http://www.forbes.com/technology/networks/2004/03/09/cx_al_0308portability.html Eric Friedebach /No Dirty Words On The Whiteboard/ ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Directory Assistance Charges, was Re: Need to Block Outgoing Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 08:58:45 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Withheld writes: [ lots snipped ] > (Refresher: An Alzheimer's patient is making dozens of calls daily to > a couple of neighbors; the neighbors are threatening harassment > action. I'm looking for a way to block outbound calls to a handful of > local numbers.) [ snip ] > But the other day I watched her make a call to a local business; she > called 411 (yes, 95 cents per call), asked them for the number, then > pressed "1" (or whatever) to have DA connect the call for her. I recognize how difficult this whole situation is. Dealing with a degrading mental illness like Alzheimers takes a toll on everyone. But I may be able to suggest something that will help, at least a tiny bit. In the above paragraph you mentioned your relative uses directory assistance at $0.95/call. Many telcos will, on the determination that the customer is unable to use a paper telephone book, offer "free" directory assistance (just like in The Good Old Days). The exact requirement for this disability rating varies, but you mentioned in your post (in a section I clipped, now that I look ...) that your relative had serious cataracts. A note to that effect by a medical professional may be enough to get you at least this small amount of relief. 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: I think the writer can also get telco to disable the 'press one to have this call connected' option removed from the line. I do know that people have tried to override any restrictions on 900/976 dialing by asking the operator to complete the call, but that won't work. TSPS won't allow the operator to complete the call. I do not know whether or not an operator can complete a call to an otherwise blocked number. If the operator *can* complete such a call, then I doubt 'call blocking' (*60) would protect the called party either, since the call's ID is lost in the switching matrix once it leaves the TSPS place. PAT] ------------------------------ From: AES/newspost Subject: Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 08:10:18 -0800 > (Refresher: An Alzheimer's patient is making dozens of calls daily to > a couple of neighbors; the neighbors are threatening harassment > action. I'm looking for a way to block outbound calls to a handful of > local numbers.) Tough problem (in multiple senses). Get a programmable phone with a lot of storable numbers (I've seen 'em with 20 choices), put all the numbers she needs in those, and somehow disable the keyboard for anything else??? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know that President Reagan has a rather advanced case of Alzheimer's in the past few years. His saint of a wife, Nancy, is with him almost constantly. It **is** tough on all concerned. PAT] ------------------------------ From: visepp@yahoo.de (Martin) Subject: Data and Clock Synchronization Date: 10 Mar 2004 05:48:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I'm desiging at a 3 wire pcm audio interface with clock, frame sync and data. Clock, data and frame sync are fed from extern. The max. clock rate starts is 2.048MHz. This clock generates interanlly a 12.288MHz clock. So far so good. The problem is, that I have to synchronize the incoming singal with the 12.288MHz signal but I don't know the phase between the 12.288MHz Clock and the incoming signals. This can be +/- T/2 of the 12.288MHz clock. This can result in cycle slips. Who has experiences which such a problem? I'm implementing this circuit into a Spartan II device. Regards, Martin ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Strange Phone Number Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 07:19:09 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 22:31:23 GMT, Adam wrote: > Anyone know what type of phone number this is: 646-539-9007 ? > I keep getting calls from this number but when I return the call, > I am asked for a pin. That NPA/NXX is owned by Broadview Networks, Inc. It's a New York City zone 2 office. http://www.telcodata.us/telcodata/telco?npa=646&exchange=539 remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 10:30:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: EchoStar May Lose From: James Bellaire In TD 23-112 Pat said: > You readers who subscribe to satellite: tell us more about it. I've tried not to let it consume my life. :) It is fair to note that Viacom is a huge conglomorate with media outlets across the nation, not only in the 16 cities that were pulled. So watch the news for bias -- in case one has ever watched the news and thought there would be no bias. Echostar had no choice. Without a contract it would have been illegal to continue airing the TV and "cable" feeds that are now slates or gone. They managed to keep them on for a few more weeks thanks to a court order. Viacom offered and accepted no "extension while negotiating" as Time Warner (Turner Network channels such as CNN, TNT, TCM, etc) and Echostar are operating under. They demanded the final contract be signed. That contract asked for 5-7% increases each year for the next several years AND forced carriage of many Viacom channels. And they are using their CBS channels as leverage. Echostar doesn't want the whole package and do not want what will amount to a 40% price increase over the next few years. And now we have a stalemate. Viacom started playing inaccurate banners on their main feeds to ALL cable and satellite providers on Friday evening in an attempt to flood Echostar's phone centers. Plus, as you note, they have been playing this channe "only on DirecTV and cable" ads on TVLand and SpikeTV ... two Viacom channels that remain under contract and will remain on Echostar until at least 2005. But Viacom has the media. They can blast Echostar 24x7 on their feeds that are still airing on DirecTV and cable and put up emotion targeted websites. And in the end, Echostar can do nothing until Viacom *allows* their channels to be aired on Dish Network. It is a mess -- but I as a DishNetwork subscriber still have over 100 video channels in my "120 channel package". This dispute has removed 8 of "my" channels -- and Echostar has moved some channels down from higher packages. Plenty to watch while we wait it out. PLUS they are giving $1 or $2 credits to compensate their customers. ($2 if you lost your Viacom O&O CBS.) It's not the end of the world. James Bellaire http://telecomindiana.com/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What are you getting now on the empty channels? Were they reassigned to somestuff that had previously been in a more expensive package? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mark Atwood Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy! Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 18:13:12 GMT Subject: More About TiVo, ReplayTV [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Due to an editing glich, the subject line on this had to be reconstructed to approximation. PAT] Linc Madison writes: > However, if I catch a glimpse of an ad that interests me, I will rewind > and watch the ad. I have the same experience, my ReplayTV does a decently good job of autozapping the ads, but sometimes it leaves a second or so of the last ad in a block, or a few seconds of the middle of a longer 60 second ad in the middle. And sometimes occationally, rarely, I will see it, jump back, turn off the autoskip, and FF to that ad. PVR is not the death of ads. It's the death of *boring* ads. In the Superbowl before last, the bit that had the most TiVo replaying was the Brittney Spears Pepsi ad. 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 ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #114 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 10 23:47:22 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2B4lLW25696; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 23:47:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 23:47:22 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403110447.i2B4lLW25696@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 #115 TELECOM Digest Wed, 10 Mar 2004 23:47:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 115 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Celebrity's Son Convicted in Phone Scam Case (Anonymous-No Spam) Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS (Tony P. Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS (J Kelly) Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS (Barry Margolin) Re: Snapshots in Time (Wesrock@aol.com) PRI voice T1 and CallerID Blocking (desafinadonospam@hotmail.com) What Are My Options? (Bruce) Re: Cell Number Portability: An Update (Sammy@nospam.biz) Navicore to Close Its First Round Funding (PressReleaseNetwork.com) Re: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email (jmeissen@aracnet.com) EFFector 17.8: FCC Faces Suit on Regulation of Digital (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: Anonymous Subject: Celebrity Chef's Son Guilty in Phone Scam Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 02:44:53 GMT Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer Copyright 2004 San Francisco Chronicle URL: sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/03/11/PHONESCAM.TMP The son of Bay Area chef and radio food personality Narsai David was convicted Wednesday of illegally reaping nearly $500,000 by repeatedly dialing 800-numbers on pay phone lines he and a co-defendant leased from Pacific Bell. Daniel David, 38, of Berkeley was found guilty of seven counts of mail fraud, seven counts of using a fictitious name for a fraudulent scheme and five counts of money laundering by a federal jury in San Francisco. The panel, which deliberated for less than two days after a weeklong trial, acquitted David of one count of conspiracy. U.S. District Judge Susan Illston will sentence David on June 25. His attorney, Thomas Carlucci, did not return calls for comment Wednesday, nor did David's father, the celebrity gourmet. A co-defendant in the case, Scott Nisbet, 40, of Berkeley, pleaded guilty to unspecified charges earlier this year as part of a plea agreement, court records show. After the two were arrested in 2002, their fathers -- Nisbet's is retired AC Transit general manager Robert Nisbet -- posted bond for them. According to federal prosecutors, David and Nisbet leased 24 pay phone lines from Pacific Bell from 1998 to 2000, routed 23 of the lines to an empty office in South San Francisco and hooked them up to an auto-dialer. Then, they made more than 2 million telephone calls to 800-numbers. ........Article continues ........ *** 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 San Francisco Chronicle.. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 19:54:01 GMT In article , Sammy@nospam.biz says: >> You readers who subscribe to satellite: tell us more about it. What >> is on all of those dark channels today? Anything, or old re-runs of >> shows the satellite operators had in stock or what? PAT] > I guess it makes a good case for staying with cable. Hardly. Look at the latest debacle between Cox and ESPN. It's going to get worse as providers start trying to squeeze more out of cable and satellite companies who then pass it on to their customers. EchoStar giving a $1 credit is ridiculous. They're just skimming as much as they can. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I turned on the television today more > out of curiosity than anything else. Of course I am on cable, not > satellite, and it appears to me they didn't miss a single beat. All > the usual crummy day time stuff. Jerry Springer (is that Fox? I dunno > for sure) had one of his 'confessions' programs on today. That's where > some poor sap comes out on the stage, tells his life story, Jerry > tells him his wife heard it all backstage, then she marches out and > clobbers the guy (who either had secret mistresses, was secretly gay, > or had some picadillo or another of which she did not approve). While > the wife is 'counseling' her husband there on the stage, another guest > whose claim to fame is his lust for indecent exposure is busily > running amok through the audience and back to the stage, with all his > clothes off. That show is such a riot! And imagine how the > authorities were complaining about Janet Jackson. Sort of hypocritcal > IMO ... PAT] So true, Springer is definitely THE lowest common denominator in television. I suppose notoriety in any form is a good thing. Wasn't he a former politician? They always end up on either television or radio pandering to the lowest of the low. It's in their blood, they can't help it. As far as the nudity, I found the whole Janet Jackson incident to be a non-issue. A few million men got a free peek, as is evident from the number of TiVo recorders that re-played the event over and over. This country has a very strange culture in that on the surface we attempt (unsuccessful depending on region, etc.) to repress sexuality. But the undercurrent is odd, puritanism and sexuality. I'd bet there are a few sociologists out there who have a field day with this stuff. ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 15:46:45 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 18:24:17 -0800, TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Sammy@nospam.biz: >> You readers who subscribe to satellite: tell us more about it. What >> is on all of those dark channels today? Anything, or old re-runs of >> shows the satellite operators had in stock or what? PAT] > I guess it makes a good case for staying with cable. You do that. Cable raises their rates every six months or so. My Dish rate has gone up $1.01 in the past two years. On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 10:30:52 -0500 (EST), James Bellaire wrote: > In TD 23-112 Pat said: >> You readers who subscribe to satellite: tell us more about it. > I've tried not to let it consume my life. :) > It is fair to note that Viacom is a huge conglomorate with media > outlets across the nation, not only in the 16 cities that were pulled. > So watch the news for bias -- in case one has ever watched the news and > thought there would be no bias. > Echostar had no choice. Without a contract it would have been illegal > to continue airing the TV and "cable" feeds that are now slates or > gone. They managed to keep them on for a few more weeks thanks to a > court order. Viacom offered and accepted no "extension while > negotiating" as Time Warner (Turner Network channels such as CNN, TNT, > TCM, etc) and Echostar are operating under. They demanded the final > contract be signed. That contract asked for 5-7% increases each year > for the next several years AND forced carriage of many Viacom > channels. And they are using their CBS channels as leverage. > Echostar doesn't want the whole package and do not want what will > amount to a 40% price increase over the next few years. And now we > have a stalemate. > Viacom started playing inaccurate banners on their main feeds to ALL > cable and satellite providers on Friday evening in an attempt to flood > Echostar's phone centers. Plus, as you note, they have been playing > this channe "only on DirecTV and cable" ads on TVLand and SpikeTV > ... two Viacom channels that remain under contract and will remain on > Echostar until at least 2005. > But Viacom has the media. They can blast Echostar 24x7 on their feeds > that are still airing on DirecTV and cable and put up emotion targeted > websites. And in the end, Echostar can do nothing until Viacom > *allows* their channels to be aired on Dish Network. > It is a mess -- but I as a DishNetwork subscriber still have over 100 > video channels in my "120 channel package". This dispute has removed > 8 of "my" channels -- and Echostar has moved some channels down from > higher packages. Plenty to watch while we wait it out. PLUS they are > giving $1 or $2 credits to compensate their customers. ($2 if you > lost your Viacom O&O CBS.) > It's not the end of the world. > James Bellaire > http://telecomindiana.com/ > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What are you getting now on the empty > channels? Were they reassigned to some stuff that had previously been > in a more expensive package? PAT] They have a slide up saying that the channel is currently unavailable and asking you to tune to channel 101 for the latest information. On channel 101 Dish CEO Charlie Ergen has a loop running with information on what has happened (which is pretty much what the previous poster said) and that they hope to reach an agreement soon so the channels can return. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Channel 101? Isn't that a premium extra pay (outside the basic range) channel? They want you to pay extra to listen to Mr. Ergen? It is a premium channel here on Cable One. Our basic channels are 2 through 62 (sixty channels total, no one or four). One hundred up here are things like MTV-2 and Showtime Movies. I do not get any of that. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS Organization: Looking for work Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 20:30:59 -0500 In article , Sammy@nospam.biz wrote: > I guess it makes a good case for staying with cable. Cable isn't immune from this type of problem. The cable companies have similar contracts with content providers, and it's possible for their renegotiations to fail just as easily. In fact, I think a few years ago subscribers to a cable company lost access to ABC and Disney Channel for about a week because of a problem similar to the one between Viacom and Dish Networks. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We used to have Time-Warner until last year but I don't think they ever had any disputes. But then last year a company called 'Cable One' took over here. Same local people in charge; the lady who worked in the office here for T-W now works here for Cable One. Her husband is the technician and also drives around the streets all day checking the wires and making hookups, etc. When I was downtown one day they were painting over the Time Warner sign on the front door with a new Cable One sign. I know they now offer cable internet also, something Time Warner said 'would come soon' but it never did until Cable One took over. I do not think the city of Independence would tolerate a lot of trouble out of them with loss of channels, it took them three or four months to get approved for the license from the city. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 19:46:41 EST Subject: Re: Snapshots in Time On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 05:31:33 -0800 Sammy@nospam.biz wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I remember very well three such 'cuts' >> in my life. > In 1986, I knew the cut time for my local Pacific Telephone Crossbar > to DMS-100. I had two lines at the time, with one connected to the > other, and one on speaker phone at the designated time (2:00 AM > Saturday). They were about 20 minutes late but there was no doubt > when the connection dropped. > Interesting bit of trivia: Why are cuts at 2:00 AM on Saturday rather > than Sunday? Answer: it gives them 24 additional weekend hours to > repair a cut gone bad. > TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Also, (at least many years ago when the > theory was first developed) [1] Saturday was the slowest day, traffic > wise and [2] 2:00 AM was the least amount of traffic on Saturday. I do > not know if those satistics are still true or not, but old habits are > hard to get rid of. PAT] A uniform time is needed nationwide because toll machines have to be reprogrammed. Every caller in the country needs to be able to call anywhere else in the country, and so every toll machine in the country has to be given the new data at a uniform time. Maybe only some tandems fairly close to the office being cut over will need to have the new information for a particular office, so as to know how to signal and outpulse and send and receive supervision to it, but some have surprising direct trunks to/from distant offices, too. The Distance Dialing Notes carried the dates for a year or two ahead, usually twice a month, either the first and third or the second and fourth weekends of the month, I forget which. There were variations around holidays and the like when traffic might be high and the date would be displaced to the week before or the week after, but everyone throughout the NANP needed to know what days cuts could be done. In a message dated Tue, 09 Mar 2004 05:30:37 GMT was written: > I have heard of (but never witnessed) cutovers happening in the same > building, like going from a Cross-Bar to an electronic switch. All > the wires from the main distributing frame (MDF) were bridged to both > switches and the "new" switch was programmed to do everything EXCEPT > complete the outgoing call. Similarly for trunks, do everyting except > make the final connection. > Once the "magic moment" hit, the new switch would go live with a > console command, and at the same time, a technician with a BIG set of > wire cutters would cut the cables to the old switch. This would > usuallly create a spark, hence the term "flash cut." > Trying to pull off this trick on the other side of the MDF is walking > where angels fear to tread. My hat is off to the folks with the brass > to even try it, much less make it work! It was more or less a routine procedure when offices were cut over, whether from manual magneto or manual common battery or step-by-step or crossbar or whatever to a new office. Whether it was in the same building or not the procedure was about the same, but not exactly as you describe it. First, the new office is not fully connected; at the frame every line is held open by "cutover tools," sort of like toothpicks, at each protector. The cutover devices have strings attached, and good sized groups of them are carried to various locations where a whole bunch of craftsmen will have hold of the strings. To make the cutover, first the main fuse from the battery to the old office is pulled out. Then guys with big wire cutters, or often axes, sever the cable carrying the pairs to the old office. Another crew of guys are there to fan out the pairs so no conductor will touch another one. When all are reported cleared, the signal is given to the guys with the strings to the cutover devices to pull them out. The new office is already turned up, but the cutover devices until then have prevented it from being connected to anything beyond the frame. As the cutover devices are pulled out, the lines are getting battery from the now-operational new office and if a customer goes off-hook he or she will get dial tone from the new office. Or an incoming or outgoing toll call will now be handled by the new office. Of course, the guys who pulled out the strings now go up and down the frame to make sure all the cutover devices came out properly and the contacts made properly. In the days before radios, an important consideration if the two offices were in different buildings, or even a considerable distance apart in the same building, was to make sure a couple of pairs, at least, would not be cut by the axemen and provided with local battery so the new office could be notified to cut it in. Usually the mayor or some other dignitary would be on hand to make the first call on the new office to some other dignitary. But of course if a customer went off hook before that phone or an incoming trunk connected to a local number, that call would actually be the first call. But that wouldn't change the ceremonial nature of the "frist call". Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: desafinadonospam@hotmail.com Subject: PRI Voice T1 and CallerID Blocking Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 02:09:05 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Is it true that a PRI ISDN voice T1 with incoming calls can always identify the callerID of the calling party? Call blocking can't prevent CallerID being passed along by the PRI ISDN voice T1 circuit? ------------------------------ From: Bruce Subject: What Are My Options? Organization: Comcast Online Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 20:01:23 GMT I currently run two small home based businesses. I have a 800 number that is routed to my line at home. I would like to use line 2 for both businesses, but I am not comfortable with this becuase I would not know which business they are calling about. What are some differant options I could do? How can I still look professional, but when a person returns my call, how can I tell which business they are wanting? I was told about "priority ring", but this sounds like distictive ring to me, where I have two different numbers tied to the same line, and then if they dial line A it whould have one pitch, and line B would have another. Would this be the right way to do it and have two different 800 numbers, one going to lineA and the other to lineB I need to keep cost down, but I want a professional image as well. Thanks, Bruce [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have one phone line here with distinctive ringing. I have my toll free line routed into the distinctive (or 'ring-ring') line, so if you call my regular number I get one ring; if you call my 800 line (or accidentally misdial on the ring-ring side) I get the other ringing cadence. This enables me to know *whose nickle* is paying for the call, and allows me to use the proper answer phrase. You can also get a *second* distinctive ring line (short-long-short) [three numbers total on the one line] if you need to have two 800 numbers as well as a 'regular' line. Of course you can still only get *one phone call* at a time, if your businesses are not that large yet. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Cell Number Portability: An Update Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 13:10:07 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications I started my attempt to port my eligible land-line number to Cingular Wireless last December 12th. Two FCC complaints later they finally got it right on March 8. My land-line number of long-standing is XXX-0000, and apparently their system gagged on it. They got porting completed for outgoing calls only on Feb 27. It took over two weeks later from them to get it to work both ways. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 22:05:21 +0400 From: Editor Subject: Navicore to Close Its First Round Funding PRESS RELEASE NETWORK http://www.pressreleasenetwork.com Navicore to Close Its First Round Funding Eqvitec Partners and Holtron Ventures to Finance Advanced Mobile Phone Navigation Software Developer Finland, Helsinki - Mar 10, 2004 (PRN): Navicore Ltd., a provider of advanced navigation and coordination applications for mobile phones, today announced that it has secured its first round of funding from two leading Finnish Technology Venture Capital firms Eqvitec Partners and Holtron Ventures. "This first funding is a powerful endorsement to our mission of bringing user-friendly map and navigation applications to mobile phone users", said Panu Vuorela, CEO of Navicore Ltd. "This funding allows us to ramp up our sales and marketing activity in order to hit the markets in Spring 2004", Vuorela added. Eqvitec was attracted to Navicore's easily deployable navigation and workforce management solution for mobile phones. Their application is extremely easy-to-use and can be utilized in any mobile phone based on Nokia Series 60 platform, commented Jussi Hattula, Investment Director of Eqvitec Partners. "We believe Navicore's mobile map and navigation solutions will create a whole new market segment for business applications. Navicore enables enterprises to leverage the installed base of mobile phones without the need to invest in dedicated GPS navigators", said Sami Ahvenniemi, Investment Director of Holtron Ventures. Navicore's software turns a mobile phone into a GPS navigator with advanced workforce management tools. Featuring a rich set of coordination and collaboration tools, Navicore's mobile client software and enterprise servers offer easy-to-use and accurate positioning and fast routing to mobile sales force, maintenance and surveillance personnel and logistics operators. Navicore's navigation solution is fast, user-friendly and able to adapt dynamically to user preferences. It computes routes effortlessly in a mobile handset. The Telematics information is received from a GPS device that may be integrated or connected wirelessly with Bluetooth. About Navicore Navicore Ltd. is a provider of navigation and coordination applications for personal and business use. Navicore's software turns a mobile phone into a GPS navigator with advanced workforce management tools. Focusing on mobile handsets and smart phones, Navicore's mobile client software and enterprise servers offer easy-to-use and accurate positioning and fast routing to mobile sales force, maintenance and surveillance personnel and logistics operators. http://www.navicore.fi About Eqvitec Partners Eqvitec Partners is the leading private and independent venture-capital firm in the Nordic countries specializing in technology companies. It currently has three funds with a total capital of 260 million euros under management. Eqvitec Partners has invested in approximately 50 Nordic technology companies with growth potential. http://www.eqvitec.com About Holtron Ventures Holtron Ventures Ltd. is a venture capital management company concentrating on early stage investments within the ICT sector in Scandinavia and in Finland. The company mission is to act as a value added investor and to coach entrepreneurs through the various development stages. Holtron Ventures manages three funds: Holtron Capital Partners I Ky, Holtron Capital Fund I Ky and Holtron Capital Fund II Ky. http://www.holtronventures.com For more information, contact: Navicore Ltd. CEO Panu Vuorela Cellular + 358 40 510 0952 Email: panu.vuorela@navicore.fi Eqvitec Partners Investment Director Jussi Hattula Cellular + 358 400 669 955 Email: jussi.hattula@eqvitec.com Holtron Ventures Investment Director Sami Ahvenniemi Cellular + 358 40 560 2734 Email: sami@holtronventures.com Editor & CEO Press Release Network editor@pressreleasenetwork.com http://www.pressreleasenetwork.com ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Re: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email is Constant Date: 10 Mar 2004 21:05:26 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Barry Margolin wrote: In article , Danny Burstein wrote: > If the East Cupcake Bakery and Internet Service allows its customers > to spam, then we cut it off. Pure and Simple. It and its spammers can > cheerfully wallow in the smelly pit of their own putrid intranet. Yes, > some non spamming customers will get hurt. But that is NOT my problem. An extremely simple and easy to implement approach is for major ISP's to block ALL outbound traffic to port 25 (SMTP). Force all customers on their networks to relay outbound mail through the ISP's mail server. This would place no undo burden on the customer... the ISP is, after all, usually configured to handle outbound mail. And it would stop viruses with built-in SMTP engines dead in their tracks. Earthlink/Mindspring already does that. It was a little bit of a pain to temporarily reconfigure my laptop's mail client when I was out of town and using their network, but I didn't mind. John Meissen jmeissen@aracnet.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 17:22:50 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 17.8: FCC Faces Suit on Regulation of Digital Broadcast EFFector Vol. 17, No. 8 March 10, 2004 donna@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 280th Issue of EFFector: * FCC Faces Suit on Regulation of Digital Broadcast Television * Court Orders Record Industry to File 203 Separate Lawsuits * EU Parliament Adopts Controversial IP Enforcement Directive * Action Center Update - Your Voice Is Making a Difference! * Let the Sun Set on PATRIOT - Section 209 * Deep Links (16): Canadian Supreme Court Brings Sanity Back to Copyright * Staff Calendar: 03.11.04 - Fred von Lohmann speaks at Southwestern Law School Symposium, Los Angeles, CA; 03.13.04 - Lee Tien speaks at DePaul University School of Law, Chicago, IL; 03.15.04 - Wendy Seltzer speaks at SXSW, Austin, TX * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/17/8.php ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #115 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 11 21:18:55 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2C2ItD06235; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:18:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:18:55 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403120218.i2C2ItD06235@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 #116 TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:19:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 116 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Viacom and DISH Network Reach Long-Term Agreement (Monty Solomon) EchoStar Reports Fourth Quarter 2003 Subscribersr (Monty Solomon) Pulling the Plug on TV Shows Has Its Costs (Monty Solomon) Angry Viewers Push EchoStar, Viacom Deal (Monty Solomon) Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS (Mark Crispin) Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS (Steven J Sobol) Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS (Garrett Wollman) Re: Celebrity Chef's Son Guilty in Phone Scam (Paul Vader) Re: PRI Voice T1 and CallerID Blocking (Justin Time) One Cell Phone / 2 Numbers? (Chris Hackett) Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name (SELLCOM Tech support) Anybody Know Anything About Broadband Over Power Lines? (Matt Simpson) Re: Snapshots in Time (Nick Landsberg) Off Premise Extension (Michael Muderick) Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers (John C. Fowler) SCO's Tapestry of Lies (Daeron) Seen on a Manhole Cover ... (Lincoln J. King-Cliby) 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, 11 Mar 2004 07:53:00 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Viacom and DISH Network Reach Long-Term Agreement Viacom and DISH Network Reach Long-Term Agreement; CBS, MTV Networks and BET Restored NEW YORK, and ENGLEWOOD, Colo., March 11 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Viacom (NYSE:VIA, VIA.B) and EchoStar Communications Corporation (Nasdaq: DISH) and its DISH Network today announced that they have reached a long-term, multi-channel agreement that provides for the satellite TV distribution of CBS, BET, and the MTV Networks channels previously carried by DISH Network. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40798560 - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40798569 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 08:17:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EchoStar Reports Fourth Quarter 2003 Subscribers EchoStar Reports Fourth Quarter 2003 Subscribers; Fourth Quarter 2003 Earnings Call to Be Rescheduled ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 11, 2004--EchoStar Communications Corporation (Nasdaq:DISH) reported today that its DISH Network(TM) satellite television service added approximately 340,000 net new subscribers during the fourth quarter of 2003. DISH Network had approximately 9.425 million subscribers as of Dec. 31, 2003, an increase of 1.245 million subscribers over Dec. 31, 2002. EchoStar also announced today that it may seek a 15-day extension of the filing deadline for its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended Dec. 31, 2003. During EchoStar's previously announced 10 a.m. (MT) conference call and webcast today, management intends to discuss and respond to questions regarding the agreements announced yesterday between EchoStar and Viacom, EchoStar's recent licensing, asset purchase and settlement agreements with Gemstar, and the accounting issue described below. Since EchoStar has not yet released its fourth quarter and full year 2003 financial results, EchoStar does not plan to discuss or respond to questions regarding its earnings or other financial results. The 800-616-6729 call-in number remains unchanged and the conference call will be broadcast live from EchoStar's website at www.echostar.com and www.dishnetwork.com . Analysts and the press are invited to participate in a question-and-answer session following introductory remarks by EchoStar executives. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40799260 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:46:53 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Pulling the Plug on TV Shows Has Its Costs By SETH SUTEL AP Business Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- When media titans clash over television rights, there's always the weapon of last resort: pulling the plug. But as the DISH Network and Viacom Inc. found out this week, actually using that weapon can be extremely costly, not only for the two combatants but also for anyone else in the industry hoping to win friends in Washington and in the public. Even when the dispute lasts just 48 hours, as it did in this case, the fallout can be poisonous. Public interest groups and members of Congress are already on a campaign to roll back media consolidation, and a public brawl between two behemoths that traps the viewing public in the middle could hardly come at a worse time. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40805152 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 10:42:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Angry Viewers Push EchoStar, Viacom Deal By DAN ELLIOTT Associated Press Writer DENVER (AP) -- After a two-day blackout that brought the wrath of satellite television viewers by the thousands, EchoStar Communications Corp. and Viacom Inc. reached a deal that restored several popular channels such as MTV and Nickelodeon to the DISH Network. The two sides reached a deal early Thursday. Within 20 minutes, Viacom's channels, including VH1, Comedy Central and BET, were back on DISH, EchoStar spokesman Marc Lumpkin said. EchoStar had dropped Viacom channels early Tuesday in a dispute over fees. Up to 9 million DISH satellite television viewers were affected. The dispute also left as many as 2 million DISH viewers without CBS shows when EchoStar pulled the network's programing in cities including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Miami, Boston, Denver, Minneapolis and Dallas. DISH subscribers in those cities were threatened with the loss of the upcoming NCAA men's basketball tournament, which begins March 18 on CBS. Viacom is CBS' parent corporation. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40800396 ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 21:45:50 -0800 Organization: University of Washington On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, J Kelly wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Channel 101? Isn't that a premium extra > pay (outside the basic range) channel? They want you to pay extra to > listen to Mr. Ergen? It is a premium channel here on Cable One. Our > basic channels are 2 through 62 (sixty channels total, no one or four). > One hundred up here are things like MTV-2 and Showtime Movies. I do > not get any of that. PAT] Satellite channels have no relationship to cable or broadcast channels. Cable and broadcast channel numbers correspond on 2-13. Higher numbers are different on cable than broadcast, and are not necessarily in ascending frequency (for example, 98 and 99 are VHF channels). Analog cable goes up to something like 125. Digital cable has its own channel assignments. Satellite channels, on the other hand, are more or less arbitrarily assigned numbers and have no relationship to frequency. It's just something that the receiver presents. Internally, it maps to such-and-such part of the signal from such-and-such transponder on such-and-such satellite. On DirecTV, the following is a overly-general description of how channels are grouped: 0-99 local channels, HDTV channels (73 and higher) 100-199 pay per view channels 200-399 general viewing channels 400-499 Spanish, Chinese language channels 500-599 premium movie channels (HBO, etc.), adult channels 600-799 sports channels 800-899 music channels 900-999 local channels (older receivers), DirecTV info channels Note that channel 4 for a Seattle DirecTV customer is not the same channel 4 that a San Francisco DirecTV customer gets. So, if you're in a location (such as Medford, OR) that's in the spot beam for Seattle and San Francisco, you could have two DirecTV receivers, side-by-side, each tuned to "channel 4" and showing different programming. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your outline above is pretty much the same as what we get on Cable One here in Independence, except there is no such thing as channel 4 at all, or channel 1 (or for that matter, channel zero.). But with sixty of the slots from 01 through 62 is our basic stuff. Oddly enough, all the other channel slots just have snow and hash *except for 'channel 70' which is obviously in use for something*, at least instead of snow/hash, there is a black screen and silence. I was downtown today at the Cable One office on Penn Street to pay my bill for this month, and inquired about 'what is seventy used for?' The woman said she did not know, and to ask her husband (who was standing there listening). I did not understand his explan- ation, but then he asked me, 'do you still have that satellite dish on your roof over there on Poplar Street?' I said I do (it is for very specialized service; it points to 61.5 degrees southwest, but it came from DISH, and its special services.) "Well," he said, "if you would sign this form for me, and authorize us to take it off your roof and the receiver that goes with it, what I can do is give you *three months* of free HBO and another *three months* of any other of the music or movie channels we offer. You would save about sixty dollars!" I reminded him that was the third time he had offered me the same deal and I had turned him down each time before. I guess he never has noticed it is not pointed in the same direction and at the same angle as all other DISH things here in town on his various trips down the alley behind my house looking at all *his* wires, boxes, etc. I told him also that the DISH agent here in Independence tried to make me the same deal: first thing I had to do was sign a form authorizing *him* to be my representative with the cable people, AND turn over my cable converter box to be returned, THEN he would gve me several months of DISH service at no charge, etc. The cable guy, and the woman in the office listened to what I said and nodded very solemnly. "Yes, he has done that around town a few times to our customers." they said. I told them I was happy with the way things were now, and would not be changing anything. I noted, "if you guys wanted to give me a full T-1 instead of that half meg I have now for my computer I might be willing to listen to that. I could actually care less about HBO, various movies and (your style of) music. I do use your cable on the back of my Bose radio to get the classical music station KRPS 89.9 out of Pittburg, KS, which is no charge (on the cable account)." He said "anything to do with computers had to come 'from our Phoenix home office' we are not allowed to make any customer deals on that, just to sell it." Thinking that I was 'too smart for my own good', he excused himself and went back to work. When I got back home, the satellite guy was puttering around over at a neighbor's house and I asked him if I could get a way to *upload* to the satellite from my computer, "then I can dump those Cable One people entirely." He said the company did not allow him to make deals like that. "The company (DISH) allows me to give away all the HBO and Showtime and sex movies and regular channels I want to lure guys away from the cable, but I am not allowed to do anything with computers and the internet. Not for free, anyway." I'll just stay put, I guess. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 23:46:07 -0600 Tony P. wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I turned on the television today more >> out of curiosity than anything else. Of course I am on cable, not >> satellite, and it appears to me they didn't miss a single beat. All >> the usual crummy day time stuff. Jerry Springer (is that Fox? I dunno >> for sure) had one of his 'confessions' programs on today. That's where >> some poor sap comes out on the stage, tells his life story, Jerry >> tells him his wife heard it all backstage, then she marches out and >> clobbers the guy (who either had secret mistresses, was secretly gay, >> or had some picadillo or another of which she did not approve). While >> the wife is 'counseling' her husband there on the stage, another guest >> whose claim to fame is his lust for indecent exposure is busily >> running amok through the audience and back to the stage, with all his >> clothes off. That show is such a riot! And imagine how the >> authorities were complaining about Janet Jackson. Sort of hypocritcal >> IMO ... PAT] > So true, Springer is definitely THE lowest common denominator in > television. I suppose notoriety in any form is a good thing. Wasn't he > a former politician? They always end up on either television or radio > pandering to the lowest of the low. It's in their blood, they can't > help it. First, Jerry Springer is syndicated. Second, yes, he's the former mayor of Cincinnati, and he's running for one of the Ohio seats in the US Senate. He makes me feel embarrassed to be an Ohio native, and I hope he doesn't get elected. 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 Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ ------------------------------ From: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 05:38:42 UTC Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science In article , Barry Margolin wrote: > Cable isn't immune from this type of problem. The cable companies > have similar contracts with content providers, and it's possible for > their renegotiations to fail just as easily. More easily, in fact, since cable companies must get "retransmission consent" from every local broadcaster they carry,[1] not just the big media conglomerates who own all the cable channels. That's the principal economic reason Comcast is hot to acquire Disney: ABC, through its broadcast stations, has been forcing all of Disney's cable services onto the "basic" tier of cable systems nationwide as a condition of carriage, resulting in a substantial increase in monthly bills for most subscribers. GE does the same with NBC and its stable of cable channels (Bravo, CNBC, MSNBC, and 1/3 of the A&E partnership). EchoStar is merely experiencing the Viacom version of the same phenomenon. Smaller media conglomerates, like E.W. Scripps, don't have nearly the sort of market power, since they own fewer local stations -- but I'm certain that HGTV, Food Network, DIY, and Fine Living are carried on every cable system in markets where EWS owns a broadcast station. Rupert Murdoch is going to be in an interesting position now that he is playing both sides of the fence; Fox is not allowed to give a better deal to DirecTV than it does to EchoStar or Comcast. -GAWollman [1] This is ignoring those broadcasters whose product is of such little economic value that no MSO would pay money to carry it; these stations can force their programming onto cable systems in their market, and onto satellite in those markets where the satellite providers offer local broadcast channels. -- Garrett A. Wollman | As the Constitution endures, persons in every wollman@lcs.mit.edu | generation can invoke its principles in their own Opinions not those of| search for greater freedom. MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - A. Kennedy, Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. ___ (2003) ------------------------------ From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader) Subject: Re: Celebrity Chef's Son Guilty in Phone Scam Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:56:26 -0000 Organization: Inline Software Creations Anonymous writes: > According to federal prosecutors, David and Nisbet leased 24 pay phone > lines from Pacific Bell from 1998 to 2000, routed 23 of the lines to > an empty office in South San Francisco and hooked them up to an > auto-dialer. Then, they made more than 2 million telephone calls to >800-numbers. Can somebody explain how this nets them any money? I must be missing something about what happens when you call an 800 number on a payphone. And where does money laundering come into it? I think there was something major missing in the article. * * PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something like corkscrews. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To answer the first question, after AT&T was divested, their 'separations and settlements' arrangement with other telcos went bye-bye. So, the owners of pay phones managed to get a surcharge added to payphone calls terminating on 800 numbers in order to get some money for the use of 'their' equipment, namely the telephone. The person or company who has an 800 number gets billed this additional surcharge for calls which orginated at a payphone, and the local telco (where the call originated, remits the surcharge to the payphone owner (in lieu of coins *not* collected in the box for the call). That's why, now and then here in this Digest when I give a bit of free advertising to a spammer and encourage phone calls to his 800 number, Carl Moore always adds, "be sure to call from a pay phone so the COCOT owner makes a little money also." What these two bozo-clowns were doing was stirring up all the toll- free calls they could so as the owners of the COCOTs (pay phones) they could collect (um, maybe) 25-30 cents on each call, when the various telcos along the way paid off (charging back their subscribers in the process.) After millions of phone calls, that adds up to a nice bit of change. PAT] ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: PRI Voice T1 and CallerID Blocking Date: 11 Mar 2004 10:01:20 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com desafinadonospam@hotmail.com wrote in message news:: > Is it true that a PRI ISDN voice T1 with incoming calls can always > identify the callerID of the calling party? Call blocking can't > prevent CallerID being passed along by the PRI ISDN voice T1 circuit? Not always true. It depends on what service is being provided on the PRI. If it is an inbound WATS service, you will receive ANI - Automatic Number Identification - for billing purposes. As you are paying for the call, you receive the billing information on the line accessing your trunks, but that's not Caller ID. ANI normally only provides the calling number, not the name associated with the line. If the PRI is configured for 2-way local service, your line may or may not receive Caller ID info. Normally, if the caller blocks their information, it is not carried on the PRI either, unless the setup of the line says you receive billing information, but the exchange carriers have been getting smarter about misconfigured high capacity lines. Exactly what you receive on your PRI will be defined in the local tarrifs filed by the provider. Check with your local governing authority for a copy of the tariff and what you should be receiving on your line. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: Chris Hackett Subject: One Cell Phone / Two Numbers? Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:14:13 -0500 Hi, Does anyone have any information on phones or carriers that support having two phone numbers active in the same phone at the same time? I'm going to have to start carrying a cell phone for my work. I really want to avoid carrying two cell phones around with me all the time. I've gotten all sorts of conflicting information regarding this potential functionality. Any information on specific phones or carriers that you know who support this functionality (if it exists) would sure be appreciated! Thanks, Chris Hackett [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Any number of carriers will support this. There are many cell phone manufacturers who manufacture 'Dual NAM' or 'Quad NAM' service. Buy a 'Dual-' or 'Quad-NAM' phone then ask any cell phone company to turn it on with two numbers. The only catch is, **only one of the two (four) numbers can actually be in service at any time. Incoming calls to the other number(s) are reported as 'out of area' to the caller. The nature of cell phones is such that two or more numbers, both on the same phone available at the same time, is impossible. You have to switch that software in and out each time (which is done with a few key presses.) The 'out of area' calls go to voice mail for your retrieval. This used to be a big thing when (for example) a business person was in two or four different cities a lot, and wanted cell phone service in each town. (Long before roaming became possible or easily paid for.) It was often times much less expensive to have two different carriers in two different cities with a number in each town (thus the Dual-NAM or Quad-NAM approach) than in one place but with a humongous roaming bill each month. It was easier to have these 'foreign exchange' type things with only one actual radio-telephone to carry around with you. I rarely ever see these 'dual-NAM' phones around any more, I guess they still make them. But if you find one, **make certain** the NAM (or software) you want to use is shifted into place **before** you tell the local dealer to turn it on with one of his numbers, otherwise he will write all over it with the new number and you will lose entirely the previous number that was in there. Then go on your way, shifting (with key presses) the soft/firmware you wish to use into place in order to recieve/place calls **on that carrier**. When you do so, the other carrier (represented by the alternate NAM) will be looking for you and not find you anywhere and send your calls to voicemail. Instead of going to all this awkward trouble (now that cellphones and roaming rates -- while still sort of outrageously priced -- are more reasonable), just get a single cell phone, show it to your bosses and say 'here is the number to reach me'. Make your voicemail greeting a generic enough message that neither work callers nor personal callers will be confused by the message and let it go at that. PAT] ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:13:56 GMT TELECOM Digest Editor posted on that vast internet thingie: > I had pretty much (foolishly) assumed my name (Patrick A. Townson) and > Editor, both e-residing I'm afraid that the newer viruses are doing that these days. I get a lot of bounces of undeliverables that were "from" me, but from some obscure IP address (if there can be such a thing). Sometimes even an IP starting with 81. The virus harvests email addresses to use and uses them in the from fields. Look at the IP address, that is the key. 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. Mini-Splitter log splitter If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ From: news01@jmatt.net (Matt Simpson) Subject: Anybody Know Anything About Broadband Over Power Lines? Date: 11 Mar 2004 08:51:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Does anybody know anything about broadband service provided over power lines? I'm in an area where cable and DSL are not available, and I'm not really thrilled with the satellite option. I've been reading about powerline broadband, which until recently seemed mostly experimental, and hoping it would catch on. Now I'm reading reports that Cinergy is starting to roll the service out to their customers in the Cincinnati are (not geographically far from me). http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/03/02/biz_biz1acin.html That makes my dreams about my own local rural co-op getting on the bandwagon seem just a tad more realistic, althought it's probably still a longshot. I realize that even though the power lines are already there, there's still a significant capital startup cost involved before they can start providing the service, so it still might only be attractive in the urban/suburban settings where Cinergy is providing it (that already have cable/DSL) instead of the boondocks that really need it (at least they wouldn't have to worry about competition). Does anybody know anything about this service and how feasible it might be as an option in areas where customers are a long way apart? ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net Subject: Re: Snapshots in Time Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 04:58:06 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Wesrock@aol.com wrote: > On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 05:31:33 -0800 Sammy@nospam.biz wrote: [SNIP] > In a message dated Tue, 09 Mar 2004 05:30:37 GMT was written: >> I have heard of (but never witnessed) cutovers happening in the same >> building, like going from a Cross-Bar to an electronic switch. All >> the wires from the main distributing frame (MDF) were bridged to both >> switches and the "new" switch was programmed to do everything EXCEPT >> complete the outgoing call. Similarly for trunks, do everyting except >> make the final connection. [SNIP] >> Trying to pull off this trick on the other side of the MDF is walking >> where angels fear to tread. My hat is off to the folks with the brass >> to even try it, much less make it work! > It was more or less a routine procedure when offices were cut > over, whether from manual magneto or manual common battery or > step-by-step or crossbar or whatever to a new office. Whether it was > in the same building or not the procedure was about the same, but not > exactly as you describe it. Wes, you just confirmed my contention that this territory was "where angels fear to tread." It had to go off without a hitch and had to be "choreographed" and planned ... carefully. That it was routine is a credit to the folks who developed the procedure. A shame that this bit of professional paranoia has not been passed down to the modern generation. :) > Wes Leatherock > wesrock@aol.com > wleathus@yahoo.com "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: Michael Muderick Subject: Off Premise Extension Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 04:24:11 -0500 I'm looking to set up a home office for a client. What he wants is to locate his receptionist at one house, with the ability to transfer necessary calls to the client's house. We live in the Phila. area, and the only service that we seem to be able to find to help with this is Centrex. Calls need to be able to be transferred, and, in the case of the absence of the receptionist, automatically ring in the client's house. He'll be using a Panasonic wireless system that has an auto-attendant built-in so calls can be routed to any of 3 extensions. Is there any way around Centrex? The houses are less than a 1/2 mile apart. Does Verizon offer just a dry pair, or loop between two locations? That would be ideal. Michael Muderick [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I had a situation a number of years ago quite similar. I had an OPX (off premises extension) to the building answering service in our office. A manual toggle switch allowed me to cut the off-premises end of the line off entirely when I was in my office. When I went out to lunch or home for the evening, as I walked out the door, all I had to do was toggle this switch (have it mounted by the door or in some obvious (will not forget it) place. Tell telco you want an off-premises extension (or OPX) at the receptionist's place and the other end of the the line is at the other guy's house. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 05:10:30 -0800 (PST) From: John C. Fowler Subject: Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific Numbers Regarding the Alzheimer's patient who calls her neighbors to the point they perceive as harrassment, and who might use directory assistance if you remove all traces of her neighbors' phone numbers from her living space. It has been suggested before that you pay for all of her neighbors to get Call Block service, which would definitely fix it, but it might be equally effective if you just got them all unlisted/unpublished numbers. Unlisted/unpublished numbers are usually cheaper than Call Block. Be sure to get the kind of service that doesn't allow lookups through directory assistance. Then remove all traces of their phone numbers from the lady's possession. Of course, all the neighbors would have to go along with it, but if the alternative is multiple unwanted calls, I imagine they could be persuaded. Note if you remove this outlet of communication for her, you'd probably better make sure she has 900/976 blocking, too, just in case she gets any new ideas when she sees a number for people to "talk to." John C. Fowler, johnfpublic@yahoo.com (E-mail to this address might not be read.) ------------------------------ From: doug_mentohl@yahoo.co.uk (Daeron) Subject: SCO's Tapestry of Lies Date: 11 Mar 2004 07:24:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com SCO's Tapestry of Lies Bruce Perens Mar 11 2004 SCO management had a problem. Their quarterly financial report was going to show only twenty thousand dollars in income for their SCO Source licensing program. And so, in an announcement timed to distract people from the bad financial report, SCO announced two new lawsuits and license purchases from Computer Associates, Leggett and Platt, and EV1 Servers. Computer Associates' CEO was quick to blast SCO, pointing out that CA had settled a breach-of-contract suit unrelated to Linux with Canopy Group - SCO's main investor - and one of its other companies, Center7 .. [..] On the same day that CA blasted SCO, Open Source evangelist Eric Raymond revealed a leaked email from SCO's strategic consultant Mike Anderer to their management. The email details how, surprise surprise, Microsoft has arranged virtually all of SCO's financing, hiding behind intermediaries like Baystar Capital .. [..] From a finanical standpoint, Canopy Group has already won. Because it's not a public company like SCO, we can't see all that's going on there. However, we know that they have swapped some of their other holdings, including a company called "Vultus", for SCO stock. And of course they've multiplied the value of their existing SCO stock as much as forty times over the past year. I've no doubt that much of this stock has already been converted to cash. The leaked email forecasts SCO's exit from this business in the near future. When they exit, Yarro and Canopy will walk away with tens of millions. http://east.perens.com/Articles/SCO/March2004.html ------------------------------ From: chsvideo@hotmail.com (Lincoln J. King-Cliby) Subject: Seen on a Manhole Cover Date: 10 Mar 2004 20:31:40 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com [Or should that be 'personhole cover'?] Hi all, Hoping someone could explain what was going on here for my own curiosity -- My university's campus is about 14 years old, and is in an area that AFAIK is 100% SBC (Pac Bell) serviced. The campus provides its own telephone service off of an Intecom (EADS Telecom North America) PointSpan mega-PBX (45000 port capacity), fed by what appears to be a Pac Bell DMS-100 large remote (That's what DSL Reports tells me thats serving 760-750 -- we have the entire NPA-NXX, and its at the same address as the university). Long background short - I don't think any ILECs are anywhere _near_ the campus. I was walking across campus today and noticed one of the manhole covers blended in with the sorounding concrete better than most had "G T E Telephone" welded in fairly small (1" or so) letters around the border. Thus my question "what was this doing there?" I know its not campus related -- all of the overhead access to the tunnel system is through square "hatches" (mostly we use normal doors, but they're there just in case) -- plus the tunnel system doesn't pass near this point -- and every other manhole I've seen is labeled "ELEC ##", "STORM DRAIN", "TELECOM ##", "SEWER", etc. where ## is the number used on prints to identify that vault, so I don't think it was some cost-saving/recycling thing. What gives -- why to we have a GTE manhole out there? And by the way, what exactly is a "DMS 100 large remote," anyways? Thanks, Lincoln ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #116 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 12 00:45:53 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2C5jr207917; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:45:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:45:53 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403120545.i2C5jr207917@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 #117 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:46:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 117 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Satellite Seeks Broadband Re-Entry (Monty Solomon) FTC Chairman Doubtful of Anti-Spam List (Monty Solomon) EchoStar Ergen Calls Viacom Deal 'Good Enough' (Monty Solomon) Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS (J Kelly) Re: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email (ellis@no.spam) Vonage Forward-on-Busy to Landline (Chainsman) Re: Seen on a Manhole Cover (Tony P.) Re: Seen on a Manhole Cover (Steven J Sobol) Re: One Cell Phone / Two Numbers? (Lincoln King-Cliby) Re: One Cell Phone / Two Numbers? (Gordon S. Hlavenka) 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, 11 Mar 2004 22:24:46 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Satellite Seeks Broadband Re-entry By Jim Hu Staff Writer, CNET News.com Hughes Electronics swallowed a bitter pill last year when it ended an ambitious partnership with America Online to deliver high-speed Internet access over the Hughes satellite network. The severance of the $1.5 billion deal offered a tacit admission that the satellite industry's costly attempt to step into the broadband ring was an abysmal failure. The technology was expensive, both for the satellite companies and for consumers. And the competition was fierce, as evidenced by cable modem and DSL's (digital subscriber line) overwhelming dominance of the U.S. broadband market. Now, despite ongoing technical and economic reservations, satellite companies including DirecTV-parent Hughes and refinanced start-up WildBlue are preparing risky plans to re-enter the broadband business -- a reversal that signals they can't afford to sit out the race. http://news.com.com/2100-1034-5172088.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:45:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FTC Chairman Doubtful of Anti-Spam List By JENNIFER C. KERR Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- The chairman of the Federal Trade Commission said Thursday he is skeptical that a national anti-spam list will mean fewer unwanted e-mails for computer users. The federal "Can Spam" legislation that went into effect Jan. 1 encourages the agency to create a "do-not-spam" list of e-mail addresses. It is similar to the FTC's popular do-not-call registry that blocks unwanted phone calls from telemarketers. People would sign up for the service and submit their e-mail addresses to the government. E-mail senders would then be barred from e-mailing those addresses. The FTC is due to submit a report to Congress by mid-June on establishing such a list. Chairman Timothy Muris, repeating comments he made before the bill passed, said he does not think the FTC can come up with a way to enforce such a list and significantly reduce unwanted e-mail. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40804923 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:56:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EchoStar Ergen Calls Viacom Deal 'Good Enough' NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Charlie Ergen, chief executive of EchoStar Communications Inc. (DISH), acknowledged that the contract with Viacom Inc. ( VIAB) isn't as good as he had wanted but it is "good enough." Speaking on a conference call Thursday, Ergen said he believed the final contract is "fair and balanced." Viacom and EchoStar announced a long-term, multi-channel deal early Thursday morning, ending a bitter, public dispute during which EchoStar pulled CBS, MTV, VH1 and other Viacom channels off its system for some 48 hours. The companies also said EchoStar dropped its lawsuit, filed in January, against Viacom. EchoStar accused the media giant of illegally forcing carriage of additional channels as a condition to carry CBS. Ergen didn't disclose the length or financial terms of the contract. He said only that the deal is within the industry norm of three to seven years. He also said he wouldn't dispute Viacom's assertions that the deal asked for price increases of 6 cents per customer. Ergen had previously refuted that figure, saying Viacom had demanded a 40% price hike over the life of the contract. EchoStar, in its agreement, agreed to carry the channels it was previously dead-set against, such as Noggin. Ergen appeared to backtrack on some of his previous statements, saying that he saw value in some of the new channels. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200403111919_DJB_000980 ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:43:15 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 15:46:45 -0600, J Kelly wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Channel 101? Isn't that a premium extra > pay (outside the basic range) channel? They want you to pay extra to > listen to Mr. Ergen? It is a premium channel here on Cable One. Our > basic channels are 2 through 62 (sixty channels total, no one or four). > One hundred up here are things like MTV-2 and Showtime Movies. I do > not get any of that. PAT] On Dish channels start with 100 (except local into local are on their OTA channel). Premiums (HBO etc) start on 300 ------------------------------ From: ellis@no.spam Subject: Re: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email is Constant Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:13:30 -0000 Organization: S.P.C.A.A. In article , wrote: > An extremely simple and easy to implement approach is for major > ISP's to block ALL outbound traffic to port 25 (SMTP). Force all > customers on their networks to relay outbound mail through the > ISP's mail server. I agree with this but only if they ISP makes provisions for a customer to be allowed to run his own mail server. ------------------------------ From: Chainsman Subject: Vonage Forward-on-Busy to Landline Date: 11 Mar 2004 17:31:27 -0800 Organization: http://netscape.net/ I have two Vonage lines. I want the busy line to forward to the second line, and when the second line is busy I want it to forward to another telephone line (not to voice mail). I cannot get Vonage to do this with call forwarding or with call hunt -- when both lines are busy it goes straight to voice mail but I want it to go to another phone number. Please tell me how I can get this working, or if it's possible. They already do this for call-forwarding but it doesn't seem to work when the phone is busy, only when the phone rings for a number of seconds. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You need to go to the dashboard thing where you review/adjust your Vonage account. From there you go to the 'features' and turn the voicemail OFF. From there, go to the advanced features area where you adjust the order you want your lines to ring in. Lastly, set the amount of time to forward your calls down to the minimum five seconds, which is one ring or less. Don't forget to save your changes as you go along, then **allow a few minutes for Vonage to get the changes into your account**. That should accomplish what you want. Turning the time to wait down to five seconds is needed, (that's the lowest time slot available), If you want voicemail ON for the calls on the one line turn it back on while leaving the other line forwarding to number X only. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Seen on a Manhole Cover Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 02:24:06 GMT In article , chsvideo@hotmail.com says: > Thus my question "what was this doing there?" I know its not campus > related -- all of the overhead access to the tunnel system is through > square "hatches" (mostly we use normal doors, but they're there just > in case) -- plus the tunnel system doesn't pass near this point -- and > every other manhole I've seen is labeled "ELEC ##", "STORM DRAIN", > "TELECOM ##", "SEWER", etc. where ## is the number used on prints to > identify that vault, so I don't think it was some cost-saving/recycling > thing. > What gives -- why to we have a GTE manhole out there? > And by the way, what exactly is a "DMS 100 large remote," anyways? It's probably trunk lines that run under the campus. ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Seen on a Manhole Cover Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:04:59 -0600 Lincoln J. King-Cliby wrote: > I was walking across campus today and noticed one of the manhole > covers blended in with the sorounding concrete better than most had "G > T E Telephone" welded in fairly small (1" or so) letters around the > border. > What gives -- why to we have a GTE manhole out there? Where is San Marcos? I'm in 760 too, but I have a feeling you are much closer to San Diego than I am. DMS-100 is a telco switch. I forget who the manufacturer is. (Nortel?) JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ "someone once called me a sofa, but I didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 18:47:30 -0800 From: Lincoln King-Cliby Organization: Is the sign of a sick mind Subject: Re: One Cell Phone / Two Numbers? [Hi, Pat - For Spam control, please remove my email address] Chris Hackett wrote: > Hi, > Does anyone have any information on phones or carriers that support > having two phone numbers active in the same phone at the same time? > I'm going to have to start carrying a cell phone for my work. I > really want to avoid carrying two cell phones around with me all the > time. > I've gotten all sorts of conflicting information regarding this > potential functionality. Any information on specific phones or > carriers that you know who support this functionality (if it exists) > would sure be appreciated! > Thanks, > Chris Hackett > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Any number of carriers will support > this. There are many cell phone manufacturers who manufacture 'Dual > NAM' or 'Quad NAM' service. Buy a 'Dual-' or 'Quad-NAM' phone > then ask any cell phone company to turn it on with two numbers. The > only catch is, **only one of the two (four) numbers can actually be > in service at any time. Incoming calls to the other number(s) are > reported as 'out of area' to the caller. The nature of cell phones > is such that two or more numbers, both on the same phone available > at the same time, is impossible. You have to switch that software in > and out each time (which is done with a few key presses.) The 'out of > area' calls go to voice mail for your retrieval. Pat - This isn't quite true -- most (all?) of Nextel's recent phones offer have "alternate line service" as an (extra cost), and their marketing info touts this (one line for business, one line for personal) as a primary use of the feature. Info: http://www.nextel.com/services/digitalcellular/alternatelineservice.shtml My university-issued i90c only has one number on it, so I don't know first hand how this feature works, but I do know that: - There is an icon on the display showing "1" or "2" as the line that an outgoing call would be placed on. - Every time I place a call, the display shows "Line 1 - Connected [phone #] to indicate what line a call was received or placed on. From what I understand, you can flip from one line to the other with very few key presses, and I also believe that you can conference call the two lines together on some phones. Since I have call waiting on my one line, I'm assuming the same thing would happen with "alternate line service" enabled, i.e. if you were on your personal line (Line 2) and a call came in you would get a beep and the display would say something to the effect of "Line 1 - Incoming Call ###########. Take call?" (If you answer no, it dumps to voicemail after giving the caller 4 rings, I'm not sure what happens to the existing call if you choose to take the new one). Lincoln ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:37:48 -0600 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelectronics.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: Re: One Cell Phone / Two Numbers? Chris Hackett wrote: > I'm going to have to start carrying a cell phone for my work. I > really want to avoid carrying two cell phones around with me all the > time. My Verizon cellphone on the cheapest plan available, includes "alternate answer" and "busy transfer" which will forward calls from that phone to any other number. I've got them disabled, but you could use them to forward your personal cell number to the business one (or vice versa) then carry only the downstream phone. I use this scheme to forward my landline office phone to my cell. It's better than Call Forwarding because it's cheaper (I pay about $1.30/month extra on the landline) plus you don't have to remember to turn it on or off. Of course, you pay for forwarding the calls -- on the landline this means I pay a penny or two per minute. I dunno how the cellular people handle it; maybe it counts against your minutes? I don't imagine it would be gratis ... 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 is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #117 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 12 14:43:36 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2CJhZu14332; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:43:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:43:36 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403121943.i2CJhZu14332@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 #118 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:42:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 118 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Googling Up Passwords (Monty Solomon) Anti-Spam Lawsuit Complaints (Monty Solomon) Quantum Crypto Reaches 150 km (Monty Solomon) Howard Stern's Schwing Voters (Monty Solomon) Re: EchoStar Ergen Calls Viacom Deal 'Good Enough' (Barry Margolin) Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS (Tom Betz) Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Seen on a Manhole Cover (Fred Goldstein) Re: One Cell Phone / Two Numbers? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email (jmeissen@aracnet.com) Re: SCO's Tapestry of Lies (Corrected URL) (William Warren) Fax Tone at 3 AM. to a Residence (Gary Kelley) Verizon Gets Offers on Upstate NY Properties (John R Levine) Thanks for the Norvergence Red Flags! (A Nunimuss) 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, 12 Mar 2004 00:45:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Googling Up Passwords Google is in many ways the most useful tool available to the bad guys, and the most dangerous Web site on the Internet for many, many thousands of individuals and organizations. By Scott Granneman Mar 09 2004 12:58PM PT In my last column, I provided a checklist for Windows users that would help them secure their computers. I created that checklist because it has become increasingly and painfully obvious to me that most home users -- and most small businesses and organizations -- have substandard security practices in place, if they have any at all. The checklist was designed to help secure things on the perimeters: on client computers and at the edges of home and business networks. This week, I want to talk about servers. Specifically, let's talk about the stuff that people are serving without realizing it. Security pros have known about this problem for years, but most computers users still have no idea that they may be revealing far more to the world than they would want. In fact, it wouldn't be far from the truth to say that Google is in many ways the most useful tool available to the bad guys, and the most dangerous Web site on the Internet for many, many thousands of individuals and organizations. http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/224 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:35:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Anti-Spam Lawsuit Complaints Spam Litigation http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/documents/index.html#spam * Complaint and Exhibits (America Online, Inc. v. John Does 1-40) (March 9, 2004) http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/cyberlaw/aoldoes30904cmp.pdf * Complaint and Exhibits (America Online, Inc. v. Davis Wolfgang Hawke, et al. (March 9, 2004) http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/cyberlaw/aolhawke30904cmp.pdf * Complaint (Earthlink, Inc. v. John Does 1-25, et al. (March 9, 2004) http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/cyberlaw/elnkdoes30904cmp.pdf * Complaint (Microsoft Corp. v. JDO Media, Inc., et al. (March 9, 2004) http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/cyberlaw/msjdo30904cmp.pdf * Complaint (Microsoft Corp. v. John Does 1-50 d/b/a Super Viagra Group) (March 9, 2004) http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/cyberlaw/mssprviag30904cmp.pdf * Complaint (Yahoo!, Inc. v. Eric Head, et al. (March 9, 2004) http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/cyberlaw/yahoohead30904cmp.pdf ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:46:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Quantum Crypto Reaches 150 km A single photon is sent over a 150 km optical link beating the previous transmission record by 50 km. Scientists at NEC in Japan claim to have smashed the transmission distance record for quantum cryptography. The team says it successfully sent a single photon over a 150-km-long optical fiber link. This significantly extends the previous record of 100 km, which was announced in June 2003. Quantum cryptography uses a stream of single photons to transfer a secret key between a transmitter and a receiver. Each transmitted bit of the cryptographic key is encoded upon a single photon. Any attempt to intercept the key changes the quantum state of the photons, which reveals the presence of a hacker. http://optics.org/articles/news/10/3/11/1 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 02:03:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Howard Stern's schwing voters The raunchy jockey is mobilizing his army of listeners against Bush -- and they could make a difference in November. By Eric Boehlert March 12, 2004 | Declaring a "radio jihad" against President Bush, syndicated morning man Howard Stern and his burgeoning crusade to drive Republicans from the White House is shaping up as a colossal media headache for the GOP, and one they never saw coming. The pioneering shock jock, "the man who launched the raunch," as the Los Angeles Times once put, has emerged almost overnight as the most influential Bush critic in all of American broadcasting, as he rails against the president hour after hour, day after day to a weekly audience of 8 million listeners. Never before has a Republican president come under such withering attack from a radio talk show host with the influence and national reach Stern has. http://salon.com/news/feature/2004/03/12/stern/ ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: EchoStar Ergen Calls Viacom Deal 'Good Enough' Organization: Looking for work Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 01:35:39 -0500 In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Charlie Ergen, chief executive of EchoStar > Communications Inc. (DISH), acknowledged that the contract with Viacom > Inc. ( VIAB) isn't as good as he had wanted but it is "good enough." > Speaking on a conference call Thursday, Ergen said he believed the > final contract is "fair and balanced." This may have resolved the conflict between EchoStar and Viacom, but now he's likely to be sued for trademark infringement by Fox News Channel. :) Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:45:07 +0000 (UTC) Organization: XOme Quoth Steven J Sobol in news:telecom23.116.6@telecom- digest.org: > First, Jerry Springer is syndicated. > Second, yes, he's the former mayor of Cincinnati, and he's running for > one of the Ohio seats in the US Senate. > He makes me feel embarrassed to be an Ohio native, and I hope he > doesn't get elected. Have you ever heard him give a political speech? You might be surprised about the guy if you did. I know I was. He's not just the putz he seems to be on his show. charitably dispose of anything when blood is their argument? Now, if these men do not die well, it will be a black matter for the King that led them to it; who to disobey were against all proportion of subjection." - W.S. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:38:51 EST Subject: Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS In a message dated Wed, 10 Mar 2004 21:45:50 -0800 Mark Crispin writes: > Cable and broadcast channel numbers correspond on 2-13. Higher numbers > are different on cable than broadcast, and are not necessarily in > ascending frequency (for example, 98 and 99 are VHF channels). Analog > cable goes up to something like 125. Digital cable has its own channel > assignments. Another point is that cable and broacast channel assignments may not be the same. In Oklahoma City, Cox Cable has broadcast channel 4, KFOR the NBC outlet, on channel 3. Channel 5, KOCO-TV the ABC outlet, is on cable channel 8. Channel 9, KWTV the CBS outlet, is on cable channel 10. Channel 13, the PBS affiliate, is on cable channel 14. I live in a suburb, and all the auburbs used to be served by Multimedia Cablevision, which had the broadcast stations on the same channels as broadcast. When Multimedia sold out to Cox (which already had everything in the city limits of Oklahoma City, a slightly smaller number of subscribers than the suburban customers served by Multimedia), Cox intentionally moved all the broadcast stations to off-channel assignments on cable. Their justification was that it was easier to prevent leakage of the broadcast signal into the cable system on the same channel causing ghosting and degraded picture. Multimedia seemed to have been able to deal with this adequately, if not always perfectly. But Cox, while they have a theoretical point, isn't perfect either. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:21:55 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: Seen on a Manhole Cover At 10 Mar 2004 20:31:40 -0800, chsvideo@hotmail.com (Lincoln J. King-Cliby) said, > Hoping someone could explain what was going on here for my own > curiosity -- My university's campus is about 14 years old, and is in > an area that AFAIK is 100% SBC (Pac Bell) serviced. > The campus provides its own telephone service off of an Intecom (EADS > Telecom North America) PointSpan mega-PBX (45000 port capacity), fed > by what appears to be a Pac Bell DMS-100 large remote (That's what DSL > Reports tells me thats serving 760-750 -- we have the entire NPA-NXX, > and its at the same address as the university). Long background short > - I don't think any ILECs are anywhere _near_ the campus. > And by the way, what exactly is a "DMS 100 large remote," anyways? The LERG entries, which DSL Reports seems consistent with, are a bit strange. It shows 760-750 as an RSC ("remote switching center", the "large remote"), a remote node off of the San Marcos DMS-100 switch (which also has a lot of Vista prefix codes on it). An RSC can serve a few thousand lines, depending on load. It's run by the host switch's processor, with backhaul trunks to the host, but has its own internal switching matrix (and "emergency standalone" capabilities). It's theoretically possible to put a few trunks onto an RSC, but normally the trunks (to other switches) are all at the host. But if the entire prefix belongs to the university PBX, then the RSC entry wouldn't make sense. PBX trunks are delivered from a host, not an RSC; the purpose of an RSC is to deliver analog (well, and ISDN BRI) lines. Large PBX systems have digital trunks, which are attached to trunk ports on a DMS, and trunk ports are normally at the host. So the PointSpan would be wired to the DMS host, not the remote. On the other hand, if there are a few thousand PacBell lines on campus, or at some point were (e.g., a Centrex, even if used primarily for some random ISDN lines), then the remote would serve them. > ...What gives -- why to we have a GTE manhole out there? Most likely, the campus just happened to be on a backbone route to GTE's territories, which are scattered all over southern California, including the valley north of San Marcos, in western Riverside County. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 15:24:15 GMT From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: One Cell Phone / Two Numbers? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services > I'm going to have to start carrying a cell phone for my work. I > really want to avoid carrying two cell phones around with me all the > time. To the best of my knowledge, even though many phones can switch back and forth between two numbers conveniently, there are no phones that will actually answer to two numbers at a time. If you really need two numbers, I would recommend getting a virtual number and forwarding it to your cell. Then your cell will answer to both the cell phone number and the virtual number. If you need to know which line people called before you answer, get a GSM phone (T-mobile or AT&T, but I think TM is better), which will let you know if your number was dialed directly or indirectly. My GSM Ericsson T38, e.g., shows me "forwarded" right on the screen when I forward to my home phone to my cell and someone calls my home number. Some phones may even support different ring tones for forwarded and non-forwarded calls. -Joel ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Re: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email is Constant Date: 12 Mar 2004 17:25:07 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com In article , wrote: > In article , > wrote: >> An extremely simple and easy to implement approach is for major >> ISP's to block ALL outbound traffic to port 25 (SMTP). Force all >> customers on their networks to relay outbound mail through the >> ISP's mail server. > I agree with this but only if they ISP makes provisions for a customer > to be allowed to run his own mail server. Blocking outbound SMTP traffic doesn't have to affect running mail servers. That's all inbound port 25 traffic. All the standard mail server software can be configured to relay outbound traffic through another server. It might be an issue if you try to host mailing lists, as the high volume of email would raise some flags. But if you're doing that I would hope you're not connecting through AOL, Comcast and their ilk anyway. John Meissen jmeissen@aracnet.com ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: SCO's Tapestry of Lies (Corrected URL) Organization: Comcast Online Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:30:47 GMT Daeron wrote in message news:telecom23.116.16@telecom-digest.org: > SCO's Tapestry of Lies > Bruce Perens Mar 11 2004 > SCO management had a problem. Their quarterly financial report was > going to show only twenty thousand dollars in income for their SCO > Source licensing program. And so, in an announcement timed to distract > people from the bad financial report, SCO announced two new lawsuits > and license purchases from Computer Associates, Leggett and Platt, and > EV1 Servers. > Computer Associates' CEO was quick to blast SCO, pointing out that CA > had settled a breach-of-contract suit unrelated to Linux with Canopy > Group - SCO's main investor - and one of its other companies, Center7 > [..] > On the same day that CA blasted SCO, Open Source evangelist Eric > Raymond revealed a leaked email from SCO's strategic consultant Mike > Anderer to their management. The email details how, surprise surprise, > Microsoft has arranged virtually all of SCO's financing, hiding behind > intermediaries like Baystar Capital .. > [..] > From a finanical standpoint, Canopy Group has already won. Because > it's not a public company like SCO, we can't see all that's going on > there. However, we know that they have swapped some of their other > holdings, including a company called "Vultus", for SCO stock. And of > course they've multiplied the value of their existing SCO stock as > much as forty times over the past year. > I've no doubt that much of this stock has already been converted to > cash. The leaked email forecasts SCO's exit from this business in the > near future. When they exit, Yarro and Canopy will walk away with tens > of millions. http://east.perens.com/SCO/March2004.html ------------------------------ From: Gary Kelley Subject: Fax Tone at 3 a.m. to a Residence Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:46:11 -0500 Please remove this number from your dialing system, it is a residence and not a fax machine. The caller id number is 646-539-9007 and I traced it back to Telecom and I'm hoping you could help me with this. 954-433-3573 Thanks, Gary [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Gary, its not *this* Telecom (Digest) you wrote to. I would suggest as an emergency measure you get your local telco involved, by having Call Rejection/Call Blocking (whatever they refer to as *60 there) installed on your line. See if you cannot restrict that number, 646-539-9007 to stop it from reaching you. You should not have to pay for your privacy and well-being even though your local telco may insist there is nothing they can do. They may even decide they cannot block that number since it is out of their immediate network. The above suggestion is just a way for you and your family to get immediate relief temporarily. I feel certain *someone* or *some company* has a misprogrammed fax machine and in their blissful ignorance they are not even aware of the hassles it is causing you. Now as the second step is it possible for you to borrow or rent a fax machine temporarily to install on your line? Let the errant fax machine talk to it and see if you can get any clues, such as the name of the bank, or lawyer or other miscreant trying to get through. If you can get enough clues (such as a voice phone number, company name or the ID of the fax machine itself (note, NOT the caller ID as presented on your display -- most fax machines have a strip on the top of the fax itself with useful information)), then give us here at TELECOM Digest the details you found out and I am sure some of the guys here will be glad to work on it further for you. There was a time, many years ago, when I would have said turn the whole matter over to your local telco's annoynance/nuisance call bureau and ask them to cure it, but there are no longer any really legitimate telcos who care about their subscribers any longer, so some self-help will be needed. Someone here the other day identified 646-539. Its out of New York City, but what telco, tell me again. We can also go that route (through the proprietors of that c.o.) as needed. I am curious about something: if it is true, as is claimed, that 'Ignorance is Bliss' which bunch of droids is the happiest and most contented, Verizon or Southwestern Bell? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 12 Mar 2004 08:50:26 -0500 From: John R Levine Subject: Verizon Gets Offers on Upstate NY Properties http://www.thedeal.com/NASApp/cs/CS?pagename=NYT&c=TDDArticle&cid=1078867378369 They've gotten interest from a bunch of private equity companies. "For sale are thousands of traditional copper telephone lines in upstate New York, which serve several cities including Albany, Buffalo and Troy. The sale does not appear to include back office systems, said one source, which would suggest that a private equity buyer would need an operating company to fold the lines into." It mentioned that some of the interested parties are also looking at Citizens, which is the next largest telco in NY and would be an obvious merger possibility. 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. ------------------------------ From: A Nunimuss Subject: Thanks For the Norvergence Red Flags! Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:23:22 -0000 Organization: Sumco I was contacted by a Norvergence rep a few weeks ago. After determining our telecommunications expenditures fit their targeted client profile, they tried to set up an appointment. I had no problem talking to them. Could I sign financial documents on the company's behalf, they asked. I'm not an idiot. I know the opening to a high-pressure sales tactic when I hear one. If you're using high-pressure sales tactics, I immediately assume you are running a scam. Even though I can, I said no. Could a decision maker also be present, they asked. I asked them why they were running a high-pressure sales tactic if they were selling a legitimate product. They said they don't use high-pressure sales tactics, but that they are so busy due to demand that they like the decision makers to be in the room in order to save themselves a trip back. I told them we'd need time to review the documents and the company in any case, and if they weren't interested in giving us the time to reach a proper decision, they could forget coming out. They'd call me back, they said. A few weeks later, I received another call from Norvergence, likely another rep. I had viewed their website by that time and they seemed legitimate, so I scheduled an appointment, even though I was less than impressed with the "sign-on-the-spot" tactic they seemed to be insinuating they'd use. Could I sign financial documents on the company's behalf, they asked. Yes, I said, having no intention of doing so on the spot. With an appointment scheduled, I did more research on Norvergence, finding the threads in here and the review on the TAA website. I called them back and cancelled the appointment because "based on my research of the company, I didn't think they'd be a 'fit' for us." Thanks to all for posting their opinions here and identifying the risks involved with doing business with this company. I should have gone with my instincts. GP [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are quite welcome, on behalf of most of the readers here. One (of several) of my ojectives here at the Digest, at least in recent years, has been to help educate the general public, especially those who use/manage/administer telephone systems, and the job, it seems, never gets done completely. Two things coming up: I have a copy of the disclaimer letter which Nortel sent out to several of their customers and prospective cust- omers about their (Nortel's) relationship (or rather, lack of good relationship) with Norvergence and it has to be sent by FTP to the archives from my personal email. I will try to get that file here with FTP Friday afternoon so you can all read it, or copy it as desired. (I had to learn the hard way *never* to tell anyone the secret backdoor via email into the Archives; now I deal with that problem by continually erasing large amounts of spam which get lodged in there each day.) Because general email to the Digest is limited in size as to what will be accepted by the mailer here at MIT (deliberatly, as a spam fighting tool) this exhibit of Nortel's disclaimer on Norvergence could not be send by email here; it had to come via my personal email. Anyway, watch for it later today. For next: I think we are going to have a new participant here starting in the next week, a gentleman from Tulsa at the university there who maintains the teaching program on telecom. The University will be a sponsor with its announcements and class schedules, etc. A fellow by the name of Charles Gray. Watch for that to happen soon also. For last, this time around, letters and gifts from *nice readers* are always welcome. Send gifts via Paypal, using the template on our home page at http://telecom-digest.org or snailmail c/o Townson, Post Office Box 50, Independence, KS 67301-0050, with my thanks in advance. 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #118 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 13 01:32:02 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2D6W2218538; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:32:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:32:02 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403130632.i2D6W2218538@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 #119 TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:32:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 119 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? (TELECOM Digest Editor) DTMF Digit Passthru (Zulu_Nation411) Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS (Steven J Sobol) Re: Anybody Know About Broadband Over Power Lines? (John Bartley) Re: SCO's Tapestry of Lies (Corrected URL) (Hudson Leighton) Re: Fax Tone at 3 a.m. to a Residence (Fritz Whittington) Re: Fax Tone at 3 a.m. to a Residence (Withheld) Re: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email (Thomas A. Horsley) Re: Siemens 2415 Gigaset Phone (Friendly Citizen) Re: EchoStar Ergen Calls Viacom Deal 'Good Enough' (J Kelly) Caller ID for PC (J Kelly) Re: Seen on a Manhole Cover (Lincoln J. Kling-Cliby) Starbucks, HP to Launch In-Store Music Service (Monty Solomon) Last Laugh! Important Notify About Your E-mail Account (noreply@telecom) 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: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:03:56 EST An outfit based out of 100 Pine Street, Suite 1000 in San Francisco, CA appears to be a new national ISP, sort of like AOL; at least they are frequently comparing themselves and their features and their prices to AOL. I receieved their literature in the mail today, along with a free CD (in the style of AOL) good for a thirty day free trial of PeoplePC Online, then further payments will be $10.95 per month. This is a 56-K dialup arrangment, although for just $5 more per month, you can get the PeoplePC Online 'Accelerated' version where they do the usual tricks with 'certain web pages' and the way .jpg and text files will load. And they give the usual dislaimers about how effective the 'acceleration' will be, i.e. won't work on certain pages, etc, but when it does work it will be up to five times faster, etc. Now the comparisons to AOL begin: Price only $10.95 per month ($15.95 accelerated); AOL they claim is $23.00 They serve 258 area codes; AOL they claim serves 252. They have 9080 local access numbers; AOL they claim has 3851. They give you a 'smart dialer'; they claim AOL does not. It supposedly works with any flavor of Windows, except that the 'Accelerated' version will not work with Windows 95. They give free tech support on line, but charge $1.95 *per minute* to talk to you on the phone. Although you can use it 24/7, continuous use is subject to time-out procedures. Its up to you go make sure the local dialup number is truly local or in your calling area. Like AOL, PeoplePC Online claims they do not require credit cards. I am sure they are not foolish enough to do open-account billing (no one ever does that anymore at all) so I assume they work with checking accounts billed electronically on line, as AOL does. Anyone who did not get their coffee table coaster (i.e. a free CD to get started) is invited to call them at 1-888-5 TRYNOW to get one. Or you can go to http://www.peoplepc.com/go/bloom and they will probably load you up on line. Regards 'Bloom' : If you got the CD in the mail you were told to enter the promotional code 'BLOOM' when requested. And unlike AOL which the last I heard was giving a a million and forty five hours of free time to help you learn how to send Spam around the net successfully these new folks are giving you a month of free service instead before the clock starts ticking. Any comments or experiences? ------------------------------ From: javhusain@hotmail.com (Zulu_Nation411) Subject: DTMF Digit Passthrough Date: 12 Mar 2004 12:24:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am trying to get inbound DID routing on a fax card I purchased to work (RockForce DUO 2 Port Analog PCI Card) with my Nortel Merdian PBX Option 51c. The fax card requires DTMF pass thru. I am not sure how to set this up and my service people don't know either. The fax software tech told me to do the following: Test for DTMF digit pass through from your phone system. The easy way to test for DTMF passthrough is to plug one of the phone lines going to the fax server into a standard analog phone. Call one of the DID numbers that should be routed to this phone line. When the phone rings pick it up and the first think you hear before the call is connected should be the sequence of DID digits as DTMF digits. If you don't here this, you should go back and focus on the phone system. Anyone know how to do this with a Nortel Meridian switch or if this is even possible. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: EchoStar May Lose More After Removing Viacom's CBS Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 15:20:12 -0600 I said, about Jerry Springer, >> He makes me feel embarrassed to be an Ohio native, and I hope he >> doesn't get elected. Tom Betz, opening up a huge can of worms, countered with > Have you ever heard him give a political speech? > You might be surprised about the guy if you did. > I know I was. He's not just the putz he seems to be on his show. I don't think he's a putz. I think he's slime, with no ethics and no issues about exploiting people whenever he can, and for me (a native Ohioan), the fact that he's from Cincinnutty just bears that out. Cincinnutty, while one of the most beautiful areas in the state, is also one of the most conservative, intolerant areas in the state. I'd argue, *the* most conservative, intolerant area. I am from Cleveland but I lived in southwest Ohio for two years while going to school at the University of Dayton. Heaven help you if you aren't white and a member of one of the more popular sects of Christianity down there. Heaven help you if *any* of your social mores deviate from the accepted norms. For $DEITY's sake, I visited west-central Virginia -- Jerry Falwell country -- and didn't encounter as much crap as I did living down near Cincinnutty. Springer sold himself out long ago. He brings new meaning to the word "pander." There is no way in hell I'd want him in Congress. Regardless of the speeches he makes. This is the same slimebag who loves to continually give Neo-Nazis airtime and seems to have avoided any philisophical issues with it even though he's Jewish. And actually, my big problem with that *isn't* the Jew-Nazi issue, it's the fact that a few years ago, he had the *same* guy on his show at least two or three times and the guy didn't contribute anything to the discussion, except to make his point, over and over again, about how Blacks and Jews don't even deserve to share a planet with him. Forget the prejudice -- what's the point of having the guy on several times saying the same thing over and over, unless that's a point you want to push? He knows exactly what he's doing. He's not stupid. He's just a lame, greedy, Maury Povich-wannabe sellout. As much as I can't stand some of the trash that shows up on his show ... getting humiliated because they know they're going to be paid cash for showing up ... he's worse than them. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ "someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maury Povich? Isn't he another one of the same kind as Springer? I've seen his show once or twice and think he is the same kind of thing. Povich seems to specialize however in giving lie detector tests and DNA tests on his show to 'prove' who is the father or broken-hearted mother of some innocent little child who was dragged to the show, so that when the DNA/lie-detector test is completed the child can be displayed; the broken-hearted parent walks or runs off the stage while Povich and the camera follows and sticks a microphone/camera in the guy's face while s/he is so upset and grieved by the hateful things said and done? Same difference I think. Do you mean they actually pay money to those people for the humiliation they must suffer on national television? Regards having the Nazi apologist on his show over and over, are you sure that was not just a rerun of the original show? And Cincinnati ... isn't that the place last summer where the citizens had so much trouble with the police, and riots, etc? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:05:41 PST From: John Bartley or K7AAY@ARRL.NET Subject: Re: Anybody Know Anything About Broadband Over Power Lines? On 11 Mar 2004 08:51:46 -0800, news01@jmatt.net (Matt Simpson) wrote: > Does anybody know anything about broadband service provided over power > lines? > I'm in an area where cable and DSL are not available, and I'm not > really thrilled with the satellite option. I've been reading about > powerline broadband, which until recently seemed mostly experimental, > and hoping it would catch on. > Now I'm reading reports that Cinergy is starting to roll the service > out to their customers in the Cincinnati are (not geographically far > from me). > http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/03/02/biz_biz1acin.html > That makes my dreams about my own local rural co-op getting on the > bandwagon seem just a tad more realistic, althought it's probably > still a longshot. I realize that even though the power lines are > already there, there's still a significant capital startup cost > involved before they can start providing the service, so it still > might only be attractive in the urban/suburban settings where Cinergy > is providing it (that already have cable/DSL) instead of the boondocks > that really need it (at least they wouldn't have to worry about > competition). > Does anybody know anything about this service and how feasible it > might be as an option in areas where customers are a long way apart? All you need is one ham firing up a licensed and legal transmitter with as little as one watt on frequencies authorized for ham use (with amateur radio as the *primary* user, I might add, by international treaty), and the BPL feed fails. The Enrons of this world are trying to sell some snake oil to the Commission, but the three-quarters of a million hams in this country are underthrilled. So are the business users, military and government users (like FEMA and the NTIS), international shortwave broadcasters and other folks who have a right by law and treaty to use the frequencies the BPL swindlers are trying to horn in on. See http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/03/09/1/?nc=1 John Bartley K7AAY PDX CERT NET BET ARES ARC ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: SCO's Tapestry of Lies (Corrected URL) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 15:58:45 -0600 Organization: MRRP In article , William Warren wrote: snip > http://east.perens.com/SCO/March2004.html Another good source on the soap opera that is SCO is: http://www.groklaw.net/ http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ From: Fritz Whittington Subject: Re: Fax Tone at 3 a.m. to a Residence Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 22:23:41 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet On or about 2004-03-12 06:46, Gary Kelley whipped out a trusty #2 pencil and scribbled: > Please remove this number from your dialing system, it is a residence > and not a fax machine. The caller id number is 646-539-9007 and I traced > it back to Telecom and I'm hoping you could help me with this. > 954-433-3573 > Thanks, Gary > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Gary, its not *this* Telecom > (Digest) you wrote to. The Google search turns up a previous post to Telecom Digest: > Lynn (lynn@no_thanks.com) > Tue, 10 Feb 2004 01:29:12 GMT > * Review Index Sorted By: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] > * Next message: Nick Landsberg: "Re: Building a Voice Driven > Application" > * Previous message: Centigramparts.com: "Re: NEC and Centigram > Help From www.ProMemoInc.com" > * May be in reply to: Alex Smith: "Building a Voice-Driven > Application" > * Next in thread: dnhunt: "Re: Building a Voice-Driven Application" > 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. I just called it and indeed, I'm prompted for a pin. By a female British accent. Strange. Fritz Whittington Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes ... That way when you do criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes! ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Fax Tone at 3 a.m. to a Residence From: Withheld Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:14:52 -0600 Pat, please withhold my name and email, thanks. Gary Kelley wrote about Fax Tone at 3 a.m. to a Residence on Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:46:11 -0500: > Please remove this number from your dialing system, it is a residence > and not a fax machine. The caller id number is 646-539-9007 and I traced > it back to Telecom and I'm hoping you could help me with this. > 954-433-3573 > Thanks, Gary Gary -- My office has quite a few DID's and sometimes attempts are made to fax to these numbers, although most all of them are for phones, not fax. What I normally do is fax them back with a note informing the originator that they are attempting to fax to a voice line and to please discontinue. This usually solves the problem. However, if it's an automatic dialer doing the faxing which can't receive but can only send, this obviously won't help. Good luck. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think not only is it an automatic dialer but it has a password on it to prevent *that end* of the line from getting bothered with spam, etc. Go figure. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Spam and the Law was Re: The Price of Email is Constant From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 23:36:39 GMT > It might be an issue if you try to host mailing lists, as the high > volume of email would raise some flags. But if you're doing that I > would hope you're not connecting through AOL, Comcast and their ilk > anyway. I think mailing lists ought to be part of the reform package anyway. All mailing lists need to be run on a "I absolutely positively must ack a round trip query from the mailing list admin" to get signed up. Any ISPs that let their users run mailing lists need to take steps to assure the lists are run this way or just run the list for their customers. (Alternatively, they need to insure that the subscription request was digitally signed -- that might be better since I wouldn't even get the one time ack requests that I'd have to waste time ignoring). -- >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics<<==+ ------------------------------ Reply-To: Friendly Citizen From: Friendly Citizen Subject: Re: Siemens 2415 Gigaset phone Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:16:23 GMT Organization: Road Runner - NC The following posts were made a long time ago, but with sales of the units still happening, I thought it would be helpful to post a helpful follow-up to the original poster's question. I called Siemens support and got the answer to this all-too-common problem. Press OK after all menu items below: Press Menu button Select Mobile Settings Select Local Settings Select Change PIN Enter the following code: *65# This should reset the handset to factory defaults. I verified this procedure works on a gigaset handset used with a 2420 system. >> Subject: Siemens 2415 Gigaset phone >> Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom.tech >> Date: 2002-12-30 20:59:20 PST >> Does anyone know how to reset the base PIN on this unit? I bought a >> used one and the PIN was already set by another person. I need to be >> able to get it back to the default. Can anyone please help? > Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom.tech > Subject: Re: Siemens 2415 Gigaset phone > Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 22:40:10 -0500 > 888-777-0211 If they can't help you no one can. > We would, however, prefer that you would purchase your phones > new from now on, if you don't mind. > Steve at SELLCOM > http://www.sellcom.com > Discount multihandset cordless phones by Siemens, Vtech 5.8Ghz > EnGenius NEW EP436 4line (the longest range), Panasonic, > Twinhead notebooks, WatchGuard firewall, Okidata, Polycom! > If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: EchoStar Ergen Calls Viacom Deal 'Good Enough' Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:14:14 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:56:45 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > EchoStar, in its agreement, agreed to carry the channels it was > previously dead-set against, such as Noggin. Ergen appeared to > backtrack on some of his previous statements, saying that he saw value > in some of the new channels. Noggin has been on Dish since 1998, it is not a new channel. He would have lost quite a few customers by removing that channel, and he knew it (my kids love that channel). He was bluffing, he is a world class poker player. ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Caller ID for PC Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:29:34 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com Does anyone know of an inexpensive device for Caller ID on a PC that plugs into either a COM port or a USB port? I can't seem to find an inexpensive PCI modem that does CID, I've gone through 5 now that claim to, but they never work (damned winmodems!). I want to avoid using the old USR Sportster external modem due to the size, I'm hoping to find something more compact. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The phone line which drives my dial-up modem was a pass-through to a desk telephone set. Just go to Radio Shack and buy a stand-alone caller ID unit and set it on the table somewhere where you can see it easily. PAT] ------------------------------ From: chsvideo@hotmail.com (Lincoln J. King-Cliby) Subject: Re: Seen on a Manhole Cover Date: 12 Mar 2004 21:51:54 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Fred Goldstein wrote in message news:: > At 10 Mar 2004 20:31:40 -0800, chsvideo@hotmail.com (Lincoln > J. King-Cliby) said, >> And by the way, what exactly is a "DMS 100 large remote," anyways? > The LERG entries, which DSL Reports seems consistent with, are a bit > strange. It shows 760-750 as an RSC ("remote switching center", the > "large remote"), a remote node off of the San Marcos DMS-100 switch > (which also has a lot of Vista prefix codes on it). An RSC can serve > a few thousand lines, depending on load. It's run by the host > switch's processor, with backhaul trunks to the host, but has its own > internal switching matrix (and "emergency standalone" capabilities). > It's theoretically possible to put a few trunks onto an RSC, but > normally the trunks (to other switches) are all at the host. Interesting ... out of curiosity by "few thousand" do you mean "less than a prefix", "a prefix", or "a few prefixes"? (Further, must a exchange exist entirely on a RSC or can it be split between the RSC and the host switch?) > But if the entire prefix belongs to the university PBX, then the RSC > entry wouldn't make sense. PBX trunks are delivered from a host, not > an RSC; the purpose of an RSC is to deliver analog (well, and ISDN > BRI) lines. Large PBX systems have digital trunks, which are attached > to trunk ports on a DMS, and trunk ports are normally at the host. So > the PointSpan would be wired to the DMS host, not the remote. On the > other hand, if there are a few thousand PacBell lines on campus, or at > some point were (e.g., a Centrex, even if used primarily for some > random ISDN lines), then the remote would serve them. I get the definate impression that the PointSpan is just about as close to a carrier-class telephone switch as a PBX can get before you park an ESS or DMS-100 in your facility -- From what I've seen of it, it is not your average PBX, so I would have to believe what you're saying is (or at least should be) the case. There are very few true ISDN lines on campus as far as I am aware (Beginning of this week: 15, end of this week: 11) and I'm fairly sure that they're provisioned off of the PointSpan. At one point in the past the campus was (POTS/Analog) Centrex based, but AFAIK everything is now provisioned off of the PointSpan ... I think even the COCOTS (actually owned and operated by some 3rd party) hang off of the PointSpan [When I called an ANAC on one of them I got a 760-750-xxxx number, and our Telephone Services people will assign #s anywhere from -0001 to -9999 off of the PointSpan]. For what it's worth, I think the "Large Remote" lives in the "Telecommunications Building" which is located between two of our parking lots and about the size of a _small_ apartment ... I know where the various bits of the PointSpan live on campus, and that isn't it. Also, all of the copper bundles that (I'm assuming) used to come into campus from the "outside" have been hacked off right inside the cable vault and abandoned in place. Connections to the outside world appear to be entirely fiber-based, with the exception of the one coax for "my" CATV service. >> ...What gives -- why to we have a GTE manhole out there? > Most likely, the campus just happened to be on a backbone route to GTE's > territories, which are scattered all over southern California, including > the valley north of San Marcos, in western Riverside County. Aha, I guess I had assumed that GTE would either use some wireless method or route their traffic over "someone else's" network between territories rahter than resorting to their own backbone... don't ask me why ... And to make this even sadder, I live in a GTE (well, GTE dba Verizon) area in southwestern Riverside County 909-69x -- I guess it seemed so far out of place. Thanks for your reply! Lincoln ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 22:56:25 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Starbucks, HP to Launch In-Store Music Service SEATTLE, March 12 (Reuters) - Starbucks Corp. (NA SDAQ:SBUX) on Friday said it will launch a new service next week that will allow customers to create and buy CDs with songs chosen from a digital music library inside the coffee house. The new service, which will debut on Tuesday at a Starbucks outlet in Santa Monica, California, has been created through a partnership with computer maker Hewlett-Packard Co. (NYSE:HPQ), the companies said in a press release. No details were provided. BusinessWeek magazine on Thursday said the service would offer 250,000 songs and would expand into 2,500 Starbucks cafes over the next two years. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40810602 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 17:37:36 -0600 Subject: Last Laugh! Important notify about your e-mail account. From: noreply@telecom-digest.org [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This not so funny spam showed up in my mailbox here at MIT on Friday. PAT] Dear user of e-mail server "Telecom-digest.org", We warn you about some attacks on your e-mail account. Your computer may contain viruses, in order to keep your computer and e-mail account safe, please, follow the instructions. For details see the attach. Sincerely, The Telecom-digest.org team http://www.telecom-digest.org [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There then followed a particularly nasty virus the 'Telecom-digest.org team' sent out around the net to everyone. NASTY IGNORANT PEOPLE DOING THIS.! 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #119 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 13 14:30:02 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2DJU2922855; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 14:30:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 14:30:02 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403131930.i2DJU2922855@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 #120 TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Mar 2004 14:30:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 120 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The End of Dial Tone Monoply (Archives Reprint - Don Kimberlin) SkyFILES: The Aftermath of DISH/Viacom (Monty Solomon) Re: Seen on a Manhole Cover (Fred Goldstein) Re: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? (dold@EverXHeard.usenet.us.com) Dial From Outlook (Saturnius) Re: Anybody Know About Broadband Over Power Lines? (Scott Dorsey) Re: Off Premise Extension (Scott Dorsey) Re: Caller ID for PC (Clarence Dold) Re: Last Laugh! Important notify about your e-mail (William Warren) 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: TELECOM Digest Editor Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 12:51:09 EST Subject: End of Dialtone Monopoly Fourteen years ago, in 1990, Donald Kimberlin presented an article to the Digest Archives on some of the massive changes which were starting to take place in the telecom industry and for this weekend I thought it might be worth a second look. PAT Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04352; 31 Aug 90 0:04 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa02297; 30 Aug 90 22:35 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac07282; 30 Aug 90 21:30 CDT Date: Thu, 30 Aug 90 20:30:07 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V10 #606 TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Aug 90 20:30:00 CDT Special: Dial Tone Monopoly Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson The End of the Dial Tone Monopoly [Donald E. Kimberlin] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 30 Aug 90 20:20:00 CDT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Organization: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL Subject: The End of the Dial Tone Monopoly Several weeks ago, one of our British colleagues here placed a good description of the current status of telephone services deregulation in the UK, and asked for a response that indicated the usual question of, "How is it over there?" The way here in the US is definitely different, but no one seemed to respond. It just might be that many US Digest readers don't yet understand. What follows is a short piece I recently prepared for an editor, and I hope it answers both kinds of parties: THE END OF THE DIAL TONE MONOPOLY By: Donald E. Kimberlin, Principal Consultant Telecommunications Network Architects Safety Harbor, FL August 12, 1990 While many Americans have been trained to believe that "dial tone" is the sacrosanct property of telephone companies, evidence is coming clear to show that "dial tone" is not a "natural monopoly." Saying this is certain to raise many hackles, but it is time we faced up to it: The "natural monopoly" view of providing Public Switched Telephone Network services on a local basis was valid in its 1913 context, when the Bell interests struck a deal to end their pillage of Indpendent telephone companies in the U.S. Technology and removal of the art of running a telephone network from the status of "trade secret" has changed all that. It's occurred so rapidly and in so many ways that few know of all the prongs now stuck into what was once a nicely-closed pie. Even though it was published, few took note that in 1984, the departing Chairman of the FCC said in a speech that since the demonopolization of long distance service had been accomplished, the time had come to work on breaking up the local telephone monopoly. Nobody reported that speech, except the general press the following day. It was obvious the Chairman had touched on a taboo of the telephone business. Despite the fact that the FCC's Open Network Architecture mandate has gone on and continues to move, nobody wants to face up to what it really means: Detaching the dial tone of the local network from the wires of the local telephone company, separating the two such that the dial tone is put on somebody else's transmission channel, or connecting the local telephone company's wire to somebody else's dial tone. That's not any technological breakthrough. It's been possible for decades. The single thing that made the dial tone and transmission channel inseparable was the lack of "somebody else" being around to do it with. Well, that's all changed, in more ways than one might think. Let's run through a few of the possibilities that really could happen today ... but for the desire of "somebody else" to take up the cudgel and push the matter into full visibility. There are some historical backgrounds to the alternatives that may be worth knowing about; these often have roots in history of things the monopoly-era telephone business didn't care too much about. They are generally exemplified in reasons behind the FCC's 1947 and 1948 decisions that opened radio-paging and use of microwave radio to non-Telcos. (That's right, we're here talking of temblors some four decades prior to the eruption of nearly unbridled competition in "the phone business.") For the most part, the Bell interests had so narrowly focused their business that even though they claimed anything moving information was their birthright, there were numerous items they handled in only the most marginal of ways. Among these was telephone service to ships in coastal waters, several earlier versions of mobile telephone service, various forms of telegraphy, burglar alarm services and others. For the most part, other firms engaged these markets, particularly in the 65% of the land area of the U.S. covered by non-Bell "Independent" telephone companies, which focused totally on telephone business. In that large territory, almost all non-telephone aspects of telecommunications were provided by private, often local business. These almost all used some form of radio in their business and became known as Radio Common Carriers (RCC's). We can thus see the roots of the FCC policy of two competing cellular companies in every market reaching back into these RCCs. In fact, McCaw Cellular, one of the larger "non-wireline" cellular operators, was a long-standing RCC in the pre-divestiture era. In that era of the "natural monopoly," there was more "patching" and "hauling" of dial tone on RCC facilities than ever made official print. Where it was of note, the Telcos treated it as "private," not as a connection of their PSTN to another common carrier. The point was that the only breach in the wall was the connection of "foreign apparatus" at the extremity of the local network; the bond between dial tone and local telco wire remained intact. The traffic truth was that telcos accounted for less than half of the stations and traffic with boats and aircraft, and as the famous Huber report showed, less than a third of paging and mobile radio operations. Much of that had already extended the "dial tone" into non-Telco hands. That situation was stable for several decades, but it ultimately did wind up today with dial tone coming from non-wireline cellular carriers and even dial marine VHF shore stations that are now all private. The "hauling" of dial tone we can readily see today as microwave bypass, but it has also gone a giant step beyond. In a case that no Telco-employed "consultant" will tell about (it's doubtful they have been "trained" on it), Arco Oil Company put in its own private microwave from downtown Dallas, Texas to its corporate headquarters in suburban Richardson, about ten miles away. Arco's reason: Dissatisfaction with the performance levels of GTE of Texas, the "natural monopoly" dial tone supplier for Richardson. The microwave hauled Southwestern Bell dial tone from downtown Dallas to Richardson. To reach Arco, all one did was dial a Dallas number. The dial tone on Arco's PBX was SW Bell, not GTE. When Arco's "illegal action" was discovered, GTE of course wanted its brother in the cloth, Southwestern Bell to disconnect the dial tone. Both telcos got the Texas utility regulators to order them to disconnect, but Arco is no stranger to court action. Arco immediately went to the FCC, arguing that the dial tone was only incidental to connections containing a high proportion of interstate traffic, which was beyond the purview of the Texas State regulators. The result: The FCC ordered Southwestern Bell to maintain dial tone supply to Arco's microwave channels to Richardson, to provide interstate calling service. GTE and Southwestern Bell appealed, and after several years in the Federal Appeals courts, GTE and SW Bell lost again in early 1990, with but one step left: The U.S. Supreme Court. It is unlikely that GTE or SW Bell want to risk a Supreme Court decision after the several slaps they have suffered on their way to the Supreme Court; they doubtful would want to be responsible for it becoming wide public knowledge that the "natural monopoly" for a dial tone is really no longer supported by the US government and its courts. An outfall of this is that if you have the means and desire, you can really carry in a dial tone from wherever you want. That opens a wealth of possibilities. It means that anyone who has the means to provide transmission to your premises can import a dial tone from whatever local telco network they want. The issue to settle is if they can SELL it to you. This portends a boon to independent Telcos located in the hinterlands who want to engage in selling their dial tone to people a thousand miles away. (And if you REALLY understand the true love/hate relation between Bell and Independent Telcos in the US, you'll see that's not a flight of fancy!) Who would sell this dial tone? The first moves have already been made in England, where instead of simply demonopolizing long distance, the government authorized a "duopoly," permitting England's globe-spanning Cable & Wireless to establish Mercury Communications to provide local dial tone as well. Mercury has done so in more than one way. In the major cities, Mercury immediately pulled fiber into abandoned steam pipes and used Northern Telecom's telephone network architecture and equipment to pop electronic exchanges in service with a speed most telephone people would not understand. The Mercury network was operational almost overnight, in typical telephone capital plan terms. And, Mercury offered services that British Telecom hadn't thought of, like Centrex, intrinsically available in the NT equipment, but not in BT-controlled designs, even the fabled System X. In less-dense areas, Mercury used existing technology to use vacant capacity in cable TV systems to reach telephone subscribers. The latter method has been slow to expand, but not for technical limits as much as economic disagreement with the cable operators. The implication for the U.S. is obvious: Your local cable TV company has the transmission plant in place to become the "other phone company in town." The technology to get telephone channels on the present coaxial cble plant exists; there is no need for a "fiber rebuild" to handle the need. Existing unused capacity in many US cable TV systems offers in the order ot 50,000 lines of capacity in every cable passing every building. The "fiber" story is chanted by Telcos, because they need fiber to get their capacity up to be able to compete in wideband data and television carriage. Adding fiber to the cable TV systems is just a convenience and modernization to their plant. In fact, in many disparate areas of the nation, cable TV companies have quietly sold telephone and data channel capacity for years, some even interconnected between cable companies for distances in excess of 100 miles, and channels up to T-1 digital rate. Again, these are not applications stories your Telco-paid "consultant" is likely to tell you about, but they are not secret nor are they illegal. Carrying a dial tone down them is no great technology problem at all. Another front of the attack on the "dial tone monopoly" exists in the buzzword "co-location" now being raised more loudly by another new form of competition to the local Telcos, the Alternative Access Carriers. The AACs are typically local fiber optic network providers such as the Metropolitan Fiber Systems now building in more than 20 cities around the nation, with nearly parallel competition from Teleport Communications in most of the same cities, while there are a number of unpublicized regional local fiber companies, like Florida's Intermedia Communications. Williams Telecommunications Group headquartered in Tulsa, OK seems to be making moves to acquire some of these firms and as well build some plant of its own in cities. Another aspect of this incursion into the "local monopoly" may come from MCI, through its acquisition last year of the local facilities of Western Union Telegraph natiowide. My own work led to discovering miles of brand new Western Union conduit in the streets of Los Angeles late last year prior to the MCI purchase, while another recent revelation was discovery of *wooden* WUTCo conduits in Oklahoma City recently. All this is now MCI property, and its purpose is obvious; MCI's intent to use it is not yet so obvious. The AAC segment is following MFS's lead to get local Telcos ordered to permit interconnection of their channels to user premises to Telco dial tone. But, they have no need to wait for that. They can just as well import dial tone from wherever they want, for VSATs already make that practical. In fact, if the U.S. can get cheap computer data entry performed on Caribbean islands by VSAT link, what is there to prevent U.S. AACs from importing cheap dial tone via VSAT from them as well? Probably nothing, if anyone really looks into the possibility. And, most recent, we have alternative space-based potentials. Motorola's IRIDIUM is but one, and has recently been well-publicized and described. Less public is NASA's Personal Access Satellite System (PASS), which proposes to use techniques rather well-developed by the military for acquiring and tracking on geosynchronous satellites. PASS focuses on developing use of the 35 gigahertz portion of the spectrum where enormous dish gains are possible with 0.3 meter (12 inch!) dishes and tiny transportable earth stations, offering megabit-sized data streams to even the remotest of locations. Both IRIDIUM and PASS propose use of satellite "crosslinks," the satellite term for having the switching network in the sky with direct trunklines between satellites. So, you could readily be in Detroit but getting your dial tone from Auckland. In fact, what's to say there can't be a "virtual Centrex" located in satellites, so the "global corporation" can have a "global Centrex?" In this context of our ability to get a dial tone from anywhere at a cheap price, does it really seem so strange that we do it? The technology for much of it is already in hand; some of it has really already been used, and all of it is so close to accomplishment that we will be doing it soon. The largest obstacle is not in technology at all; it is in people's emotions and in vested economic interests of an industry that faces threats many of its most endangered species participants cannot even understand: America's local "natural monopoly" telephone companies. ---------------- (Historical afternote: One way to understand the way in which the "natural dial tone monopoly" has been fabricated and ingrained into minds in the U.S. is to read a book on the non-Bell "independent" telephone industry. This history has been documented several times this century, and the latest is titled, "The Spirit of Independent Telephony," by Charles A. Pleasance, 1989, ISBN 0-9622202-0-7. It indexes 37 U.S. cities that once had independent telcos competing with Bell, and I know of others that had multiple independent Telcos, some until after WW II. This history will surprise some when they learn that the Independent telcos even tried to form a non-Bell long distance network; one that Bell interests finally quashed with the formation of AT&T's Long Lines "department," really a shadow company that built the long-distance links and pooled the money collected for long distance calls. The point here is that the "natural monopoly" concept for dial tone is a fabrication that may have made sense in 1913, was driven home by vested interests, and today is obviously a dinosaur running out of food.) End of TELECOM Digest Special: Dial Tone Monopoly [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: (from 2004) And the above article is the way one man, Don Kimberlin, saw things as the 1990's got underway. Arco *had* been headquartered here in Independence for many years prior to their corporate relocation to Richardson, Texas and their 'discovery' at that point of the GTE service they would be 'stuck with'. But microwave transmission was nothing new to Arco at that point. They were also using microwave facilities for various purposes at their offices here in Independence. Their microwave 'wire room' was located in Room 217 in the Arco (now known as Independence Corporate Office) Building here, and in recent years was the offices of TerraWorld, our local ISP, which made use of some of the 'dishware' on the roof of the building left behind by Arco. TerraWorld expanded into telephone service (as Prairie Stream Communications) in 2002 and moved into basement quarters at the Arco Building where access to the house pairs and building LEC was more convenient for them. A small fire in the Arco Building on the second floor last year did some minor damage to the remains of the old 'wire room' in room 217. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 10:55:56 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: SkyFILES: The Aftermath of DISH/Viacom by Michael Hopkins Viacom and EchoStar have ended their skirmish. But was the dispute just the beginning of more challenges to come for the cable and satellite TV industry? The spat between the companies, concerning DISH Network's carriage of Viacom channels and CBS owned-and-operated nets, not only put the spotlight on the two entities. It opened up a Pandora's Box of issues for the entire pay-TV business. This week, consumers got a peek behind the curtain that divides them from the wizardry of multichannel programming. They've learned a lot about how "their" channels get chosen -- and they may begin to push for the chance to pick and choose only the channels they want instead of paying for dozens of channels they don't really care to watch. That could be troublesome for pay-TV services and programmers. http://www.skyreport.com/viewskyreport.cfm?ReleaseID=1342#Story4 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 08:47:25 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: Seen on a Manhole Cover chsvideo@hotmail.com (Lincoln J. King-Cliby) wrote, >fg> The LERG entries, which DSL Reports seems consistent with, are a bit >> strange. It shows 760-750 as an RSC ("remote switching center", the >> "large remote"), a remote node off of the San Marcos DMS-100 switch >> (which also has a lot of Vista prefix codes on it). An RSC can serve >> a few thousand lines, depending on load. It's run by the host >> switch's processor, with backhaul trunks to the host, but has its own >> internal switching matrix (and "emergency standalone" capabilities). >> It's theoretically possible to put a few trunks onto an RSC, but >> normally the trunks (to other switches) are all at the host. > Interesting ... out of curiosity by "few thousand" do you mean "less > than a prefix", "a prefix", or "a few prefixes"? (Further, must a > exchange exist entirely on a RSC or can it be split between the RSC > and the host switch?) Prefix codes nowadays are like DNS addresses; they can be flexibly pointed at whatever. They are portable between switches and carriers, though they are not geographically portable, which simply means that a given prefix is billed to a given place, no matter where the physical switch or customer is. Even absent number portability, number assignment is via a common pool in the host, so prefix codes are not really assigned to remotes. > There are very few true ISDN lines on campus as far as I am aware > (Beginning of this week: 15, end of this week: 11) and I'm fairly sure > that they're provisioned off of the PointSpan. > At one point in the past the campus was (POTS/Analog) Centrex based, A hA! That's probably why there's an RSC listed for that code. It was probably there for the Centrex. The Centrex was replaced but the LERG entry was not removed. The RSC itself might have been pulled out after the Centrex went away, if nobody else was using it. The LERG doesn't have to be accurate; trunks go to the host, so whatever the LERG (the source of all of this info) says about host-remote assignment is, well, merely informational. A carrier using the LERG will send 760-750 to the host, whether or not it's used at a remote, whether it's billed as San Marcos or Vista (both on the same switch). > but AFAIK everything is now provisioned off of the PointSpan ... I > think even the COCOTS (actually owned and operated by some 3rd party) > hang off of the PointSpan [When I called an ANAC on one of them I got > a 760-750-xxxx number, and our Telephone Services people will assign > #s anywhere from -0001 to -9999 off of the PointSpan]. The code has probably been rerouted to your PBX, via the host. > For what it's worth, I think the "Large Remote" lives in the > "Telecommunications Building" which is located between two of our > parking lots and about the size of a _small_ apartment ... I know > where the various bits of the PointSpan live on campus, and that isn't > it. Also, all of the copper bundles that (I'm assuming) used to come > into campus from the "outside" have been hacked off right inside the > cable vault and abandoned in place. Connections to the outside world > appear to be entirely fiber-based, with the exception of the one coax > for "my" CATV service. Hmmm, more evidence that the remote has been redeployed someplace else. >>> ...What gives -- why to we have a GTE manhole out there? >> Most likely, the campus just happened to be on a backbone route to GTE's >> territories, which are scattered all over southern California, including >> the valley north of San Marcos, in western Riverside County. > Aha, I guess I had assumed that GTE would either use some wireless > method or route their traffic over "someone else's" network between > territories rather than resorting to their own backbone ... don't ask > me why ... Nobody uses wireless nowadays to serve wireline except for *very* remote routes. It's all glass. Toll revenues are divided among carriers based on who owns how much of the toll network, so GTE had good reason to do their own hauling. A lot of smaller telcos meet the Bell at the exchange boundary, but GTE could afford to pull more. > And to make this even sadder, I live in a GTE (well, GTE dba > Verizon) area in southwestern Riverside County 909-69x -- I guess it > seemed so far out of place. > Thanks for your reply! > Lincoln ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 10:01:18 EST Subject: Re: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? In a message dated Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:03:56 EST, TELECOM Digest Editor ptownson@telecom-digest.org writes: > Its up to you to make sure the local dialup number is truly local or > in your calling area. The same thing is true on AOL. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ From: dold@EverXHeard.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 16:48:28 UTC Organization: a2i network TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > month, you can get the PeoplePC Online 'Accelerated' version where They, or at least the name and the kid in the ads on TV, have been around for a while. A couple of years ago you could get a PC and internet service for $29.95 per month, with a new PC every year or two. I think they gave up on that one, and just offer the ISP service now. I have no experience with them. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well that child on television is with a group known as 'Net Zero', and they say they are traveling all around the USA encouraging people to take the 'NetZero Challenge', and he informs us there is no reason guys would not want to get involved. Is NetZero the same as PeoplePC Online? PAT] ------------------------------ From: saturnius@gmx.net (saturnius) Subject: Dial From Outlook Date: 13 Mar 2004 09:02:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hello, I am looking for a product that connects a standard telephone with MS Outlook. I was just wondering whether there is a standard telephone with a serial/USB/Bluetooth interface and an Outlook plugin. I would like to use the Outlook Contacts but also keep my standard telephone. Is there something like this? ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Anybody Know Anything About Broadband Over Power Lines? Date: 13 Mar 2004 09:11:00 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Matt Simpson wrote: > Does anybody know anything about broadband service provided over power > lines? It's basically an impractical idea. Power lines are not exactly the constant-impedance at very high frequencies. Currently there are systems to run 50 baud and 110 baud data over long-distance transmission lines for switch control and signalling, but much more than that isn't reliable. The folks promoting BPL are mostly promoting it for last-mile access in rural areas, which is in fact the place where the lines are least going to be able to handle any sort of impressed carriers. > I'm in an area where cable and DSL are not available, and I'm not > really thrilled with the satellite option. I've been reading about > powerline broadband, which until recently seemed mostly experimental, > and hoping it would catch on. Sadly, you will probably also be in a location where BPL won't be available for a long time either. The whole notion of using the low voltage power system for distributing RF is a bad one. You might be more likely to find reasonably priced satellite network service soon. > Now I'm reading reports that Cinergy is starting to roll the service > out to their customers in the Cincinnati are (not geographically far > from me). > http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/03/02/biz_biz1acin.html Give it some time and see how this one plays out. It's going to be interesting to see if they can make the system work at all without totally wiping out AM radio in the process of providing intermittent service to small areas. But we'll see. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Off Premise Extension Date: 13 Mar 2004 09:12:56 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Michael Muderick wrote: > He'll be using a Panasonic wireless system that has an auto-attendant > built-in so calls can be routed to any of 3 extensions. Is there any > way around Centrex? The houses are less than a 1/2 mile apart. Does > Verizon offer just a dry pair, or loop between two locations? That > would be ideal. In some areas you can still get dry pairs, but it depends on the local infrastructure. Ask the telco to connect you with whoever handles radio loops and burglar alarm circuits. It may take a good while to find the right person, but once you do manage to get him, ask about 48F circuits. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: dold@CallerXIDX.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Caller ID for PC Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 16:54:24 +0000 (UTC) Organization: a2i network J Kelly wrote: > Does anyone know of an inexpensive device for Caller ID on a PC that > plugs into either a COM port or a USB port? I can't seem to find an > inexpensive PCI modem that does CID, I've gone through 5 now that > claim to, but they never work (damned winmodems!). I want to avoid > using the old USR Sportster external modem due to the size, I'm hoping > to find something more compact. My USRobotics 56K Voice PCI shows caller ID, both with the software that came with it, and the built in Fax driver with WinXP. With WinXP, when the phone rings, there is a pop up, noting that a call is coming in from XXX-XXX-XXXX, would I like to answer it as a fax machine? It came bundled in the Dell PC when I bought it, so I don't know how expensive it is as a retail item. Why not get a $10 caller ID device at Target, and plug it in to the "phone" port of your modem? Or are you trying to do some computer work with the CID? Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Important notify about your e-mail account. Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 14:15:39 GMT wrote in message news:telecom23.119.14@telecom-digest.org: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This not so funny spam showed up in > my mailbox here at MIT on Friday. PAT] > Dear user of e-mail server "Telecom-digest.org", > We warn you about some attacks on your e-mail account. Your computer > may contain viruses, in order to keep your computer and e-mail account > safe, please, follow the instructions. > For details see the attach. > Sincerely, > The Telecom-digest.org team http://www.telecom-digest.org > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There then followed a particularly > nasty virus the 'Telecom-digest.org team' sent out around the net to > everyone. NASTY IGNORANT PEOPLE DOING THIS.! PAT] Pat, It's just W32.Cone.D@mm, which is relatively benign. See http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.cone.d@mm.html for details. HTH. Bill Warren [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It may well be 'relatively benign' as you suggest. But I still do not like having things go out *under my name* which could harm or break up someone else's computer and have them think I said or did it. I guess it does not matter what I like or don't like. At first I thought it was sort of funny when those things came from 'microsoft updates' (as they still do), but now they also come from PFSR, and various other good organizations, usually disguised as a way to 'clear the viruses out of your computer', or 'prevent spam from reaching you'. Indeed ... just by rote teaching and suggestions I flush it all away, since I do not really know that much about computers or their innards. But I really feel sorry for the guys who know even less than myself about computers and feel that something which comes from 'microsoft security department' or PFSR must be for their own good and should be installed right away 'just as the people at Microsoft told me to do.' 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #120 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 14 02:12:25 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2E7CPl26561; Sun, 14 Mar 2004 02:12:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 02:12:25 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403140712.i2E7CPl26561@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 #121 TELECOM Digest Sun, 14 Mar 2004 02:12:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 121 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson One File Swapper per Lawsuit, Please (Monty Solomon) Broadband in Northern MI (Lincoln J. King-Cliby) Billed by AT&T for PNG (Fred Atkinson) Ham Domain Article (Fred Atkinson) President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (The Finger) Re: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? (Steven J Sobol) Re: SkyFILES: The Aftermath of DISH/Viacom (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: SkyFILES: The Aftermath of DISH/Viacom (ellis@no.spam) Re: Dial From Outlook (Gary Breuckman) Re: Anybody Know Anything About Broadband On Power Lines? (John Levine) Re: Last Laugh! Important notify about your e-mail (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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:53:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: One File Swapper, One Lawsuit By Katie Dean A federal judge ruled on Friday that the music industry cannot sue over 200 alleged file sharers in one swoop and that the companies must sue each defendant individually. The Recording Industry Association of America grouped 203 so-called "John Doe" defendants -- "John Doe" because their identities are not yet known -- into one lawsuit when it sued them in federal court in Philadelphia last month. All of those sued use Comcast as their Internet service provider. Since a federal court barred the RIAA from using the Digital Millenium Copyright Act to subpoena names of suspected copyright infringers in December, the recording industry has resorted to the "John Doe" method. The RIAA now must identify alleged file swappers by their Internet Protocol addresses, but does not know the individuals' names. On Friday, Judge Clarence Newcomer authorized a subpoena in the case of John Doe No. 1, because the RIAA had submitted a detailed case against the individual. But the judge ordered the music industry to file separate suits against the remaining 202 alleged infringers. Each of the lawsuits will be doled out to judges in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and the RIAA will have to make separate requests to seek the identity of each alleged file sharer. http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,62576,00.html ------------------------------ From: chsvideo@hotmail.com (Lincoln J. King-Cliby) Subject: Broadband in Northern MI Date: 13 Mar 2004 18:55:35 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hello again, My grandparents recently relocated their primary residence from central California to what has been their vacation place in Northern Michigan (St. Ignace to be percise) ... Their CO is literally a few hundred feet away from their home, and they had been told by an Ameritech/SBC/whatever the heck they are this month telemarketer that DSL was available [I was a -bit- suprised given how sparsely populated the area is], now it appears that it isn't. Cablemodem service also does not appear to be available. Any ideas for a low-cost (I.e. $<60/mo) broadband option that may be available for them? (They've experienced DSL. They like the speed.) The town library is also nearby, so if nothing else, two WiFi access points in a point-to-point configuration may be an option ... Thanks, Lincoln [By the way - I have heard from various places that St. Ignace was one of the last places to eliminate its cordboard in the late 60s ... any truth to this?] ------------------------------ Reply-To: Fred Atkinson From: Fred Atkinson Subject: Billed by AT&T for PNG Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 18:22:03 -0500 My landlady switched from AT&T to Power Net Global in September of last year. I know this is true because I helped her switch over. And she has been paying Power Net Global ever since. AT&T's collections people have been calling her. They sent her an invoice for calls allegedly made in the December/January timeframe, a time when her calls were going through Power Net Global. I've heard of being billed for the same calls by two different carriers, but not in a long time. Every time she calls to try to get this resolved, she get's transfered and transfered and transfered and nobody ever wants to take responsibility for helping her resolve the situation. She's called them every month since she receive the bill. She called again today and I got on the extension. We finally got through to a supervisor. He now claims that the calls were for September. She has a check that cleared to pay for that. Finally, we got his name, address, and telephone number (his name is Jack Davis). She is sending him a copy of her payment (a copy of a canceled check, I believe). Meantime, AT&T's collections people are calling her and hounding her and will not take that she's already paid as an answer. They say she has to contact AT&T and resolve that with them. I told Mr. Davis to make sure they stopped hounding her as my landlady is trying her best to get this resolved. It's sad she has to go through all of this just because no one at AT&T customer service is able to work with her to settle the matter. I have doubts that this is going to get it stopped. Does anyone have any suggestions? Fred [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T is the classic example of an unstoppable object meeting an unmoveable object. The company reaches some 'decision' and then things just start moving along and nothing seems to stop them. Nothing makes them go away. And if, by chance, someone at AT&T -- not their collection office; forget that bunch -- ever does take some pity on you and listen to what you are saying, you'll be the person expected to do the back track and the auditing, the required 'customer service' work to close the matter. Long ago I gave up on almost every telco of any size to accomplish anything. Not AT&T, certainly not Southwestern Bell. If your landlady has copies of past bills (either from AT&T or from Power Net Global), and cancelled checks for the same period of time (let's say September through December) I would make one final attempt to resolve it by sending a copy of each cancelled check and each bill for the months in question; two copies, one each to the collection people and one to the company with a note saying "We are paid in full, our file on this matter is now closed. If you contact us again further, by phone or letter, we will regard it as harassment." Maybe then they will let you alone. Oh, certified mail is the best way to send the letters. Or use "poor man's certified" which is called 'proof of mailing' and that only costs about fifty cents. You take the letter(s) to the post office and give them to a counter clerk. **DO NOT DEPOSIT THEM IN A MAIL BOX. THEY HAVE TO PHYSICALLY BE HANDED OVER TO A CLERK WHO PLACES THE POSTAGE ON THEM, APPLIES THE PROPER INDICIA AND KEEPS THEM IN HER/HIS POSSESSION.** You then get back from post office a slip of paper with indicia on it marked 'proof of mailing'. Certified or registered mail is much more expensive, and 'proof of mailing' works quite well and is much less expensive. After a few days, if the mail 'sticks' (that is, was not returned to the sender), the legal assumption is delivery was accomplished. Maybe that will clear this mess up for you. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: Fred, WB4AEJ From: Fred, WB4AEJ Subject: Ham Domain Article Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 18:23:44 -0500 Pat, I've noticed that there seems to be some ham radio operators on Telecom-Digest. So, I thought I'd send a blurb along about this. I've written an article showing a very inexpensive way to set up a ham radio domain on the Internet (Example: My call sign is WB4AEJ, therefore my ham radio domain is: http://www.wb4aej.com (or .net, or .org, etc.) and my email address is 'fred@wb4aej.com'. The URL to the article is: http://www.wb4aej.com/hamdomain. I have documented over 600 ham domain sites on the Internet (in the article) and most of them were done even without the aid of my article. But, if you're not sure how to get started doing this, my article is a good place to get help. It gives a step-by-step procedure that keeps the guesswork out of it. Also, Pat, I'd appreciate a link to this article on the Telecom Digest site if you are so inclined. Anyone else that can provide links to it on a Web site with ham related content please feel free to do so. I have some 'link to' graphics at http://www.wb4aej.com/hamdomain/faq.html#linkto if you want to use them. But, a text link would be appreciated as well. Thanks, Fred Atkinson, WB4AEJ ------------------------------ From: The Finger Subject: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 17:55:50 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - Tampa Bay Hello, fellow techies, An insidious plot is underway to bug the Internet. Many of you who have lost jobs know what bad news the Bush administration has been to the IT community. The story is getting even worse. President Bush wants to bug the Internet. He wants to read your email, see what you are downloading and find out what you are buying on Ebay. He also wants to listen in your VoiP calls. If you are as angry as I am, please call him or send a fax or email to: president@whitehouse.gov Phone: (202) 456-1414 Fax: (202) 456-2461 Please crosspost this article in other conferences you read. Justice, FBI Seek Rules for Internet Taps TED BRIDIS Associated Press WASHINGTON - Technology companies should be required to ensure that law enforcement agencies can install wiretaps on Internet traffic and new generations of digital communications, the Justice Department says. The push would effectively expand the scope of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, a 1994 law that requires the telecommunications industry to build into its products tools that U.S. investigators can use to eavesdrop on conversations with a court order. Fearful that federal agents can't install wiretaps against criminals using the latest communications technologies, lawyers for the Justice Department, FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration said their proposals "require immediate attention and resolution" by the Federal Communications Commission. They called wiretaps "an invaluable and necessary tool for federal, state, and local law enforcement in their fight against criminals, terrorists, and spies." "The ability of federal, state, and local law enforcement to carry out critical electronic surveillance is being compromised today," they wrote in legal papers filed with the FCC earlier this week. "Communications among surveillance targets are being lost ... These problems are real, not hypothetical." The FCC agreed last month to hold proceedings on the issue to "address the scope of covered services, assign responsibility for compliance, and identify the wiretap capabilities required." Critics said the government's proposal would have far-reaching impact on new communications technologies and could be enormously expensive for companies that need to add wiretap-capabilities to their products, such as push-to-talk cellular telephones and telephone service over Internet lines. The Justice Department urged the FCC to declare that companies must pay for any such improvements themselves, although it said companies should be permitted to pass those expenses on to their customers. Stewart Baker, a Washington telecommunications lawyer and former general counsel at the National Security Agency, complained that the government's proposal applies broadly to high-speed Internet service and puts limits on the introduction of new technology until it can be made wiretap-friendly. Baker said the plan "seeks to erect a brand new and quite extensive regulatory program" that gives the FBI and telephone regulators a crucial role in the design of future communications technologies. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 11:50:51 -0600 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelectronics.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: Re: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? PAT wondered about PeoplePC ... I used their internet service for a couple of years, until early 2003 when they switched to requiring a proprietary dialer program. PeoplePC got their start as a PC sales outfit that gave away internet access with their PCs; apparently they've unbundled the internet part now and dropped PC sales entirely. They were still selling them a year ago, though. You could buy a cheap PC from them for about what you'd pay for AOL dialup. The PCs were refurbished and/or last year's model and what you were actually getting was a 3-year installment sale. Still, it might have been useful for someone who had no money skills. If you're going to be paying AOL $29/mo. anyway, why not send it to these guys and get a PC in the bargain? Of course it's not much of a PC and you're locked in for several years. But what do you have after three years of AOL? WRT their internet service -- no complaints from me about price, reliability, or speed. I don't know if any of this changed when they went to the proprietary dialer because I can't use one of those so I never accessed the service in that configuration. There are cheaper ISPs out there for dialup access, though. Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com "If we imagined he could _find_ the car, we could pretend it might be fixed." - Calvin ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:34:22 -0600 dold@everxheard.usenet.us.com wrote: > TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: >> month, you can get the PeoplePC Online 'Accelerated' version where > They, or at least the name and the kid in the ads on TV, have been > around for a while. A couple of years ago you could get a PC and > internet service for $29.95 per month, with a new PC every year or > two. > I think they gave up on that one, and just offer the ISP service now. And I believe they resell Earthlink. > I have no experience with them. Me neither. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ "someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Earthlink has a division which is called 'Mail Station', which is an email only device that looks sort of like an electric typewriter. Subscribers get an internet address of name@mymailstation.com . If you have a Mail Station (you can buy them at Walmart and various places) they use dial-up to send and receive email. I think the price at Walmart, etc is around a hundred dollars for the device and a year of prepaid service on mymailstation.com if all you want is email, and yes, those folks get a truckload of spam in their email everyday also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 20:09:57 EST Subject: Re: SkyFILES: The Aftermath of DISH/Viacom In a message dated Sat, 13 Mar 2004 10:55:56 -0500 Monty Solomon writes: > by Michael Hopkins > Viacom and EchoStar have ended their skirmish. But was the dispute > just the beginning of more challenges to come for the cable and > satellite TV industry? > The spat between the companies, concerning DISH Network's carriage of > Viacom channels and CBS owned-and-operated nets, not only put the > spotlight on the two entities. It opened up a Pandora's Box of issues > for the entire pay-TV business. > This week, consumers got a peek behind the curtain that divides them > from the wizardry of multichannel programming. The curtain was wide open for several months as Cox and ESPN fought over ESPN increases. Both sides ran TV commercials and full-page newspaper ads, and of course Cox threatened to take ESPN off Cox Cable. Probably they would have, too, Hardly a peek inside the curtain, but virtually a war noisily played out in public. It's not clear how the DISH-Viacom battle was any different, except that one of the players was a satellite service and the other was the cable company. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: ellis@no.spam Subject: Re: SkyFILES: The Aftermath of DISH/Viacom Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 03:55:17 -0000 Organization: S.P.C.A.A. In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > and they may begin to push for the chance to pick and choose > only the channels they want instead of paying for dozens of > channels they don't really care to watch. I've been wanting that chance for years and now that I've heard that ESPN is the most expensive "basic" cable channel I want it even more. I have no use for sports channels, shopping channels, channels that aren't in English, soap opera channels, or Fox News. So why am I paying for them? http://www.spinics.net/linux/ ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Re: Dial From Outlook Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 21:47:55 -0600 Organization: Puma's Lair - catbox.com In article , "saturnius" wrote: > Hello, > I am looking for a product that connects a standard telephone with MS > Outlook. I was just wondering whether there is a standard telephone > with a serial/USB/Bluetooth interface and an Outlook plugin. I would > like to use the Outlook Contacts but also keep my standard telephone. Is > there something like this? There are other 'contact managers' that do well with this, ACT is the one that I use. Act will find a contact, dial the number for you (using the computer's modem), and will keep a log of all the calls with the notes you enter after the call. It will schedule a later call for followup, if you want it to. The only problem with ACT is that it's hard to do this with a multi-line telephone in an office environment, unless you can plug the modem into one of the lines on your telephone set. With a single line (or at least a less 'shared line large office' type setup, it's fairly easy. There are others besides ACT -- Goldmine is another, and there are contact managers for specific industries like PC-Law and Amicus for the legal profession. They are very similar to ACT, but keep different information and organize it in the format the profession finds more useful. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Mar 2004 04:04:41 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Anybody Know Anything About Broadband Over Power Lines? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> Does anybody know anything about broadband service provided over power >> lines? > It's basically an impractical idea. Power lines are not exactly the > constant-impedance at very high frequencies. Yup. It also turns out to be rather expensive. A transformer very efficiently filters out RF, so the power company has to put equipment on each transformer to bridge the data from one side to the other. In Europe, which I gather is where BPL was originally proposed, the voltages are higher and people live closer together, so you get over a hundred customers on a typical transformer. In the US, the average number is four. If you have to go out and add extra expensive equipment for every user or two, the economics are really bad. > The folks promoting BPL are mostly promoting it for last-mile access > in rural areas, which is in fact the place where the lines are least > going to be able to handle any sort of impressed carriers. Yes, and where you're going to have only one or two customers per transformer, making the economics even worse. 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: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Important notify about your e-mail account. Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:14:13 -0500 Organization: Bell Sympatico noreply@telecom-digest.org wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This not so funny spam showed up in > my mailbox here at MIT on Friday. PAT] > Dear user of e-mail server "Telecom-digest.org", > We warn you about some attacks on your e-mail account. Your computer > may contain viruses, in order to keep your computer and e-mail account > safe, please, follow the instructions. > For details see the attach. > Sincerely, > The Telecom-digest.org team http://www.telecom-digest.org > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There then followed a particularly > nasty virus the 'Telecom-digest.org team' sent out around the net to > everyone. NASTY IGNORANT PEOPLE DOING THIS.! PAT] (1) It's not spam, it's a virus (Bagle, version j and later); someone who has your e-mail address on their system has been infected and you're the lucky recipient of a gift from them. (2) You haven't been singled out - the virus uses one of several templates, and fill in the text using the recipient's domain name (i.e., when sending itself to joe@foo.com it would say "Sincerely, The foo.com team http://www.foo.com") 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #121 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 14 22:49:51 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2F3npu03892; Sun, 14 Mar 2004 22:49:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 22:49:51 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403150349.i2F3npu03892@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 #122 TELECOM Digest Sun, 14 Mar 2004 22:50:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 122 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson TV Changing Rapidly, Viewers Try to Adjust (Monty Solomon) Hoax Soaks Aliso Viejo (Monty Solomon) Shock Jocks My Fly Free with Satellite Radio (Monty Solomon) Re: Snapshots in Time (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Caller ID for PC (J Kelly) Re: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? (J Kelly) Re: SkyFILES: The Aftermath of DISH/Viacom (Tony P.) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (William Warren) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Mark Crispin) 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, 14 Mar 2004 13:05:47 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TV Changing Rapidly, Viewers Try to Adjust By DAVID BAUDER AP Television Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- The natural rhythms of television used to be as dependable as leaves sprouting in spring and falling in autumn. Broadcast networks would premiere new shows in mid-September, then replace failures when the weather turned cold. Summer was rerun season. Prime-time schedules rarely changed. Those days are long gone. Series pop up and disappear anytime, dispatched around the schedule like chess pieces. Some shows are rerun all the time, others never. You can't even count on a show to start at the top of an hour anymore. For ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox, plus upstarts WB and UPN, the landscape is changing rapidly. The reasons include viewers' lackluster response to the current season, cable continuing to grab viewers and awards, and the hyper-competitiveness of TV executives. For viewers, their trusted TV sets can be confusing. Here's a look at how things are changing and why: http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200403092003_APO_V0089 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:27:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Hoax Soaks Aliso Viejo City officials fall for an Internet prank and draft a law to curb the risks of dihydrogen monoxide. By William Wan, Times Staff Writer In large quantities, dihydrogen monoxide can cause medical problems in humans and even destroy property. But in Aliso Viejo, it's only causing red faces. Officials of the south Orange County city were embarrassed to learn Friday that they had tripped over an Internet hoax about dihydrogen monoxide -- commonly known as water -- in an effort to be environmentally correct. A proposed law that was scheduled to go before the City Council next week would have banned foam cups and containers at events requiring city permits. A staff report cited environmental concerns, including the danger posed by dihydrogen monoxide, described as a chemical used in production of the plastic that can "threaten human health and safety." http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-me-water13mar13,1,7644732.story ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:48:56 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Shock Jocks May Fly Free With Satellite Radio By Franklin Paul NEW YORK, March 14 (Reuters) - The maelstrom over indecency at the big U.S. radio conglomerates could propel "shock jocks" like Howard Stern to the freer air of satellite radio, but such a move would likely mean smaller audiences and thinner paychecks. Satellite radio, a nascent business with fewer than 2 million subscribers who pay about $10 a month to hear shows broadcast coast to coast, is being painted as an oasis of artistic freedom in light of a crackdown by federal regulators against indecent broadcasts. Already, dozens of personalities, ranging from hip-hop trailblazer DJ Red Alert to rock radio veteran Kid Kelly, have set up camp on Sirius Satellite Radio Inc.'s (NASDAQ:SIRI) music system, whose programs are so far unregulated by Washington. Potentially, that could be a boon for Stern, whose popular syndicated daily show was dumped last month by six stations owned by Clear Channel Communications Inc. (NYSE:CCU) after a caller asked Stern's guest if he had ever had sex with a famous black woman, using offensive language. Congress is currently debating a law that would sharply stiffen fines on indecency on radio and TV, and Stern, whose show features raunchy and explicit humor, could be slammed with major penalties if the measure passes. Stern's misfortune may be good news for the satellite radio industry, according to independent media analyst Jack Myers. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40817473 ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 20:27:09 EST Subject: Re: Snapshots in Time On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 19:27:24 -0800 Al Gillis wrote: > That's interesting, Wes ... First, I couldn't even imagine such a > feat, then I hear it's not unique! Well, I guess those Texans were > gutsy, too! > Do you have any additional information about this move? About when > did it take place? Where in Dallas was the building located? Any > web resources available to see photos or read accounts of the move? > Thanks!! > Al I posted an inquiry on another list where there are a lot of Southwestern Bell retirees (yes, it's SBC now, but wasn't necessarily when they retired). This is the gist of what I wrote in my inquiry, including what I remembered: "The Dallas Automatic Telephone Company had been moved in service for a street widening project. It's been a long time ago that I heard about it [I heard about it shortly after I went to work for SWBT in Dallas] and I know there was a lot written about it over the years, but I don't know where tho look now. "At the time I went to work for SWBT the Dallas Automatic Telephone Company was still standing, with "D.A.T.Co." and the date in a stone over the lintel. The D.A.T.Co. had apparently been part of SWBT for many years, and the step-by-step equipment in it was still serving part, perhaps most, of downtown Dallas as that time. "There were very detailed stories about how the move was made and how carefully and slowly. Can anyone recall any of the details or tell me where I could look? It was, as I recall, a very interesting operation and well documented." (The building was adjacent to what was then the state headquarters building at 308 S. Akard in Dallas, and the D.A.T.Co. C.O. served much or all of downtown Dallas.) Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com I got several replies, of which this one was the most complete and fits in with what I remember: If memory serves me right the building was moved about 15 - 20 feet. There are pictures that were taken at the time. Public Relations had access to the pictures along with the numerous shots of construction of what is now 3 SBC Plaza (Riverside CO). When I saw the pictures they showed that the exchange had been jacked up and was supported on beams with some type of wheels. It moved very, very slowly; inch by inch over something in excess of a week. This was a stone or brick building, so very, heavy, let alone being full of SxS equipment and operators (yes they worked while the building was moved). This is strictly from memory of reading about this event once; these facts need to be checked! ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Caller ID for PC Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 19:44:58 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 16:54:24 UTC, dold@CallerXIDX.usenet.us.com wrote: > Why not get a $10 caller ID device at Target, and plug it in to the > "phone" port of your modem? Becuase the desk has enough devices sitting on it, and I like the pop-up CID software I have. I just got a new cordless phone so the old one that also had CID moved to the computer room, so I guess that solves my dillema for the most part. I will miss the logging that the software did, but I guess I'll live. Thanks for the reply. ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 19:42:00 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:34:22 -0600, Steven J Sobol wrote: > dold@everxheard.usenet.us.com wrote: >> TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: >>> month, you can get the PeoplePC Online 'Accelerated' version where >> They, or at least the name and the kid in the ads on TV, have been >> around for a while. A couple of years ago you could get a PC and >> internet service for $29.95 per month, with a new PC every year or >> two. >> I think they gave up on that one, and just offer the ISP service now. > > And I believe they resell Earthlink. AFAIK they have nothing to dowith Earthlink, but they lease the dialup network from various carriers (Qwest, Sprint, etc). Many ISP's these days are "Virtual ISP's" that buy dialup service wholesale from 7 or 8 national networks. The wholesale price seems to be in the neighborhood of $5-10/user/month depending on the number of customers. I've noticed that there are about a dozen different ISPs in my area that all use the same dial up number (including Earthlink and AOL) which is a Qwest wholesale dial up number. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ditto here in Independence. Almost all of the resellers go through one of the TerraWorld dialups regardless of what they call themselves. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: SkyFILES: The Aftermath of DISH/Viacom Organization: ATCC Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 21:01:26 GMT In article , ellis@no.spam says: > In article , > Monty Solomon wrote: >> and they may begin to push for the chance to pick and choose >> only the channels they want instead of paying for dozens of >> channels they don't really care to watch. > I've been wanting that chance for years and now that I've heard that > ESPN is the most expensive "basic" cable channel I want it even more. > I have no use for sports channels, shopping channels, channels that > aren't in English, soap opera channels, or Fox News. So why am I > paying for them? Because if they didn't spread the cost among ALL their subscribers the cost to that segment who regularly enjoys having all the sports channels would bear an unreasonable cost. It wouldn't be a viable market for ESPN. ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 05:28:30 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications The Finger wrote: > Hello, fellow techies, > An insidious plot is underway to bug the Internet. Many of you who > have lost jobs know what bad news the Bush administration has been to > the IT community. The story is getting even worse. President Bush > wants to bug the Internet. He wants to read your email, see what you > are downloading and find out what you are buying on Ebay. He also > wants to listen in your VoiP calls. If you are as angry as I am, > please call him or send a fax or email to: > president@whitehouse.gov > Phone: (202) 456-1414 > Fax: (202) 456-2461 You think Bushman cares about what you or I think? Your best message is your vote this coming November. ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 16:24:20 GMT "The Finger" wrote in message news:telecom23.121.5@telecom-digest.org: > Hello, fellow techies, > An insidious plot is underway to bug the Internet. [snip] Three boxes protect your freedom: soap, cartridge, and ballot. Three letters protect your privacy: GPG. See http://www.gnupg.org/. HTH. Bill ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 10:07:26 -0800 Organization: University of Washington If you are going to push this sort of thing, then you should also post that John Kerry is a big supporter of key escrow. He was a co-sponsor of S.909, the Secure Public Networks Act of 1997, which fortunately did not pass. S.909 was one of those deceptively-written laws that made it appear to be legal to use keys that were not escrowed with the government, but which so narrowly limited the circumstances in which non-escrowed keys were legal that the exemption was meaningless. Ironically, John Ashcroft's counter-proposal that year, S.2067, was to allow strong encryption for everybody without government back doors. That didn't pass either, but a substantially similar encryption policy ended up being adopted. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Purely IMO, purely ... but the only really good politicians I would vote for or support are the Libertarians, however let's face it, they do not stand a chance in hell of ever getting elected. The Demopublicans and the Rebublicrats have things so tied up (and they are essentially the same regards oppressive government legislation, etc) no one else ever gets a chance at it. And when a third party candidate comes along who is at all popular with a large number of people, (i.e. Ralph Nader) then the Demopublicans all grouse about how the new comer is going to spoil the election for the others. What is it they are saying now about Nader running (once again) for office? "He is going to guarentee that Bush gets elected again!" Too bad our political system has to be so corrupted here in the USA. 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #122 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 15 16:41:59 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2FLfwG10927; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 16:41:59 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 16:41:59 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403152141.i2FLfwG10927@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 #123 TELECOM Digest Mon, 15 Mar 2004 16:42:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 123 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #424, March 15, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Dial From Outlook (RC@mail2.sol.net) Re: Dial From Outlook (Scott Dorsey) Re: Caller ID for PC (Clarence Dold) Re: Caller ID for PC (Tony P.) Re: Broadband in Northern MI (yeltrabnhoj@email.com) Re: Thanks For the Norvergence Red Flags! (Richard Ramirez) Re: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? (Dave Close) 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, 15 Mar 2004 11:17:49 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #424, March 15, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 424: March 15, 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: ** Nortel Delays Results Again ** Wireless Net Launched Near Ottawa ** Major ISPs Sue Spammers ** FCC Proposes Rules for Internet Telephony ** Court Won't Hear Cities' Appeal ** CGI Acquires U.S. Firm ** Spectrum Cap, AWS Comments Posted ** Private Label ISP Tariff Okayed ** Aliant Seeks Centrex Rate Hike ** CRC Assists Wireless R&D ** RIM Sees Carrier Base Doubling ** Toronto Telemarketers Plead Guilty ** French Retailer Buys 40,000 Mitel Phones ** SharcNet Expands ** Wireless Internet Domain Proposed ** Call Centre Meeting to Feature Angus Speakers ============================================================ NORTEL DELAYS RESULTS AGAIN: Nortel Networks says it is again revising its past results, and that this will force it to postpone filing financial statements for 2003, possibly past the March 30 deadline set in covenants for US$3.6 billion in debt. (See Telecom Update #414) WIRELESS NET LAUNCHED NEAR OTTAWA: The wholesale broadband wireless service launched in Richmond B.C. last week (see Telecom Update #423) is now also available in Cumberland, a rural area 30 km east of Ottawa. As in B.C., Allstream and Microcell are offering retail Internet access using the service. ** AOL Canada says it will conduct a service trial using the new network in Toronto "in coming months." MAJOR ISPs SUE SPAMMERS: America Online, Earthlink, Microsoft, and Yahoo have sued 200 alleged spammers under the U.S. anti-spam law that went into effect in January. The defendants include three Kitchener, Ontario men accused of sending 94 million e-mails in January alone. FCC PROPOSES RULES FOR INTERNET TELEPHONY: The U.S. Federal Communications Commission has issued a 97-page "Notice of Proposed Rule Making" for voice services over the Internet. Comments are due in 60 days. http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243868A1.pdf ** In a separate NPRM, the FCC has asked for comments on how to protect mobile phone users from spam and unwanted telemarketing calls. http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244843A1.pdf COURT WON'T HEAR CITIES' APPEAL: The Federal Court of Appeal has dismissed an application by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and several major cities to appeal CRTC Telecom Decision 2003-82 (see Telecom Update #417), in which the Commission says it may review and change municipal access agreements between carriers and cities on a case-by-case basis. ** Allstream says it will file submissions with the CRTC by April 12, resuming the company's request for amendments to its agreements with Toronto and Calgary. FCM has asked the CRTC to postpone these submissions, because it has filed a motion asking the court to reconsider. CGI ACQUIRES U.S. FIRM: CGI Group has agreed to buy Virginia- based American Management Systems, a U.S. computer services firm with annual revenue of about C$900 million. As part of the deal, AMS defence business in the U.S. will be sold to a third party. CGI's net acquisition cost is about $586 million. ** CGI will issue about $330 million in new shares to finance the deal. BCE will buy about 20%, reducing its stake in CGI by a percentage point. SPECTRUM CAP, AWS COMMENTS POSTED: Industry Canada has posted the comments it received in response to a consultation paper on several spectrum policy issues, including lifting the current cap on the amount of spectrum PCS/cellular companies are allowed to hold, and when to allocate spectrum for Advanced Wireless Services. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.nsf/vwGeneratedInterE/h_sf08089e.html PRIVATE LABEL ISP TARIFF OKAYED: The CRTC has approved a customer-specific tariff under which Bell Canada will provide a turnkey service enabling the unnamed customer to act as a virtual Internet Service Provider. The tariff includes a minimum volume commitment of 3,000 end-users. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2004/o2004-68.htm ALIANT SEEKS CENTREX RATE HIKE: Aliant has asked the CRTC to increase Centrex rates by $2/month/local, for customers in Newfoundland & Labrador, Nova Scotia and PEI with fewer than 1,500 accesses and no term contract, and for all monthly rated Centrex customers in New Brunswick. The change would not affect Brunswick BCS. www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2004/A53.htm#200401828 CRC ASSISTS WIRELESS R&D: Communications Research Centre Canada, and five other agencies have launched the Canada Network of Wireless Centres (CWCnet), which will provide infrastructure, training, and research support to Canadian small and medium-sized enterprises seeking to bring wireless technology to market. CRC is an agency of Industry Canada. www.cwcnet.ca RIM SEES CARRIER BASE DOUBLING: Chairman James Basillie told a New York audience March 10 that Research In Motion's BlackBerry service is now offered by 50 carriers in 30 countries, and predicted that RIM will sign up another 50 carriers in the next 18 months. TORONTO TELEMARKETERS PLEAD GUILTY: A Competition Bureau investigation has led to a guilty plea from a Toronto telemarketing company accused of deceptive practices. Medical Discount Inc. was fined $125,000 for actions that included making unauthorized withdrawals from its U.S. clients' bank accounts. FRENCH RETAILER BUYS 40,000 MITEL PHONES: French big box retailer Auchan will replace its existing telephone systems with Mitel's 3300 ICP. The contract, which covers some 200 locations, includes over 40,000 IP telephones, 10,000 of which will be wireless. SHARCNET EXPANDS: SharcNet, a high performance computing network linking five universities in southern Ontario, will expand to provide gigabit Ethernet connections to six colleges. The project is backed by a $19 million grant from the federal government's Canada Foundation for Innovation. WIRELESS INTERNET DOMAIN PROPOSED: Nine companies, including Nokia, Microsoft, and Hewlett Packard, are calling for creation of a specific domain name (possibly ".mobile") for websites designed for use by wireless devices. The group made their application to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers last week. CALL CENTRE MEETING TO FEATURE ANGUS SPEAKERS: ICCM Canada, Canada's premier contact centre event, will be held in Toronto, April 19-21. The agenda will feature several top analysts from Angus Dortmans Associates and Angus TeleManagement Group. ** Henry Dortmans and Michael Dunne will conduct a half-day tutorial on business skills for contact centre managers, and both will moderate panel discussions. ** Ian Angus will open the conference with a talk on the state of the call centre industry in Canada. ** Lis Angus will moderate a panel on key performance indicators. ** John Riddell will lead a session on speech recognition. For information on ICCM Canada, go to www.iccmcanada.com/iccmcanada/V40/index.cvn?id=10000&p_navID=1 To register, call 1-800-265-5665 or go to www.iccmcanada.com/iccmcanada/V40/index.cvn?id=10014&p_navID=25 ============================================================ 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. ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: Subject: Re: Dial From Outlook Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 09:28:22 -0500 Organization: NNTP Servers - The best Usenet service available anywhere Act, Outlook, the others all use TAPI extensions to dial the phone. Outlook, depending on your version, will work with a standard modem as long as it has a jack for the phone. No special phone or software required. Gary Breuckman wrote in message news:telecom23.121.10@telecom-digest.org: > In article , "saturnius" > wrote: >> Hello, >> I am looking for a product that connects a standard telephone with MS >> Outlook. I was just wondering whether there is a standard telephone >> with a serial/USB/Bluetooth interface and an Outlook plugin. I would >> like to use the Outlook Contacts but also keep my standard telephone. Is >> there something like this? > There are other 'contact managers' that do well with this, ACT is the > one that I use. Act will find a contact, dial the number for you > (using the computer's modem), and will keep a log of all the calls > with the notes you enter after the call. It will schedule a later > call for followup, if you want it to. > The only problem with ACT is that it's hard to do this with a > multi-line telephone in an office environment, unless you can plug the > modem into one of the lines on your telephone set. With a single line > (or at least a less 'shared line large office' type setup, it's fairly > easy. > There are others besides ACT -- Goldmine is another, and there are > contact managers for specific industries like PC-Law and Amicus for > the legal profession. They are very similar to ACT, but keep > different information and organize it in the format the profession > finds more useful. ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Dial From Outlook Date: 15 Mar 2004 13:02:22 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) saturnius wrote: > I am looking for a product that connects a standard telephone with MS > Outlook. I was just wondering whether there is a standard telephone > with a serial/USB/Bluetooth interface and an Outlook plugin. I would > like to use the Outlook Contacts but also keep my standard > telephone. Is there something like this? Why would you want to use Outlook, when there are plenty of dialing packages out there? At worst you could export your outlook address book to one. Or are you looking for some new way to get more virus infections and spread them by telephone too? --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: dold@CallerXIDX.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Caller ID for PC Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 04:23:48 UTC Organization: a2i network J Kelly wrote: > Becuase the desk has enough devices sitting on it, and I like the > pop-up CID software I have. I just got a new cordless phone so the > old one that also had CID moved to the computer room, so I guess that > solves my dillema for the most part. I will miss the logging that the > software did, but I guess I'll live. Thanks for the reply. Why doesn't your popup work anymore? I missed that part. I thought you were looking for a modem where you never had success before. What OS are you running? As I mentioned, my USRobotics works, and they are among the cheapest of anything whose name I recognize. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Caller ID for PC Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 05:24:16 GMT In article , jkelly@newsguy.com says: > On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 16:54:24 UTC, dold@CallerXIDX.usenet.us.com wrote: >> Why not get a $10 caller ID device at Target, and plug it in to the >> "phone" port of your modem? > Because the desk has enough devices sitting on it, and I like the > pop-up CID software I have. I just got a new cordless phone so the > old one that also had CID moved to the computer room, so I guess that > solves my dillema for the most part. I will miss the logging that the > software did, but I guess I'll live. Thanks for the reply. Just FYI -- the HSP56 modems built into most PC's handle CLID just fine. You just need software to monitor it. Go to download.com and search on Caller ID. ------------------------------ From: yeltrabnhoj@email.com Subject: Re: Broadband in Northern MI Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 18:15:35 GMT Organization: (reverse to reply) (John Bartley, K7AAY, Portland OR) On 13 Mar 2004 18:55:35 -0800, chsvideo@hotmail.com (Lincoln J. King-Cliby) wrote: > Hello again, > My grandparents recently relocated their primary residence from > central California to what has been their vacation place in Northern > Michigan (St. Ignace to be percise) ... > Their CO is literally a few hundred feet away from their home, and > they had been told by an Ameritech/SBC/whatever the heck they are this > month telemarketer that DSL was available [I was a -bit- suprised > given how sparsely populated the area is], now it appears that it > isn't. Cablemodem service also does not appear to be available. > Any ideas for a low-cost (I.e. $<60/mo) broadband option that may be > available for them? (They've experienced DSL. They like the speed.) > The town library is also nearby, so if nothing else, two WiFi access > points in a point-to-point configuration may be an option ... www.pbs.org has several articles on P2P WiFi for impossible-last-miles situations. Search for Robert X. Cringlely, and then select his Pulpit articles. I think the first was in 2000 or 2001. > Thanks, > Lincoln > [By the way - I have heard from various places that St. Ignace was one > of the last places to eliminate its cordboard in the late 60s ... any > truth to this?] I worked a cord board in Naples for United Telephone of Florida, '72-'73, before I went to a switchroom, so cord boards persisted into the 70s, at least, in the Lower 48. We also had party lines, out into the Everglades, e.g., "Frog City 12." Nobody but a fool goes into a federal counterrorism operation without duct tape - Richard Preston, THE COBRA EVENT. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 10:11:08 -0800 (PST) From: Richard Ramirez Subject: Re: Thanks For the Norvergence Red Flags! So you never actually met with a rep and you really are just assuming what type of sales tactic they would use? Did you know that they leave all the documents with you for your review after the initial interview? They do not expect you to "sign on the spot" as you feared. Now, in all fairness, if you didn't like the phone call, then say that. If you had received a proposal that made no sense, then say that. But don't post that they used a high pressure sales tactic when you never even met with a rep. There is nothing wrong with a company not wanting to meet with an admin or secretary. Anybody with sales experience will tell you the importance of meeting with an authorized decision maker. It prevents the rep from wasting their (& the company's) time. That is sales 101. R.R. ------------------------------ From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close) Subject: Re: Ever Heard of PeoplePC Online? Date: 14 Mar 2004 22:06:37 -0800 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California Steven J Sobol writes: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Earthlink has a division which is > called 'Mail Station', which is an email only device that looks sort > of like an electric typewriter. Subscribers get an internet address > of name@mymailstation.com . If you have a Mail Station (you can buy > them at Walmart and various places) they use dial-up to send and > receive email. I think the price at Walmart, etc is around a hundred > dollars for the device and a year of prepaid service on mymailstation.com > if all you want is email, and yes, those folks get a truckload of > spam in their email everyday also. PAT] Well, actually the price starts about $200 and does not include service which is about $10 per month, less if paid a year in advance. Customers actually don't get much spam because the devices can't display HTML and so messages containing HTML are blocked. I bought a competing product called a Mailbug for my mother several years ago and she has been very happy with it. So far as I know, she has never received any spam through the service. It is still available. 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 is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #123 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 15 17:38:12 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2FMcCw11857; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:38:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:38:12 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403152238.i2FMcCw11857@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 #124 TELECOM Digest Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:38:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 124 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Network Security for Dummies", Chey Cobb (Rob Slade) AOL Embraces Social Networking (Monty Solomon) Renting to Record Has Its Attractions (Monty Solomon) Correcting the Cable Record (Monty Solomon) Linksys / Netopia Parental Control Services (Monty Solomon) Re: Seen on a Manhole Cover (Daniel Rudy) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Matt Simpson) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: PRI Voice T1 and CallerID Blocking (Scott Dorsey) Re: Strange Phone Number (Isaiah Beard) 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: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 07:53:41 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Network Security for Dummies", Chey Cobb BKNTSCDM.RVW 20031204 "Network Security for Dummies", Chey Cobb, 2003, 0-7645-1679-5, U$29.99/C$44.99 %A Chey Cobb chey@patriot.net %C 5353 Dundas Street West, 4th Floor, Etobicoke, ON M9B 6H8 %D 2003 %G 0-7645-1679-5 %I John Wiley & Sons, Inc. %O U$29.99/C$44.99 416-236-4433 fax: 416-236-4448 %O http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0764516795/robsladesinterne http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0764516795/robsladesinte-21 %O http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/0764516795/robsladesin03-20 %P 380 p. %T "Network Security for Dummies" Part one is entitled "The Path to Network Security." Chapter one is meant to be a start on network security, but instead is just a random collection of threats, network connection options, and security aphorisms. The material is both confused and confusing: in one paragraph we are told that you don't have to worry about viruses because virus writers only write viruses for Microsoft software so if you don't use Microsoft software you are safe but you can't live without using Microsoft software so you have to worry about viruses. Chapter two suggests taking an inventory of your computer hardware, software, and policies. The basics of risk management are presented in chapter three, and policies and procedures are explained in four. The outlines are not bad at all. Unfortunately, the sample policies are vague and generic. Part two supposedly turns to the network. Choosing security controls, in chapter five, is limited to an overly simplistic synopsis of antivirus software, firewalls, and intrusion detection systems (IDSs). There is a barebones list of US laws related to security in chapter six. Network components are enumerated in chapter seven. Part three looks at security mechanisms. The material in chapter five is slightly, but insufficiently, expanded as chapters eight, nine, and ten review antivirus, firewalls, and IDS, respectively. Chapter eleven lists commands for setting permissions under UNIX and Windows. Part four seems to be considered advanced security. Chapters twelve, thirteen, and fourteen provide some directions for hardening UNIX, Windows, and Mac systems, but the explanations are almost non- existent. Instead of dealing with the patching of applications, chapter fifteen mostly lists loopholes. Chapter sixteen describes virtual private networks, but the technical details that are given are irrelevant to an exegesis of how the technology actually functions. Basic but reasonable suggestions about making wireless networks slightly harder to get into are given in chapter seventeen. Electronic commerce needs special protection, says chapter eighteen, and mentions some Web security mechanisms. Part five deals with disaster recovery. Chapter nineteen suggests having a computer emergency response team. A slightly disorganized (and rather brief) look at disaster recovery is in twenty. Computer forensics gets a once over very, very lightly in twenty one. The traditional "Part of Tens" lists the ten best security practices, ten best Web sites (for once I agree with the antivirus recommendation), ten security tools, and ten questions to ask a security consultant. Overall, this book is not very good advice about network security, and would not be terribly helpful for improving security. But it does have some (a few) decent bits that provide skeletal outlines of some important security concepts. copyright Robert M. Slade, 2003 BKNTSCDM.RVW 20031204 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca rslade@sun.soci.niu.edu Without education we are in a horrible and deadly danger of taking educated people seriously. - G.K. Chesterton http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 12:25:00 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL Embraces Social Networking Tacking on instant messaging gives AOL a boost in the hot social networking scene. At other sites you communicate with your network of friends and colleagues via e-mail. By Michelle Johnson, 3/15/2004 'You've got social networking!" No, you won't hear that when you log onto America Online, but the "six degrees of separation" craze has arrived in the AOL universe. More specifically, it's arrived at ICQ Universe, a service recently launched by ICQ, which is owned by AOL. Social networking, popularized by sites such as Friendster, Ryze, and LinkedIn, allows you to meet people with connections. Think of it as a personal introduction service in which the people you meet know someone you know. Linking up in these so-called "trusted communities" has become a hot way for job seekers and business types to network, as well as for strictly social interaction such as finding a date or new friends. According to Yael Givon, ICQ's director of marketing, ICQ Universe is the first service to pair up instant messaging with social networking. AOL acquired ICQ (as in "I Seek You"), the first widely used instant messaging service, in 1998. As a worldwide service with 8 million active users and more than 175 million registered users, ICQ draws a wide mix of people from around the globe. The company's new ICQ Universe (universe.icq.com) uses an animated graphical interface to visually map out your "six degrees." So it puts a graphic of you and your particulars (name, age, profession, number of people in your universe) at the center of your network, with images of friends, family, and colleagues in orbit around you. You can upload a photo of yourself or use one of the cartoon-like mugs available in the Universe's image gallery. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/03/15/aol_embraces_social_networking/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 13:16:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Renting to Record Has Its Attractions By Daniel Greenberg Special to The Washington Post The inner workings of digital video recorders like TiVo and ReplayTV can be confusing, but not their basic point -- they put viewers back in charge of television, letting them pause, rewind and replay live TV and easily store far more shows than a stack of videotapes would allow. Now cable TV companies are getting in on the act. Instead of selling video recorders, at $150 and up, they're renting them: Subscribers to digital-cable services (required for this add-on) can pay a few more dollars a month to trade in their cable boxes for ones that include digital video recorders. In the Washington area, Comcast's recorder costs $9.95 a month -- since the recorder replaces the $3-a-month cable box, it adds only $7 to regular digital service -- while Cox's adds $9.99 to the bill. (Adelphia charges $8.95, plus a service fee, but offers this option only in Stafford County.) We tried Comcast's model over three weeks. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35513-2004Mar6.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 13:17:22 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Correcting the Cable Record The Washington Post We got a great example of why you should never assume anything last week, when we ran a correction on the review of Comcast's digital video recorder Reviewer Daniel Greenberg criticized this TiVo-esque device for not allowing viewers to watch one show while recording another. But within minutes of the start of my Web chat Monday afternoon, I had readers reporting that they could watch-while-recording on their own Comcast DVRs. Daniel -- a guy even more detail-obsessed than I am, which is both saying a lot and probably unhealthy -- confirmed that the model in his living room did not offer that feature. How could this be? The answer came from a Comcast publicist, who said Comcast subscribers in the District, Montgomery County and Prince George's County get the model of DVR that we reviewed, while those in Comcast's other service areas around here get a different model that includes two cable tuners. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55911-2004Mar13.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 10:57:00 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Linksys / Netopia Parental Control Services IRVINE, Calif. & EMERYVILLE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 15, 2004--Linksys, a division of Cisco Systems Inc. (Nasdaq:CSCO) and the leading provider of broadband, wireless and networking hardware for the consumer and Small Office/Home Office, and Netopia, Inc. (Nasdaq:NTPA), a market leader in broadband equipment and software, today announced they have teamed to offer a Parental Control Service to select Linksys home networking customers. Linksys will incorporate Netopia Parental Controls into its flagship Wireless-G Broadband Router with SpeedBooster (model number WRT54GS), which is now available nationwide at leading electronics superstores, through major online retailers, and other Linksys resellers. The Parental Control service uses a thin-client model, delivered on the Broadband Router, which functions as the "choke point" of Internet access going into a home. This solution automatically covers all Internet-capable devices (wired or wireless) on the home network and can deliver far stronger protection than desktop or ISP-based parental control software that is installed separately on each computer. While family-specific security functions are embedded in the WRT54GS, the core service is network-hosted in order to minimize deployment costs and offer the most robust features. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40821152 ------------------------------ From: Daniel Rudy Reply-To: dcrudy@invalid.pacbell.nospam.net.0123456789 Organization: SBC Internet Services Subject: Re: Seen on a Manhole Cover Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 11:27:53 GMT And somewhere around the time of 03/13/2004 05:47, the world stopped and listened as Fred Goldstein contributed the following to humanity: > chsvideo@hotmail.com (Lincoln J. King-Cliby) wrote, >>fg> The LERG entries, which DSL Reports seems consistent with, are a >>> bit strange. It shows 760-750 as an RSC ("remote switching center", the >>> "large remote"), a remote node off of the San Marcos DMS-100 switch >>> (which also has a lot of Vista prefix codes on it). An RSC can serve >>> a few thousand lines, depending on load. It's run by the host >>> switch's processor, with backhaul trunks to the host, but has its own >>> internal switching matrix (and "emergency standalone" capabilities). >>> It's theoretically possible to put a few trunks onto an RSC, but >>> normally the trunks (to other switches) are all at the host. >> Interesting ... out of curiosity by "few thousand" do you mean "less >> than a prefix", "a prefix", or "a few prefixes"? (Further, must a >> exchange exist entirely on a RSC or can it be split between the RSC >> and the host switch?) > Prefix codes nowadays are like DNS addresses; they can be flexibly > pointed at whatever. They are portable between switches and carriers, > though they are not geographically portable, which simply means that a > given prefix is billed to a given place, no matter where the physical > switch or customer is. Even absent number portability, number > assignment is via a common pool in the host, so prefix codes are not > really assigned to remotes. Actually, they are if the remote is in a different rate center than the host. Oh, and a DMS-100 is a telco central office switch manufactured by Northern Telecom aka Nortel. Not a bad switch. As for the remote switching center, it is basically switch hardware that is extended from the host to serve a remote or rural area where a full switch is not needed. The PBX is more than likely served by the host switch via fiber links ... probably SONET. As for the GTE manhole cover, that is probably a cable splice point or repeater station for Verizon's trunking circuits. Verizon, like SBC, is a ILEC aka RBOC which can afford to have their own trunking between central office sites. Daniel Rudy Remove nospam, invalid, and 0123456789 to reply. ------------------------------ From: net-news02@jmatt.net (Matt Simpson) Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: 15 Mar 2004 06:04:27 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com In an editor's note, Pat wrote: > The Demopublicans and the Rebublicrats have things so tied up (and > they are essentially the same regards oppressive government > legislation, etc) no one else ever gets a chance at it. And when a > third party candidate comes along who is at all popular with a large > number of people, (i.e. Ralph Nader) then the Demopublicans all > grouse about how the new comer is going to spoil the election for > the others. Those who are not happy with the stranglehold the two major parties have on our political system and wish to vote for candidates they prefer instead of choosing the lesser of two evils should push for the adoption of "Instant Runoff Voting". http://www.fairvote.org/irv/ This system would encourage people to cast their votes for candidates they actually preferred, without the fear that doing so would allow the eviler of two evils to be elected with less than a majority. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 15:14:16 GMT From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Organization: Excelsior Computer Services Playing Devil's advocate for a moment, why is it so bad if the government can tap into my e-mail the same way they do into my phones? If the government can use the technology to stop one terrorist attack, or to catch one future greedy CEO, or to break up a drug dealing operation, why should I care if they can also read my personal e-mail? Why aren't the same people who are afraid of touch-screen voting problems in favor of tools that will help police catch cyber- criminals? Or what about spam? What's the point of making it illegal if law enforcement doesn't have the tools to catch violators? Every aspect of my well being in the USA is based upon the rule of law. Couldn't one make the argument that the only way this "bugging" of the Internet could be used against innocent people is if we lose the rule of law here, but that if we lose the rule of law then the Internet problems will be insignificant compared to all the others? My personal view is that all of these efforts are in vain anyway. Any first-semester encryption textbook gives me the tools to create secure electronic communications on the Internet. (For example, if I really cared to, I could generate a huge one-time random cypher, give the only copy to my friend, and the only way people could read our conversations is if they stole a copy of the key. If I wanted to transfer the key without telling my friend "I'm transfering the key," I could use a track on a publicly available CD for the key, or send a JPG of a friend, etc.) -Joel ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: PRI Voice T1 and CallerID Blocking Date: 15 Mar 2004 12:59:03 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , wrote: > Is it true that a PRI ISDN voice T1 with incoming calls can always > identify the callerID of the calling party? Call blocking can't > prevent CallerID being passed along by the PRI ISDN voice T1 circuit? Are you sure you are not talking about ANI? --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 14:56:16 -0500 From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Strange Phone Number Adam wrote: > Anyone know what type of phone number this is: 646-539-9007 ? > I keep getting calls from this number but when I return the call, > I am asked for a pin. Likely someone is calling you from a VoIP calling card, such as Net2Phone direct. When a call is made through such a card, they tend to pass CID info as the dial-in point's number, rather then the originating caller's number. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #124 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 16 14:23:51 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2GJNps19760; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 14:23:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 14:23:51 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403161923.i2GJNps19760@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 #125 TELECOM Digest Tue, 16 Mar 2004 14:23:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 125 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Call Control (was Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls)(Withheld by reader) Need Sys Admin Manual for VODAVI Starplus STS System (Mike Roman) Re: Caller ID for PC (Flatus Ohlfahrt) Re: Caller ID for PC (J Kelly) Re: Dial From Outlook (RC@mail2.sol.net) Re: Dial From Outlook (saturnius) Re: Thanks For the Norvergence Red Flags! (Justin Time) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (jmayson@nyx.net) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Tony P.) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Michael Chance) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Paul Vader) Re: I Found Something You May Like (Andrew Bell) 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, 15 Mar 2004 22:33:52 -0600 From: Withheld at Request Subject: Call Control (was Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific) [Hi, PAT -- please drop email and sig again. Thanks.] OK, here's the wrap-up on this situation. We finally got Call Control installed and configured; hopefully this will solve the problem. Strangely, Call Screening is not available in this area even though Call Control is. Perhaps there's a regulatory requirement for Call Control? It seems to be implemented in a pretty kludgy fashion (see below). When I called to actually get Call Control installed (BTW I'm in Illinois and the Call Center I was talking to was in Spokane, WA), the rep said, "OK, what type of call control would you like?" They didn't know that Call Control was the name of a specific feature. Once we got over that hump, they had to poke around in several different screens before they found it. Before Call Control was ordered, dialing "*95" got reorder and nothing else. After ordering Call Control but before it was working, for a while *95 got a recording: "Your call cannot be completed as dialed." The recording was very scratchy and almost unintelligible. Now that Call Control is installed, here's how it works: You pick up the phone and dial *95. There is a long delay, I counted 6 seconds before anything happened. You are prompted to enter your telephone number, then your PIN (default is "9999"). Then a recording says, "Please wait while your phone number and PIN are verified." The first time (only) you are then taken immediately to the "change PIN" routine. A system of menus walks you through setting up numbers to be blocked, or permitted, and exceptions. For instance, you can block all LD, except this number, or this AC. All we're using here (so far) is the "block specific numbers" feature. Every time you dial *95, you are prompted to enter your telephone number. I don't know why this should be needed, as you can only program it from the line it's been installed on. Once the service is programmed, if you dial a blocked number you get a (very bad!) recording saying, "The number you have dialed is not authorized." At least, I _think_ that's what the recording says. It's so scratchy and distorted I really can't understand the last few syllables. But the service does work, in that you can't complete a directly-dialed call to blocked numbers. The way Call Control is programmed, and the way it acts in operation, lead me to believe it's implemented outside the switch -- at least in 708-354. It seems quite rough around the edges. I can't believe how crappy those recordings are! But it gets the job done, anyway. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Two questions: How much was the charge to set it up and how much is the monthly fee? Does *95 also allow for numbers/codes, etc previously blocked to be removed from the list or re-authorized once again as needed? Another question of a more personal nature: How has the alzheimers patient reacted to this change in service? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike Roman Subject: Need Sys Admin Manual for VODAVI Starplus STS System Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 18:27:14 -0500 The Trenton Area Soup Kitchen just purchased a VODAVI Starplus STS phone and voice mail system, and we are in need of the system administrator's manual(s). Our vendor claims not to have them, but someone has gotta have the information he's learned and keeps in his head. :-) Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Flatus Ohlfahrt Subject: Re: Caller ID for PC Date: 15 Mar 2004 22:44:30 GMT Organization: USAF Ret On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 05:24:16 GMT, Tony P. wrote in news:telecom23.123.5@telecom-digest.org: > In article , > jkelly@newsguy.com says: >> On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 16:54:24 UTC, >> dold@CallerXIDX.usenet.us.com wrote: >>> Why not get a $10 caller ID device at Target, and plug it >>> in to the "phone" port of your modem? >> Because the desk has enough devices sitting on it, and I >> like the pop-up CID software I have. I just got a new >> cordless phone so the old one that also had CID moved to >> the computer room, so I guess that solves my dillema for >> the most part. I will miss the logging that the software >> did, but I guess I'll live. Thanks for the reply. > Just FYI -- the HSP56 modems built into most PC's handle > CLID just fine. You just need software to monitor it. Go to > download.com and search on Caller ID. I tried every caller ID software I could find on line a couple of years back. None met my expectations when used with Windows (as opposed to a couple of pretty good ones from the DOS days). What I wanted, in addition to a really large visual pop-up, was call logging, ability to pull the computer out of screen-saver mode, very fast reaction time, and ability to return calls. FWIW, the best CID devices I have are the ones built into my DirecTV receivers. They really do work well. Flatus ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Caller ID for PC Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 20:49:27 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 04:23:48 UTC, dold@CallerXIDX.usenet.us.com wrote: > Why doesn't your popup work anymore? I missed that part. I thought > you were looking for a modem where you never had success before. I was using an old USR External modem, and it takes up too much room on the desk so I ditched it. Looking for something either *very* small, or internal PCI. I've tried a half dozen internal PCI's (all claiming to support CLID) and none work properly. It appears that most winmodems either can't do CLID or require specialized software, but do not necesarrily supports the AT command set for CLID which is what the software I like uses. Most of the cheap USRs I've seen do not mention CLID. I wish there was a PCI version of the USR Courier, I have an ISA one but PC's don't come with ISA slots these days. ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: Subject: Re: Dial From Outlook Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 20:08:09 -0500 Organization: NNTP Servers - The best Usenet service available anywhere Scott Dorsey wrote in message news:telecom23.123.3@telecom: > Why would you want to use Outlook, when there are plenty of dialing > packages out there? At worst you could export your outlook address > book to one. Or are you looking for some new way to get more virus > infections and spread them by telephone too? > --scott > "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." Scott, Isn't there enough misinformation without confusing people by saying you can spread a computer virus through a phone call. Stick with reality. And for the record I use Outlook and manage dozens of networks none of which have EVER had a virus problem after they put in the AV solution I recommend. It's even maintaince free, does all it's own updates, can't be turned off by the uses, has NEVER returned a false positive, and there is no yearly subscription fee. It's all about picking the right product and knowing how to use it. And if you need a reason to use Outlook, how about this it's FREE and mayby they're using some of the more advanced features of Exchange that don't translate to another application. Outlook isn't Outlook Express (God I wish MS would rename it). Randall Cohen Sr. Systems Engineer Alternative Communication Systems, Inc. Email: rcohen_at_acsvoicedata_dot_com.no-spam The only thing I guaranty about my free advice is that it's mine and it's free. ------------------------------ From: saturnius@gmx.net (saturnius) Subject: Re: Dial From Outlook Date: 16 Mar 2004 06:09:35 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Dear all, Thank you for your replies. The reason for using Outlook is because I do synchronise with my mobile telephone and my PDA -- Why using an other programme? On the other hand, me and my collegues (they are a bit older ;-) are used to "standard" telephones. Why is there not a progamme that uses the serial interface (or USB) to connect to a standard telephone? Cheers, Saturnius kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in message news:: > saturnius wrote: >> I am looking for a product that connects a standard telephone with MS >> Outlook. I was just wondering whether there is a standard telephone >> with a serial/USB/Bluetooth interface and an Outlook plugin. I would >> like to use the Outlook Contacts but also keep my standard >> telephone. Is there something like this? > Why would you want to use Outlook, when there are plenty of dialing > packages out there? At worst you could export your outlook address > book to one. Or are you looking for some new way to get more virus > infections and spread them by telephone too? > --scott > "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just of curiosity, I have a Motorola Cable Modem model 'SB4220' Surfboard. On the back of this modem, in addition to the cable in/output and the ethernet cable connection and the power cord, there is a place for a USB connection. Who knows what that USB connection is for? Would some people use that instead of the ethernet connector? PAT] ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Thanks For the Norvergence Red Flags! Date: 16 Mar 2004 06:07:14 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Richard Ramirez wrote in message news:: > So you never actually met with a rep and you really are just assuming > what type of sales tactic they would use? > Did you know that they leave all the documents with you for your > review after the initial interview? They do not expect you to "sign > on the spot" as you feared. Now, in all fairness, if you didn't like > the phone call, then say that. If you had received a proposal that > made no sense, then say that. > But don't post that they used a high pressure sales tactic when you > never even met with a rep. There is nothing wrong with a company not > wanting to meet with an admin or secretary. Anybody with sales > experience will tell you the importance of meeting with an authorized > decision maker. It prevents the rep from wasting their (& the > company's) time. That is sales 101. > R.R. I hate to burst Mr. Ramirez's bubble, but there are courses labled Sales 101 and there are courses labled Sales 101. I work in a position where I am not the decision maker, I cannot sign documents committing money, time or resources, so, according to your class in Sales 101 I am not worth speaking to. Please tell that to the 15 to 20 representatives I meet or speak with monthly. They all realize that I do not sign the orders, nor do I commit the resources they need to close the sale, but they all realize that I am the person who will recommend the product or service they represent to those who can commit resources. What it boils down to is this: If you want to get the people I represent to use your product or services, you have to convince me that it is in their best interest to do so first. Now, recognizing who the key players are in the decision chain is really the lesson that should be learned in Sales 101, not making demands that only those who can commit are worth pitching to. The companies that come through me normally end up with much larger sales than those who bypass me. Users of goods and services seek my opinion and guidance. If I state I know nothing about this company or its services, the next question is usually along the lines of: "Well, why are we doing business with them then?" There have been those who have come in, graduating from your version of Sales 101 and have landed agreements but they are hollow. There are no orders placed against their contracts or agreements and they are usually never renewed. Those who follow the more normal pathway of determining who is in the decision path and obtaining a concensus seem to walk away with the same contracts and agreements that are actually worth something. Now, not to sound conceited, I am not the only recommender, just one of several, but I work in Telecommunications, specifically voice telecommunications and do infrastructure design. If your product or service fits in one of those categories, then I am one of the people that should be on your list. Rodgers Platt [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And the people who *are* authorized to spend the company's money in all probability have *no idea* or expertise in the company telecommunications network. What President or CEO or Chairman of the Board have you ever met who knew anything about how the company's phone system worked? This is NOT to speak in either way about Norvergence, good or bad, but if a salesperson is trying to sell some sort of crappy phone thing to a company, s/he needs to chat with a 'decision maker' (i.e. money spender) in the hopes of slipping one through before the company's workers get wind of what is happening. That was how MCI telemarketers operated back in the 1970's when MCI was first getting started. They would talk to the telecom people first with their 'get one over on AT&T and their high prices' routine, and if the telecom people bought it (and many did, for no other reason than the general dislike of AT&T that was so prevalent in the 1970-80's) they were all set. If the telecom people did NOT buy the routine, then the MCI telemarketers would always shoot right for the top of the line, the CEO, or Board Chairman, etc, knowing the 'save money' lie would work and nothing else would matter (at that level). Stop and think about it: in any really large, huge corporation, what does the CEO, or president or Chairman of the Board *really* know about anything? Computers, customer service, telecommunications; three areas which can bring a company down to its knees if they are mismanaged, and the three areas which are horribly expensive to oper- ate and maintain. So Rodgers, do you see why telemarketers have to 'jump the line' and get right to the top if they are going to slip their crap in the door? PAT] ------------------------------ From: jmayson@nyx.net Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 02:38:42 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com > Playing Devil's advocate for a moment, why is it so bad if the > government can tap into my e-mail the same way they do into my phones? > If the government can use the technology to stop one terrorist attack, > or to catch one future greedy CEO, or to break up a drug dealing > operation, why should I care if they can also read my personal e-mail? Would you allow the police to search your home whenever they felt like it? What about pulling you over for any reason? I cannot trust a government that doesn't trust its citizens. I have absolutely nothing to hide, but that doesn't mean I want to give the government carte blanche to investigate me and spy on me. Yes, we could possibly catch the next Enron. But I doubt it. We couldn't catch a bunch of Middle Eastern flight students who wanted to skip those boring classes about take-offs and landings. > Why aren't the same people who are afraid of touch-screen voting > problems in favor of tools that will help police catch cyber- > criminals? Or what about spam? What's the point of making it illegal > if law enforcement doesn't have the tools to catch violators? I'm not against touch-screen voting because I'm afraid of vote fraud. I'm against it because it's a waste of money. My county uses the good old fashioned #2 pencil and Scantron sheet and it works just fine. Other voting methods were demonized in 2000 when, quite frankly, the problem was human error. I used to live in Florida and I remember even in 1992 checking my ballot to make sure everything punched through. I can't expect the government to do everything for me. > Every aspect of my well being in the USA is based upon the rule of > law. Couldn't one make the argument that the only way this "bugging" > of the Internet could be used against innocent people is if we lose > the rule of law here, but that if we lose the rule of law then the > Internet problems will be insignificant compared to all the others? > > My personal view is that all of these efforts are in vain anyway. Any > first-semester encryption textbook gives me the tools to create secure > electronic communications on the Internet. (For example, if I really > cared to, I could generate a huge one-time random cypher, give the > only copy to my friend, and the only way people could read our > conversations is if they stole a copy of the key. If I wanted to > transfer the key without telling my friend "I'm transfering the key," > I could use a track on a publicly available CD for the key, or send a > JPG of a friend, etc.) I agree. There are plenty of tools out there allowing people to encrypt their messages. If someone were really motivated I supposed they could create their own. Or use low-tech methods of communicating. During World War I, Germans in this country had phonographs to send Morse code at something like 100 words per minute. This was recorded in Germany and played back and a slower speed. Are we actively monitoring every inch of RF spectrum for something like this? What about face-to-face conversations? Letters? Even hidden messages in personal ads or comp.dcom.telecom postings could be used. John Mayson Austin, Texas, USA ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Organization: ATCC Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 04:03:20 GMT In article , joel@exc.com says: > Playing Devil's advocate for a moment, why is it so bad if the > government can tap into my e-mail the same way they do into my phones? > If the government can use the technology to stop one terrorist attack, > or to catch one future greedy CEO, or to break up a drug dealing > operation, why should I care if they can also read my personal e-mail? Because it has been proven that if you give government agencies an inch, they'll take a mile. Do the Hoover years mean nothing to you? How about COINTELPRO? When you remove the courts from the process bad things tend to happen in the form of abuses for political gain, etc. > Why aren't the same people who are afraid of touch-screen voting > problems in favor of tools that will help police catch cyber- > criminals? Or what about spam? What's the point of making it illegal > if law enforcement doesn't have the tools to catch violators? Ok, let me preface this by saying I worked for the state AG's office and dealt with PD's on a regular basis. Most PD's don't have the resources to have a full time I.T. specialist, let alone an investigator that specialized in I.T. investigations. Even at the AG's office the only forensic unit we had was limited to using EnCase software but nothing beyond that. Even the prosecutors weren't really aware we could get warrants to trace IP traffic if we wished. Law enforcement right now is too concerned with the War on Drugs to be truly effective in much else. The AG's office implemented a program called the Nuisance Task Force (NTF). NTF had wide leeway to clean up neighborhoods. > Every aspect of my well being in the USA is based upon the rule of > law. Couldn't one make the argument that the only way this "bugging" > of the Internet could be used against innocent people is if we lose > the rule of law here, but that if we lose the rule of law then the > Internet problems will be insignificant compared to all the others? The main problem is that the 'rule of law' as you so like to put it has been perverted over the years. > My personal view is that all of these efforts are in vain anyway. Any > first-semester encryption textbook gives me the tools to create secure > electronic communications on the Internet. (For example, if I really > cared to, I could generate a huge one-time random cypher, give the > only copy to my friend, and the only way people could read our > conversations is if they stole a copy of the key. If I wanted to > transfer the key without telling my friend "I'm transfering the key," > I could use a track on a publicly available CD for the key, or send a > JPG of a friend, etc.) It is an escalating battle that will never be solved until those people in the I.T. field start becoming police officers, or even prosecutors. While at the AG's office I did my best to educate as many of the prosecutors as I could about crimes involving information systems. But to date, I haven't seen a single computer crime prosecuted in my state. ------------------------------ From: Michael Chance Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 04:27:21 GMT In article , eelder1@tampabay.rr.com says: > An insidious plot is underway to bug the Internet. Many of you who > have lost jobs know what bad news the Bush administration has been to > the IT community. The story is getting even worse. President Bush > wants to bug the Internet. He wants to read your email, see what you > are downloading and find out what you are buying on Ebay. He also > wants to listen in your VoiP calls. Just a bit Chicken Little-ish, eh? Frankly, I doubt if President Bush would be interested in much of what your saying over the Internet, or on your VoIP phone calls, or anything else, even if he had the time. However, if you're engaged in criminal behavior and law enforcement types need proof positive before they haul you into court, and they can convince a judge that you're up to no good, then you'd have something to worry about. Just like you do with your wireline and wireless phone calls now. No great conspiracy. Just extending the current rules, with all of the current protections, to digital communications. Wireline and wireless phone companies have to provide the means to put legal wiretaps on their facilities under court orders. Why should ISPs and VoIP phone companies be exempt? Michael Chance ------------------------------ From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader) Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 17:26:39 -0000 Organization: Inline Software Creations joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) writes: > If the government can use the technology to stop one terrorist attack, > or to catch one future greedy CEO, or to break up a drug dealing > operation, why should I care if they can also read my personal e-mail? There's a certain quote by Benjamin Franklin that you need to familiarize yourself with. * * PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something like corkscrews. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:41:38 PST From: Andrew Bell Subject: Re: I Found Something You May Like [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Referring now to last month's thread on the infamous porn worm. PAT] It sure does find a LOT of porn. I've never seen so many transvestite shots in one place before. :( TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > 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! > 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 > 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. > 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. 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. > Let me know how you like it. > http://www.thumbgal.com/download/thumbgal2.exe > PAT [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Also known as http://porn-worm.us.tf which is an alias re-director, nothing more or less. That UNONIC place is a great spot to get all the alias re-directors you want at no charge in any country of the world you want it. Just look at http://unonic.com and take what you need. They like it if you run a banner ad for them on your site, no big deal either way. Register your 'true name and address' and the alias re-director right there on line. They also give away page counters, and passworded pages if you want. For the former just a line of the form inserted on your page works okay. Except for a couple readers who stunk up the place something awful about porn worm when I mentioned it last month, the more industrious readers here have been busy reverse engineering the damn thing, and have discovered 'porn' is only one by-product of the worm, which knows from nothing until you teach it what 'porn looks like' or indeed, what an mp-3 looks like or other files of interest look like, such as Hollywood movie trailers, games, etc, then send the worm looking for same. You can build up a huge collection of .mid files also if desired. I suppose if I had announced a worm which went around looking for classical music midi files on the net, everyone -- even the stink raisers -- would have applauded politely but by now someone would have reverse engineered it to go around collecting porn to play on their pornograph machines. But you are correct, Andrew. As it is now configured, the porn-worm (also known as Thumbgal version 2), sometimes seems to concentrate on tranvestite pictures, other times 'amateurs' and God knows what. You can always be sure of one thing though; let it run for a few hours and whatever it is picking up runs you out of space on the computer or wherever. Reverse engineer it to be your very effecient picker-upper of files on the net! 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 #125 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 17 00:03:02 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2H532Q24031; Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:03:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:03:02 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403170503.i2H532Q24031@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 #126 TELECOM Digest Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:03:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 126 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Norvergence Files in Archives (TELECOM Digest Editor) AXXESS Forced Mute Help (EFL) Re: Caller ID for PC (Tony P.) Re: Caller ID for PC (J Kelly) Re: Dial From Outlook (Daryl R Gibson) Re: Dial From Outlook (RC@mail2.sol.net) Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name (Henry E Schaffer) Re: Billed by AT&T for PNG (Linc Madison) Re: SkyFILES: The Aftermath of DISH/Viacom (Gary Novosielski) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Tony P.) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (nospam) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (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: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:07:48 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: New Norvergence Files in Archives I said last week I was going to try to get three new files on Norvergence moved into the archives. The volume of spam coming through pretty much kept that from happening until just tonight, but now those three files are in place. Look at http://telecom-digest.org and the reports section of the archives. Therein, look for norvergence-nortel.jpg as well as norvergence1.doc and norvergence2.doc ; the .jpg file is Nortel's disclaimer of any business arrangement with Norvergence. The two .doc files are a discussion of the matrix device and a user's formal account of the 'scam' Norvergence has perpetrated. Sorry it took me so long to get these in place. PAT ------------------------------ From: eflist@nj2la.com (EFL) Subject: AXXESS Forced Mute Help Date: 16 Mar 2004 13:23:06 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com HELP! We have an axxess system (phone model 8520) and for some unknown reason my mute button, when I am in speakerphone mode, cannot and willnot be disabled. When I do try to push it, I get CANNOT DISABLE FORCED MUTE. All other times, the mute button works fine. Please let me know if you can help me! -eflist*at*nj2la*dot*com ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Caller ID for PC Organization: ATCC Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:55:22 GMT In article , flatus@militaryretired.us says: > On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 05:24:16 GMT, Tony P. wrote in > news:telecom23.123.5@telecom-digest.org: >> In article , >> jkelly@newsguy.com says: >>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 16:54:24 UTC, >>> dold@CallerXIDX.usenet.us.com wrote: >>>> Why not get a $10 caller ID device at Target, and plug it >>>> in to the "phone" port of your modem? >>> Because the desk has enough devices sitting on it, and I >>> like the pop-up CID software I have. I just got a new >>> cordless phone so the old one that also had CID moved to >>> the computer room, so I guess that solves my dillema for >>> the most part. I will miss the logging that the software >>> did, but I guess I'll live. Thanks for the reply. >> Just FYI -- the HSP56 modems built into most PC's handle >> CLID just fine. You just need software to monitor it. Go to >> download.com and search on Caller ID. > I tried every caller ID software I could find on line a couple of > years back. None met my expectations when used with Windows (as > opposed to a couple of pretty good ones from the DOS days). > What I wanted, in addition to a really large visual pop-up, was > call logging, ability to pull the computer out of screen-saver > mode, very fast reaction time, and ability to return calls. > FWIW, the best CID devices I have are the ones built into my > DirecTV receivers. They really do work well. Umm ... I think the company is called Sunny Beach Software. They sell a package of VB routines for accessing the Caller-ID information from TAPI. ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Caller ID for PC Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 17:15:50 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On 15 Mar 2004 22:44:30 GMT, Flatus Ohlfahrt wrote: > What I wanted, in addition to a really large visual pop-up, was > call logging, ability to pull the computer out of screen-saver > mode, very fast reaction time, and ability to return calls. CallTrace has the really large pop up and logging. Not sure on pulling out of screensaver mode (if it's in screensaver I'm probably not at the PC anyway). ------------------------------ From: Daryl R Gibson Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 14:17:20 -0700 Subject: Re: Dial From Outlook On 16 Mar 2004 at 14:23, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just of curiosity, I have a Motorola > Cable Modem model 'SB4220' Surfboard. On the back of this modem, in > addition to the cable in/output and the ethernet cable connection > and the power cord, there is a place for a USB connection. Who knows > what that USB connection is for? Would some people use that instead > of the ethernet connector? PAT] Quite right. The cable modem can be connected through a standard RJ45, or through the USB connector, making a NIC for the PC unnecessary. My Linksys cable modem also has both options, as do some others. I've never used the USB, though, so I don't know what kind of throughput it gives compared to the Ethernet jack. Linksys also sells several nice USB-to-network connectors, for both wired and wireless, including a very nice NIC that has a collapsing RJ-45 jack embedded in the unit, and a compact Wi-Fi adapter that looks for all the world like a standard USB "drive." Some people like them for connecting their TIVOs. 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 ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: Subject: Re: Dial From Outlook Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:53:12 -0500 Organization: NNTP Servers - The best Usenet service available anywhere saturnius wrote in message news:telecom23.125.6@telecom-digest.org: > Dear all, > Thank you for your replies. > The reason for using Outlook is because I do synchronise with my > mobile telephone and my PDA -- Why using an other programme? > On the other hand, me and my collegues (they are a bit older ;-) are > used to "standard" telephones. Why is there not a progamme that uses > the serial interface (or USB) to connect to a standard telephone? What I'm trying to tell you is that you don't need anything more then a modem. The line goes into the modem line jack, the phone goes into the modem phone jack, configure the PCs "Telephony" service so that "voice" calls are associated with that modem (this is the default) and you're done. BTW when was the last time you saw a serial port on a standard telephone???? ------------------------------ From: hes@unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E Schaffer) Subject: Re: Spam Going Out Under My Name Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 21:05:07 UTC Organization: North Carolina State University In article , SELLCOM Tech support wrote: > I'm afraid that the newer viruses are doing that these days. I get > a lot of bounces of undeliverables that were "from" me, but from > some obscure IP address (if there can be such a thing). Sometimes > even an IP starting with 81. > The virus harvests email addresses to use and uses them in > the from fields. Look at the IP address, that is the key. The mail agent I use (elm) makes it very easy to view all of the mail headers, so it is easy for me to trace back all of the Received: mail headers and see where the mail (apparently) originated. These aren't from my domain or IP number range. But the mail agents that most of my friends and colleagues use make it difficult or impossible to view all of the mail headers - so they can't do the same thing. --henry schaffer hes _AT_ ncsu _DOT_ edu ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Billed by AT&T for PNG Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:50:44 -0800 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed In article , Fred Atkinson wrote: > My landlady switched from AT&T to Power Net Global in September > of last year. I know this is true because I helped her switch over. > And she has been paying Power Net Global ever since. > AT&T's collections people have been calling her. ... > [inconsistent answers as to when the calls were made, no one will > take responsibility, etc.] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T is the classic example of an > unstoppable object meeting an unmoveable object. Unfortunately, my experience with PNG was far worse, to the point that I take every possible opportunity to recommend that no one, not even my worst enemies, do business with them. They displayed repeated massive incompetence in setting up a simple 800 number. They assigned my 800 number and started billing me for it, but never bothered to tell me what the number was! Even during regular business hours, all I ever got the first 8 or 10 times I called their customer service number was a voice mailbox which was usually already full. After I finally found out and started using the number, they assigned it to another customer, so my 800 number was now ringing in South Dakota. We got that squared away, and then they did it again, a second, and later even a third time! (This was not a shared number with different PINs, but just a straight 800 number that could only ring to one customer at a time.) I gave them my work number as a contact for keeping me apprised of their progress in resolving the issue, so, of course, they started ringing the 800 number on my work phone instead of my home phone, even though I made it very clear that the work phone was an "alternate contact number," not a new number for the 800 line to ring to. Not long after that, I found another company to handle my 800 number, and cursed the day that I ever heard of Power Net Global, with only the consolation that I would never hear from them again. Or so I thought. More than three years after my PNG account was closed, they suddenly began billing me a $3 monthly minimum service charge. I complained to the FCC and the CPUC, and they stopped. Bottom line: the problem this time around may be AT&T or it may be PNG. However, doing business with PNG, it is only a matter of time before they make a complete mess of anything they come in contact with. 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. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh my ... I have never had any experience with PNG, but I regretfully have had enough with AT&T to know how bad they have gotten in recent years. Based on Linc's testimony here, I would have to agree it could well have been the fault of either of the circus clowns; but if correspondent's landlady has cancelled checks for service, then I would just toss out the checks and tell the two telcos to squabble over it; the bills are paid. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Gary Novosielski Subject: Re: SkyFILES: The Aftermath of DISH/Viacom Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 02:17:38 GMT Tony P. wrote: > Because if they didn't spread the cost among ALL their subscribers the > cost to that segment who regularly enjoys having all the sports channels > would bear an unreasonable cost. > It wouldn't be a viable market for ESPN. But would there be any down-side? ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Organization: ATCC Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:10:55 GMT In article , mchance@swbell.net says: > In article , > eelder1@tampabay.rr.com says: >> An insidious plot is underway to bug the Internet. Many of you who >> have lost jobs know what bad news the Bush administration has been to >> the IT community. The story is getting even worse. President Bush >> wants to bug the Internet. He wants to read your email, see what you >> are downloading and find out what you are buying on Ebay. He also >> wants to listen in your VoiP calls. > Just a bit Chicken Little-ish, eh? Frankly, I doubt if President Bush > would be interested in much of what your saying over the Internet, or > on your VoIP phone calls, or anything else, even if he had the time. > However, if you're engaged in criminal behavior and law enforcement > types need proof positive before they haul you into court, and they > can convince a judge that you're up to no good, then you'd have > something to worry about. > Just like you do with your wireline and wireless phone calls now. Tapping a line be it wired or wireless requires a judge's signature on the warrant to do so. The rules being proposed would take the judge out of the equation. > No great conspiracy. Just extending the current rules, with all of > the current protections, to digital communications. Wireline and > wireless phone companies have to provide the means to put legal > wiretaps on their facilities under court orders. Why should ISPs and > VoIP phone companies be exempt? You'd have felt right at home in Germany during Hitler's time wouldn't you. In article , pv+usenet@pobox.com says: > joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) writes: >> If the government can use the technology to stop one terrorist attack, >> or to catch one future greedy CEO, or to break up a drug dealing >> operation, why should I care if they can also read my personal e-mail? > There's a certain quote by Benjamin Franklin that you need to familiarize > yourself with. * Ah yes -- those who clamor for security while preserving liberty deserve neither. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But sir, your assertion that a judge's signature is required on a warrant (true) making it sound as though it were difficult to obtain (false) shows you to be very naive. Judges tend to do whatever their puppet-masters, police and prosecutors, tell them to do. It takes absolutely no effort to obtain a warrant at all. Prosecutor just asks for one, and usually the judge knows better than to refuse the request. Oh, theoretically he could refuse to sign off on it, but in actual practice they don't refuse the request. By eliminating that requirement it would simply bring things more in line with how they actually are. Either that, or supply each prosecutor with a rubber stamp of the judge's signature. PAT] ------------------------------ From: nospam Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:54:06 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 15:14:16 GMT, joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote: > Playing Devil's advocate for a moment, why is it so bad if the > government can tap into my e-mail the same way they do into my phones? > If the government can use the technology to stop one terrorist attack, > or to catch one future greedy CEO, or to break up a drug dealing > operation, why should I care if they can also read my personal e-mail? There are a lot of reasons, starting with 1. Hoover. 2. Abuses and coverups, like the time an FBI "sharpshooter" shot a baby in her mother's arms. 3. "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 http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/sns-ap-fbi-child-molester,0,5538886.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-headlines > My personal view is that all of these efforts are in vain anyway. Any > first-semester encryption textbook gives me the tools to create secure > electronic communications on the Internet. (For example, if I really > cared to, I could generate a huge one-time random cypher, give the > only copy to my friend, and the only way people could read our > conversations is if they stole a copy of the key. If I wanted to > transfer the key without telling my friend "I'm transfering the key," > I could use a track on a publicly available CD for the key, or send a > JPG of a friend, etc.) Key? Cipher? All you need to do is know how to XOR. I agree with your view that its all in vain. Thus the two biggest reasons against it are: 1. We have to pay for something that doesn't help our security. 2. The people that should be watching the terrorists are lulled into a false sense of complacency. IMO, the whole reason the agencies are up in arms is that they're faced with something they don't understand, and trying to apply the things that worked in the past. This is sort of like building a stronger Maginot line because today's tanks are more powerful than ever, and disregarding bombers, ICBMs, cruise missiles, nuclear weapons, and the like. On the other hand, the technical community sees ways to get around the agency solution that are so obvious they can't believe the agency personal didn't see them. So it looks like the agencies are malicious, but (IMO) they are merely incompetent. (Didn't Heinlen say something about if you assume incompetence instead of evil, you'll be right 99% of the time?) ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:26:27 -0600 Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: > Playing Devil's advocate for a moment, why is it so bad if the > government can tap into my e-mail the same way they do into my phones? > If the government can use the technology to stop one terrorist attack, > or to catch one future greedy CEO, or to break up a drug dealing > operation, why should I care if they can also read my personal e-mail? Because the current President has proven that he doesn't give a damn about individual civil liberties, that's why. > Every aspect of my well being in the USA is based upon the rule of > law. Couldn't one make the argument that the only way this "bugging" > of the Internet could be used against innocent people is if we lose > the rule of law here, but that if we lose the rule of law then the > Internet problems will be insignificant compared to all the others? You're living in a fantasy world. You're assuming that our government will follow its own rules, and I just can't agree with that. And if people start encrypting everything, don't you think the government will look real hard at making encryption illegal? JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ "someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought most encryption is already illegal. Take that fellow in Colorado -- what's his name? Phil something who invented PGP (Pretty Good Privacy)? Didn't he get arrested and put on trial for telling people on the net how to encrypt their stuff? 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #126 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 17 15:31:01 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2HKV0P01106; Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:31:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:31:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403172031.i2HKV0P01106@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 #127 TELECOM Digest Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:31:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 127 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson One Cable Company to Rule Them All (Monty Solomon) Google Rolls Out Local Search System (Monty Solomon) FCC Getting Fuzzy on Digital Television (Monty Solomon) Nokia Megapixel Phone (Monty Solomon) AOL to Launch Bill Payment Service (Monty Solomon) US Lawmakers Bicker Over Appealing Telephone Case (Monty Solomon) USDTV to Launch Low-Cost Wireless TV Service (Monty Solomon) Re: Call Control (was Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls) (Withheld) Re: Call Control (was Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls) (Sammy@nospam) Quick Question on Blocking Outgoing Calls (Joe Carlson) Re: Caller ID for PC (JDS) Vote Machine Salesman Will Deliver Ohio to Bush in November (grub) Re: Thanks For the Norvergence Red Flags! (Justin Time) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Tony P.) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Hank Karl) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Paul VaderP Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Herb Stein) 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, 17 Mar 2004 00:53:17 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: One Cable Company to Rule Them All Comcast's bid to buy Disney raises a specter even scarier than the witch in Snow White: A Mickey Mouse Internet. Editor's note: Ninth in a series on the consolidation of power and ownership in the media landscape. By Farhad Manjoo March 17, 2004 | If you're looking for a perfect example of the limitless possibility of the Internet, the true, world-shrinking power of a fast, always-on network, you might find it at George's house. George is a British expat who lives in Philadelphia with his wife and kids and father. (We'll call him George, because, for reasons that will be explained, he doesn't want his real name published.) George loves America, but he also can't shake the feeling that he's not fully at home here; something about the place just doesn't click with him. "Very few Brits ever get totally assimilated into the American culture," he says. So at George's house, the Internet functions as a portal to a world left behind. George and his family watch the BBC News on the Web three times a day. George, who spent two decades in the British film industry, makes digital movies of his family, and he sends the movies over the Internet to the extended family back home; they, in turn, send films of the mother country. "We use the Net as a lifeline," George says. "For anybody for whom this isn't their native country, you'd understand." But Comcast, the company that provides George's high-speed Internet service, didn't understand. Last August, the company sent him a letter telling him to quit it -- he was using the Internet too much. The firm said he was violating Comcast's "acceptable use" policy, that he was somehow abusing his service. This surprised George, because as far as he knew he wasn't doing anything illegal or unseemly online -- "We're not using porn sites," he says -- and his contract with the firm didn't spell out any limits on his Internet use. When he called the company, it gave him the "runaround" -- nobody would tell George specifically what he should do to bring his use back in line with Comcast's policies, other than that, as a general matter, he ought to consider using the Internet much, much less. http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/03/17/comcast/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:30:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Google Rolls Out Local Search System By MICHAEL LIEDTKE AP Business Writer SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Online search engine leader Google Inc. is introducing a new system designed to make it easier for people to find things closer to their homes, paving the way for the company to make more money selling ads to small businesses. The new algorithmic formulas, scheduled to begin working Wednesday, will allow Google to display more local information in response to search requests that include a ZIP code or a city's name. Google says these geographic queries are now more likely to generate phone numbers and specific addresses on its main results page. In many cases, Google also will display an icon of a compass that can be clicked upon to open another page containing a detailed map and directions to the location. Web surfers who want a broader selection of parochial information will be encouraged to visit a new gateway, http://local.google.com . - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40848750 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:52:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Getting Fuzzy on Digital Television FCC Getting Fuzzy on Digital Television Consumers Should Get Full Benefits of Hi-Res Devices Washington, D.C. - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) will ask the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) today to prevent satellite and cable television providers from intentionally reducing the quality of digital television signals on analog outputs, a practice known as "down-rezzing." Endorsed by the motion picture industry as a content-protection measure, the practice would force people who have invested in high-definition digital television equipment to accept inferior-quality content. http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/HDTV/20040315_eff_pr.php EFF Reply Comments re the Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SFNPRM) in the FCC's "Plug and Play" proceeding (CS Docket No. 97-80/PP Docket No. 00-67). In these reply comments, EFF urges the FCC to prohibit down-resolution, or down-rezzing, of component analog outputs for nonbroadcast programming carried on cable and satellite systems. http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/HDTV/eff_fcc_comments.php ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:28:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nokia Megapixel Phone Sharpen and Smarten Your Image with the New Nokia Megapixel Phone HANOVER, Germany--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 17, 2004-- Stylish and slim Nokia 7610 combines robust imaging capabilities with multiple smartphone features On a makeshift catwalk, Nokia grabbed the spotlight at CeBIT 2004 with the introduction of the sleek Nokia 7610 imaging device, the company's first megapixel camera phone. Encased in fashionable dual-tone ruby and onyx-colored covers, the slim and stylish Nokia 7610 phone offers quick and convenient capturing, printing, storing and sending of photo-quality images and videos in addition to the benefits of the Series 60 Platform. The tri-band model is planned to be available during the second quarter of 2004 in two variants, GSM 900/1800/1900 and GSM 850/1800/1900. It is expected to retail for approximately EUR 500. Printing is a breeze for users of the Nokia 7610 imaging device - pictures can be turned into prints in just a few seconds via a Bluetooth connection to a compatible printer or by using a printer kiosk available in Nokia branded retail locations or other photo shops. Using the Kodak Pictures application on the phone, pictures can be uploaded to a virtual photo album on the web and shared online with others or ordered as prints via an online service. The Nokia 7610 phone offers a 65,000 color screen for viewing still images and video captured by the integrated camera and watching real-time video streaming using the built-in RealOne mobile player. The megapixel (1152 X 864) camera features a high-quality lens, 4x digital zoom, and a self-timer. The Nokia 7610 imaging device also allows users to capture images in low-light conditions. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40849048 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:47:19 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL to Launch Bill Payment Service By Kenneth Li NEW YORK, March 16 (Reuters) - In seeking a return to growth, America Online on Tuesday said it sees a check in the e-mail. AOL, the online unit owned by Time Warner Inc. (NYSE:TWX), said it plans to unveil a new service called AOL Bill Pay that lets its subscribers pay nearly all their bills directly through its proprietary e-mail service. The company struck a partnership with Yodlee, a technology company that helps aggregate bills from vendors as diverse as Verizon to American Express, to provide the guts of the service. But what it hopes will lure subscribers are the safety features built into its mailbox, where reminders and links to bills will be sent. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40840070 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:32:50 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: US Lawmakers Bicker Over Appealing Telephone Case WASHINGTON, March 16 (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers on Tuesday lined up on both sides of the question of whether the government should move to require local telephone carriers to share their networks with rivals at cut rates. A bipartisan group of about 120 members of the U.S. House of Representatives wrote to President George W. Bush asking that the administration leave unchallenged a court ruling that forced Verizon Communications (NYSE:VZ) and other local giants to share their networks at government-mandated prices. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40846212 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:35:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: USDTV to Launch Low-Cost Wireless TV Service By Kenneth Li and Franklin Paul NEW YORK, March 16 (Reuters) - Start-up company USDTV on Tuesday unveiled a digital television service being rolled out in various U.S. cities this year and sent via VHF/UHF antennas in a lower-cost alternative to cable and satellite television. Subscribers must buy a $99 set-top box from regional electronic chain stores and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (NYSE:WMT) outlets. They also have to pay a monthly fee of $19.95 -- compared with than cable and satellite service bills that range from about $30 to over $100 per month. The company has already launched the service in Salt Lake City, Utah, where it where it is based, with more than 25 channels and plans to debut in Albuquerque, New Mexico and Las Vegas, Nevada in the next 30 days. It plans to launch in 30 major markets by end-year. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40845849 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:26:16 -0600 From: Withheld Subject: Re: Call Control (was Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific) [Me again, PAT -- still anon please] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Two questions: How much was the charge > to set it up and how much is the monthly fee? There was a $10 setup fee, and the service itself is $7.95/month. We'll see if that's what the bill reflects ... > Does *95 also allow for numbers/codes, etc previously blocked to be > removed from the list or re-authorized once again as needed? Yes. In fact, that's how I tested it -- I put in my own office number (which she would never have reason to call so it's no loss if it accidentally gets permanently blocked), then dialed it to see how the system blocked a call. After the test I unblocked the number. BTW you can still dial a blocked number, just enter the PIN after the recording plays and you'll be connected. > Another question of a more personal nature: How has the alzheimers > patient reacted to this change in service? We are taking several steps to deal with her situation, and one of these steps is that she has someone staying with her 4 hours a day M-F to take her shopping and to Dr. appointments, clean house, walk the dog, make lunch, etc. This seems to have stopped her calling the neighbors, since she's now getting personal attention on a daily basis. Call Control is a backup system, "symptomatic relief" as it were. We'll see what happens when she wants to go somewhere "after hours" (i.e. outside of 9am-1pm M-F) and can't get ahold of a family member on the first try. I'm sure we'll hear about it, because she won't be able to make heads nor tails out of the unintelligible recording from Call Control. The whole neighbor thing was really a wake-up call for the rest of the family; we've made a lot of changes in the relationship and she seems to be doing better at the moment. I'm still a bit disturbed about how things are proceeding, since we are infringing on her liberties without her permission. We intercept her mail, block her phone calls, confiscate her car keys, control her diet, and so on. We never asked for permission to do any of this, we just stepped in and usurped her life. On the other hand, she's now living in a clean house (HER house!), eating a balanced diet, and taking her medications appropriately. She has human company for at least 20 hours a week, plus her dog for companionship. Overall her quality of life has improved substantially in the last month, and she has much more freedom and comfort than she would have in even the best "facility." The road to Hell is paved with our intentions! But I hope we're managing to make the right decisions. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Caring for an Alzheimer's patient is NEVER an easy job. My best wishes to you and the entire family as you try to make the right decisions as this progresses. I have always been very frightened that eventually Alzheimer's would claim me. I do not know why I feel that way, except it is a very fearsome thought. Because the brain aneurysm left me with substantial neurological damage, I have to have people come in to care for me everyday, so I sort of understand how the lady in your family feels with life. I actually look forward to the City of Independence meals-on-wheels people coming around each day at 10:30 AM and the State of Kansas SRS lady who comes around a few hours each week to do my housekeeping. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Call Control (was Re: Need to Block Outgoing Calls to Specific) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:21:22 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Two questions: How much was the charge > to set it up and how much is the monthly fee? Does *95 also allow > for numbers/codes, etc previously blocked to be removed from the list > or re-authorized once again as needed? Another question of a more > personal nature: How has the alzheimers patient reacted to this > change in service? PAT] There is certainly no Call Control in California. Or, if there is, it is not on SBC's list of offerings. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My feeling is this may be what SBC and other telcos refer to as a customer specific tariff. In other words, it is developed specifically for disabled customers for example. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joe Carlson Subject: Quick Question Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:23:21 -0500 Hi, I was wondering if it was possible to block outgoing calls on only one phone line in a house?? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Assuming you want a total block on the line -- not specific numbers as our family of an Alzheimer's patient was requesting, then that is simple. Ask telco to make that one line (by telephone number) to be 'one-way incoming' only. When the job is done, by picking up the phone you will hear 'battery' or side tone, but no dial tone. People sometimes get those lines when they have one or more phones for some specific task involving incoming calls and do not want abuse on the lines otherwise. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Caller ID for PC From: JDS Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:04:58 GMT The Zeus Phonstuff Whozz Calling 2 is terrific but relatively expensive ($185 from sandman.com). It reports all incoming and **outgoing** calls to your serial port. I've had one for several years. Tech support is outstanding. It lets you keep a complete log of all your phone activity. Also check out "NetCallerID" for only $15 - http://www.dallaswifi.net/netcallerid.html. I believe this only reports on incoming calls. ------------------------------ From: grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk Subject: Vote Machine Salesman Will Deliver Ohio to Bush in November Reply-To: grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:56:58 +0000 Organization: Customer of PlusNet Vote machine salesman will deliver Ohio to Bush in November The head of a company vying to sell voting machines in Ohio, told Republicans in a fund-raising letter that he is "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year." http://www.sweetliberty.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Thanks For the Norvergence Red Flags! Date: 17 Mar 2004 06:52:27 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com TELECOM Digest Editor's wrote in message news:: > <> > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And the people who *are* authorized to > spend the company's money in all probability have *no idea* or > expertise in the company telecommunications network. What President > or CEO or Chairman of the Board have you ever met who knew anything > about how the company's phone system worked? This is NOT to speak in > either way about Norvergence, good or bad, but if a salesperson is > trying to sell some sort of crappy phone thing to a company, s/he > needs to chat with a 'decision maker' (i.e. money spender) in the > hopes of slipping one through before the company's workers get wind > of what is happening. That was how MCI telemarketers operated back > in the 1970's when MCI was first getting started. They would talk to > the telecom people first with their 'get one over on AT&T and their > high prices' routine, and if the telecom people bought it (and many > did, for no other reason than the general dislike of AT&T that was > so prevalent in the 1970-80's) they were all set. If the telecom > people did NOT buy the routine, then the MCI telemarketers would > always shoot right for the top of the line, the CEO, or Board > Chairman, etc, knowing the 'save money' lie would work and nothing > else would matter (at that level). > Stop and think about it: in any really large, huge corporation, what > does the CEO, or president or Chairman of the Board *really* know > about anything? Computers, customer service, telecommunications; three > areas which can bring a company down to its knees if they are > mismanaged, and the three areas which are horribly expensive to oper- > ate and maintain. So Rodgers, do you see why telemarketers have to > 'jump the line' and get right to the top if they are going to slip > their crap in the door? PAT] Pat, I think your brush is a little too wide here when condemning the corporate mavens of lacking insight as to how their internal systems are set up and / or work. In my 40 years of experience, it isn't the chief executives that bite so much on the "see how much money you can save if you just ..." spiel, it is the upper middle management that succumbs to these tactics. Chief executives normally have the smarts from years of experience that some decisions are best researched before being pronounced. When the issue is over something they may not know all the details, they will often defer a decision until they confer with people they trust to bring the correct information to the table. The problem is that the CIO or the head of the administrative division of a corporation are some of those people that chief executives often rely on. If that department head, exec VP, VP, Director -- pick a title -- hasn't done their homework and has been sold the bill of goods, then the decision is based on faulty input from a trusted source. (Hmmm -- sounds like a current political situation involving a certain Middle Eastern country.) I have worked in organizations where every decision was made by committee, and very little was accomplished, and organizations where no one was consulted before a decision. The best organizations have their warrens of cubicles staffed with people whose job is to obfuscate everything, but something magical also happens. At some point in the process all the "cacca de toro" is stripped away and a clear picture results because the item was examined by 27 clerks who had little else to do but research. When all the research is looked at, dissected, blended, homogonized and reconstituted the truth normally is left. How that truth is presented is often tainted by the person charged with presenting it to the decision makers, but then that's another diatribe. The entire point of this is a plea, and that is to ask you carefully consider the statements you put into your comments so you are not guilty of grabbing a brush that infairly paints people who are truly competent and do their jobs with integrity when you wish to paint the few who lack these traits. Rodgers Platt [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very good point. But unfortunatly, the people who are truly competent and doing their jobs with integrity are few and far between in many very large companies, and rarely do we hear from them. I think those people are mostly with smaller (by comparison) companies. It is also very important that employees have knowledge of the employees above them and below them in the 'chain' since having at least a reasonable idea of what *those* people are doing often times helps *them* take more care and concern about their own jobs. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:16:59 GMT In article , kd1s@nospamplease.verizon.reallynospam.net says: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But sir, your assertion that a judge's > signature is required on a warrant (true) making it sound as though it > were difficult to obtain (false) shows you to be very naive. Judges > tend to do whatever their puppet-masters, police and prosecutors, tell > them to do. It takes absolutely no effort to obtain a warrant at all. > Prosecutor just asks for one, and usually the judge knows better than > to refuse the request. Oh, theoretically he could refuse to sign off > on it, but in actual practice they don't refuse the request. By > eliminating that requirement it would simply bring things more in line > with how they actually are. Either that, or supply each prosecutor > with a rubber stamp of the judge's signature. PAT] I suppose it all depends upon where you live. As I may have mentioned elsewhere I once worked for the Department of Attorney General. It was a major pain to get a judge to sign off on a warrant in Rhode Island. Granted, in some places the judge is simply a rubber stamp. It's up to the citizens to get the local or state representatives to revise the qualifications and conditions attached to judicial positions in order to fix that. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, things were much different in Chicago, Illinois. Judges and prosecutors in Chicago are part of an 'untouchables club'. They all do as they please, and the other ones know most of the details. But they pretty much keep it to themselves in their club, **unless/until one of them does not play right where the others are concerned. Then the others squash him.** For instance, take Judge Maloney; he was known as a 'hanging judge' when it came to punishing criminals with long, stern prison sentences. All the prosecutors knew they had Judge Maloney on the hook because he also on occassion would accept bribes to 'fix' murder cases. Judge Maloney was himself finally sent to prison for all the bribes he took, but for years prosecutors knew about it and whenever they wanted a search warrant and the circumstances were dubious at best, someone would always suggest 'go upstairs and see Maloney, tell him to sign on it.' The rule seemed to be 'why waste a judge when you can have him around as a good tool.' Maybe one of the Chicago area readers can refresh my memory on this: How many area judges were themselves sent to prison in that purge back about 1990? I think it was 27, including the supervising judge over at the County Jail. Quite a few prosecutors went to prison also. Imagine, 27 Chicago area judges and prosecutors all with dirty hands. Is Maloney still in prison now, or was he ever released? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Hank Karl Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:29:27 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:10:55 GMT, Tony P. wrote: > In article , mchance@swbell.net > says: >> There's a certain quote by Benjamin Franklin that you need to familiarize >> yourself with. * > Ah yes -- those who clamor for security while preserving liberty deserve > neither. IIRC, the quote by Ben Franklin is "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security " And a similar quote from Abraham Lincoln: "Those who are ready to sacrifice freedom for security ultimately will lose both." The words of William O. Douglas, Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court explain why this is so: "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air however slight lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness. " ------------------------------ From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader) Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 16:03:53 -0000 Organization: Inline Software Creations > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought most encryption is already > illegal. No. Fortunately, the laws have actually weakened in the last decade. > Take that fellow in Colorado -- what's his name? Phil > something who invented PGP (Pretty Good Privacy)? Didn't he get > arrested and put on trial for telling people on the net how to > encrypt their stuff? PAT] No. He got in trouble with the old munitions law, which made it illegal to *export* high-grade encryption. Phil Zimmerman was hounded by the government for 3 years, but in the end he won when the government dropped the case. * * PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something like corkscrews. ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 23:10:06 -0600 Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote in message news:telecom23.124.8@telecom-digest.org: > Playing Devil's advocate for a moment, why is it so bad if the > government can tap into my e-mail the same way they do into my phones? > If the government can use the technology to stop one terrorist attack, > or to catch one future greedy CEO, or to break up a drug dealing > operation, why should I care if they can also read my personal e-mail? > Why aren't the same people who are afraid of touch-screen voting > problems in favor of tools that will help police catch cyber- > criminals? Or what about spam? What's the point of making it illegal > if law enforcement doesn't have the tools to catch violators? > Every aspect of my well being in the USA is based upon the rule of > law. Couldn't one make the argument that the only way this "bugging" > of the Internet could be used against innocent people is if we lose > the rule of law here, but that if we lose the rule of law then the > Internet problems will be insignificant compared to all the others? > My personal view is that all of these efforts are in vain anyway. Any > first-semester encryption textbook gives me the tools to create secure > electronic communications on the Internet. (For example, if I really > cared to, I could generate a huge one-time random cypher, give the > only copy to my friend, and the only way people could read our > conversations is if they stole a copy of the key. If I wanted to > transfer the key without telling my friend "I'm transfering the key," > I could use a track on a publicly available CD for the key, or send a > JPG of a friend, etc.) > -Joel This is troll, right Pat? No one is this stupid. Herb Stein herb@herbstein.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, I dunno, Herb. They come pretty stupid as things go, or perhaps brazen is a better term. You've heard the rumors about playing phonograph records backwards to hear messages about devil worship, haven't you? Well, if you take most issues of Telecom Digest and run it backward through your spool then count off every 127th letter (reading backward) you can see terrorist messages. That's how I send secret messages to all those bad people in Iraq. 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #127 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 18 01:03:55 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2I63tX04461; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:03:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:03:55 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403180603.i2I63tX04461@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 #128 TELECOM Digest Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:04:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 128 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Finally, Apple Speaks to the Blind (Monty Solomon) Welcome to the 'New' Web, Same as the 'old' Web (Monty Solomon) EFFector 17.9: California Bills Backed by Hollywood Attack (M Solomon) The Next Picture Messaging Boom (Eric Friedebach) Busch Gardens Callers Get 'Pleasure Zone' (Eric Friedebach) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (werner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (Eric) Seeking Any Advice on 5.8 GHZ Phones (Dolchas) Re: Thanks For the Norvergence Red Flags! (Richard Ramirez) 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, 17 Mar 2004 22:19:50 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Finally, Apple Speaks to the Blind BYTE OF THE APPLE By Alex Salkever It's building innovative screen-reading technology into OS X. That's essential for the visually impaired -- and a smart business move. With its brash marketing campaigns and big brand image, few would accuse Apple Computer (AAPL ) of being a silent company. But to the millions of Americans who are legally blind or seriously visually impaired Apple has seemed silent and uncaring because it has no screen-reader program of its own. And software maker ALVA Access Group decided in summer, 2003, to stop making the last such Mac-compatible program on the market. This leaves visually impaired Mac users without software that allows them to navigate a computer desktop and Web pages by vocalizing complex menu trees, cursor locations, and other key visual cues taken for granted by sighted users. Apple recognized that ALVA's decision elevated the situation to crisis proportions and scrambled to tackle the problem. This week at the 19th annual Technology & Persons with Disabilities Conference in Los Angeles -- the biggest assistive-technology confab in the country -- Jobs & Co. introduced a nifty tool to help the blind use Macs again. Apple calls this new technology "Spoken Interface." The basic concept is to vocalize and make audible everything that visually happens on a desktop, just like screen-reading software. http://businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2004/tc20040316_6454_tc056.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 22:23:34 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Welcome to the 'New' Web, same as the 'Old' Web By Christine Boese CNN Headline News (CNN) -- Do you remember the day you first surfed the Web, stretched out your arms over the vastness of cyberspace, teleported from site to site with an almost exhilarating power? Or alternately, sat waiting for "fat" pages to load? Well, hang on to your hats boys and girls, because your experience of the World Wide Web is about to change, possibly for the first time since Mosaic, one of the first graphical browsers, was unleashed in 1993 from Champaign-Urbana, Illinois. If I'm saying the Web is changing and that you'd better get on board or miss out, I'd better be prepared to back it up. I believe I can. In a previous column, (To Blog or not to Blog?), I wrote about how the blog movement is changing the Web by giving more people a voice online. But a parallel movement is also changing the online experience for ordinary surfers. The point of entry into this efficient and focused style of surfing does not involve search engines. Instead, many users, learning from bloggers, are setting aside their browsers at certain times to use news feed readers, sometimes called "news aggregators," instead. Try out the new on-ramp http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/03/15/new.web/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 20:08:59 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 17.9: California Bills Backed by Hollywood Attack EFFector Vol. 17, No. 9 March 17, 2004 donna@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 281st Issue of EFFector: * California Bills Backed by Hollywood Attack Internet Privacy * EFF Releases "Monsters of Privacy" Animation Feature * FCC Getting Fuzzy on Digital Television * Let the Sun Set on PATRIOT - Section 220 * EFF Seeks Webmaster Who Wants to Make a Difference * Deep Links (17): Florida as the Next Florida * Staff Calendar: 03.19.04 - Fred von Lohmann speaks at Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN; Shari Steele debates Bruce Taylor at Harvard Law School, Cambridge, MA * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/17/9.php ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: The Next Picture Messaging Boom Date: 17 Mar 2004 14:01:54 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Penelope Patsuris, 03.16.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - Camera phones may be popular, but one of that technology's biggest market opportunities has yet to become a reality: users swapping snapshots between different wireless carriers. It's not only the carriers that stand to profit from this development, but also the companies that supply the products and services that will make such interoperability possible. By the end of 2004, consumers will have sent 3.8 billion multimedia messages, which are mostly photographs, according to research outfit IDC. That's astounding considering that camera phones didn't even hit the U.S. market in a meaningful way until 2003, and that U.S. users still can't send pictures to phones on different networks such as Verizon Wireless and AT&T Wireless. For the most part, people are either exchanging pictures in-network or are sending them to e-mail addresses where friends and family can see the photos online. http://www.forbes.com/technology/2004/03/16/cx_pp_0316picturemessaging.html Eric Friedebach /Tonight's Skywarn training cancelled due to ... weather?/ ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Busch Gardens Callers Get 'Pleasure Zone' Date: 17 Mar 2004 15:43:04 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com March 17, 2004, Associated Press TAMPA, Fla. - Busch Gardens may be a lot of fun, but it's not the "Pleasure Zone." The theme park listed the wrong number on marketing fliers sent to former holders of its discount Fun Card last week. Instead of reaching Busch Gardens, callers got a recorded sex line with a woman welcoming them to the "Pleasure Zone." http://www.startribune.com/stories/670/4668919.html Eric Friedebach /Tonight's Skywarn training cancelled due to... weather?/ ------------------------------ From: werner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 00:26:08 UTC Organization: Hoeland >> No great conspiracy. Just extending the current rules, with all of >> the current protections, to digital communications. Wireline and >> wireless phone companies have to provide the means to put legal >> wiretaps on their facilities under court orders. >> Why should ISPs and VoIP phone companies be exempt? > You'd have felt right at home in Germany during Hitler's time, > wouldn't you. tssss, that's not fair commentary to what was stated. Why, indeed, should VoIP and ISP communication providers not be held to the same (recognized/needed) standards? I'm surprised that the moderator did not declare the discussion "moot" -- i.e. *ended* at this point ... (as you had *clearly* "asked for it" -- by USEnet standards, at least, by making reference to the H-person... ... after which ... PAT opines (something which would be much *better* done in a separate followup article, btw, and in my opinion ... one moderator to another ... as it is unfair and simply not right to mix 'moderator duties' with 'discussion participation' in such a manner -- for discussion purposes a moderator should make an extra effort to appear *equal* to the rest, keep it possible that one can search and find his opinion simply by keying on the poster's name... and this is *NOT* to be construed as as "bashing the moderator" -- as well know to appreciate the fine effort that he makes in most everything else -- rather than as demanding that certain, to me *obvious* standards deserve to be promoted, even demanded by "the people" ... :) > ... your assertion that a judge's signature on a warrant were difficult > to obtain (false) shows you to be very naive. Also a completely inappropriate, undeserved tear down of the contributing poster. I'm astounded by that tone, choice of word. I'm as sceptical about what's going on as the next guy, but the poster did not deserve to be called on the carpet "like that", IMO. > Judges tend to do whatever their puppet-masters, police and > prosecutors, tell them to do. It takes absolutely no effort to > obtain a warrant at all. That's simply not true -- it does take *some* effort ... > in actual practice they don't refuse the request. Eliminating it > would simply bring things more in line with how they actually are. > Either that, or supply each prosecutor with a rubber stamp of the > judge's signature. ... but, what's much, much more important, it forces prosecutor and police to list (and date-stamp) what's claimed as reasons for the action, rather than allowing to invent (and/or rephrase) them *afterwards* (when being called on the carpet for it), using what was learned (or planted) as a-priori justification ... That said, it's not the system that's broken but rather it is being stressed (as are the people participating in it) to the breaking point by *circumstances* ... I don't know how to make it fail-safe or significantly improve it, not with what we have as *material* to do it with... mainly *people* that are the product of our system, culture, society ... :( /"\ ASCII... ._. ||"We the sheeple...Don't Mess With Penguins!" \ / on Usenet /v\ || OPT-OUT is *E*V*I*L* X ANYTHING ELSE /( )\ || I KILL-file top-posters / ignore posts with / \ IS BLOAT !! ^^ ^^ || only quoted text in the first screen... [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am pleased to make your aquaintence, Mr. Werner (? I assume ?) I guess I am not familiar with the newsgroup you moderate, which one is it? One of the reasons I often times will intersperse my notes with the Digest (usually at the bottom of a message but now and then at the top if there may be some confusion in the use of the message to start with) is because although we do have 'discussion' here, quite often the writer asks a question (simple to me, very difficult to them in many cases) and since telephony is sort of my forte, often times my answer is all they need for whatever they are working on. For example in recent days there have been questions here about how to make a phone 'one way inbound only', how to restrict dialed calls, how to investigate and deal with billing fraud, etc. Since I do not always know what the person is going to say or inquire about prior to printing an issue of the Digest, it makes better sense to me to simply supply the answer when the question is presented. I suppose I could print their question, then when the next issue is done up a few hours later publish an answer. That would require the correspondent to wait several more hours or perhaps another day to get an answer. Quite honestly, in many instances the first time I see the person's question or comment is when I am editing it here. Other than a simple skeleton used in formatting the Digest, most of it is all manual editing from issue to issue. Ah, but you were not speaking about the technical, yet mostly elementary technical questions on phones, which is about all I know for sure. You were addressing the 'other topics' which come up here from time to time, I think, and wondering why I was getting involved in those as a 'moderator' rather than another 'reader'. All I can say is its just the way I have always done it. Now to address some of your statements herein: You questioned my use of phraseolgy including the word 'naive'. Isn't it rather naive to think, or say, or publish the thought that American government and jurisprudence is done like the high school civics text books say, instead of how it really is in most places, such as Chicago, Illinois? Although I was born in a small rural town in s.e. Kansas in 1942, and fled back here as though my life depended on it, (which it mostly did) in the late 1990's, the middle part of my life (forty some years) was spent in that great example of good government and politics and police activity called 'Chicago, Illinois'. I saw what was originally 1940-50 era) a somewhat decent place to live turn into a complete hell-hole by the early 1990's. A town where 42 of the 50 members of the City Council were in fact convicted felons. A town where 27 of the Circuit Court judges were sent at various times to prison and then disbarred (only because the law requires same; not because the mayor or the council people who had them in office to start with wanted it to happen that way). A town where there were two *major* 'race riots' in my history (1968's assassination of MLK; and later the same year the Democratic political convention.) A town which beat Boston by twenty years with a priest/child sex scandal. ('ours' was in 1981-83 when almost a hundred priests were involved.) A town where public transportation is quickly becoming a total shambles (why do you think the CTA is laughingly referred to as the *C*hicago *T*ransist *A*trocity) when over a hundred subway fare collectors between them stole over *six million dollars* in fares, but kept their patronage-provided jobs until even Mayor Daley or their workers union could not protect them any longer. A town where public housing is such a shambles the federal government placed the CHA (*C*hicago *H*ousing *A*trocity) in recievership. A town where judges are beholden to prosecutors and prosecutors and judges are often times beholden to police officers who caught them in varying degrees of hanky panky, and all of them, judges, prosecutors and politicians alike are beholden to the Chicago Tribune, a 160 year old newspaper with a *massive* archives of pictures and unpublished stories, many of which are *not* complimentary at all and only get used when the Tribune gets an urge to sodomize one or more politicians; police officers, e.g. the 'prosecutorial misconduct' series of stories the Tribune ran in 1998 and a few prosecutors and police officers were sent off to join their judge buddies in prison. A town where Bush/Ashcroft and their Patriot Act would have nothing on Chicago Police who for forty years at least have had a 'Red Squad' to spy on citizens, and a 'Morals Squad' to hassle gay guys left and right. So, Mr. Werner, you were shocked by my phraseology 'naive' to say getting a search warrant by 'going through channels' was in the same calibre as Jimmy Stewart standing up in the House of Representatives to introduce a bill for a children's playground (his movie, "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" 1940 by Columbia Pictures). Mr. Werner, that is NOT how it happens, and you are just as naive as the original writer if you think so. This has already gone on way too long, and I am in need of going to vomit once again. For your other questions, please contact me after the show -- in email -- to talk more if you wish. PAT] ------------------------------ From: egusenet@verizon.net (Eric) Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: 17 Mar 2004 21:19:51 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com > Those who are not happy with the stranglehold the two major parties > have on our political system and wish to vote for candidates they > prefer instead of choosing the lesser of two evils should push for the > adoption of "Instant Runoff Voting". For those who are interested, there are actually far better methods the IRV and I would encourage you to check out: http://electionmethods.org/ http://approvalvoting.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~seppley/ To learn more about the problems with Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), you can check out: http://electionmethods.org/IRVproblems.htm http://www.condorcet.org/rp/IRV.shtml http://tinyurl.com/lyzd ------------------------------ From: dncmullin@yahoo.com (Dolchas) Subject: Seeking any Advice on 5.8 GHZ Phones Date: 17 Mar 2004 18:35:00 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Greetings all! I have a Uniden 900mz cordless phone that I always thought was pretty mediocre (and the battery holds almost no charge nowadays), so I figured I'd upgrade to a 2.4 ghz Panasonic that I saw at Costco for a good price. The nice thing about this package is that it came with three handsets and the promise of an intercom function; this intercom function is a key feature for me because I live in a three story house and am tired of yelling across floors. When I got the 2.4 ghz system home, I found it interfered with my Lorex transmitter device that sends signals from one TV to another on 2.4 ghz frequency. So I figured maybe I'll try moving up to a 5.8 ghz system, but as I started to research things, I read that: (a) Some (many? all?) 5.8 ghz systems transmit partly on 2.4 ghz and partly on 5.8 ghz, in which case I would still expect interference;and (b) higher frequency units are more likely to be obstructed by objects as opposed to lower freq units like my 9n00 mz units. I have to be able go through walls and floors whilst communicating between handset and base, and handset to handset (for the intercom function) -- will I have problems with this at 5.8 ghz? Costco has a good price on a Uniden 5.8 ghz phone which also has three handsets (I am not presently confident about whether or not it has the intercom function). Does anyone know if this Uniden phone utilizes 2.4 ghz freqs in any way? Also, does anyone know if, like the Panasonic, it has a handset-to-handset interocom function? Am I likely to have problems communicating through floors and walls with a 5.8 ghz system? How is Uniden as a brand? Should I just stay in the 20th century rather than leap into the 21st? If so, are there any decent 900 mz cordless phone systems with three handsets and an intercom feature? Any recommendations at all are much appreciated! Chuck ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 11:56:24 PST From: Richard Ramirez Subject: Re: Thanks For the Norvergence Red Flags! Justin Time, A.K.A. Rodgers Platt wrote: > "I work in a position where I am not the decision maker, I cannot sign > documents committing money, time or resources, so, according to your > class in Sales 101 I am not worth speaking to." -That's right. Now please open the Administrative Assistant's First Aid Kit, and apply a band aid to your ego. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #128 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 19 02:13:34 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2J7DX313785; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 02:13:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 02:13:34 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403190713.i2J7DX313785@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 #129 TELECOM Digest Fri, 19 Mar 2004 02:13:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 129 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Directory to Provide 4-1-1 on Cell Users (Joseph) Telephone Bill Reconciliation Software (Randy H) Laser Telepointer (wendell@visualecho.com) Power Lines Set to Carry Internet to Outlet Near You (Colin Sutton) Line Identifier (Steve Griffin) Re: Seeking any Advice on 5.8 GHZ Phones (burris) Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet (jbl) Motorola Makes Hands-Free Dialing Easier With Aftermarket (M Solomon) How Do I Love Thee, TiVo? (Monty Solomon) A TV That Cuts All Cords (Monty Solomon) Could Stern's Anti-Bush Rants Shock the Vote? (Monty Solomon) Phone Sex (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: Joseph Subject: Directory to Provide 4-1-1 on Cell Users Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 13:49:12 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom Phones: Despite complaints about loss of privacy, a listing of wireless owners is likely to have your number. By Dan Thanh Dang Sun Staff Consumers have come to expect a certain degree of confidentiality when it comes to their mobile phone numbers. Until now, the privacy of wireless subscribers has long been safeguarded. All that might change this year. The cellular phone industry is expected to launch a wireless directory-assistance service that seeks to include more than 70 percent of the nation's 156 million cellular numbers in a database. While wireless numbers will not be published in a book, anyone dialing 411 directory assistance on any phone will be able to get almost any wireless number. The directory could be available by the end of the year, the wireless industry said, as five of the six largest cellular carriers work to compile names and numbers. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bal-te.bz.wireless18mar18,0,7380301.story?coll=bal-home-headlines or http://tinyurl.com/ype3b remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: randyh@southlandprinting.com (Randy H) Subject: Telephone Bill Reconciliation Software Date: 18 Mar 2004 07:02:04 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Does anyone know of a Retail or shareware piece of software that can take a phone bill from AT+T (delimeted file) and another file generated on an in-house SMDR system and compare the two for accuracy? I tried to come up with an Excel V-Lookup formula (I'm not too good with formulas) but couldnt get an accurate match. A big problem is that the Times of the calls do not match exactly in both. AT+T may have a call time at 8:00 am, and the SMDR may have the same call at 8:01 am, etc. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Randy ------------------------------ From: wendell@visualecho.com Subject: Laser Telepointer Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 13:44:26 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - Central Florida New technology now available: www.mirrorminds.com or www.visualecho.com ------------------------------ From: Colin Sutton Subject: Power Lines Set to Carry Internet to Outlet Near You Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 23:51:23 +1100 A unit of Cinergy Corp. today will become the nation's first electric utility to offer high-speed Internet service to customers via its power lines, turning every electrical outlet in homes or offices into a Web connection. Cinergy and Current plan to offer several levels of service starting at 1 megabit a second at $29.95 a month. Road Runner locally costs $44.95 a month for download speeds of up to 3 megabits; Cincinnati Bell's Zoomtown costs $41.95 a month for the same speed. They both offer signup discounts. http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/03/02/biz_biz1acin.html . Regards, Colin Sutton ------------------------------ From: Steve Griffin Subject: Line Identifier Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 19:03:24 GMT I do residential structured wiring. When I'm connecting to the NID, it's nice to know which line I'm connecting to. In most areas around here (Maryland, DC, VA), 811 will get me a recording of the line I'm calling from. In some areas, this won't work. I was told there is a universal number that will work, but I don't now what it is. Can anyone help? Thanks, Steve ------------------------------ From: burris Subject: Re: Seeking any Advice on 5.8 GHZ Phones Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 06:32:41 -0500 Dolchas wrote: > Greetings all! > I have a Uniden 900mz cordless phone that I always thought was pretty > mediocre (and the battery holds almost no charge nowadays), so I > figured I'd upgrade to a 2.4 ghz Panasonic that I saw at Costco for a > good price. The nice thing about this package is that it came with > three handsets and the promise of an intercom function; this intercom > function is a key feature for me because I live in a three story house > and am tired of yelling across floors. > When I got the 2.4 ghz system home, I found it interfered with my > Lorex transmitter device that sends signals from one TV to another on > 2.4 ghz frequency. So I figured maybe I'll try moving up to a 5.8 ghz > system, but as I started to research things, I read that: > (a) Some (many? all?) 5.8 ghz systems transmit partly on 2.4 ghz and > partly on 5.8 ghz, in which case I would still expect interference;and Yes, all that I have seen, and I do beta testing for a few manufacturers of 5.8, use 2.4 from handset to base and 5.8 from base to handset. Marketing?? > (b) higher frequency units are more likely to be obstructed by objects > as opposed to lower freq units like my 9n00 mz units. I have to be > able go through walls and floors whilst communicating between handset > and base, and handset to handset (for the intercom function) -- will I > have problems with this at 5.8 ghz? I live on the 14th floor of a hi-rise and have used cordless phones since the beginning. The 2.4 and 5.8 are terrible for range. I can't get down the hall before they all drop the signal. The very best I ever had was the Sanyo series of 900Mhz..Digital Spread Spectrum. They would work all the way down to the lobby. This was a few years ago, before read-outs came into play, so no intercoms, except for the handset locater from the base unit. The handsets were quite a bit larger and heavier than the current products. The also required a base to go with each handset...no remotes at that time yet. As far as interference, I have always kept a handset next to my computing equipment and never experienced a problem with interference with either 2.4 or 5.8. > Costco has a good price on a Uniden 5.8 ghz phone which also has three > handsets (I am not presently confident about whether or not it has the > intercom function). Does anyone know if this Uniden phone utilizes > 2.4 ghz freqs in any way? Also, does anyone know if, like the > Panasonic, it has a handset-to-handset interocom function? Am I > likely to have problems communicating through floors and walls with a > 5.8 ghz system? How is Uniden as a brand? From my years of testing and experience in using these phones, I find that the 21st Century aims a bit toward bells and whistles. I just can't believe the features that the new models have. Unfortunately, not much to do with good solid communications. Probably the best advantage is a greater measure of security against remote hacking via listening in. The phones are smaller, the have all kinds of graphics on the screens and as always, you will maybe use 25% of the features, much like TV or Stereo products. > Should I just stay in the 20th century rather than leap into the 21st? > If so, are there any decent 900 mz cordless phone systems with three > handsets and an intercom feature? > Any recommendations at all are much appreciated! You will find that everyone has a different need and expectation and result, therefore many people may disagree and find fault with my observations. For years now I have found Panasonic to be the best in the area of cordless phones. The "only" way for you to find a product that you will like and that will work in your environment is to buy it, take it home and try it. This requires purchasing from a dealer who will allow you to return any product that doesn't please you for any reason. Costco is certainly one of those dealers. Burris ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: President Bush Wants to Bug the Internet Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 00:02:10 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , werner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu, or actually PAT wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am pleased to make your aquaintence, > Mr. Werner (? I assume ?) I guess I am not familiar with the newsgroup > you moderate, which one is it? My goodness. Pat, meet Werner. Werner, meet Pat. I have "known" Pat since about the time he took over the digest, which is more or less when I started reading it; I have know Werner since the early days of the Macintosh, certainly when the first virus appeared on a Mac, and possibly earlier (CRAFT(*) memory strikes). I'm a little surprised that this is a first encounter. > One of the reasons I often times will intersperse my notes with the > Digest ... From time to time Pat's moderating style has come up for discussion. At this point, however ec- (or ego-?) centric it may be, it's traditional here and helps define the tone of this digest or newsgroup; people who don't like it avoid it. There's probably no point in discussing it, though. Regards / JBL (*)Can't Remember A [gosh-darn] Thing Nets: jbl@spamblocked.com | ARS: KD1ON | Phone: (520)424-9075 | [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: At one point, many years ago, when this newsgroup was the sole one on the net dealing with telecommunications (that's where the old Usenet title 'comp.dcom.telecom' came from) I did give serious thought to Mr. Werner's (and other folks') suggestions about separating the moderator notes from the rest of the messages, because I thought it would be more fair. But in the past few years there have been *so many* telecom-related discussion groups between the web, various internet sites, and ISPs that I felt it no longer really mattered. People can either post/read here or so the same thing in many other telecom-related forums. I guess the main reason I know nothing about Mr. Werner's forum is that years ago when I *could* read them I chose instead to spend most of my on net time working on this Digest, and the volume of messages was *so heavy*. Does anyone remember when I was routinely publishing five or six issues of the Digest daily; that's how heavy the volume was when there were fewer choices. Now with more choices for readers and as a result fewer messages in any group, I could go read the other groups but because of the brain aneurysm, I am **so tired** most days, and I do not get as far in my personal reading as I used to. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:33:32 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Motorola Makes Hands-Free Dialing Easier With a New Aftermarket Motorola Makes Hands-Free Dialing Easier With a New Aftermarket Integrated System With Bluetooth(R) Wireless Technology - Mar 18, 2004 09:00 AM (PR Newswire) Cornerstone of Corporate-Wide Product Strategy Is a Standards-Based Approach To Ensure Compatibility Across Multiple Devices and Vehicles HANNOVER, Germany, March 18 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- CeBIT -- Busy mobile-professionals and tech-savvy consumers will appreciate the Integrated Hands Free system with Bluetooth wireless technology that Motorola, Inc. (NYSE:MOT) unveiled at CeBIT today. The latest Motorola in-vehicle system will automatically connect securely to a driver's Bluetooth enabled mobile phone, whether the conversation was initiated before or after starting the vehicle, all without wires or connections. The Motorola Integrated Hands Free system with Bluetooth wireless technology features intuitive user controls and is designed to help drivers keep their eyes on the road and hands on the wheel. By incorporating advanced voice recognition technology into the system, drivers have the ability to simply speak the telephone number to which they would like to be connected, and the technology will place the call on the driver's behalf. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40870586 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 23:32:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: How Do I Love Thee, TiVo? By ERIC A. TAUB JEFF Davies was so fond of his digital video recorder that he bought a second one. Then he bought another. And another. And another. And another. Today, Mr. Davies, a software engineer in Mountain View, Calif., owns six TiVo and ReplayTV digital video recorders, and actively uses five of them to record programs from his satellite dish for later viewing. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/18/technology/circuits/18tivo.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 23:36:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A TV That Cuts All Cords By DAVID POGUE EVERY industry has its marketing buzzwords. In the food business, you've got your "fat-free," your "all natural" and, lately, your "low-carb." In the auto market, it's "G.P.S.," "ABS" and "AWD." But in the consumer-technology racket, the three hottest buzzwords are, in no particular order, "wireless," "wireless" and "wireless." The Wireless Fairy has already tapped her magic wand on phones, computers and palmtops. But next month Sharp will deliver the first entrant in a whole new category of wireless gear. Its new Aquos LC-15L1U is the world's first wireless flat-panel television. Imagine a bright, beautiful 15-inch liquid crystal display screen - like a plasma, but with longer life and no risk of permanent burn-in - flanked by protruding round speakers that suggest a Picasso rendering of Mickey Mouse. Here's the twist: Using the carrying handle at the top, you can bring the 11-pound screen anywhere in the house as you work, play or entertain, without being tethered to your home-theater setup. You can park this Sharp on the kitchen counter as you chop carrots, keep an eye on the game as you labor at the grill, catch the end of "The Apprentice" while you brush your teeth in the bathroom - all without wires or plugs. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/18/technology/circuits/18stat.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 12:28:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Could Stern's Anti-Bush Rants Shock the Vote? By Matthew Gilbert, Globe Staff, 3/18/2004 American liberals have been waiting for a perch on talk radio, a medium dominated by conservative and right-wing voices since the 1980s. And on March 31, the new Air America Radio network will give them a nascent one, as it premieres in the New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago markets. Just as "The Daily Show" brings an openly lefty spin to TV news, Air America will fly in the face of the right wing with hosts including Al Franken, Janeane Garofalo, and Marty Kaplan. But wait a minute: Is "shock jock" Howard Stern -- stripper aficionado, champion of misfits everywhere, all-purpose radio provocateur -- already giving liberals a voice on the airwaves? And is that voice powerful enough to affect the upcoming presidential election? Since the FCC crackdown on media "indecency" in the wake of Janet Jackson's Nipplegate incident, Stern has transformed his morning variety show into a rabidly anti-Bush talk forum. Every weekday, he has been devoting hours of his broadcast (locally on WBCN-FM, 104.1) to impassioned criticism of President Bush and support of Senator John Kerry. Railing tirelessly against the president, Stern has been attacking Bush's yoking together of church and state, the legitimacy of his National Guard service, his use of Sept. 11 imagery in his campaign ads, his stances regarding First Amendment rights, his handling of Iraq, and his stands on gay marriage and stem-cell research. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/2004/03/18/could_sterns_anti_bush_rants_shock_the_vote/ ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Phone Sex Date: 18 Mar 2004 17:31:40 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Seth Lubove, 03.18.04, Forbes.com LOS ANGELES - As many as 87% of U.S. consumers are still worried about using their credit cards to make Internet purchases, according to one recent survey. Stephane Touboul says he has the killer app that could reinvent Internet purchasing. His company, ChargeMeLater, allows consumers to buy online and pay for it simply by entering the sum of the last four digits of their social security number. Touboul uses a proprietary algorithm that corroborates the identity of users based on a search of multiple databases and their phone numbers, validates their ages and addresses, makes sure they're good for the money, and then sends a bill to the user's house. "We have created a mechanism that could really change the face of commerce on the Internet," boasts Touboul from his Secaucus, N.J., headquarters. But Touboul has some big problems that stand between him and Internet enlightenment for the masses: the Federal Trade Commission and attorneys general in 20 states. In a lawsuit filed in May, and echoed in the state actions, the FTC accuses Touboul and his other company, Alyon Technologies, of "unjust enrichment," "unfair" billing, violations of the FTC's Pay-Per-Call Rule and other mischief. At the time of the lawsuit, Touboul said he was "stunned by the FTC's decision to initiate this unwarranted action," since the company had already "voluntarily" discussed the issues with the FTC and "implemented measures" to protect consumers. http://www.forbes.com/ebusiness/2004/03/18/cz_sl_0318credit.html Eric Friedebach /Tonight's Skywarn training cancelled due to... weather?/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the FTC is so far out in left field on these claims regards the 'ChargeMeLater' plan. I do not understand why it would be considered 'unjust enrichment' or 'unfair billing.' The internet merchant *is* entitled to be paid for whatever it is he sold the consumer, and at least under 'ChargeMeLater' the consumer gets to examine the merchandise rather than having to pay up front with a credit card (and we all know what hassles getting a refund from credit card companies can be). Under 'ChargeMeLater' a sort of informal credit card on the internet, the consumer okays the purchase, (generally thus far, just porn stuff on line), gets to examine or make use of his purchase, then **about a week later** gets a bill in the mail from the 'ChargeMeLater' people, and **within about fifteen days of that point** is expected to remit payment with a check or credit card, etc. 'ChargeMeLater' sets up small credit limits on each new customer, that limit later moves up depending on how well the person is about paying. I do not understand why FTC would think so poorly of that plan. If anything, the merchant (who does not get paid until 'ChargeMeLater' gets paid) is more likely than the consumer to get ripped off. When I first saw a reference to 'Charge MeLater' as a way to access some of 'that stuff' on line, I was astounded that an internet merchant would take chances like that. What exactly is the problem with the FTC on this? The merchants still use credit cards as valid proof of age before displaying their wares, etc. 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #129 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 19 17:20:57 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2JMKvl20346; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:20:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:20:57 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403192220.i2JMKvl20346@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 #130 TELECOM Digest Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:21:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 130 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New VoIP News Mailing List (Jack Decker) Second International Conference: Secure Communication and Net (SECI'04) Google Local is Cool (Phil Earnhardt) Re: Telephone Bill Reconciliation Software (Scott Dorsey) New York City 911 Data - Anywhere? (Cliff Stabbert) Re: Phone Sex (John Levine) Re: Phone Sex (Steven J Sobol) Re: Credit Card Security (Was: Phone Sex) (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Caller ID for PC (Clarence Dold) 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, 19 Mar 2004 13:01:00 -0500 From: Jack Decker Subject: New VoIP News Mailing List Pat, please conceal my e-mail address -- even though it's not my "usual" I don't want it to become a spam trap. I just wanted to let you know that I'm starting a new e-mail mailing list at Yahoo Groups called "VoIP News", at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/voipnews/ . This is basically an extension of what I've been doing in the MI-Telecom (Michigan Telecommunications) group, which is forwarding excerpts of, and links to, relevant news items that I've found online. Both of those groups are moderated, meaning I approve all posts, but any subscriber to the list can post. Here's the "official" description of the list: This list is intended to distribute news items relating to consumer-grade VoIP service -- that is, VoIP as used by residential or small business customers as a replacement for, or in addition to, traditional wireline telephone service. News items relating to consumer VoIP companies (such as VoicePulse, Vonage, Packet8, and similar companies) or to matters affecting those companies or their customers (such as efforts to regulate VoIP, or new hardware devices intended to be used with such services) are welcome. Please do not post the full text of copyrighted articles -- instead, send a link, the headline, and a short excerpt. Company press releases may be posted within certain limits -- we do not want items saying that, for example, the corporate CEO made a speech somewhere, but announcements of added or enhanced services or features, or similar items directly affecting customers will generally be accepted. Spam messages, or messages containing coupon or referral codes (or links to same) will be rejected. The emphasis in this list will be VoIP news that in some way affects VoIP customers, or that has the potential to do so. (End of description. Note that any of the above is subject to change if necessary to prevent abuse of the group -- I don't intend to let it be used as anyone's advertising vehicle.) As I write this there have been no messages posted to the list yet; it's that new (and Fridays tend to be slow news days anyway). The URL is: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/voipnews/ Or, send an e-mail to voipnews-subscribe@yahoogroups.com to subscribe. I mentioned the MI-Telecom (Michigan Telecommunications) list above - that one has been around since at least 1996 although it was just moved to Yahoo Groups last November. There will be some duplication between the two lists (for example, stories about VoIP companies that have ratecenters in Michigan may appear in both) but generally the MI-Telecom list will primarily be of interest to Michigan residents. The web page for that one is at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ Or, send an e-mail to MI-Telecom-subscribe@yahoogroups.com to subscribe. I'd also like to mention one web page that VoIP users may find useful. If you want to use your existing home telephone wiring with your VoIP service, you may find the page on "How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home" useful. The instructions here also work for someone who has a CellSocket or similar device, that allows a wireless phone service to be used with standard phone equipment. Most readers of this group probably won't need these instructions, but you may want to save the URL for when your non-techie friends ask how they can use their home phone wiring with their VoIP service or CellSocket type device. The URL for that is: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html As a final comment, it is my belief that VoIP is the thing that will finally bring us the level of competition (and the lower prices) that we've all been waiting for. In just the last year or so, there's been an explosion in the number of "unlimited" plans offered by both VoIP and traditional wireline companies. Yesterday, USA Today carried an article that began by saying, "Major phone companies are close to an agreement that would eliminate the fees long-distance carriers pay local phone providers to connect calls, and would raise local rates to make up the revenue, say people involved in the discussions." (See http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2004-03-18-phonerates_x.htm ). But what the article doesn't explicitly say is that if this agreement is approved, it probably will mean the end of timed long distance pricing (at least on domestic calls), and that local prices probably can't go up too much because anyone with broadband Internet service will have a multitude of low-cost VoIP options to choose from, not to mention the ever-present threat of people dropping wireline service entirely in favor of wireless service. I don't think anything like this would have been on the table had it not been for the VoIP services breaking onto the scene, and the degree of wireless substitution taking place. I am probably of the first generation that never recalls having sent or received a traditional telegram. I wonder if the kids just being born today will be of the first generation to never remember having wireline phone service, at least not the traditional circuit-switched variety? Jack (If you want to e-mail me, go to http://michigantelephone.mi.org/ and use the e-mail address shown in the graphic image near the bottom of the page). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Jack, this really sounds exciting, and I wish you the best of luck with it. Let's exchange VOIP related messages if you want. That is, you feel free to take VOIP stuff which appears here and use it in *your* newsgroup for same and if you will add 'editor@telecom-digest.org' as a member on your list to receive individual emails as they come out, then the messages for your list will automatically come here. Have you personally gotten into VOIP yet for your phone service? I have, and it works great, but I can see where new VOIP users would have some trouble sorting it all out. And your exhibits on how to connect VOIP to your house pairs or Cell Socket devices are a good idea also. Anyone who wants an e-coupon for a month of free service on Vonage is free to ask me for one. The e-coupon gets you the second month at no charge of whatever type of service you sign up for. Write not-for-pub to ptownson@telecom-digest.org to get one. PAT] ------------------------------ From: halfao_y@epitech.net (ILIES HALFAOUI) Subject: Second International Conference: Secure Communication and Internet Date: 19 Mar 2004 00:54:12 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com ************************************ Second International Conference on Secure Communication and the Internet " Threats and Challenges in an open Environment " ************************************ 27 - 29 December, Cairo, EGYPT ******************* The National Telecommunication Institute (NTI) of the Ministry of telecommunications and Information Technology in Egypt is organizing the second conference on " Secure Communication and the Internet " (SecI2004) in Cairo during the period 27 - 29 December 2004 . The conference theme is " Threats and Challenges in an open Environment ". . The topics covered by the conference include but are not limited to: 1 - Web-based technologies for application security (SOAP, LDAP, etc) 2 - Wireless network security (LAN, WAN) . 3 - Intrusion detection systems . 4 - Elliptic cryptography . 5 - Automation of formal verification . 6 - Smart card-based applications . 7 - Watermarking/IPR . 8 - Techniques for authentication and authorization . Important Dates : 1st call for papers 31 January 2004 2nd call for papers 15 April 2004 Submission deadline 15 August 2004 Notification of Acceptance 10ctober 2004 Camera Ready Manuscript 15 October 2004 Conference 27 - 29 December 2004 Paper Submission : Detailed instructions are found on the conference website . Registration Fees : The fees will cover a hard copy and CD of the conference proceedings , coffee breaks and lunches during the conference days at the following rates : US $ 500 with an additional US $ 50 for every page exceeding the allowable 12 pages . Conference Chair : Dr. Mahmoud T. El-Hadidi (Cairo University) Conference Co-Chair : Dr. Ahmed H. El-Sherbini (Director , NTI) Conference Secretary General : Dr. Magdi El-Soudani (Deputy Director,NTI) Technical Program Committee Chair : Dr. Gamal Darwish (Cairo University) Co-Chair : Dr. Nabil El-Kadhi (Laboratoire LERIA, France) Mohamed ABDEL-MEGUID - Egypt Heba ASLAN - Egypt Bill CAELLI - Australia David CHADWICK - UK Frederic CUPPENS - France Yasser DAKROURY - Egypt Mahmoud EL-HADIDI - Egypt Magdi EL-SOUDANI - Egypt Mohamed Adeeb GHONAIMY - Egypt Jean GOUBAULT-LARRECQ - France Dimitris GRITZALIS - Greece Bahaa HASSAN - Egypt James HUGHES - USA Gamal HUSSEIN - Egypt Sokratis KATSIKAS - Greece Yassine LAKHNECH - France Zakia MARRAKCHI - France Scott Knight - Canada Hartmut POHL - Germany Thomas QUILLINAN - Ireland Jean-Jacques QUISQUATER - Belgium Pierangela SAMARATI - Italy Thomas SCHLIENGER - Switzerland Amr YOUSSEF - Egypt Contact Information : Conference website : http://www.seci2004.nti.sci.eg/ For more inquiry send E-mail to : Seci2004@nti.sci.eg ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Google Local is cool Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 08:26:06 -0700 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Google launched their location-specific business directory service, local.google.com , this week. FAQ for it is at http://local.google.com/help/faq_local.html . This is a beta release of the service: it currently only works in the US and will have some glitches. But it is definitely a useful service today. Google is using web pages, online phone directories, etc., to get the locations of local businesses. You then enter a location and some set of keywords; google returns the results. The results are mostly sorted by distance to the specified location, but Google's ranking can override this. And Google will sell locally-targeted advertising. As with all their services, the sponsored links are clearly labeled as such aid displayed in a distinct area on the search results page. The online Yellow Pages are one of the few legacy databases I use on a regular basis. I am amazed by the clunkiness of the GUI and the general uselessness of these online interfaces. Yellow Page advertisements have traditionally been a huge cash cow for the Baby Bells. If Google can sway users to access their online directories instead, significant advertising dollars should start flowing to this friendly directory service -- and away from the traditional Yellow Pages. One wonders what countermeasures the Baby Bells -- and other owners of Yellow Pages services -- will launch. Effectiveness at using search engines is enhanced by studying them; I'm wondering if Google has contemplated buying/subsidizing one of the better guides to using Google (like O'Reilley's _Google Pocket Guide_) and distributing on a massive scale. I'm also interested in seeing how Google will work to provide access to their service beyond a traditional web interface. I really like Google's news service ( news.google.com ) and the beta of their shopping service ( froogle.google.com ). Google's taking on the Yellow Pages could massively shift the landscape of the Internet again. --phil ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Telephone Bill Reconciliation Software Date: 19 Mar 2004 11:08:41 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Randy H wrote: > Does anyone know of a Retail or shareware piece of software that can > take a phone bill from AT+T (delimeted file) and another file > generated on an in-house SMDR system and compare the two for accuracy? > I tried to come up with an Excel V-Lookup formula (I'm not too good > with formulas) but couldnt get an accurate match. > A big problem is that the Times of the calls do not match exactly in > both. AT+T may have a call time at 8:00 am, and the SMDR may have the > same call at 8:01 am, etc. > Any help would be appreciated. Try subtracting the times from one another, then taking the absolute value. If the result is less than five minutes and the destination fields match, consider them the same call. This could fail IF you have a lot of short calls to the same place within a five-minute period, but that's the kind of error you can overlook. The three hour call to Guyana will be handled fine. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: cstabbert@yahoo.com (Cliff Stabbert) Subject: New York City 911 Data - Anywhere? Date: 19 Mar 2004 06:33:22 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi. I've been trying to locate some specific information on 911 calls in New York over the last six months to a year. Ideally, I'd like to be able to get information calls dispatched to specific precincts broken down by incident type (domestic/assault/ theft etc.), by time of day, and by day of the week. Googling around has led to NYPD's CompStat information, which provides precinct-level crime statistics, but isn't really what I'm looking for. It's a tall order, perhaps. So far, calling the NYPD (both main information and specific precincts) and the New York mayor's office hasn't gotten me very far (the information doesn't exist, or isn't public, or would be released only under FOIA). Anybody have a clue whether this information is out there, and if so, how I'd get it? If there's a better newsgroup to post this in, or some other forum that might provide leads, please let me know. Thanks in advance, Cliff ------------------------------ Date: 19 Mar 2004 14:54:03 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Phone Sex Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > But Touboul has some big problems that stand between him and Internet > enlightenment for the masses: the Federal Trade Commission and > attorneys general in 20 states. In a lawsuit filed in May, and echoed > in the state actions, the FTC accuses Touboul and his other company, > Alyon Technologies, of "unjust enrichment," "unfair" billing, > violations of the FTC's Pay-Per-Call Rule and other mischief. ... http://www.forbes.com/ebusiness/2004/03/18/cz_sl_0318credit.html > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the FTC is so far out in left > field on these claims regards the 'ChargeMeLater' plan. I do not > understand why it would be considered 'unjust enrichment' or 'unfair > billing.' Read the article. The FTC and state AG's are after him not for this latest plan (which is a really stupid idea, but that's a separate issue), but because he was running a free porn scam where the victim downloads a dialer program that calls a $5/min number. If that's his idea of a legitimate business plan, I don't think I have any further interest in whatever he's proposing now. 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 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: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Phone Sex Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 10:57:37 -0600 Eric Friedebach wrote: > Seth Lubove, 03.18.04, Forbes.com > LOS ANGELES - As many as 87% of U.S. consumers are still worried about > using their credit cards to make Internet purchases, according to one > recent survey. Stephane Touboul says he has the killer app that could > reinvent Internet purchasing. > His company, ChargeMeLater, allows consumers to buy online and pay for > it simply by entering the sum of the last four digits of their social > security number. Lessee, a quarter of a billion people living in the USA, only ten thousand distinct combinations of digits from 0000 to 9999 and not all of those are used in SSNs ... how does he expect this to work again? > Touboul uses a proprietary algorithm that corroborates the identity > of users based on a search of multiple databases and their phone > numbers, validates their ages and addresses, makes sure they're good > for the money, and then sends a bill to the user's house. "We have > created a mechanism that could really change the face of commerce on > the Internet," boasts Touboul from his Secaucus, N.J., headquarters. Then he woke up. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the FTC is so far out in left > field on these claims regards the 'ChargeMeLater' plan. I do not > understand why it would be considered 'unjust enrichment' or 'unfair > billing.' I'm afraid I just do not see how he's going to make it work. Forget about the FTC allegations for a second. Is it not possible that you might have more than one person in a household that may have the same sum? What about people who aren't fiscally responsible for the phone lines? > how well the person is about paying. I do not understand why FTC would > think so poorly of that plan. If anything, the merchant (who does not > get paid until 'ChargeMeLater' gets paid) Ummm, yeah. If I want to screw around waiting for money to come in, I'll bill the customer myself. This plan ain't gonna work. The credit card processors put all the liability on the merchant anyhow, and at least I am guaranteed the money once I get an authorization. The bank *must* fund my account and that is generally done within 2-3 business days. I think the FTC allegations are a moot point. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ "someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although with an SSN there are only ten thousand (give or take) 'last four digits' as you point out what I read recently on line is that he also uses some one or more digits from a person's credit card (NOT the first digit 4, 5, or 6) and that serves pretty well to avoid two people having the same sum of digits. Unless your intent is to defraud you wind up with a unique number. Obviously he does not publish his entire algorithym. Its sort of like how credit card point of sale credit authorization is done when the computer is 'down' and a human bean has to use some judgment. The merchant's proof that he did call in and get authorization for the sale is when the human bean recites a number to the sales person which is acquired by taking two of the digits in the credit card, summing them a certain way. No one knows the exact formula (which digits in the card number are used, and the way they are added or subtracted and the absolute! value recieved except for the authorization people. The merchant writes that number on the ticket as his proof. There are flaws in the system, but as computers get more and more reliable (less 'down' time) it works well enough, especially when the authorizaton phone room has a huge backlog of calls in the queue waiting for answers. And, they change the choice of digits used and the calculation process every month or so. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 10:34:41 EST Subject: Re: Credit Card Security (Was: Phone Sex) In a message dated 18 Mar 2004 17:31:40 -0800, friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) writes: > Seth Lubove, 03.18.04, Forbes.com > LOS ANGELES - As many as 87% of U.S. consumers are still worried about > using their credit cards to make Internet purchases, according to one > recent survey. Stephane Touboul says he has the killer app that could > reinvent Internet purchasing. > His company, ChargeMeLater, allows consumers to buy online and pay for > it simply by entering the sum of the last four digits of their social > security number. I had dealings last fall with a company which had a web site displaying their wares (not porn) which would not accept credit cards over the internet. They gave an 800 number to call to actually place your order. (My dealings with them were satisfactory, although my credit card issuer called to ask if this charge from New Mexico was legitimate in the middle of several other charges the day before and the same day in my home state.) Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: dold@CallerXIDX.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Caller ID for PC Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 18:34:07 UTC Organization: a2i network J Kelly wrote: > On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 04:23:48 UTC, dold@CallerXIDX.usenet.us.com wrote: >> Why doesn't your popup work anymore? I missed that part. I thought >> you were looking for a modem where you never had success before. > I was using an old USR External modem, and it takes up too much room > on the desk so I ditched it. Looking for something either *very* > small, or internal PCI. I've tried a half dozen internal PCI's (all > claiming to support CLID) and none work properly. It appears that > most winmodems either can't do CLID or require specialized software, > but do not necesarrily supports the AT command set for CLID which is > what the software I like uses. Most of the cheap USRs I've seen do > not mention CLID. I wish there was a PCI version of the USR Courier, > I have an ISA one but PC's don't come with ISA slots these days. You're a tough guy to help. You trim off the parts of an answer that might give you help, and pose the same question again, with a little more detail. So, you liked your USR? Get another one. What is cheap, anyway? The $19.95 USR-PCI is a WinModem. They don't mention Caller ID as a feature, because that is a given. They do mention the ability to display Caller ID while you are online. Internet Call Notification (ICN) is the buzzword. http://www.usr.com/products/home/compare-home.asp http://www.usr.com/products/home/home-product.asp?sku=USR5610B looks like the current version of the courier. It shows a list price of $79.95, but I see that online for $51. My U.S. Robotics 56K Voice PCI is not a WinModem. It appears to be a model 5601, but that must be a Dell rebrand, because I can't find that model mentioned on the USR site. If a PCI Winmodem won't run the software that you like, maybe you need different software, or stay with the old modem that worked. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #130 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 20 03:37:17 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2K8bGa24912; Sat, 20 Mar 2004 03:37:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 03:37:17 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403200837.i2K8bGa24912@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 #131 TELECOM Digest Sat, 20 Mar 2004 03:36:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 131 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges (Danny Burstein) Telephone Switchbox (Will) BellSouth DSL Rate Increase (John McHarry) Lottery's Toll-Free Number Leads to Different Fantasies (E Friedebach) Strange Call (Michael Muderick) Re: New York City 911 Data - Anywhere? (Tony P.) Re: Power Lines Set to Carry Internet to Outlet Near You (John Bartley) Re: Seeking any Advice on 5.8 GHZ Phones (Clark W. Griswold, Jr.) VoicePulse Announces Major Expansion (From VOIP News) Telephone/Engineer Tool Kit For Sale (Rick) Re: Line Identifier (Herb Stein) Re: TV Changing Rapidly, Viewers Try to Adjust (Stan) TiVo Will Die (Monty Solomon) After TiVo, Radio Rewound (Monty Solomon) Listen, You'll Hear the Future (Monty Solomon) Akimbo Seeks Obscure Entertainment du jour (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: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 21:27:25 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC New York, NY -- A filing today (11-March-2004) with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) asks the agency to examine the harm caused by high phone rates charged to people in prison, and criticizes the relationships between prison administrators and commercial phone companies that give rise to the unusually high rates. "The filing asks the FCC to take two primary steps to remedy this problem: One, require that private prisons replace exclusive telephone service contracts with contracts allowing people in prison to select one of several telephone companies to carry their long distance calls. And two, require private prisons to allow the people they incarcerate the option of making direct dial calls as an alternative to the more expensive collect calls most currently require. [ snippety snip, rest at (watch for line wrap) : http://www.brennancenter.org/presscenter/releases_2004/ pressrelease_2004_0311.html _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: mlliw@joimail.com (Will) Subject: Telephone Switchbox Date: 19 Mar 2004 19:05:27 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Is there a box that when called to normally, it sends through, but when a code such as #22, It brings the caller to a _dialtone_ on another line? I have seen several boxes that do this (for computer/fax/telephone) that when #22 is dialed, they send to a separate place, but they don't give a _dialtone_ on a separate line. Thanks! mlliw PS This would be for when my work has AreaPlus (More non-long distance places) and when I call it and dial #22, I would be able to call a nearby county for free. ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: BellSouth DSL Rate Increase Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 19:05:09 -0500 BellSouth has decided to impose a $2.97 "regulatory cost recovery fee", actually a simple price increase on their DSL service. One of the reasons they site is the federal universal service charge. I don't think this is charged against DSL, or am I wrong? ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Lottery's Toll-Free Number Leads to Different Kind of Fantasies Date: 19 Mar 2004 16:44:16 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com March 19, 2004, Associated Press BISMARCK, N.D. -- North Dakota lottery officials had to send new stickers to merchants to cover up an embarrassing glitch - a toll-free number on the new lottery's ticket terminals that directed callers to a phone-sex line. The number is for retailers who have lottery questions, and is not intended for public use. Those who called it got a recording that gave them a second number to call, which advertised 'live, one-on-one fantasy talk.' http://www.startribune.com/stories/484/4673576.html [Note from Eric: This being Friday, I can almost guarantee there will be no more news items like this for the remainder of the week.] Eric Friedebach /Tonight's Skywarn training cancelled due to... weather?/ ------------------------------ From: Michael Muderick Subject: Strange Call Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:44:14 -0500 I got a call at my office today: "I'm sorry, this call was intended for answer by an answering machine." Click. Not worth *69. No caller ID. Any ideas? ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: New York City 911 Data - Anywhere? Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 01:11:10 GMT In article , cstabbert@yahoo.com says: > Hi. I've been trying to locate some specific information on 911 calls > in New York over the last six months to a year. > Ideally, I'd like to be able to get information calls dispatched to > specific precincts broken down by incident type (domestic/assault/ > theft etc.), by time of day, and by day of the week. > Googling around has led to NYPD's CompStat information, which provides > precinct-level crime statistics, but isn't really what I'm looking > for. > It's a tall order, perhaps. So far, calling the NYPD (both main > information and specific precincts) and the New York mayor's office > hasn't gotten me very far (the information doesn't exist, or isn't > public, or would be released only under FOIA). Anybody have a clue > whether this information is out there, and if so, how I'd get it? > If there's a better newsgroup to post this in, or some other forum > that might provide leads, please let me know. You should be able to pull the dispatch records. That is probably the best indicator. I know we tracked both incident and dispatch. It was rather interesting to see how long it took the officers to get on the scene. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 14:32:55 PST From: John Bartley or K7AAY@ARRL.NET Subject: Re: Power Lines Set to Carry Internet to Outlet Near You On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 23:51:23 +1100, Colin Sutton wrote: > A unit of Cinergy Corp. today will become the nation's first electric > utility to offer high-speed Internet service to customers via its > power lines, turning every electrical outlet in homes or offices into > a Web connection. That is, until an amateur radio operator, either in the neighborhood or in a vehicle driving by, transmists with as little as one watt of power on HF bands. The Enrons pushing BPL are doing so under Part 15 of the Communications Act, and have no license from the FCC to do so. Where hams have tested (Austria, Japan, and now here), they have found that BPL interferes with amateur radio and shortwave reception. Conversely, transmitting on licensed ham frequencies has been shown to interfere with BPL, at power levels much lower than the maximum permitted 1,500 watts. It should be noted those frequency allocations are a matter of law, as amateurs are the primary users of many HF frequencies. This is confirmed by international treaty. Those HF frequencies are reliable at bouncing off the inner ionosphere, and are the key to hams being able to reach far away locations without satellite. Other licensed users of HF, such as commercial shortwave broadcasters and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, have also noted the technical weaknesses of BPL. Therefore, BPL may be offered, but its reliability is in question. 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: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <73115.1041@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Seeking any Advice on 5.8 GHZ Phones Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:15:24 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com burris wrote: > Yes, all that I have seen, and I do beta testing for a few > manufacturers of 5.8, use 2.4 from handset to base and 5.8 from base > to handset. Marketing?? I suspect a combination of cost and marketing. The higher the frequency, the smaller the antenna length needs to be. In the handset, that becomes a marketing factor as you can eliminate the antenna. The perceived "betterness" of a higher number for frequency also comes into play. It doesn't matter in the base and there's no need to spend the money ... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 19:19:23 -0500 From: VOIP News Subject: VoicePulse Announces Major Expansion [Pat: Please conceal the "From:" e-mail address if you use this. -Jack] http://www.voxilla.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=59&mode=nested&order=0&thold=0 Inching Westward VOXILLA.COM News Report New Jersey-based Voice over IP service provider VoicePulse will be tripling the number of rate centers it serves throughout the United States over the next two weeks. The expansion effort, says VoicePulse CEO and President Ravi Sakaria, is part of the company's goal to cover the 48 continental United States by the end of 2004. Today (Mar. 19), VoicePulse began offering service in California's populous Los Angeles County, the first time the company has offered service on the Pacific coast. By early April, Sakaria said, VoicePulse will be adding service to 1,800 rate centers throughout the country. Before today, the company served a total of 900 rate centers in 14 states, primarily on the East Coast. Full story at: http://www.voxilla.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=59&mode=nested&order=0&thold=0 If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VoIPnews/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: VoIPnews-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ------------------------------ From: rixride@hotmail.com (Rick) Subject: Telephone/Engineer Tool Kit For Sale Date: 19 Mar 2004 19:04:28 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3803843729 Used Engieering Tool Case for sale, Cheap! Thanks, Rick ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: Line Identifier Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 21:55:15 -0600 Steve Griffin wrote in message news:telecom23.129.5@telecom-digest.org: > I do residential structured wiring. When I'm connecting to the NID, > it's nice to know which line I'm connecting to. In most areas around > here (Maryland, DC, VA), 811 will get me a recording of the line I'm > calling from. In some areas, this won't work. I was told there is a > universal number that will work, but I don't now what it is. Can > anyone help? Try 1 888 902-9998 Herb Stein herb@herbstein.com ------------------------------ From: Stan Subject: Re: TV Changing Rapidly, Viewers Try to Adjust Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 04:28:50 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - Carolina The more things change, the more they stay the same. These days, 'The Sopranos' is called a 'limited run' series because it only runs 13 weeks. In the 50's and 60's, there were no VCRs and hardly any re-runs. You watched a television show for 39 weeks from September to May. For the other 13 weeks, there were 'Summer replacement series'. Every year there was a new batch of summer replacement series, usually low cost musical/comedy/variety shows. 'Glen Campbell' and 'The Hudson Brothers' come to mind as examples. In the 21st Century, 'The Apprentice', 'Survivor', and other 'limited run' series run approximately 13 episodes, often bloated by one or two clip shows and a recap show (with 'lost' footage). 'The Sopranos' runs 13 weeks at a time, disappears for a year, and comes back when there's a new story to tell. Sounds more like a Summer Replacement to me. -Stan Monty Solomon wrote in message news:telecom23.122.1@telecom-digest.org: > By DAVID BAUDER AP Television Writer > NEW YORK (AP) -- The natural rhythms of television used to be as > dependable as leaves sprouting in spring and falling in autumn. > Broadcast networks would premiere new shows in mid-September, then > replace failures when the weather turned cold. Summer was rerun > season. Prime-time schedules rarely changed. > > Those days are long gone. > Series pop up and disappear anytime, dispatched around the schedule > like chess pieces. Some shows are rerun all the time, others never. > You can't even count on a show to start at the top of an hour anymore. > For ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox, plus upstarts WB and UPN, the landscape is > changing rapidly. The reasons include viewers' lackluster response to > the current season, cable continuing to grab viewers and awards, and > the hyper-competitiveness of TV executives. > For viewers, their trusted TV sets can be confusing. Here's a look at > how things are changing and why: > http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200403092003_APO_V0089 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 02:09:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Will Die By Jim Louderback March 18, 2004 PC Magazine It's always hard to write an obituary, especially when the subject is still alive. It's especially hard for me, because I love the little guy like a brother. But, alas, TiVo will die. I was one of the first reviewers to get my hands on an early TiVo box. I compared TiVo with ReplayTV, and although I really wanted to like ReplayTV, TiVo won my heart over. It wasn't the cutesy mascot, although that helped. Rather, it was the drop-dead simplicity and ease of use that even the first version evinced. And to top everything off, TiVo came with the world's best remote control ever, even more astounding for such a fiendishly complex device. Shaped like a dog bone, it was simple to use, easy to understand, and a pleasure to hold. The Wall Street Journal's arbiter of tech-Walt Mossberg-still thinks ReplayTV was better, and we've argued over the brilliance of the remote. But the acid test, for me, was when I plopped TiVo down in front of my computer-averse wife. She took to it like a duck to water. So much, in fact, that I soon purchased another one just so I could watch what I wanted to see. But TiVo today has a problem-and it's not what you think. Most folks point to TiVo's inability to convince consumers just how cool the product is and why they need one. Yes, it's hard to describe why a personal video recorder (PVR) is better than a VCR-until you use one. Give a TiVo to your friends for a month and you'll have to pry the remote out of their cold, dead hands. ReplayTV faces the same challenge, but that's not where the real threat lies. Instead, a convergence of three separate trends is conspiring to kill off TiVo. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1550772,00.asp TiVo Will Die Posted by michael on Friday March 19, @01:13PM from the tivo-is-dying-etc.-etc. dept. http://slashdot.org/articles/04/03/19/1749233.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 02:21:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: After TiVo, Radio Rewound By DAVID POGUE YOU'VE heard of occupational hazards like tennis elbow, runner's knee, footballer's ankle. But those ailments pale next to the agony of the TiVo twitch. This recently diagnosed condition is exhibited by owners of digital video recorders like TiVo and ReplayTV. Having become addicted to the seven-second replay button -- an essential movie-watching tool in this era of special effects and mumbled dialogue -- TiVo twitch sufferers are often seen reflexively pressing a nonexistent seven-second replay button, even when they're not in front of the television. Their brains helplessly fire the deeply ingrained "Let me catch that again" command when they're listening to the car radio, enduring a flaky cellphone connection or savoring a hard-won apology from a spouse. Truth is, you can't blame the brain for misfiring. It's bizarre that five years into the digital video-recorder era, you still can't buy a digital VCR for radio. Why has the electronics industry developed so many machines that let us time-shift Dr. Phil and "Saturday Night Live," but so few that do so for Dr. Joy Browne and "Science Friday"? Actually, there is one such device. Radio YourWay (pogoproducts.com) looks at first glance like a pocket-size (2.2 by 3.9 by 0.7 inches) AM-FM transistor radio, which, in part, it is. But it also contains a built-in timer, so that you can set up a schedule for recording radio broadcasts. Programming it is exactly as easy -- or as difficult -- as programming a VCR, except that it uses a military-style 24-hour clock instead of AM and PM designations. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/26/technology/circuits/26stat.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 02:50:22 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Listen, You'll Hear the Future Radio stations, receivers get in tune with digital age By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 3/1/2004 It's been 101 years since Guglielmo Marconi made this country's first trans-Atlantic radio broadcast from South Wellfleet on Cape Cod, but radio continues to be a vibrant focus of technological innovation. After years of development, in recent months three Boston stations have begun broadcasting digital versions of their signals that can offer CD-quality music as well as streaming text information such as song titles and news and weather headlines to display screens on special digital receivers. Another 10 area stations plan to offer digital -- sometimes called ''high-definition radio" -- this year, joining nearly 300 stations nationwide that have licensed the technology. Japanese radio maker Kenwood in mid-January rolled out the first digital radio receiver, a $350 unit that includes a display screen similar to the ''crawler" at the bottom of cable television news channels. JVC and Panasonic are expected to introduce digital car radios in the next 30 to 60 days. The sets would all pick up conventional broadcasts when digital versions are unavailable. http://www.boston.com/business/markets/articles/2004/03/01/listen_youll_hear_the_future/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 02:14:29 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Akimbo Seeks Obscure Entertainment du jour By Michael Kanellos Staff Writer, CNET News.com Ever have a desire to watch first-run movies from Nigeria, videos on fishing for Walleye Pike or see someone deliver the nightly news while naked? Akimbo might be for you. The San Mateo, Calif.-based start-up will launch a set-top box and subscription service in May that will offer a chance for home viewers to obtain programs and entertainment that they otherwise might not see on cable TV channels or networks. The programming, for instance, will include short films that have been nominated for awards at the Cannes Film Festival or the Oscars; features from the Billiard Club Network; music videos from India; extreme sports documentaries; and the Naked News, described as "the first Internet news program to present the news with nude newscasters, delivering international, national, sports and entertainment news together with health and fitness, movie reviews and in-the-street interviews." In addition, Akimbo expects to deliver first-run films on a pay-per-view basis from studios such as Lions Gate Films, which made the recently released film "The Cooler." Akimbo CEO Josh Goldman and other company executives previously worked at MySimon, a shopping site owned by CNET Networks, publisher of News.com. The idea behind Akimbo is to create a TiVo-like service that doesn't have to rely on the programming from media conglomerates, said Steve Shannon, the company's executive vice president of sales and marketing and an alumni of ReplayTV. http://news.com.com/2100-1041-5176273.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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #131 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 22 02:45:35 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2M7jY411377; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 02:45:35 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 02:45:35 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403220745.i2M7jY411377@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 #132 TELECOM Digest Mon, 22 Mar 2004 02:45:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 132 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Watch Your Mouth (Monty Solomon) Shredder Sales Soar in U.S. in Era of ID Theft (Monty Solomon) Forget TV Phones, US Mobile Industry Fixing Basics (Monty Solomon) Re: Strange Call (Steven J Sobol) Re: Strange Call (Gary Breuckman) U.S. Government Attack on Internet and First Amendment (From VOIP News) CALEA Petition Concerns VOIP Proponents (From VOIP News) Broadcom Introduces New IP Phone Chips Targeted (From VOIP News) Industry Fears Wiretap Plan Could Chill Innovation (From VOIP News) Western Union Clocks (Mike Riddle) SS7 MTP: Qs on Changeback (Swami) Re: Seeking any Advice on 5.8 GHZ Phones (SELLCOM Tech support) Re: Telephone Switchbox (Carl Navarro) Re: Telephone/Engineer Tool Kit For Sale (William Warren) Re: Google Local is Cool (Wesrock@aol.com) Caller ID Printer Mechanism on Ebay (stbann) Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges (R Schaffrath) Re: Phone Sex (Gary Novosielski) DSL Without Dialtone (Ernest Young) 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, 20 Mar 2004 03:20:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Watch Your Mouth In its Thursday ruling against Bono and Howard Stern, the FCC announced that a new day of language policing has dawned. By Eric Boehlert March 19, 2004 | Taking on its new role as the indecency hanging judge, and doing it with a vengeance, the Federal Communications Commission on Thursday levied a fine against Howard Stern, America's most notorious radio talk show host, and ruled that U2 frontman Bono had been indecent and profane for using the word "fucking" in a Golden Globes telecast. The moves were just the latest in what the FCC suggests will be a string of penalties. Under pressure during an election year from politicians and grass-roots groups to clean up the airwaves, the bipartisan commission, which for years was all but dormant on the topic, has launched an unprecedented campaign to battle indecency on the airwaves. http://salon.com/news/feature/2004/03/19/fcc/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:50:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Shredder Sales Soar in U.S. in Era of ID Theft By Michael Flaherty NEW YORK, March 21 (Reuters) - Yuri Fernandez discovered recently that a stranger could snatch bills and receipts from his trash and empty his bank account. To avoid that possibility, Fernandez, 32, did what a lot of other people are doing nowadays: He went out and bought a shredder. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40902637 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:41:34 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Forget TV Phones, US Mobile Industry Fixing Basics By Eric Auchard ATLANTA, March 21 (Reuters) - Gee-whiz gadgetry like TV on cell phones will be overshadowed by more pedestrian concerns like on-the-go convenience and fewer dropped calls as the U.S. wireless industry meets this week for its big annual showcase. The Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA) trade show here beginning Monday will offer a snapshot into the hopes and fears of an industry halfway into a five-year, multibillion dollar upgrade to video and Internet networks. Hundreds of companies will tease conference goers with glimpses of a world of ubiquitous high-speed Internet connections, with full-length movies running on cell phones and a Palm devices that can remotely control a stove. And while TV and photos over phones are common in Korea and Japan and set to take off in Europe later this year, the United States is still in the early stages of building networks to handle such services. As the industry tries to fix common problems like dropped calls and fuzzy connections, they seek to lure consumers to new phones with a taste of future technology -- at some risk. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40902597 ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Strange Call Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 10:29:46 -0600 Michael Muderick wrote: > I got a call at my office today: > "I'm sorry, this call was intended for answer by an answering > machine." Click. Not worth *69. No caller ID. Any ideas? I got a call to my cell phone with caller ID showing the remove number for Xpedite Inc. in New Jersey. It was a robocall to my cell phone and therefore is actionable under the TCPA and I can sue for $1500, and I sent a demand letter on the 12th -- unfortunately, it *still* hasn't gotten there, contrary to my experiences sending stuff to the East Coast previously. (Even an employee at the Asbury Park, NJ post office said it should have gotten there already.) The message was the same as the one you got. Robo-dialed calls to devices where the call recipient pays are illegal. Not sure about robo-dialed calls to landlines, but on the other hand, telemarketers ARE now legally required to provide caller ID. I don't know if this is worth pursuing for you -- if it is actionable under a telemarketing law or the TCPA, perhaps ... JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ "someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003 ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Re: Strange Call Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:00:36 -0600 Organization: Puma's Lair - catbox.com In article , Michael Muderick wrote: > I got a call at my office today: > "I'm sorry, this call was intended for answer by an answering machine." > Click. Not worth *69. No caller ID. Any ideas? I've received similar ones, where you answer the call and a recording states, "sorry, I've dialed the wrong number" ... RIGHT ... I think they're trolling for FAX lines, for the unsolicitied stock tips and vacation deals. -- Gary Breuckman ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:47:28 -0500 Subject: U.S. Government Attack on Internet and First Amendment Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_5633.shtml U.S. Government Attack on Internet and First Amendment By Ben Charny FBI pushes for broadband wiretap powers: ISPs, Net phone services would all have to rewire March 12, 2004-A far-reaching proposal from the FBI, made public Friday, would require all broadband Internet providers, including cable modem and DSL companies, to rewire their networks to support easy wiretapping by police. The FBI's request to the Federal Communications Commission aims to give police ready access to any form of Internet-based communica- tions. If approved as drafted, the proposal could dramatically expand the scope of the agency's wiretap powers, raise costs for cable broadband companies and complicate Internet product development. Legal experts said the 85-page filing includes language that could be interpreted as forcing companies to build backdoors into everything from instant messaging and voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) programs to Microsoft's Xbox Live gaming service. The introduction of new services that did not support a back door for police would be outlawed, and companies would be given 15 months to make sure existing services comply. Full story at: http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_5633.shtml How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:58:38 -0500 Subject: CALEA Petition Concerns VOIP Proponents Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://industryclick.com/magazinearticle.asp?magazineid=7&releaseid=12104&magazinearticleid=194837&siteid=3 by Donny Jackson Telephony, Mar 22, 2004 A far-reaching petition from the nation's most powerful law enforcement bodies calling for surveillance access of voice-over-IP calls and other broadband services could hamper development of the emerging technologies. In a recent joint petition, the U.S. Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Administration asked the FCC to make packet-mode services subject to provisions of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), which governs surveillance access of messages transported by carriers. The law enforcement agencies claim their efforts to conduct surveillance are being undermined by communications providers that claim they are not required to comply with CALEA. The petition seeks an expedited response from the FCC to clarify the matter. Full story at: http://industryclick.com/magazinearticle.asp?magazineid=7&releaseid=12104&magazinearticleid=194837&siteid=3 ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:35:36 -0500 Subject: Broadcom Introduces New IP Phone Chips Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2004/Feb/1024204.htm Broadcom Introduces New IP Phone Chips Targeted at the Rapidly Emerging Residential and SOHO VoIP Markets Broadcom Corporation (Nasdaq: BRCM), a leading provider of silicon solutions enabling broadband communications, today announced two new Internet Protocol (IP) phone engine chips that enable manufacturers to economically build feature-rich IP phones for the residential, small office home office (SOHO), and small-to-medium sized business (SMB) markets. VoIP-enabled broadband services using IP phones based on the new Broadcom(R) BCM1113R and BCM1115R offer the consumer and small office markets significant cost savings and feature advantages over traditional analog phones connected to the public switched telephone network (PSTN). These services include: high fidelity voice quality; the integration of voice, instant messaging, email and video; the integration of landline, wireless LAN and cellular; on-line gaming with voice; and more. Full story at: http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2004/Feb/1024204.htm ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 04:58:52 -0500 Subject: Industry Fears Wiretap Plan Could Chill Innovation Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.detnews.com/2004/technology/0403/20/technology-97636.htm By Matthew Fordahl / AP Technology Writer SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Before 8x8 Inc. launched an Internet phone service in late 2002, it drafted a business plan, set up its equipment, posted a Web site and began taking orders from customers. As with most online ventures, U.S. government approval wasn't needed. That would change if the Department of Justice succeeds at persuading federal regulators to require new online communications services -- such as Internet calling -- to comply with wiretapping laws. Critics, including some online businesses that are working with authorities to make their services wiretap-capable, say the DOJ proposal isn't just unprecedented and overzealous but also dangerously impractical. It would chill innovation, they say, invade privacy and drive businesses outside the United States. "No one in the Internet world is going to support this," said Bryan Martin, chief executive of 8x8, which sells the Packet8 phone service. "It's counter to everything we've done to date in terms of building the Internet as a free, anonymous and creative place." Full story at: http://www.detnews.com/2004/technology/0403/20/technology-97636.htm ------------------------------ From: Mike Riddle Organization: Solitary, Poor,Nasty, Brutish and Short Subject: Western Union Clocks Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 06:56:01 -0600 Several years ago our esteemed moderator ran several articles on Western Union Clocks. These were typically installed in train stations and other public places. They were electrically powered, self-winding (made by the "Self-Winding Clock Company") and synchronized with the Naval Observatory on a periodic basis through a 20 or 60 ma (I'm not sure which right now) circuit to Western Union. I've looked in the archives and while I found several of the old messages, I couldn't locate any detailed information on how to actual sync them now that WU is no longer in the time business. So I'm looking for an affordable ("cheap") WWV receiver or other timing device that could give at least a contact closure daily or hourly at the top of the hour so I could use one or two of these old beauties as they were truly designed. A manual circuit is simple and described in the archives. An automagic one quickly gets past my knowledge of available products/techniques. ;-( TIA. Mike Riddle /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign mriddle%nospam@ivgate.omahug.org \ / Respect for open standards "To Reply Remove the Obvious" X No HTML/RTF in email http://www.mikeriddle.com / \ No M$ Word docs in email [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Quite honestly, I am looking *even for a single clock* right now. I had three (one wooden case, two metal case ones) several years ago, but some one or more persons stole them from me around the start of 2000. Mike, *unless you have sweep second hands on your clock(s) -- not all that common -- those clocks can be manually calibrated quite easily -- well, it takes a couple days of very close observation -- to within a few seconds, maybe 10 seconds per **month**, meaning with the naked eye, any discrepancy in the time is so negligible it does not matter. They *are* beautiful old clocks, but hardly the world's most accurate; but to the casual observer or even some one who stand there and looks at them closely, they can be quite accurate. I had all three of my clocks wired in parallel to a 4.5 volt battery eliminator; since it never happened that all three of them (and quite rare that even two of them) chose to wind at the same time, that little battery eliminator was quite sufficient. As the clock(s) would wind once per hour, I also had the little red light bulb illuminate on the winding circuit. To set the clocks, I had the setting circuits all wired in parallel also to a nine-volt battery which was taped under my desk through a doorbell button. Once a month or so, when I happened to look at the clocks *and* my radio controlled wristwatch at the same time and see the digital wristwatch approach an even hour and could actually see with my eyes where one or more of the clocks was a thin hair off the correct time, as the proper second approached I would tap that doorbell button and listen to the ker-chunk as all three clocks would jerk their minute a tiny fraction of an inch backward or forward as needed. How to get the clocks that accurate to start with? Well, they have to be ***totally level*** both flush against the wall and from the floor or ceiling. Make sure the hands are screwed on tight. Not so tight they bend or fall off, but make the little screw fasten on there snuggly. Starting at midnight or noon, make both hands evenly point at the '12'. Look again at 12:05; if you can see even the tiniest discrepancy, then tweak the pendulum set screw just a tiny bit, mark the *exact* time with a digital time piece and start again. Do that every five minutes until you can no longer detect any discrepancy with your naked eye. Then wait 30 minutes or so and check again, and repeat as needed. No noticeable discrepancies? Then check it again in a couple hours. Then go off to bed; when you wake up in the morning go look again. If the discrepancy wasn't really gross to start with, then after a day or two of looking and making little tweaks of the pendulum as needed, you will have the clock very, very,very close, close enough that you can ignore it for at least a few days at a time. Train your ears also to listen to the beat. If your clock(s) have a 'sweep second' hand as well, the setting arm does both the second hand and the minute hand. But even WUTCO techs had a hard time calibrating the second hand; if it was between 1 second and around 20 seconds it would jump backward; between about 35 seconds and 60 seconds it would jump forward. If it was between about 20 seconds and 35 seconds more or less when the pulse came down the line, well then you had a problem. The mechanical finger would try to pull it one way or the other, but often times miss entirely. (Remember, WUTCO clocks were more glamorous than they were 'to-the- split-second' accurate.) My wooden case clock arrived with a broken glass on the front, and fifty years of paint covering up an original varnish finish. It spent the first fifty years of its life hanging in the Board of Education Building lunchroom (downtown Chicago), then I had it in service for another *25 years* (1973-1998) in my office. The finest clock I ever saw was a grandfather clock in a large case which stood on the floor in the Chicago Temple Building third floor library; it also had Western Union works in it, and I think its original smooth varnish finish and the original glass in it, and door latches. I sure miss those three clocks I had since they were stolen. If **anyone** is willing to part with one, please let me know and how much. No total basket cases please, but small repairs are quite acceptable. Write to ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu and thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ From: swami18@lycos.com (Swami) Subject: SS7 MTP: Qs on Changeback Date: 21 Mar 2004 19:56:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi I have some Qs on Changeback (CHB) mechanism in the Message Transfer Part of SS7 (after reading ITU-T Q.704): 1. What is the purpose/use of the Changeback Acknowledge? Is it only to say that the Remote exchange is ready to receive on the "new available" link? 2. Since Changeback message contains only the SLC of the "available" link, in case of using multiple alternate links, when exactly will the CHB message be sent? Will it be sent after the last MSU on all the alternate links is sent? 3. Why is CHB required to be sent in both directions? Is it because, a link that is "available" on one direction (A->B), does not necessarily imply that it is available in the opposite direction also (B->)? In other words, say exchange B, need not start rerouting traffic from the alternate links to the newly available link, just because exchange A has done so (after sending a changeback & receiving a CHB ack from B)? This would mean that the CHB in either direction are completely independent of each other. 4. Should 2 exchanges connected to each other have the same SLS distibution/redistribution algorithms? Though it would be make perfect sense to start off in this manner, my question is whether on occurrence of a changeover/changeback, should the same links be used by both exchanges for sending MSUs containing a certain SLS? Thanks & Regards, Swami. ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Seeking any Advice on 5.8 GHZ Phones Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 04:24:47 GMT I was under the impression that the Motorola 5.8 phones we have are true 5.8. I am able to go down the hall and past a G 2.4GHz router and have no problems. 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, Beamer, Watchguard! Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. Mini-Splitter log splitter! If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Telephone Switchbox Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 08:57:17 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On 19 Mar 2004 19:05:27 -0800, mlliw@joimail.com (Will) wrote: > Is there a box that when called to normally, it sends through, but > when a code such as #22, It brings the caller to a _dialtone_ on > another line? I have seen several boxes that do this (for > computer/fax/telephone) that when #22 is dialed, they send to a > separate place, but they don't give a _dialtone_ on a separate > line. Thanks! It might depend on what type of phone system you have. Some systems have Direct System Inward Access (DISA) available. Teltone used to make a 106 box that was a bridging unit with amplifiers. They still make an Officelink Solo, but I bet it's a bit pricey. http://www.teltone.com/products/remotevoice/solo/home.htm One thing to keep in mind, DISA and the 106 is highly hackable. A teenager with a lot of time on his hands can key the universe of 3 digit numbers as a hobby to find out what makes it work. The Officelink is a callback device. Carl Navarro > PS This would be for when my work has AreaPlus (More non-long distance > places) and when I call it and dial #22, I would be able to call a nearby > county for free. ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: Telephone/Engineer Tool Kit For Sale Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:38:58 GMT Rick wrote in message news:telecom23.131.10@telecom-digest.org: > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3803843729 > Used Engieering Tool Case for sale, Cheap! > Thanks, > Rick The listing says "see pictures for details", but unfortunately they appear to be too dark for use. Please post more images. Bill ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 09:40:49 EST Subject: Re: Google Local is cool In a message dated Fri, 19 Mar 2004 08:26:06 -0700, Phil Earnhardt < pae@dim.com> writes: > One wonders what countermeasures the Baby Bells -- and other > owners of Yellow Pages services -- will launch. SmartPages.com is an SBC operation. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: sales@cdadapter.com (stbann) Subject: Caller ID Printer Mechanism on Ebay Date: 20 Mar 2004 07:25:58 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Check it out: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=15048&item=3085726750 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 23:25:59 GMT From: Schaffrath Subject: Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges Organization: Total Disorganized Of course one solution to paying the high prison phone rates is the advice Jim Carrey gave to his client in "Liar Liar"; STOP BREAKIN' THE LAW! Danny Burstein wrote: > New York, NY -- > A filing today (11-March-2004) with the Federal Communications > Commission (FCC) asks the agency to examine the harm caused by high > phone rates charged to people in prison, and criticizes the > relationships between prison administrators and commercial phone > companies that give rise to the unusually high rates. > "The filing asks the FCC to take two primary steps to remedy this > problem: One, require that private prisons replace exclusive telephone > service contracts with contracts allowing people in prison to select > one of several telephone companies to carry their long distance > calls. And two, require private prisons to allow the people they > incarcerate the option of making direct dial calls as an alternative > to the more expensive collect calls most currently require. > [ snippety snip, rest at (watch for line wrap) : > http://www.brennancenter.org/presscenter/releases_2004/ > pressrelease_2004_0311.html > Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key > dannyb@panix.com > [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Gary Novosielski Subject: Re: Phone Sex Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 05:17:46 GMT Steven J Sobol wrote: > Lessee, a quarter of a billion people living in the USA, only ten > thousand distinct combinations of digits from 0000 to 9999 and not all > of those are used in SSNs ... how does he expect this to work again? It sounds even worse than that: if the system uses the SUM of the last four digits, there are only 37 different "checksums" possible. ------------------------------ From: Ernest Young Subject: DSL Without Dialtone Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:59:15 -0800 "Hey, there is such a thing as DSL without dialtone. It's called SDSL." SDSL Symmetric DSL is an HDSL variation that uses only one cable pair and is offered in a wide range of speeds from 144 Kbps to 1.5 Mbps. SDSL is a rate adaptive technology, and like HDSL, SDSL cannot share lines with analog telephones. Thanks, Ernie Young ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #132 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 22 14:37:46 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2MJbjx16655; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 14:37:46 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 14:37:46 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403221937.i2MJbjx16655@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 #133 TELECOM Digest Mon, 22 Mar 2004 14:37:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 133 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #425, March 22, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges (William Warren) Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges (Lisa Hancock) Re: Western Union Clocks (Lisa Hancock) Re: Western Union Clocks (Mike Riddle) 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, 22 Mar 2004 09:50:37 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #425, March 22, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 425: March 22, 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: ** MTS Shares Fall on Allstream Deal ** Nortel Suspends CFO, Controller ** Vonage Readies Canadian Launch ** Staff Cuts at 3Com Canada ** Fired Videotron Execs Win Severance ** Competitors Get Power Rebates ** Telus Calling-Area Expansion Terms Approved ** Phone Card Company Fined $750,000 ** Aliant Union Seeks New Strike Mandate ** Two Toronto Conferencing Suppliers Join Forces ** Rogers Cable Names New COO ** Royal Host Equips Hotels With WLAN ** Pulver Brings VON to Canada ** Red Ink at Persona ** Telemanagement Online: Last Chance for Charter Rates ============================================================ MTS SHARES FALL ON ALLSTREAM DEAL: Shares of Manitoba Telecom Services fell 10% following last Thursday's announcement that it plans to buy Allstream Inc. for $1.7 billion. (See the Telecom Update Extra published March 18.) Many market analysts had been expecting MTS to reorganize as an income trust. ** BCE, which owns 21.7% of MTS, says it will "consider its alternatives," because the acquisition is "a significant change in the strategic direction of MTS." NORTEL SUSPENDS CFO, CONTROLLER: Nortel Networks has put its CFO and Controller on paid leave of absence pending completion of the current review of the company's finances. (See Telecom Update #424) VONAGE READIES CANADIAN LAUNCH: At the Merrill Lynch Global Communications Conference in New York last week, Vonage CFO John Rego said the company would launch its Internet telephony service in Toronto, Montreal, and Calgary "in about two weeks." Canadian pricing will be similar to that offered in the U.S., adjusted for currency. ** According to published reports, Yak Communications and AOL Canada also plan to offer VoIP services later this year. STAFF CUTS AT 3COM CANADA: 3Com has laid off an undisclosed number of Canadian employees as part of a decision to rely "more heavily on distributors and resellers." Among the employees dropped was Canadian general manager Bruce Comeau, hired just six months ago. ** In the nine months ended February 28, 3Com Corporation lost US$331 million on global revenues of $516 million. FIRED VIDEOTRON EXECS WIN SEVERANCE: The Quebec Superior Court has ordered Videotron Telecom to pay three former employees a total of $900,000 to cover severance and other amounts owed. CEO Pierre Karl Peladeau fired the three senior managers in 2001, shortly after Quebecor acquired the company. COMPETITORS GET POWER REBATES: The CRTC has ordered Bell Canada to pay rebates to co-locating carriers for power charges they paid between November 2000 and September 2002. The Commission said the competitors should not have to wait for the "significant sums" until Bell's new power pricing rates are approved. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/dt2004-18.htm TELUS CALLING-AREA EXPANSION TERMS APPROVED: CRTC Telecom Order 2004-90 approves a Telus tariff spelling out the terms and conditions that will apply to government requests to expand local calling areas in Alberta and B.C. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2004/o2004-90.htm PHONE CARD COMPANY FINED $750,000: Teleresolve, an affiliate of a Gold Line Telemanagement (Richmond Hill, Ontario) has agreed to pay an "administrative monetary penalty" of $750,000 for allegedly charging hidden fees and higher-than- advertised rates, and providing fewer minutes than promised, on its Wow and Lily prepaid long distance phone cards. ** The Competition Bureau says Teleresolve has also agreed to provide a 50% credit to purchasers of the cards. ALIANT UNION SEEKS NEW STRIKE MANDATE: Following the breakdown of negotiations with Aliant, two unions representing 4,300 employees are holding a strike vote. The workers could be in a legal strike position in April. (See Telecom Update #411) TWO TORONTO CONFERENCING SUPPLIERS JOIN FORCES: Globalive Communications, a teleconferencing wholesaler, has agreed to buy up to 47% of Enunciate Conferencing. Enunciate will assume management of Globalive's Assemble conferencing product in Canada. Both companies are Toronto-based. ROGERS CABLE NAMES NEW COO: Rogers Cable has named Michael Adams, formerly with U.S. cableco RCN Corp, as Chief Operating Officer, with a mandate to lead Rogers' move to Internet telephony. Adams replaces Dean MacDonald, who resigned earlier this month. (See Telecom Update #423) ROYAL HOST EQUIPS HOTELS WITH WLAN: Bell Canada has contracted with Calgary-based Royal Host to provide high- speed wireless LAN Internet in 5,000 rooms at 36 Royal York hotels across Canada. PULVER BRINGS VON TO CANADA: Pulver.com has announced that VON Canada 2004, a conference and trade show focusing on "the IP communications revolution," will be held in Markham, Ontario, May 18-20. Pulver has organized similar events in the U.S. and Europe since 1996. www.pulver.com/canada2004/index.html RED INK AT PERSONA: Persona, a St. John's-based cableco, reports revenue of $226 million for the 16 months ended December 31, including $15 million from telecom operations. A net loss of $6.1 million compares with a profit of $6.5 million for the year ended August 31, 2002. (See Telecom Update #418) TELEMANAGEMENT ONLINE: LAST CHANCE FOR CHARTER RATES: Subscribers to Telemanagement Online get the current issue a week before it is mailed, and have exclusive access to our online library of past issues, reports, and editorials. Subscribe now: Reduced Charter Subscription rates expire March 31. www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub-online.html. ** Telemanagement #213 includes a special feature report by Henry Dortmans on how suppliers view corporate RFPs for communications systems and services; and Part Two of John Riddell's survey of IP Telephony Systems for Branch Offices. ============================================================ 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: William Warren Subject: Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges Organization: Comcast Online Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 13:41:13 GMT Schaffrath wrote in message news:telecom23.132.17@telecom-digest.org: > Danny Burstein wrote: >> New York, NY -- >> A filing today (11-March-2004) with the Federal Communications >> Commission (FCC) asks the agency to examine the harm caused by high >> phone rates charged to people in prison, and criticizes the >> relationships between prison administrators and commercial phone >> companies that give rise to the unusually high rates. > [ snippety snip, rest at (watch for line wrap) : >> http://www.brennancenter.org/presscenter/releases_2004/ >> pressrelease_2004_0311.html (alternate) http://tinyurl.com/yt88g > Of course one solution to paying the high prison phone rates is the > advice Jim Carrey gave to his client in "Liar Liar"; STOP BREAKIN' THE > LAW! From the press release: (the link to the actual filing doesn't work.) The Ad Hoc Coalition for the Right to Communicate includes families of people in prison, religious leaders, educators, social service agencies, and attorneys who seek to communicate with those behind bars. Sounds to me like the attorneys are concerned with the way the calls are automatically recorded. The reason for their concern is left as an exercise for the reader. BTW, the companies that provide automated attendant services aren't making a bundle of money: since they accept all the marginal costs of the operation, including the cost of fraudulent calls (from a prison; who'd have thought?), the added expense of having technicians service equipment in an environment where they can only have one tool on their person at a time (sometimes with a 610 foot walk back to the truck, through security each way, when they need a different one), and the exorbitant license fees the equipment manufacturers charge for the autocall hardware and software. It seems the judicial system is being called on, yet again, to lesson the incredible pain that those with relatives inside the bars have to suffer because the system done them wrong. In Kafkaesque parady of a sensible world, we law-abiding citizens are being told that those who choose to associate with convicted felons can't suffer any inconvenience by it. Everything from "conjugal" visits to cheap phone calls must be provided at taxpayer expense, so that the inmates don't have to worry about the mental stress and anguish the big, bad world is imposing on their relatives, lovers, dealers, bookies, boyfriends, and lawyers. Kafka is turning in his grave. Yet again, the government steps in to enable another sick, twisted system of dependence. Wasn't welfare vicious enough for the bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.? Instead of encouraging a normal and independent life for those outside, i.e., the notion that those inside deserve to be there and those outside should write them off and move on, Uncle Sam's bitches are making sure that nothing much changes and nobody gets any uppity ideas about addressing the problem at its source, namely the slave labor trade that the underclass provides to the wealthy. What was it that Dennis Miller said about the way you have to thin the herd sometimes? I think Mao had it right: if you want to lessen crime, simply kill the criminals. Bill "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime" Warren [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What Bill says *might* be true in prisons *most of the time*, however the vendors of the telephone service in prisons are also installing their high-priced, very restrictive telephone service in jails and police lockups as well. Since everyone knows that police never make any mistakes in their judgment of who is to be locked up, I would guess by that same reasoning the incarcerated people should be treated as 'criminals' right from the beginning. If you hear police radio transmissions, they refer to the people they take into custody as 'prisoners' right from the beginning. And since everyone knows that prisoners and criminals are all scum, it only makes sense that anyone who would associate with them (parents, other relatives, lawyers, pastors, co-workers, etc) must be scum as well. Ask any police officer to explain it to you. The only people police arrest are guilty to start with, and scum. Unfortunatly, the US Constitution has this thing in it where the pre-selected scummy criminals are entitled to a trial, etc. Police and prosecutors don't really care for that provision, but they have to humor the ignorant parents and other family members by allowing the scum of the first part to have a trial. *Whatever* can be done to discourage them from staying in touch with their prisoner family member must be effected. Does anyone remember when the rule was an arrested person had to be, under law, given a FREE phone call of his choice at the time of arrest? No longer, or I should say, it has now been interpreted to mean 'FREE phone call' is a collect call at an outragous rate to whoever. 'At time of arrest' means sometime in the two or three day period it takes to process the scum. Bill, did I interpret what you said about phone calls correctly? PAT] ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges Date: 22 Mar 2004 07:48:57 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Schaffrath wrote > Of course one solution to paying the high prison phone rates is the > advice Jim Carrey gave to his client in "Liar Liar"; STOP BREAKIN' THE > LAW! All calls by prison inmates are made collect. The recipient must pay extremely high charges. The problem is that the people getting socked with the high phone charges -- the offenders' families -- are not the one who committed the crime. The high phone charges are in reality an unfair tax upon a captive audience. They are there to raise money for the state's treasury from those who can least afford it. The cost of a call today is nominal, even with security considerations. There is a practical matter at work here, too. We don't want inmates going back to crime when they get out. One way to reduce that is to have good family contact while the offender is imprisoned. Sadly, many inmates are housed literally hundreds of miles from their home, so it is hard for families to come visit, and some states make visiting a real burden. The telephone can keep family contacts ongoing and help in rehabilitation. I don't mind if the family has to pay the real costs of a phone call (including security), but that is far, far less than what is being charged today. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Lisa, Lisa, Lisa ... of course we want the criminals going back into crime when they get out. The Corrections Industry has to survive also. Just ask any police officer; all that rot about 'rehabilitation' is just a pipe dream by a liberal social worker. If they were not scum, they would not be in prisons, jails or police lockups to start with, and I've already discussed how, by extension, their family, pastors, other friends are scum as well. That damn Supreme Court is to blame! They are the ones who insisted that people get some rights, so they have to be given phone calls. At the very least, keep them so outrageously expensive that almost no one can afford it. As you point out, some states have effectively made personal visitation of prisoners impossible, let's not allow for cheap phone calls to get in the way. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks Date: 22 Mar 2004 08:04:09 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Mike Riddle wrote: > Several years ago our esteemed moderator ran several articles on > Western Union Clocks. These were typically installed in train > stations and other public places. They were electrically powered, > self-winding (made by the "Self-Winding Clock Company") and > synchronized with the Naval Observatory on a periodic basis through > a 20 or 60 ma (I'm not sure which right now) circuit to Western > Union. The city public schools I attended had IBM clocks. (IBM used to have a central-clock and timeclock business which was part of its original corporate merger; they sold it off in the late 1950s). On a day to day basis they worked ok, but if something went wrong, i.e. a power failure or especially seasonal change of time, it took days until they got them right again. If something broke, again it took days until it was fixed and they'd show all sorts of crazy times. The reset efforts would have the clocks relatively slowly advance. I don't know if these troubles was from the system itself or if school maintenance people had trouble maintaining them. IBM had sold out when I was in school, although the systems weren't that old (about 12 years old). I believe in the late 1960s, the Pennsylvania Railroad or early Penn Central replaced the old style clocks with modern looking digitial clocks. They had problems with those. In the waning days of the Penn Central RR, they replaced their station clocks with individual stand-alone units that each had to be set manually. They were always a few minutes off from each other which used to be a big no-no in the railroad business. I don't know why it's so hard to keep time coordinated. In the Philadelphia area, the transportation authority tells riders to use Bell (Verizon) time, 215-846-1212, as a standardized source. My $20 Casio "50M" watch is pretty reliable. Bell has offered that service since at least the 1960s (846 was TIme 6). ------------------------------ From: Mike Riddle Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 10:38:11 -0600 Subject: Western Union Clocks Pat: There are usualy a few for sale on Ebay. You might have to gut and paste this URL. http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?cgiurl=http%3A%2F% 2Fcgi.ebay.com%2Fws%2F&krd=1&from=R8&MfcISAPICommand=GetResult&ht=1 &SortProperty=MetaEndSort&query=Western+Union+Clock Mike ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #133 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 22 16:17:39 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2MLHdj18207; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:17:39 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:17:39 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403222117.i2MLHdj18207@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 #134 TELECOM Digest Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:15:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 134 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson RTX Makes WiFi Telephony Splash (VOIP News) RTX Pushing the Envelope in Wireless VoIP for Consumers (VOIP News) Voiceglo Chooses Terremark's NAP of the Americas (VOIP News) VoicePulse Now Offers Seven Digit Dialing (VOIP News) How Much Are These UPS Components Worth? (Lucas) Notebaert Shakes Things up at Qwest (Sam Chen) Variety of Phone Numbers -- 1950s (Lisa Hancock) Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? (Lisa Hancock) Re: Phone Sex (Daniel W. Johnson) Re: Telephone Switchbox (Tony P.) Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges (Justin Time) Re: New York City 911 Data - Anywhere? (Justin Time) Re: U.S. Government Attack on Internet, First Amendment (William Warren) Re: Western Union Clocks (DevilsPGD) 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: VOIP News Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 11:39:29 -0500 Subject: RTX Makes WiFi Telephony Splash Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2004/Mar/1025229.htm [March 19, 2004] RTX Makes WiFi Telephony Splash Atlanta, GA March 22, 2004 RTX Telecom A/S, Danish wireless-technology expert, is moving ahead rapidly with product designs to kick-start the consumer wireless voice-over-IP (VoIP) market. It has also established a subsidiary, RTX America Inc., to accelerate participation by the PC and telecommunications industries in the rapidly-growing VoIP opportunity. At the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA) Wireless conference, here this week, RTX will demonstrate cordless phone sets designed to provide wireless VoIP access through a PC's USB port, in addition to a standard interface to public-switched telephone networks (PSTNs). This provides consumers with streamlined access to regular telephone services and VoIP using a single cordless telephone. This will be the first of what will be a suite of products, including a VoFi (802.11-enabled VoIP) phone. Full story at: http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2004/Mar/1025229.htm How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 12:06:44 -0500 Subject: RTX Pushing the Envelope in Wireless VoIP for Consumers Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-22-2004/0002132289&STORY&EDATE= RTX Pushing the Envelope in Wireless VoIP for Consumers ATLANTA, Georgia, March 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Establishes U.S. Subsidiary to Spearhead Effort in North America RTX Telecom A/S, Danish wireless-technology expert, is moving ahead rapidly with product designs to kick-start the consumer wireless voice-over-IP (VoIP) market. It has also established a subsidiary, RTX America Inc., to accelerate participation by the PC and telecommunications industries in the rapidly growing VoIP opportunity. At the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA) Wireless conference, here this week, RTX will demonstrate cordless phone sets designed to provide wireless VoIP access through a PC's USB port, in addition to a standard interface to public-switched telephone networks (PSTNs). This provides consumers with streamlined access to regular telephone services and VoIP using a single cordless telephone. This will be the first of what will be a suite of products, including a VoFi (802.11-enabled VoIP) phone. It's Timely "Wireless VoIP is becoming a hot trend and RTX Telecom is establishing itself as a supplier of the key system components and platforms that will bring this technology to consumers in the home," said J. Gerry Purdy, Ph.D. principal analyst with MobileTrax. "The VoIP trend started with a focus on the enterprise, not the consumer market. With technologies that can leapfrog the costs and installation complexities of enterprise VoIP, such as RTX is offering, the market could experience a big surge in consumer VoIP demand," said Connie Wong, Director of Wireless Communications, Semico Research Corp. "RTX has been servicing the consumer electronics industry for the last 10 years with competitive, advanced, cordless phones and other wireless products. Bringing the features and reliability to VoIP that consumers have come to expect from their telephone products is a natural extension of our business," said Jorgen Elbaek, president and CEO of RTX Telecom. "I believe RTX's wireless expertise and technology will be the enabler for bringing VoIP to the consumer, and this market will be driven from North America," stated Chris Tubis, CEO of RTX America. Chris Tubis joined RTX to establish a North American beachhead for the Aalborg, Denmark-based wireless technology company. He is a Silicon Valley veteran, formerly vice-president of National Semiconductor's Wireless Communications Group and president of Ultra RF. About RTX Telecom RTX Telecom provides wireless engineering expertise and technology to OEMs developing products based on advanced wireless communications standards, such as GSM/GPRS, DECT, Bluetooth, CDMA, TD-SCDMA, 802.11a/b/g, VoIP, and others. RTX Telecom provides individually tailored turnkey solutions where a customer's specification is turned into a fully-tested product, ready for market in the shortest possible time. RTX has 210 employees, including 170 engineers. RTX telecom is listed on the Copenhagen Stock Exchange as RTX.CO. Its customer list includes many of the world's leading manufacturers of wireless communications devices. SOURCE RTX Telecom A/S ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 11:53:28 -0500 Subject: Voiceglo Chooses Terremark's NAP of the Americas Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20040322005116&newsLang=en March 22, 2004 08:30 AM US Eastern Timezone Voiceglo Chooses Terremark's NAP of the Americas as Connectivity Hub for Its Global VoIP Infrastructure MIAMI & FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 22, 2004--Terremark Worldwide, Inc. (AMEX:TWW), a leading operator of integrated Tier-1 Network Access Points (NAPs) and best-in-class network services, today announced that Voiceglo, a worldwide full service Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) communications company, has signed a three-year contract with a base value of $900,000, to make the NAP of the Americas the anchor connectivity hub for their global VoIP infrastructure. Voiceglo, a wholly-owned subsidiary of theglobe.com (OTCBB:TGLO), is a new kind of global communications company, offering web-based, home and business phone service to anyone anywhere in the world that enables customers to use the Internet to make and receive local and long distance calls and keep their existing phone number. Voiceglo's flagship product, the GloPhone (http://www.glophone.com), allows users to make calls directly from their browsers to any telephone in the world. GloPhone Blue, a FREE product, offers users the ability to make unlimited calls to other GloPhone users at no cost. For as little as $3.99 per month and low per minute rates, the GloPhone upgrades allow users to make and receive calls from regular landline and cellular phones. Among all of the proven VoIP providers, Voiceglo's technology is the only one that permits use with dial-up connections. [Comment: One thing you will find about this list is that when I see false and misleading statements in corporate propaganda, I will have no hesitation to call your attention to them. Thus is the case here - I know of at least two other providers that can be used over dial-up connections, though I do not believe that either officially supports them, probably because dial-up connections are sort of like Forrest Gump's box of chocolates ... you never know what you're gonna get, and some dial-up connections are doubtless too slow to support even the highest compression codecs. But, Packet8 has let it be known that their service can work over a dial-up connection, and VoicePulse's low bandwidth setting (available only to customers with the newer Sipura SPA-2000 adapters) would also work over dial-up, providing the customer has enough savvy to set up Internet Connection Sharing. So VoiceGlo's assertion in this press release that "Among all of the proven VoIP providers, Voiceglo's technology is the only one that permits use with dial-up connections" is simply not a factual statement. They *may* offer somewhat better performance over dial-up than the others, although personally I'd even have some doubts about that, but they certainly are not the "only one."] Full story at: http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20040322005116&newsLang=en ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 12:25:33 -0500 Subject: VoicePulse Now Offers Seven Digit Dialing Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com According to a message posted this morning on the BroadbandReports.com VoIP forum, VoicePulse is now offering seven digit dialing to its customers. After a bit of checking, I was able to determine that the seven digit dialing comes in two flavors, and the user can select their preference. Also, at the present time it only works for customers that have one of the newer Sipura SPA-2000 adapters. Cisco ATA-186 users still have to dial all 11 digits for the time being. In the default mode, customers have 7, 10 & 11 digit dialing. In this mode, customers can dial US numbers using either 7 digits (555-1212), 10 digits (732-555-1212) or 11 digits (1-732-555-1212). There will be a delay of 3 seconds after pressing the 7th digit (the delay is necessary to distinguish an area code from an exchange prefix, or to put it another way, to see if the customer is going to dial a ten digit number, or stop after the seventh digit). But customers can also opt for 7 & 11 digit dialing. In this mode, customers can dial US numbers using either 7 digits or 11 digits. Because there's no chance of confusion between a seven digit number and a ten digit number in this mode, the call will begin to be connected immediately after the 7th or 11th digit is dialed. In this mode you must dial the leading "1" on calls outside your home area code. Customers can select their "home" area code for seven digit dialing (in case it is different from the area code of their phone number). My understanding is that it defaults to the area code of the customer's (primary) VoicePulse number, but any U.S. area code can be selected. The BroadbandReports thread that brought this to my attention is here: http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/remark,9746628~mode=flat ------------------------------ From: rohenaz@nycap.rr.com (Lucas) Subject: How Much Are These UPS Components Worth? Date: 22 Mar 2004 07:26:36 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, I'm happened to get my hands on some NEW IN BOX high end telecom and UPS equiptment but the problem is I only have a vague idea what it is all worth. I want to get a better idea of what a reasonable asking price is for this stuff. First of all, UPS batteries have to be replaced every so often ... these are brand new in box, never used, BUT they have been sitting in a warehouse for 3 years! Here are some model numbers from the packages: Box #1 - "6000 Powerpass" 208/240 : 120/240 L14-30R - The manual has a big Avaya logo on it, the unit itself has a Lucent logo on it. As far as I've been able to tell, PEI makes the powerware line? Some websites have Powerware listed as the manufacturer too! This photo looks like the right unit with the exception of the blue logo which isnt present on mine. Like I said mine says lucent in smaller letters instead. http://www.peii.com/products/details.cfm?ProductID=27727&cfid=87475&cftoken=98969474 This is a stackable unit. Box #2 - "6000P6HV" - This one looks similar, is much lighter, and has the Avaya logo on it. I found a website that had it listed for $500 used. Should I expect to get less or more for this? Box #3 - 5000V A , ExtendedB att. Cab.w/charger(120V dc) - Avaya part no. 408128056 - This unit is BIG. It weighs 410 lbs. I have absolutely no idea how much this unit is worth. Box #4 - Same as above without charger. Avaya Part No. 408128064. This one ONLY weighs 395 lbs. There are a couple more packages, but I have a better idea of what those are worth. If anyone here knows anything about this kind of stuff and can even give me a ROUGH idea of what these units are worth I would appreciate it very much. THANKS! - Luke ------------------------------ From: schen5547@yahoo.com (sam_chen) Subject: Notebaert Shakes Things up at Qwest Date: 22 Mar 2004 08:42:30 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Looks like Notebaert is continuing to clean house at Qwest. Also looks like the SEC is starting to breathe down the necks of Cruciotti and others. The Barry Allen appointment and the consolidation of IT and networks seems to be a wise move: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/business/article/0,1299,DRMN_4_2744537,00.html Looks like Allen's a former military guy with loads of experience on the operations front: http://www.qwest.com/about/company/management/barry_allen.html ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Variety of Phone Numbers -- 1950s Date: 22 Mar 2004 08:14:30 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I found an old rail schedule (North Shore Line -- Chicago to Milwaukee) of the 1950s, and it shows a variety of telephone number types. Today, we take for granted nationwide direct-dialing. But in order to make that happen, the Bell System had to assign every subscriber in the U.S. a unique phone number. That was much harder than it sounds. Back in the 1950s and earlier, the size (length) of a phone number varied on the size of the town. The big cities had 7 digit numbers just like today. Many smaller cities and towns had 5 digit numbers x-nnnn (that seems to be the most common). But I've seen 6, 4, and 3 digit numbers as well. One small place had a phone number 1234-F2. I don't know what "F2" meant, probably a ringing code for a large multi-party line. It's relatively easy to add digits to small phone numbers to bring them up to seven digits. I know of an old church whose number was "23" back in 1927 is today 947-0023. But the big problem was dealing with the local switches and tandem machines. To add digits on an SxS system meant that either more switches would be required or "absorption" switches would be required. Indeed, until the 1980s, many 5 digit towns could continue using 5 digits for local calls and needed only 7 for calls to/from outside the town. But all this required special planning and translations in the long distance switches. With a system that was wholly electro-mechanical, this was a difficult process. At the same time, this process had to work alongside a tremendous growth in telephone service. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff nor Lisa) Subject: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? Date: 22 Mar 2004 08:19:18 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com In 1950, a good deal of the Bell System's customers were still served by purely manual exchanges. In the 1950s, the Bell System converted the bulk of the remaining system to dial and also accomodated tremendous growth. It didn't all happen overnight. I know of two suburban towns in my area that didn't get converted until around 1962; one town was a pretty large suburb. The last cutover was Santa Catalina Island off of California, which I think was delayed due to the big difficulty of getting a switch out to it. It went to a modular ESS. I don't know when the last independent cutover to dial was. I'm curious about large towns (not rural hamlets) that still had manual service after 1960. If anyone has any stories, could you post publicly them? (If any are in the NYC metro area, a date would be helpful since I could look that up in the NY Times.) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Chicago started cutting over to dial service in the 1930's, but suspended the cutover when Western Electric was nationalized by the federal government during World War Two. The cutover then resumed in 1946 and was complete in 1948 wheh the last of the manual offices (Chicago-Humboldt) was converted. But the first of the offices to be converted to dial in the downtown area (Chicago- Wabash) of necessity only had the oldest of the old equipment (panel and step switching) since I think that is all there was in the 1930's. Other downtown offices had 'newer, more modern' stuff like crossbar as they were converted in the later 1930's and early 1940's, as did most of the neighborhoods. When ESS (the very first generics of same) became available, Morris, Illinois got it first around 1969 and then downtown Chicago (Wabash c.o.) was next, and it went direct from the oldest stuff (stepping switches) direct to ESS, without any stop to use crossbar or other schemes first as many places did.) For regular downtown phone users, it was quite a cultural shock to hear the difference: absolute silence and an immediate ring tone (leading many folks to first think they had misdialed) in place of the old and very noisy stepping switches, often times jokingly referred to in the industry as the 'Wabash Cannonball', particularly when the switch train got derailed on the way to its destination. So just like the orginal conversion from manual to dial, downtown went first, then eventually the neighborhoods and suburbs followed during the 1980's from X-bar to ESS. The very last Chicago exchange to cut to ESS from X-bar was LOngbeach (312-561) about 1980 or so. PAT] ------------------------------ From: panoptes@iquest.net (Daniel W. Johnson) Subject: Re: Phone Sex Date: 22 Mar 2004 09:32:57 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Gary Novosielski wrote in message news:: > Steven J Sobol wrote: >> Lessee, a quarter of a billion people living in the USA, only ten >> thousand distinct combinations of digits from 0000 to 9999 and not all >> of those are used in SSNs ... how does he expect this to work again? > It sounds even worse than that: if the system uses the SUM of the last > four digits, there are only 37 different "checksums" possible. 36. 0 is not possible. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Telephone Switchbox Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 18:28:21 GMT In article , cnavarro@wcnet.org says: > On 19 Mar 2004 19:05:27 -0800, mlliw@joimail.com (Will) wrote: >> Is there a box that when called to normally, it sends through, but >> when a code such as #22, It brings the caller to a _dialtone_ on >> another line? I have seen several boxes that do this (for >> computer/fax/telephone) that when #22 is dialed, they send to a >> separate place, but they don't give a _dialtone_ on a separate >> line. Thanks! > It might depend on what type of phone system you have. Some systems > have Direct System Inward Access (DISA) available. Teltone used to > make a 106 box that was a bridging unit with amplifiers. They still > make an Officelink Solo, but I bet it's a bit pricey. > http://www.teltone.com/products/remotevoice/solo/home.htm > One thing to keep in mind, DISA and the 106 is highly hackable. A > teenager with a lot of time on his hands can key the universe of 3 > digit numbers as a hobby to find out what makes it work. The > Officelink is a callback device. I setup DISA on a Samsung DCS. It requires a seven digit passcode. So that ups the possibilities. The way the system was configured, the first digit had to be a 2 or 3, the next six could be 0 thru 9. So 2x10x10x10x10x10x10 = 2,000,000 possible combinations. ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges Date: 22 Mar 2004 10:42:22 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Danny Burstein wrote in message news:: > New York, NY -- > A filing today (11-March-2004) with the Federal Communications > Commission (FCC) asks the agency to examine the harm caused by high > phone rates charged to people in prison, and criticizes the > relationships between prison administrators and commercial phone > companies that give rise to the unusually high rates. > "The filing asks the FCC to take two primary steps to remedy this > problem: One, require that private prisons replace exclusive telephone > service contracts with contracts allowing people in prison to select > one of several telephone companies to carry their long distance > calls. And two, require private prisons to allow the people they > incarcerate the option of making direct dial calls as an alternative > to the more expensive collect calls most currently require. > [ snippety snip, rest at (watch for line wrap) : > http://www.brennancenter.org/presscenter/releases_2004/ > pressrelease_2004_0311.html Next you will see lawsuits for the prisoners to be paid a "living wage" while they are incarcerated for illegal activity. Well, shouldn't they be paid for doing nothing? After all its society's fault for putting them there in the first place! Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: New York City 911 Data - Anywhere? Date: 22 Mar 2004 10:50:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com cstabbert@yahoo.com (Cliff Stabbert) wrote in message news:: > Hi. I've been trying to locate some specific information on 911 calls > in New York over the last six months to a year. > Ideally, I'd like to be able to get information calls dispatched to > specific precincts broken down by incident type (domestic/assault/ > theft etc.), by time of day, and by day of the week. > Googling around has led to NYPD's CompStat information, which provides > precinct-level crime statistics, but isn't really what I'm looking > for. > It's a tall order, perhaps. So far, calling the NYPD (both main > information and specific precincts) and the New York mayor's office > hasn't gotten me very far (the information doesn't exist, or isn't > public, or would be released only under FOIA). Anybody have a clue > whether this information is out there, and if so, how I'd get it? > If there's a better newsgroup to post this in, or some other forum > that might provide leads, please let me know. > Thanks in advance, > Cliff Actually a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request is extremely easy to file and doesn't necessarily have to follow any form. Just state exactly what you are looking for in a letter and state the request is being made under the auspices of the Freedom of Information Act. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: U.S. Government Attack on Internet and First Amendment Organization: Comcast Online Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 14:19:22 GMT wrote in message news:telecom23.132.6@telecom-digest.org: > http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_5633.shtml > U.S. Government Attack on Internet and First Amendment > By Ben Charny > FBI pushes for broadband wiretap powers: ISPs, Net phone services would > all have to rewire > March 12, 2004-A far-reaching proposal from the FBI, made public > Friday, would require all broadband Internet providers, including > cable modem and DSL companies, to rewire their networks to support > easy wiretapping by police. [snip] "Rewire" is a good choice for this kind of FUD: it implies a labor-intensive effort with lots of time, tools, and (of course) wire. However, given that the "IP" in VoIP stands for "Internet Protocol", it's a simple matter to copy all packets destined for a particular destination to another interface, connected to the FBI or other agency. This is nothing new: CALEA has been in effect for years, and it's requirements are real, and reasonable, but this isn't about enforcing laws. In the shadow-boxing world of big-carrier long-distance, it's actually a feint intended to put off FBI efforts to have the common carriers do free work for the government. Given that the "loaded" costs of executing a single search warrant can exceed $5,000, the VoIP industry is scared to death of having to maintain the staff needed to support such an effort. The FBI doesn't want to deal with new technology, so it's trying to leverage CALEA to have VoIP (and any other new technology) converted to POTS connections that their ancient pen recorders and tape recorders can handle: the government doesn't want to risk introducing any new evidence techniques into a courtroom (think about the evidence chain for a bunch of bits on a hard drive), and is deathly afraid of having to admit that it can't understand mu-law encoding, robbed-bit signalling, or any other "Flash Gordon" technology. In any case, those users whom are concerned about government avesdropping -- I encrypt all my VoIP calls so that the FBI can't find out how boring my life is -- need only apply GPG or equivalent military-grade encryption to their packet stream. Bill Warren ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy! Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 20:28:58 GMT In message <> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) did ramble: > I don't know why it's so hard to keep time coordinated. In the > Philadelphia area, the transportation authority tells riders to use > Bell (Verizon) time, 215-846-1212, as a standardized source. My $20 > Casio "50M" watch is pretty reliable. Bell has offered that service > since at least the 1960s (846 was TIme 6). This always confuses me. One of my servers pulls from NTP sources on the next, the rest synch from there. My phones all set themselves (Analog, via CID/CND data). My bedroom clock not only has a backup battery, but it also receives over the air signals, and is able to set itself as well. Given that the data is out there, via a network, or being broadcast, why is it such a challenge in the business world? 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." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I use ntp2.kansas.net for my computers here. The Windows 2000 pulls from there, or navobs, and then serves the Windows 98 and Windows 95 laptops over the LAN. 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #134 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 23 02:00:12 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2N70CQ22935; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 02:00:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 02:00:12 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403230700.i2N70CQ22935@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 #135 TELECOM Digest Tue, 23 Mar 2004 02:00:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 135 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CallVantage 'Mainstreaming' VoIP? If so, They've Got Some (VOIP News) CableNET '04 Lists Nearly 50 Participants (VOIP News) Passing ANI From PBX to PBX (16paws) Need Assistance with Mitel SX200D (Larry Rachman) Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? (John Levine) Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? (Fred Goldstein) Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? (Carl Navarro) Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial (BV124@aol.com) Re: Western Union Clocks (Tony P.) Re: Western Union Clocks (Chuk Gleason) Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges (William Warren) Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges (Lisa Hancock) Re: Variety of Phone Numbers -- 1950s (Tony P.) Re: Variety of Phone Numbers -- 1950s (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: New York City 911 Data - Anywhere? (Tony P.) FOILs, was Re: New York City 911 Data - Anywhere? (Danny Burstein) Bloglines (John Mayson) 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: VOIP News Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 19:31:10 -0500 Subject: CallVantage 'Mainstreaming' VoIP? Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/41167 CallVantage 'Mainstreaming' VoIP? If so, They've Ggot Some Catch-up Work to Do Time Magazine's on-line edition says AT&T's "CallVantage" VoIP service promises to "bring the technology into the mainstream", with one analyst opining that the service "should broadly legitimize VOIP for residential customers". However it's AT&T who has some catching up to do if they hope to compete with established providers like Vonage, argue our VoIP forum regulars. They claim AT&T's feature-set is skimpy, their area code selection is limited, and on top of being $5 more a month than Vonage, the added fees make the service comparably unattractive (particularly the $59.99 early termination fee). Full article, with embedded links (e.g. to the aforementioned Time article) at: http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/41167 How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 19:25:15 -0500 Subject: CableNET '04 Lists Nearly 50 Participants Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com Just in case you think the cable industry hasn't taken notice of VoIP ... http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20040322005996&newsLang=en March 22, 2004 03:06 PM US Eastern Timezone CableNET '04 Lists Nearly 50 Participants; VoIP and OCAP Are Among Highlights of Exhibit at The National Show LOUISVILLE, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 22, 2004--CableNET(R), the broadband industry's premiere technology showcase, has announced its list of about 50 broadband demonstrations in this year's exhibit. CableNET is co-sponsored by CableLabs(R) and the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) and will be among the highlights at the annual NCTA Convention and International Exhibition to be held in New Orleans May 2-5. Now in its 12th year, CableNET magnifies the true value of broadband services by once again offering a hands-on experience with many of the most exciting technologies that cable operators may provide in the next several years. Overall, the content, services, and applications demonstrated are expected to improve the lives of cable customers. Designed as an educational forum, CableNET enables attendees to see and discuss new technologies such as interactive services and Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) with experts from supplying companies. Among the highlights of this year's CableNET are Advanced Digital Broadcast showing an end-to-end OpenCable(TM) Application Platform (OCAP(TM)) system, several demonstrations of interactive applications by the American Film Institute and its development partners; and displays of advanced VoIP calling features. Full press release at: http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20040322005996&newsLang=en ------------------------------ From: 16paws <16paws@comcast.net> Subject: Passing ANI from PBX to PBX Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 21:40:26 -0500 I work for a large corporation and with dozens of PBX's. The current situation allows us to capture the ANI at the receiving PBX, but the ANI is dropped if the call is transferred to another PBX. Is there a way to pass the ANI from PBX to PBX? Thank you. Barry358 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 04:07:06 GMT From: Larry Rachman <_lr_@yahoo.com> Subject: Need Assistance with Mitel SX200D I administer a Mitel SX-200D (G1005) which has been incredibly reliable for the past 10 or so years. Last week, we installed two new T1 circuits and began having troubles at roughly the same time. The switch will accumulate software errors that look like this in the log: 2004-MAR-12 09:21:53 Main Control trace back at address = 10A9DC dialing.dialing_digit_receive : 1EC 2004-MAR-12 09:21:53 Main Control trace back at address = 10BC74 dialing.dialing_seize_ack : 1EC 2004-MAR-12 09:21:53 * CP Process recovered from software error #01 Exception = unas_tp at address = 10BC74 The software error # increases from 01 to 50 over a period of about 4 hours during heavy system operation, and then the system resets, dropping all calls. This seems to not happen (or happen a **LOT** less) during low traffic times). So far, we've done the following: Replaced the CPU and all daughter boards... twice Replaced the CPU bay power supply Replaced the Switch matrix card Replaced the floppy disk drives Backed up the database and run from a different set of floppies Backed out to the two original T1 cards bringing in service Pretty much, we've run out of things to try. There is another SX-200D sitting next to this one, running off the same power, that is working flawlessly. Our dealer tells us that this is the sort of log error that they'd normally take back to Mitel, except that Mitel is no longer supporting the SX-200D. Anyone with a suggestion, please email me directly. Thanks, Larry Rachman ------------------------------ Date: 23 Mar 2004 03:51:03 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I don't know when the last independent cutover to dial was. I believe it was Bryant Pond, Maine, on October 11, 1983. 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: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 23:10:06 -0500 On Monday 22 March 2004 04:15 pm, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff nor Lisa) said: > The last cutover was Santa Catalina Island off of California, which I > think was delayed due to the big difficulty of getting a switch out to > it. It went to a modular ESS. IIRC they got a 3ESS, one of the very few of those ever built. It was a small analog switch, obsolete before it came out, because everything else was going in digital. AT&T was slow. > I don't know when the last independent cutover to dial was. Long-time readers of the Digest (when it was new, ca. 1981) may remember the saga of the Bryant Pond Telephone Company in Maine. They had the last full-scale manual local exchange in the country (toll stations don't count), about 400 lines, switched in Elden Hathaway's living room. (Please no calls between 10 and 7 unless it's an emergency.) Elden retired and sold it to Oxford County Tel, who wanted to put in dial (a secondhand stepper!). This led to something like "The Movement To Preserve America's Most Historic Telephone Exchange" with its motto "Don't Yank the Crank". I still have the T-shirt, a candlestick phone whose cord spells out that message. There's a book about it. The movement failed and Bryant Pond went dial ca. 1982. It's now on a DMS-10. Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein at ionary dot com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 03:53:19 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On 22 Mar 2004 08:19:18 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff nor Lisa) wrote: > In 1950, a good deal of the Bell System's customers were still served > by purely manual exchanges. In the 1950s, the Bell System converted > the bulk of the remaining system to dial and also accomodated > tremendous growth. > It didn't all happen overnight. I know of two suburban towns in my > narea that didn't get converted until around 1962; one town was a > pretty large suburb. > The last cutover was Santa Catalina Island off of California, which I > think was delayed due to the big difficulty of getting a switch out to > it. It went to a modular ESS. > I don't know when the last independent cutover to dial was. > I'm curious about large towns (not rural hamlets) that still had > manual service after 1960. If anyone has any stories, could you post > publicly them? (If any are in the NYC metro area, a date would be > helpful since I could look that up in the NY Times.) Our last office in a small town to cut to dial tone was in 1978 or '79.) It went from manual to Quatman Step with DTMF, McClure OH 419-748). The white pages are 4 pages long, in a 5x8 1/2 format and the phone numbers are 1 2 3 and 4 digits long. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Chicago started cutting over to dial > service in the 1930's, but suspended the cutover when Western Electric > was nationalized by the federal government during World War Two. The > cutover then resumed in 1946 and was complete in 1948 wheh the last of > the manual offices (Chicago-Humboldt) was converted. I distinctly remember that the PROspect exchange was cut over sometime between the summer of 1955 and Spring of '56. I was very concerned becuase I didnt' know how to dial a phone, I just gave the operator my friends number PROspect 66094. Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: BV124@aol.com Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 22:13:07 EST Subject: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial I have a very vivid memory of my childhood in the 1950s in Berwyn, IL, (312-GUnderson-4), a nearby suburb of Chicago. I had two sets of aunts and uncles who lived on the west side of Chicago in the Lawndale neighborhood. Both of them had telephones WITHOUT dials (312-LAwndale-1 & 312-CRawford-7). When you picked them up, the Operator answered "Number please." Even more amazing (and I may be wrong here, but the memory is pretty clear) is that I recall WE (in Berwyn) could dial THEM (in Chicago) direct, but they needed the operator to get ALL of their calls. Maybe you or some other readers have memory of when the LAwndale exchange converted to dial. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 21:59:26 GMT In article , lalalaNOSPAM@crazyhat.net says: > In message <> > hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) did ramble: >> I don't know why it's so hard to keep time coordinated. In the >> Philadelphia area, the transportation authority tells riders to use >> Bell (Verizon) time, 215-846-1212, as a standardized source. My $20 >> Casio "50M" watch is pretty reliable. Bell has offered that service >> since at least the 1960s (846 was TIme 6). > This always confuses me. One of my servers pulls from NTP sources on > the next, the rest synch from there. My phones all set themselves > (Analog, via CID/CND data). My bedroom clock not only has a backup > battery, but it also receives over the air signals, and is able to set > itself as well. > Given that the data is out there, via a network, or being broadcast, > why is it such a challenge in the business world? Most PBS stations (All if I'm not mistaken as both WGBH Channel 2 Boston, and WSBE Channel 36 Providence both do so.) send a time signal in the blanking interval. My Philips VCR can sync the time by tuning to a PBS station. Pretty cool feature as I never have to manually set the damned clock. ------------------------------ From: Chuk Gleason Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 21:04:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks Might this link be to an external device to keep your clocks on time? http://www.piexx.com/imp1/imp1dc.html Chuk G. Cary, NC > Mike Riddle wrote: >> Several years ago our esteemed moderator ran several articles on >> Western Union Clocks. These were typically installed in train >> stations and other public places. They were electrically powered, >> self-winding (made by the "Self-Winding Clock Company") and >> synchronized with the Naval Observatory on a periodic basis through >> a 20 or 60 ma (I'm not sure which right now) circuit to Western >> Union. ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges Organization: Comcast Online Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 21:36:02 GMT William Warren wrote in message news:telecom23.133.2@telecom-digest.org: > Schaffrath wrote in message > news:telecom23.132.17@telecom-digest.org: >> Danny Burstein wrote: >>> New York, NY -- >>> A filing today (11-March-2004) with the Federal Communications >>> Commission (FCC) asks the agency to examine the harm caused by high >>> phone rates charged to people in prison, and criticizes the >>> relationships between prison administrators and commercial phone >>> companies that give rise to the unusually high rates. [snip] > It seems the judicial system is being called on, yet again, to lesson > the incredible pain that those with relatives inside the bars have to > suffer because the system done them wrong. In Kafkaesque parady of a > sensible world, we law-abiding citizens are being told that those who > choose to associate with convicted felons can't suffer any > inconvenience by it. [snip] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What Bill says *might* be true in > prisons *most of the time*, however the vendors of the telephone > service in prisons are also installing their high-priced, very > restrictive telephone service in jails and police lockups as well. > Since everyone knows that police never make any mistakes in their > judgment of who is to be locked up, I would guess by that same > reasoning the incarcerated people should be treated as 'criminals' > right from the beginning. [snip] > Unfortunatly, the US Constitution has this thing in it where the > pre-selected scummy criminals are entitled to a trial, etc. Police > and prosecutors don't really care for that provision, but they have > to humor the ignorant parents and other family members by allowing the > scum of the first part to have a trial.[snip] > Bill. did I interpret what you said about phone calls correctly? PAT] Pat, I said "convicted felons". What I said applies to those _CONVICTED_ of crimes, since my experience is only with systems in medium and maximum security prisons. As to gaols, lockups, the clink, etc.: I think anybody over the age of ten knows that they're nothing like what we saw on the Andy Griffith show. Although I'm sure we could argue endlessly about the treatment due people _CHARGED_ with a crime, the social approbrium that _used_ to be attached to even being _questioned_ by police, let alone arrested, has largely dissappeared in the face of well-publicized abuses of both the law enforcement system and the judiciary. Yes, I think those arrested are entitled to a free phone call, so long as it's not to a foreign country, but I don't think there's any reasonable alternative to having automated-attendent systems handle the administrative, technical, and (let's be frank) financial burden of subsequent telephone conversations. There just isn't enough manpower or enough budget to justify human intervention anymore: nothing against those arrested, but I'm battling my own budget war, and my taxes are already too high. FWIW. YMMV. Bill ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges Date: 22 Mar 2004 19:40:41 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote: While I'm far from an expert, I have had exposure to the criminal justice system and telecommunications and I must offer some observations: 1) Prison phone calls are a big profit for the states. IMHO, that's unfair and bad policy. 2) Families do not "choose" to be associated with prison inmates, as one poster suggested. Stuff happens. 3) One night my family got a phone call from my father who was en route home from work. He was in poor health at the time. He was calling from a stranger's house where he was stranded. (There was no public phone nearby but someone was nice enough to let him come inside to use the phone. Pre cellphone days.) Seems that the cops pulled over his carpool driver under suspicion of a crime, even though the driver had his work ID and with my father (an older man at that point). They took him in, stranding my father. Eventually the man was released but was put through the ringer. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Lisa, Lisa, Lisa ... of course we want > the criminals going back into crime when they get out. The Corrections > Industry has to survive also. Just ask any police officer; all that > rot about 'rehabilitation' is just a pipe dream by a liberal social > worker. If they were not scum, they would not be in prisons, jails or > police lockups to start with, and I've already discussed how, by > extension, their family, pastors, other friends are scum as well. That > damn Supreme Court is to blame! They are the ones who insisted that > people get some rights, so they have to be given phone calls. At the > very least, keep them so outrageously expensive that almost no one > can afford it. As you point out, some states have effectively made > personal visitation of prisoners impossible, let's not allow for cheap > phone calls to get in the way. PAT] As in any industry, there are good and bad cops, good and bad judges, and good and bad prison administrators. But you would be surprised at how many prison officials really do seek rehabilitation within the resources they have. Prison officials do not set policy or the way their facilities run. That is done by the state legislature, which balances the public's "lock 'em up throw away the key" against the ACLU concerns and an ever inadequate budget. (See "The Big House" movie, made in 1930. Nothing has changed.) As to telephones for inmates, it is a good idea, it is good for society, and it ought to be charged at cost. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Variety of Phone Numbers -- 1950s Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 22:07:22 GMT In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says: > I found an old rail schedule (North Shore Line -- Chicago to > Milwaukee) of the 1950s, and it shows a variety of telephone number > types. > Today, we take for granted nationwide direct-dialing. But in order to > make that happen, the Bell System had to assign every subscriber in > the U.S. a unique phone number. That was much harder than it sounds. > Back in the 1950s and earlier, the size (length) of a phone number > varied on the size of the town. The big cities had 7 digit numbers > just like today. Many smaller cities and towns had 5 digit numbers > x-nnnn (that seems to be the most common). But I've seen 6, 4, and 3 > digit numbers as well. One small place had a phone number 1234-F2. I > don't know what "F2" meant, probably a ringing code for a large > multi-party line. Back in the 80's you could still dial 5 digits in North Kingstown, RI. It was either 5 or 6 and then 4 digits within NK. From everywhere else it was 26(5 or 6) + nnnn. > But the big problem was dealing with the local switches and tandem > machines. To add digits on an SxS system meant that either more > switches would be required or "absorption" switches would be required. > Indeed, until the 1980s, many 5 digit towns could continue using 5 > digits for local calls and needed only 7 for calls to/from outside the > town. But all this required special planning and translations in the > long distance switches. Yep -- this was true in many communities in RI, only one I'm familiar with is NK. Interestingly cities like Woonsocket, Pawtucket, and Newport all have exchanges that start with 76, 72 and 84. I suspect they were on stepper at one point or another. Providence has always had a mix of exchange codes, and there is evidence that Providence was one of the cities in which a Panel switch was used at one time. But there's a gap I don't know about - the Panel was installed during the 20's - with a 30 year service life for most gear it would have been decommissioned in the 50's so it's likely Providence got Xbar gear, and then in the mid 70's went ESS. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 20:08:26 EST Subject: Re: Variety of Phone Numbers -- 1950s In a message dated 22 Mar 2004 08:14:30 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) writes: > Back in the 1950s and earlier, the size (length) of a phone number > varied on the size of the town. The big cities had 7 digit numbers > just like today. Many smaller cities and towns had 5 digit numbers > x-nnnn (that seems to be the most common). But I've seen 6, 4, and 3 > digit numbers as well. One small place had a phone number 1234-F2. I > don't know what "F2" meant, probably a ringing code for a large > multi-party line. When I lived in Konawa, Oklahoma, in the early 1950s the place was served by a terminal-per-line step-by-step office. Individual lines were 3 digits, party lines 4 digits, the fourth digit designating the ringing current to be applied. This also mean that any regroups or moves on party lines meant some or all of the parties had to have their numbers changed and there could be no reference of calls on party lines. A number of the form 1234-F2 was indeed a number fo a large multi-line, usually a ground-return magneto line, and "F2" was indeed the ringing code. F1, one short ring; F2; two short rings; F131, one short, one long and one short, and numerous other more complicated combinations. These were usually rural lines, often owned by the subscribers, and could exist in large exchanges as well as small. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: New York City 911 Data - Anywhere? Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 22:11:23 GMT In article , a_user2000@yahoo.com says: > cstabbert@yahoo.com (Cliff Stabbert) wrote in message > news:: >> Hi. I've been trying to locate some specific information on 911 calls >> in New York over the last six months to a year. >> Ideally, I'd like to be able to get information calls dispatched to >> specific precincts broken down by incident type (domestic/assault/ >> theft etc.), by time of day, and by day of the week. >> Googling around has led to NYPD's CompStat information, which provides >> precinct-level crime statistics, but isn't really what I'm looking >> for. >> It's a tall order, perhaps. So far, calling the NYPD (both main >> information and specific precincts) and the New York mayor's office >> hasn't gotten me very far (the information doesn't exist, or isn't >> public, or would be released only under FOIA). Anybody have a clue >> whether this information is out there, and if so, how I'd get it? >> If there's a better newsgroup to post this in, or some other forum >> that might provide leads, please let me know. >> Thanks in advance, >> Cliff > Actually a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request is extremely easy > to file and doesn't necessarily have to follow any form. Just state > exactly what you are looking for in a letter and state the request is > being made under the auspices of the Freedom of Information Act. Oh boy -- that's a good one. When I was at the AG's office it took meeting after meeting to get real incident data (PPD didn't use the same RMS as the rest of the state so we had to get exports!). Then it was decided we should get dispatch data too. This became 4 meetings with PPD, then 2 with ProvComm while they figured out who owned the dispatch data. ------------------------------ From: danny burstein Subject: FOILs, was Re: New York City 911 Data - Anywhere? Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 21:33:33 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) writes: >> Hi. I've been trying to locate some specific information on 911 calls >> in New York over the last six months to a year. > Actually a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request is extremely easy > to file and doesn't necessarily have to follow any form. Just state > exactly what you are looking for in a letter and state the request is > being made under the auspices of the Freedom of Information Act. The responding gov't agency only has to provide the information if it's something that they've already compiled in the normal course of their business. So to use this example, if the NYPD tabulates monthly statistics of this type by precinct or community board, then you can get that monthly report (maybe ...). If they don't have such reports, they do NOT by any interpretation of FOIL have to put it together for you. NOTE that there are plenty of exceptions to FOIL, particularly when you're trying to get material from a law enforcement agency, doubly so if there's a hint of politics, triply if it's something they don't necessarily want getting out (do you really think any gov't agency anywhere is happy with the public overseeing their perfomance [a]), and quadruply if they suspect the slightest "security" concern. For this specific info there's a reasonable chance the NYC Council Public Safety Committee has this material. It might be worth sending a polite note to them. Contact info at: http://www.nyc.gov . [a] Mayor Mike's administration is far more public than those of some past and interim mayors, but there's still plenty of institutional inertia. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: jmayson@nyx.net Subject: Bloglines Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 05:42:31 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com A few weeks ago Pat told us about his blog. At the time I was scratching my head wondering why anyone would blog or read one. I'll admit I've gotten hooked on Pat's. In the meantime I have discovered RSS feeds, but wasn't really sure what those were or what to do with them. This past weekend I discovered Bloglines http://www.bloglines.com which allows you to select RSS feeds (which include many blogs along with various news sources). All I can say is this site is incredible! I no longer have to muddle through various websites catching up on my reading. It's all right here in one place. It notifies me when a new article becomes available. I can save articles for reference. To make this posting even remotely telecom related, I found this interesting article on wifi: http://wifinetnews.com/archives/003116.html And I see Pat has not updated his blog today. ;-) John Mayson Austin, Texas, USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, I have not updated it (as of early Tuesday morning, 12:50 AM Central time). Trouble is, John, I get so tired, so early and so often. I will probably go and work on it yet tonight before going to bed. 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #135 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 23 15:26:16 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2NKQGb01013; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 15:26:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 15:26:16 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403232026.i2NKQGb01013@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 #136 TELECOM Digest Tue, 23 Mar 2004 15:26:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 136 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Previewing Level 3's Upcoming VOIP Announcement (VOIP News) Nortel Submits VOIP E-9ll Proposal (VOIP News) VoIP: Major Rip and Rep (VOIP News) Voices On Broadband (VOIP News) And Then There's VoIP Over Broadband Powerline (VOIP News) CDT: Law Enforcement Concerns Can Be Addressed (VOIP News via CDT) Re: Google Local is Cool (John A. Cummings) Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges (Stanley Cline) Re: Watch Your Mouth (Colin Sutton) Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? (Howie) Deja vu For TV Viewers / As Color TV Turns 50, HDTV Feels Same (Solomon) Triumph of the Telcos (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: VOIP News Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 11:40:04 -0500 Subject: Previewing Level 3's Upcoming VOIP Announcement Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.americasnetwork.com/americasnetwork/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=89588 Previewing Level 3's upcoming VOIP announcement By: Joan Engebretson America's Network Weekly Level 3, which claims to operate the world's largest softswitch network, will announce a residential VOIP-over-broadband offering later this month. Unlike others who have entered this market, the carrier will use a wholesale-only approach. The company already has serious interest in the service from channel partners that include "household names in the interexchange carrier, Internet service provider, and cable MSO types of categories," said Level 3 vice president Dennis Kyle. Level 3's new service will resemble offerings from carriers such as Vonage and AT&T that ride on broadband DSL or cable modem connections, which could be supplied by any service provider. In addition, Level 3 will offer what it calls a "building block" service that will provide E911, local number portability and directory assistance services to cable companies or others that have their own softswitches. Full story at: http://www.americasnetwork.com/americasnetwork/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=89588 How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:23:33 -0500 Subject: Nortel Submits VOIP E-911 Proposal Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=49828 WASHINGTON -- In response to a call from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for industry support, Nortel Networks has submitted a proposal for an architectural framework that will enable Enhanced 9-1-1 (E9-1-1) access on voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) networks. Last week at an FCC-hosted Washington forum, FCC Chairman Michael Powell urged the telecommunications industry to make the development of a nationwide VoIP E9-1-1 solution a top priority. Nortel Networks shares Commissioner Powell's views on the importance of reliable E9-1-1 service. Last week, Nortel Networks submitted a detailed proposal to NENA - the National Emergency Number Association - to address key technology challenges. Full story at: http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=49828 If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 11:53:49 -0500 Subject: VoIP: Major Rip and Rep Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://p2pnet.net/story/1041 p2pnet.net News:- We're about to go through major rip and replacement in the communications world, says Federal Communications Commission Michael Powell, speaking of VoIP deployments on top of high-speed Internet networks. Addressing the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association's trade show, to think of VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) as just another voice service is missing the point and, "The truth is, a bit is a bit," he's quoted as saying in a Wi-Fi Planet report here . VoIP is a killer app" and it's going to be a "competitive revolution for the wireline [providers], but for wireless guys as well," he said. "Data isn't an incremental add-on, data is the end-game," he said earlier in his talk, urging "industry leaders" not to "look to the government to solve every problem they encounter". If the wild popularity of another data transmission protocol, Wi-Fi, took the cellular industry's own 3G plans by surprise, the lesson is not to fear a potentially disruptive technology, the Wi-Fi Planet report has him saying. "Although a nascent technology, VoIP is already forcing traditional wireline phone providers to adopt new strategies at the same time cellular phone service is eroding their revenue base." Story from http://www.p2pnet.net How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 12:21:13 -0500 Subject: Voices On Broadband Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040329-603253,00.html Voices On Broadband AT&T brings Internet phone calling to the masses. Don't worry, it's easy By ANITA HAMILTON Need another good reason to step up to high-speed Internet access at home? Here's one: it could save you money on your monthly telephone bill. That's because a technology called voice over Internet protocol (VOIP) lets you use your cable or DSL Internet connection to make cheap local and long-distance calls, all while using your regular home-phone handset. Previously offered mainly by small start-ups, VOIP has generated so much interest that long-distance giant AT&T began offering it this month. AT&T isn't the first player in the consumer VOIP market; start-ups Vonage and VoicePulse have had similar offerings for $35 and $25 a month, respectively, since last year. But support of VOIP by AT&T, the largest long-distance carrier in the U.S., promises to bring the technology into the mainstream. "AT&T's entry should broadly legitimize VOIP for residential customers," says Steve Koppman, principal analyst for Gartner Group Dataquest. ..... Full story at: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040329-603253,00.html ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 12:29:08 -0500 Subject: And Then Theres VoIP over Broadband Powerline Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.xchangemag.com/articles/431coverstory5.html And Then There's VoIP over Broadband Powerline VoIP seems to be invading every nook and cranny of networking. Just another example: powerline communications. Jay Birnbaum, vice president and general counsel for Current Technologies, which provides products to enable utilities' electrical grids to act as broadband access networks, says the company, and its customers clearly see VoIP as the next phase of service. That is, after they get powerline-based broadband Internet access services off the ground. He adds that VoIP was one of the applications FCC Commissioner Michael Powell witnessed during his visit to Current Technologies, Potomac, Md.-based test house just after the Triennial Review decision was released. Birnbaum adds that interest in powerline is not exclusive to electric companies and their equipment suppliers. He says AT&T has publicly stated that it is looking at broadband powerline technology as a possible way to compete in the local loop. Full story at: http://www.xchangemag.com/articles/431coverstory5.html ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 04:55:36 -0500 Subject: CDT: Law Enforcement Concerns Can Be Addressed Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com This statement is from the Center for Democracy & Technology at http://www.cdt.org/ - the text below is from the PDF format file at: http://www.cdt.org/digi_tele/20040319voiponepager.pdf The Internet and Law Enforcement Surveillance: Law Enforcement Concerns Can Be Addressed Without Regulation, Which Would Stifle Innovation, Raise Costs, Risk Security There is nothing untappable about packet or Internet technology. Packet services currently available for voice and data are tappable at one or more points in the networks, and service providers are quite willing to work with law enforcement to satisfy interception orders quickly and fully. But the Internet is different from the traditional telephone network, and government agencies should not expect that surveillance will be carried out on the Internet the same way it is carried out in the circuit-switched telephone network. The digital revolution has produced many means of communication and it is not reasonable to require that all of them identify communications and route traffic the same way that the telephone network does. Yet the Justice Department and the FBI are trying to force the diversity of services available over the Internet into a single format resembling the telephone network. On March 10, 2004, DOJ and FBI filed a Joint Petition for Expedited Rulemaking with the Federal Communications Commission asking the FCC (a) to declare that providers of broadband access and 'Voice over IP' (or Voice on the Net) services are covered by the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), and (b) to create a regulatory process under which new communications protocols, applications, or services must be reviewed and approved by the FBI before they can be deployed. CALEA was adopted in 1994 in response to law enforcement concerns that wiretaps would be more difficult in digital telephone networks than they had been with the analog phone system. CALEA required telecommunications carriers to design basic wiretap capabilities into their networks. As it was implemented, the CALEA statute gave the FBI very precise design control over telephone switching software. The FBI was able to convince the FCC to mandate very specific features, including 'at substantial cost to carriers' features that gave the government capabilities going beyond those that had been available in older phone systems. Thus CALEA was used to enhance rather than merely preserve government surveillance capabilities. The CALEA statute applies only to telecommunications common carriers. It does not apply to 'information services.' Congress realized that the Internet was fundamentally different from the telephone system and Congress chose not to apply CALEA to the Internet and 'information services' carried over it. VoIP, email, Instant Messaging and other forms of Internet communications are information services and thus are not covered by CALEA. Although ISPs and Internet application providers must (and do) comply with interception orders under the wiretap laws, they have not had to design their networks and services to meet FBI specifications. The Joint Petition seeks to alter the balance initially struck in CALEA, and asks the FCC to extend CALEA to cover broadband Internet access generally and VoIP services specifically. Moreover, the Joint Petition asks the FCC to create a system under which any new technology that might replace a range of existing communications technologies must be reviewed and approved by the FBI before deployment. Such a prior-review requirement would destroy the United States' ability to innovate on the Internet, and would in effect overturn the critical decisions of the FCC over the years that facilitated the rise of the Internet as a mass communications medium. The changes that the FBI seeks are not necessary to allow law enforcement to carry out court-ordered interceptions. The Internet and technology industries are working hard to meet the needs of law enforcement, and the imposition of the sweeping regulatory regime advocated by the Joint Petition is not necessary to provide law enforcement with the ability to carry out its investigations. Surveillance features built in to satisfy government demands could undermine the openness and security of the Internet. For more information, contact Jim Dempsey (jdempsey@cdt.org), Lara Flint (lflint@cdt.org) or John Morris (jmorris@cdt.org) at (202) 637-9800. ------------------------------ From: John Cummings Subject: Re: Google Local is cool Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 07:15:07 -0600 wrote in message news:telecom23.132.15@telecom-digest.org: > In a message dated Fri, 19 Mar 2004 08:26:06 -0700, Phil Earnhardt > < pae@dim.com> writes: >> One wonders what countermeasures the Baby Bells -- and other >> owners of Yellow Pages services -- will launch. >> SmartPages.com is an SBC operation. > SmartPages.com is an SBC operation. RealPages.com is a BellSouth operation. John Cummings ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 08:08:18 GMT On 22 Mar 2004 07:48:57 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote: > All calls by prison inmates are made collect. The recipient > must pay extremely high charges. There is another, relatively new, growing problem -- the fact that collect calls are becoming an anachronism because of the growing amount of competition in the telecom business. * Try calling a cell phone collect -- can't do it. * Try calling a number served by a CLEC collect -- in the vast majority of cases, can't do it (most CLECs refuse to handle billing for other carriers and so most CLEC customers can't receive collect calls.) * Try calling a number served by a VoIP provider (Vonage, VoicePulse, etc.) collect -- can't do it. (VoIP providers are invariably customers of CLECs, and don't want to handle billing for other carriers either.) I know quite a few people who would be unable to call *anyone* if they were to be arrested because the only numbers they have for friends and family are cell phones, CLEC or VoIP numbers, etc. (I still have a BellSouth POTS line that is not restricted from receiving collect calls, but very few people have the number ...) IMO, the whole "prison phone" business is in need of serious reform, and not just because of what the carriers handling the calls are charging and where revenues are going. The mindset that "everyone is still a customer of the ILEC and can receive collect calls" is simply obsolete -- there has to be a better way. 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 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When I was living in Skokie, Illinois (Chicago suburb, and god -- how long ago it now seems) I had a neighbor named Ken who was employed by the Cook County Jail as an 'intake clerk'; that is, a person who sits there checking in new inmates (of which there are several hundred every 24 hours.) Ken was not precisely a model citizen himself and had gotten his job at the jail through the patronage system (what else is new?) because he had probably voted for, and encouraged others to vote for the 'right candidate' for one of the various government offices. The person got elected and handed out many jobs to reward his workers. But Ken could make sense now and then when speaking frankly about jail conditions. He said it was all too often that an arrested person getting to the jail would ask about being allowed to make a phone call to his wife or family to let them know where he was at, and it was a situation where jail (inmate) phones were 'incompatible' with the phones used by the general public (which is to say, the recipient could not receive a 'collect' call, and jail phones did not allow one to place a call to an '800' number, etc.) "The police who brought me here said I would be allowed to make a call when I got here, I have been in booking for eight hours, and still can't make any calls!" Ken said if the newly arrived inmate was an 'asshole' he would just follow the script and tell him "try calling from the phone in your cell block when you get there", knowing that would not work either, but hoping the new inmate was unaware of it. "But then one day, there was this very mild-mannered older guy getting checked in who said to me, 'what if *you* were on the 'wrong side of the counter for a change getting checked in?'" Ken said he thought about that silently and said silently to himself, "well, only through Gods grace I am not," so he handed *his* phone to the man and said "go ahead and dial a local call." The old dude was so grateful that someone had given him a chance to make a one minute phone call to his family. Cook County Jail is on the same phone centrex (773-890) as the inmate's cell block phones, but the employee phones are unrestricted. They cost no more or less to use for local calls than the inmate phones, and because it is a HUGE centrex (the entire 773-890 range) they more than likely get calls cheaper than 'regular citizens' anyway. So why not allow them to be used since this was, after all, a jail and theoreticallty innocent people were being warehoused there. Stanley, my feeling is the Corrections Industry just wants to be as punitive as possible. Those phones cannot call anywhere prepaid, they cannot get incoming calls, they cannot call 800 numbers, the call recipients cannot 'call forward' or 'three way call' incoming from inmates; in general the phones may as well not be available at all, which they wouldn't be if the Supreme Court had not said 'try your best to rehabilitate inmates' which flies in the face of everything the Corrections Industry is trying to accomplish. So they wound up giving the inmates very high priced, almost worthless phones to show who were the real bosses. Either call 'collect' (at our inflated prices) or don't call at all. Jail/prison phones cannot call the zero operator, they cannot call '411', or anything other than zero plus ten digits, collect. If there are three phones per cellblock, two of them are out of order, and the one working phone has fifty people in line to use it, then too bad. But don't touch that phone on the desk at the guard station, or else you die! PAT] ------------------------------ From: Colin Sutton Subject: Re: Watch Your Mouth Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 22:11:49 +1100 Hey, it's not 1st April yet! :-) Colin Monty Solomon wrote in message news:telecom23.132.1@telecom-digest.org: > In its Thursday ruling against Bono and Howard Stern, the FCC > announced that a new day of language policing has dawned. > By Eric Boehlert > March 19, 2004 | Taking on its new role as the indecency hanging > judge, and doing it with a vengeance, the Federal Communications > Commission on Thursday levied a fine against Howard Stern, America's > most notorious radio talk show host, and ruled that U2 frontman Bono > had been indecent and profane for using the word "fucking" in a Golden > Globes telecast. The moves were just the latest in what the FCC > suggests will be a string of penalties. Under pressure during an > election year from politicians and grass-roots groups to clean up the > airwaves, the bipartisan commission, which for years was all but > dormant on the topic, has launched an unprecedented campaign to battle > indecency on the airwaves. > http://salon.com/news/feature/2004/03/19/fcc/ Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.639 / Virus Database: 408 - Release Date: 22/03/04 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:47:22 -0500 From: Howie Subject: Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? A quick search uncovered: Michael Hathaway reports that "[My] parents owned the Bryant Pond Telephone Company in Bryant Pond, Maine, the last hand-crank magneto company to go dial. It was in our living room and the last call was made October 11, 1983." More info at: http://www.privateline.com/TelephoneHistory5/History5.htm -Howie ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 07:49:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Deja vu For TV Viewers / As Color TV Turns 50, HDTV Feels Same Benny Evangelista, Chronicle Staff Writer Back in the days when black-and-white television was the norm, Pete Deksnis delighted in watching one of the few shows broadcast in living color. "No matter how lousy the show was, you looked at it," said Deksnis, who owns one of the first mass-produced color TV sets that began rolling out of an RCA factory 50 years ago this week. Today, with color TV the rule, not the exception, it's deja vu for Deksnis -- he goes out of his way now to watch one of the relatively few shows broadcast in high-definition television. "HD drove me back to network television after years of apathy," said Deksnis, who has his antique TV parked next to his HDTV set in his living room. "I'll even check the afternoon HD soap opera on CBS, but for a few minutes only, to enjoy the crystal clear picture." HDTV, because it offers dramatically higher quality video and audio than standard TV, is hyped as the biggest technological advance in TV since color. Yet HDTV has not quite caught on with mainstream consumers for many of the same reasons that held back color TV sales for more than a decade -- the high prices of sets, the fact that only a few shows and major events were broadcast in color and some initial confusion in technological standards. Consumer interest in HDTV is on the rise, yet it's hardly as fervent as the early interest in color TV. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/03/22/BUG4E5OAHI1.DTL ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 11:32:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Triumph of the Telcos Internet telephony advocates are predicting that free long distance means the downfall of Big Telecom. But it won't be so easy to topple the king. By G. Pascal Zachary March 23, 2004 | Technology pundits would have us believe that Internet telephony, which enables "free" phone calls for those with broadband and the proper equipment, is going to topple the established phone companies. But the future may not turn out to be so one-sided. Instead, Internet telephony (commonly referred to as VOIP, for "voice over Internet protocol") may represent just another battleground for the usual fights between the Baby Bells, the long-distance telephone companies and the cable companies. While the outcome is uncertain, Internet telephony, despite its insurgent, revolutionary credentials, stands a good chance of being co-opted by the oligarchy that rules over telecommunications in America. http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/03/23/voip/ ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #136 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 23 22:29:55 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2O3Tt604292; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 22:29:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 22:29:55 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403240329.i2O3Tt604292@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 #137 TELECOM Digest Tue, 23 Mar 2004 22:30:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 137 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Chief Comments on Voice Over Internet (VOIP News) Call Centers' Early Warning Systems (Eric Friedebach) Blackberry Not Receiving Messages - Please Help! (James Lynx) New Way of Doing QOS on VOIP Networks (Art Reisman) Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges (Charles Cryderman) Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges (Clarence Dold) Re: Western Union Clocks (Reed) Re: Western Union Clocks (Howard S. Wharton) Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? (John R. Covert) Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial (Lisa Hancock) Re: Google Local is cool (Steven J Sobol) Re: Google Local is cool (jbl) Re: Triumph of the Telcos (Burris) Re: Variety of Phone Numbers -- 1950s (Skinner) Time to Pass the Hat Once Again - March Share Day (Patrick Townson) 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: VOIP News Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 12:37:15 -0500 Subject: FCC Chief Comments on Voice Over Internet Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com ATLANTA - Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell called Monday for a "light regulatory touch" on Voice over Internet Protocol technology. "I think the government will take a hands-off approach to it," he said, speaking to a crowd of several thousand wireless industry professionals at the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association's annual meeting. Full story at: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040322/ap_on_hi_te/powell_voip_1 How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VoIPnews/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: VoIPnews-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Call Centers' Early Warning Systems Date: 23 Mar 2004 16:37:43 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Michael Freedman, 03.23.04, Forbes.com LONDON - You've heard the refrain: "This call may be recorded for quality assurance purposes." Chances are good the company behind it is NICE Systems. A leader in the call center market, this Israel-based company was established a decade ago, and its recording devices and software packages are now used in some 30,000 call centers, financial institutions and government outfits and emergency hot lines like 911. More could be on the way. Every year, companies and government agencies spend an estimated $500 million buying equipment to record telephone calls, data and screen images. The information is used to analyze customer behavior and to train call center agents. http://www.forbes.com/networks/2004/03/23/cz_mf_0323nice.html [Note from Eric: I had to call the FCC this afternoon when I was having trouble logging into their ULS website. After the standard "your call will be recorded" announcement, I had to listen to a loud beep every few seconds as if I was calling a 911 center when a tech came on line. I wonder why the announcement at the beginning of the call was not sufficient.] Eric Friedebach /Tonight's Skywarn training cancelled due to... weather?/ ------------------------------ From: SafronJasmine@yahoo.com (James Lynx) Subject: Blackberry Not Receiving Messages - Please Help! Date: 23 Mar 2004 15:01:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am in charge of the distribution and installation of Blackberries at my organization. We are using the 7230 model of Blackberry. We are using the T-Mobile as our data carrier. We have probably about 50 of these on our network and of those about 5 of them are not receiving messages from about 6:30 PM and on. Then when these end users check their BBs in the morning there are still no new messages (even tho there are some in the queue that seem not to deliver) received by the unit. The user seems to be able to kick the thing in by emailing himself from the BB and then a bunch of messages come in that were originally queued up and haven't been delivered. Mind you, these end users say that they don't live in areas that there is little or no reception. They have four out of five bars indicating great reception. Weird that every night from about 6:30 and on they don't receive messages at all and the reception is four out of five bars. I checked with T-Mobile and they don't know what the problem is and I check with RIM and they don't know. We use Blackberry Enterprise Server and we are on Microsoft Exchange for our email. Have you experienced this and how did you fix the issue? Just strange that only about five of 50 users have this problem. Thanks, James ------------------------------ From: astormchaser2002@yahoo.com (Art Reisman) Subject: New Way of Doing QOS on VOIP Networks Date: 23 Mar 2004 15:15:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com We have developed and released a new product called the Netequalizer QOS which has the ability to control data traffic and let voice traffic run on a converged network . And it is really plug and play. Check out www.netequalizer.com for details FAQs and information. ------------------------------ From: Charles Cryderman Subject: Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 13:37:08 -0500 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote about Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges on 22 Mar 2004 19:40:41 saying: > "While I'm far from an expert, I have had exposure to the criminal justice > system and telecommunications and I must offer some observations: > 1) Prison phone calls are a big profit for the states. IMHO, that's > unfair and bad policy." Agreed, all government agencies should be non-profit making business. "2) Families do not "choose" to be associated with prison inmates, as one poster suggested. Stuff happens." Again I must agree, unfortunately stuff happens all the time. (Other comments deleted) "As to telephones for inmates, it is a good idea, it is good for society, and it ought to be charged at cost." This on the other hand I do not agree with. While station with the US Army in Japan one military publication had an article about Japanese prison. First a few facts from the article. In Japan the average prison sentence is 5 years, time served is 3 years. The return rate to prison is about 3%. In the USA the average prison sentence is about 20 years, time served is 15 years. The return rate to prison is about 90%. When you are sent to a Japanese prison you have no contact with anyone. The guards will not even talk to you and you get no visitors (unless you were US military at the time you were sentence to prison. Then you get one visit per year from the Commander of your last unit and once a year from your last unit's Chaplain.) Each day you get one hour to walk around in a prison yard by yourself (rain or shine). Two meals each day which normally consists of fish soup and rice. You can write letters but will get none in return and all mail is reviewed prior to being sent. They do not beat their charges as some may think. They punish, not pretending to rehabilitate, their prisons are there to punish those the commit crimes against society. Rehabilitation is the responsibil- ity of the convicted not society. With a return rate as low as 3% this is something we as a country need to think about. Which is better, having a revolving door at the entrance of your prisons or truly making a situation that no one wants to return to. For many, prison is a place where they get three meals each day a bed and cable TV. Why is it that most intercity schools lack a better library then most prisons? I would rather get to the point that prisons are a place that those convicted of a crime are again punished. Letting them call mommy when ever they want to will not reduce the number of crimes committed. Putting the criminal in a place they never want to go back to will. Chip Cryderman ------------------------------ From: dold@LawsuitXRe.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Lawsuit Regarding Excessive Prison Phone Charges Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 22:19:58 +0000 (UTC) Organization: a2i network Stanley Cline wrote: > I know quite a few people who would be unable to call *anyone* if they > were to be arrested because the only numbers they have for friends and > family are cell phones, CLEC or VoIP numbers, etc. (I still have a When my son went to Japan, he couldn't call home because the only phone number he had used to call me, for years, was an 800 number. William Warren wrote: > who'd have thought?), the added expense of having technicians service > equipment in an environment where they can only have one tool on their > person at a time (sometimes with a 610 foot walk back to the truck, > through security each way, when they need a different one), and the ... I carried my toolbox with me. I did have someone with me constantly, was never in a room with anyone else, and had to pass through locked doors every few feet, but I had my complete toolkit with me. I don't recall that anyone even searched it, although I suppose they did. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ From: Reed Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 13:59:34 -0600 Mike, Back in the 60's I worked as an engineer in a TV/FM broadcast facility. We had about a dozen of these clocks all over the building, all synchronized by the hourly pulse from Western Union. Sometime around 1970 we designed a circuit based on the NE555 (?) PLL chip that would listen for the hourly tone from our dual-redundancy WWV receiver and generate the sync pulse to all of the clocks. It was a very simple design, but I don't recall the specifics. More recently someone else had the great idea of using a computer, synchronized to one of the online NBS time servers, that would send an hourly X10 signal to an X10 relay module to synchronize his WU clocks. Look here for his article: http://www.ubr.com/clocks/sync/syncwu.html -Reed ------------------------------ From: Howard S. Wharton Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:58:03 -0500 Organization: The University at Buffalo Besides clock systems, IBM also made fire alarms. Still have two IBM systems in service on our south (Main Street in Buffalo) campus. Sometime in the 1950's IBM sold their clock service plus the fire alarms to Simplex Time Recorder Company. Today they are called SimplexGrinnell merging with Grinnell Sprinkler Co. after they were purchased by Tyco few years ago. Howard S. Wharton Fire Safety Technician Occupational and Environmental Safety Services State University of New York at Buffalo ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:58:58 -0500 (EST) From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? While Bryant Pond was the last full scale local exchange to go dial (and also had the distinction of being the last magneto exchange -- most local manual exchanges had been common battery), there were still several other kinds of manual service which lasted well into the 1980s. Fred Goldstein says "toll stations don't count" so we'll ignore them -- although my favorite one was a private phone at some ranch in Texas: I used to drive operators nuts asking them to connect me to "Bill Smith" in "Longhorn, Texas" (sorry, that's neither the correct name for the line which was listed BY NAME with rate and route, nor the correct town). "I need his phone number." "He doesn't have a phone number." "Then you can't call him." "Yes you can. Ask Rate and Route." "Rate and Route doesn't have phone numbers, I'll have to connect you to Directory Assistance." "No, Rate and Route DOES have Bill Smith's phone number." Along the Salmon River, near Shoup, Idaho, there was one of the last "Farmers' Lines". This was neither a manual exchange nor a toll station. It was a single wire ground return magneto system. Subscribers to the service were all on the same wire, and could call each other by dialing their neighbors' ringing codes (2 longs and a short, etc.) and made outside calls with a long continuous ring, which would summon the operator at a local toll board. Incoming calls were placed via this same operator. The last time I called, I ended up with a charge for a call to Egypt on my bill, since the operator filled out the ticket incorrectly, and the "20" of the first two digits of Idaho's area code were interpreted as the "20" country code for Egypt by the billing system. An earlier message mentioned a number of the format nnnn-F2. That was the format used for a Farmers' line. There were also, until some time in the mid-80s, a number of towns (particularly in California) which had dial service which was not compatible with the toll network, which meant that incoming calls had to be placed through an operator. There were at least two reasons that inbound service would not be provided. First, if the equipment was incapable of properly reporting answer supervision for billing, then only manual incoming toll service could be provided. Second, unless it was possible to dial calls within the local exchange on a seven digit basis, AT&T would not officially connect the exchange to the toll network. That is, unless you had a seven digit number which could be dialed by your neighbor, then you didn't officially have a ten-digit number. In a few cases, the number that was going to eventually be assigned to that exchange would actually work, but this was not encouraged. /john [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wasn't Lafayette, Indiana and its neighbor West Lafayette a similar situation? Long after that part of Indiana was in the 317 area code, and largely dialable, I recall we still had to go through the operator to get Lafayette from the Chicago area. So was Fort Wayne, Indiana I think, in the 219 area. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial Date: 23 Mar 2004 13:27:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com BV124@aol.com wrote > Even more amazing (and I may be wrong here, but the memory is pretty > clear) is that I recall WE (in Berwyn) could dial THEM (in Chicago) > direct, but they needed the operator to get ALL of their calls. When the Bell System began to install dial phones, it developed a method by which dial customers could dial people served by manual exchanges instead of dialing zero and having the operator do it. When a dial subscriber dialed a manual exchange, the switch sent coded impulses to a special switchboard in the manual exchange. These impules either lit up a visual indicator with the number or activated an audio announcement (using strips of sound motion picture film on a drum recorded with digits). An operator in the manual exchange got the desired number this way and made the connection. This is described in detail in one of the Bell Labs histories (1875-1925). However, I know not all manual exchanges were reached this way. I don't know why, but at least in the Phila area during the transition years, some manual exchanges were dialable yet others required calling the operator (0) and asking for the number. For example, in the Phila phone book, it would say "FLanders 2-1234" (a dialable manual exchange) but "Willow Grove 1234" a non-dialable manual exchange. [IIRC, Willow Grove and FLanders (Upper Darby) were the last Phila suburbs to go dial, converting around 1962.] One of the tough challenges the Bell System faced in the 1950s was the vast variety of equipment in its switching centers -- most dating from a time switches were installed to meet a community's needs only without much concern to a bigger picture. Converting to dial in the mid 1950s meant not only replacing existing equipment in kind, but assessing future growth and providing a building and equipment accordingly. Plenty of towns undoubtedly got second-hand SxS gear from other towns upgraded to XBar, and probably a few got additional manual board positions to tide them over for a while. Remember that SxS lines didn't peak out until 1974. We take the telephone for granted these days, but it wasn't so long ago that even making a local call was considered serious business, not to be done frivilously, and many people didn't have phones at all. If you want into a store or public place today and ask for a phone, there's a good chance they'll let you use their phone if it's a quick local call. Years ago that was unheard even for employees, most places had at least one pay phone, often banks of them, for the public or employees to make personal calls on. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About fifty years ago, when Hammond, IN was just getting converted to dial, to reach Whiting, IN (still manual) one dialed '911' and talked to the Whiting operator to get the desired number. But in Whiting when you asked the operator for a Hammond number you would then hear 'beep beep beep' as she punched it in to get the Hammond number. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Google Local is Cool Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:44:54 -0600 John Cummings wrote: > wrote in message > news:telecom23.132.15@telecom-digest.org: >> In a message dated Fri, 19 Mar 2004 08:26:06 -0700, Phil Earnhardt >> writes: >>> One wonders what countermeasures the Baby Bells -- and other >>> owners of Yellow Pages services -- will launch. >>> SmartPages.com is an SBC operation. >> SmartPages.com is an SBC operation. > RealPages.com is a BellSouth operation. And Verizon has SuperPages, and Qwest has DEX (IIRC). Both are available in traditional phonebook format as well as online. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ "someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003 ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: Google Local is Cool Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:03:40 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , John Cummings wrote: > wrote in message > news:telecom23.132.15@telecom-digest.org: >> In a message dated Fri, 19 Mar 2004 08:26:06 -0700, Phil Earnhardt >> < pae@dim.com> writes: >>> One wonders what countermeasures the Baby Bells -- and other >>> owners of Yellow Pages services -- will launch. >>> SmartPages.com is an SBC operation. >> SmartPages.com is an SBC operation. > RealPages.com is a BellSouth operation. Superpages.com is a Verizon operation (from GTE) Qwest has Qwestdex.com /JBL ------------------------------ From: burris Subject: Re: Triumph of the Telcos Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 17:17:16 -0500 Monty Solomon wrote: > Internet telephony advocates are predicting that free long distance > means the downfall of Big Telecom. But it won't be so easy to topple > the king. > By G. Pascal Zachary > March 23, 2004 | Technology pundits would have us believe that > Internet telephony, which enables "free" phone calls for those with > broadband and the proper equipment, is going to topple the established > phone companies. But the future may not turn out to be so > one-sided. Instead, Internet telephony (commonly referred to as VOIP, > for "voice over Internet protocol") may represent just another > battleground for the usual fights between the Baby Bells, the > long-distance telephone companies and the cable companies. > While the outcome is uncertain, Internet telephony, despite its > insurgent, revolutionary credentials, stands a good chance of being > co-opted by the oligarchy that rules over telecommunications in > America. > http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/03/23/voip/ Unfortunately, one must subscribe to read the article. Perhaps you could copy it and post that way. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: j_s_skinner@hotmail.com (Skinner) Subject: Re: Variety of Phone Numbers -- 1950s Date: 23 Mar 2004 15:03:28 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Up until the 90's the CO in my small town used an old step-by-step and we could dial 4 digits to call within town. This stopped when it was replaced with a Stromberg-Carlson remote. When questioned, a lineman told me that "there's too many numbers these days" to have four-digit dialing. In fact, the population of the town has gone down since that time, and we're the only town in our exchange, so probably the set of numbers has gotten smaller too. I guess that's just the way it is. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here in Independence, KS *everyone* has a 620-331 number where landlines are concerned. When giving out your number socially around town, most folks here just quote the last four digits, since the 331 part is assumed. Then City of Independence got a centrex for all their stuff, and it went on 332 for police, city hall, all the schools, parks, etc. The Montgomery County Sheriff is odd, having *330*-1000 as their number. Cell phones are also on 330 and some on 332. But there are a bunch of other prefixes (714 comes to mind) 'assigned' but no one is on any of them. Another oddity is our local ISP, TerraWorld (which also owns our phone company, Prairie Stream) and even though TerraWorld and Prairie Stream both conduct business on 331 numbers, TerraWorld's 56K dialup (also used by AOL and anyone else who leases 56K dialups from them) go through 714-0005, which so far as I can tell is the only working number in the 714 exchange. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: Time to Pass the Hat Once Again Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 21:00:00 CST Its that time of the month once again, when I come to you very humbly asking for financial assistance in publishing this Digest day after day. How much you give is up to you. Your letters and gifts are very important to me, and are frequently used the same month they are recieved. Being on a fixed income from Social Security Disability is not a lot of fun, but somehow I get by each month, with additional gifts from readers who find this a useful newsgroup, and one that is mostly free of spam, etc. You can contribute as you see fit through PayPal on our home page http://telecom-digest.org where at the very bottom of the home page is a PayPal button for credit card donations. If you prefer to send a check you may do that also at this address: Patrick Townson/TELECOM, Post Office Box 50, Independence, KS 67301-0050. You will get a thank you acknowledgment in either case, plus this advance thank you from me now. 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #137 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 24 14:02:55 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2OJ2s813648; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 14:02:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 14:02:55 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403241902.i2OJ2s813648@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 #138 TELECOM Digest Wed, 24 Mar 2004 14:03:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 138 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson In Fights Over Telecom Issues, Record Shows, Kerry's Worked (M Solomon) The Real Story Behind Must-Carry (Monty Solomon) Broadcasters Hate Digital-TV Proposal (Monty Solomon) Broadcasters: Keep Must-Carry as it Is (Monty Solomon) The Free Lane on the Information Highway (Monty Solomon) Supreme Court Rules Against Local Government Phone Service (M Solomon) Public Knowledge Demystifies Digital Rights Management (Monty Solomon) Thumbs Up For APTS Digital-Only Strategy (Monty Solomon) DTV: Should we Bet the Farm on a Digital-Only Strategy? (Monty Solomon) Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial (Tony P.) Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: Lafayette, IN Long Distance (was Re: Last Modern Towns) (Geo. Adams) Re: Google Local is Cool (Phil Earnhardt) Review of Norvergence (Joel Keck) 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, 24 Mar 2004 09:39:27 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: In Fights Over Telecom Issues, Record Shows, Kerry's Worked In Fights Over Telecom Issues, Record Shows, Kerry's Worked on Many Sides By TIMOTHY L. O'BRIEN and STEPHEN LABATON In late 1999, as deregulation and a stock market boom propelled a wave of deal making among the nation's biggest telecommunications concerns, Senator John Kerry worked hard to ensure that Bell Atlantic, the largest private employer in his home state, Massachusetts, remained in the industry's front ranks. In letters to senior Federal Communications Commission officials that year, Mr. Kerry -- a member of the Senate committee that oversees the F.C.C. -- pushed the agency to remove roadblocks to regulatory approval of a merger of Bell Atlantic and GTE. He also pressed the agency to allow the company to enter New York's lucrative long-distance market. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/24/politics/campaign/24TELE.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:45:23 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Real Story Behind Must-Carry From Multichannel News, March 22, 2004 By Ted Hearn Washington- A decade ago, five U.S. Supreme Court justices agreed behind closed doors to strike down a new federal law that required mandatory cable carriage of local TV stations. But the coalition, spearheaded by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, that wanted to topple the must-carry law turned out to be fragile. It collapsed when Justice David H. Souter had second thoughts and joined the pro-must-carry camp, supporting a law that broadcasters considered vital. Thomas Veered Souter's flip followed a mid-course correction by Justice Clarence Thomas into the anti-must-carry camp. The result: What once might have been a 5-4 vote to overturn must-carry became a 5-4 vote simply remanding the case to a lower court. The high court ultimately affirmed must-carry in a 5-4 vote in 1997. Cable's near miss on that important Supreme Court decision -- and the nine justices' circuitous process -- might never have become known outside the court's inner core, had it not been spelled out in the recently released papers and records of former Justice Harry A. Blackmun, a Nixon appointee who penned the landmark Roe v. Wade decision on abortion. Blackmun, who helped change Souter's mind on must-carry, retired in 1994 and died in 1999 at 85. In 1997, he donated records from his long and distinguished judicial career to the Library of Congress, with instructions not to release them for five years after his death. On March 4, the Library opened the records to the public -- in all, about 1,600 boxes of letters, memos, draft opinions and notes that shed some light on the inner workings of the country's most secretive institution from a man who served it for 24 years. The must-carry case has a long shadow. Broadcasters today rely on their victory in their effort to get the Federal Communications Commission to force cable systems to carry not just one programming service per TV station, but as many free programming services as a station can pack into its digital spectrum. http://www.mediareform.net/news/article.php?id=2838 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:50:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Broadcasters Hate Digital-TV Proposal From Multichannel News, March 22, 2004 By Ted Hearn Washington- What's good for Berlin, Germany, isn't so good for Berlin, N.H. That's the word broadcasters quietly put out last week in their effort to quell a bold plan by the Federal Communications Commission that would require TV stations to give back their analog licenses many years sooner than expected. The FCC would like to get its hands on the analog spectrum as quickly as possible for reallocation to the wireless phone industry, which wants to deploy over-the-air broadband data services. Public safety groups also want a slice of the airwaves. The FCC's transition model is the German capital, which last August became the first major city in the world to complete the DTV transition and did so apparently without complication. Broadcasting sources, who asked not to be identified, had nothing nice to say about elements of the FCC plan they had seen. They called it too complicated, politically naive -- and generous to the cable industry on a scale not seen in many years. http://www.freepress.net/news/article.php?id=2839 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:52:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Broadcasters: Keep must-carry as it is From Multichannel News, March 22, 2004 By Ted Hearn Washington - The cable industry may have found its most lethal weapon yet against a policy to expand cable carriage of local TV stations. It's opposition from broadcasters themselves. The vast majority of TV stations want a federal rule to require cable systems to carry their multiple digital-programming services in an expansion of current analog must-carry rules that limit carriage to one service. But at least one TV-station group has other ideas. FEARS BREAKDOWN Spanish broadcaster Entravision Holdings Inc. is a holdout from the multicast must-carry consensus, telling the Federal Communications Commission that broadening the carriage rules for digital TV could cause the courts to bring down all must-carry rules. That would greatly harm Entravision stations, which need bare bones must-carry rights to get berths on cable systems. Cable programmers are beginning to replay Entravision's message at the FCC. In a March 16 filing, A&E Television Networks and Court TV cited Entravision's analysis as yet another -- and telling -- rationale for limiting TV stations to just one programming stream on cable. http://www.freepress.net/news/article.php?id=2840 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:58:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Free Lane on the Information Highway By DALTON CONLEY The WiFi revolution is here. With the technology known as wireless fidelity, laptop users can get onto the Internet and download e-mail, photos and other electronic files from places once well off the information superhighway -- parks, truck stops and cafes, to name a few. That's a wonderful thing, but what's better is that WiFi holds the promise of bridging America's much discussed digital divide - if we make it ubiquitous and free to use, like the public library system. After all, just as roads and bridges were among the most important public investments in the industrial period, wireless access to the Internet is arguably the most crucial public investment of the information age. For now, though, wireless Internet access is a hodgepodge. In most cases, a home computer user buys a wireless router (which costs less than $100) that links to an Internet connection (which can cost several hundred dollars a year). The router then broadcasts a signal, which typically covers 300 feet to 1,600 feet, that allows all computers within that range to tap into the Internet. Some businesses, like coffee shops, have WiFi on their premises to lure customers. Some institutions also provide WiFi to the public. In Bryant Park, next to the New York Public Library on 42nd Street, laptop users can sit at one of the public tables on a glorious afternoon and read their e-mail while sipping a latte, thanks to the Bryant Park Restoration Corporation. Similarly, Columbia University offers free wireless access on its campus. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/19/opinion/19CONL.html ------------------------------ Subject: Supreme Court Rules Against Local Government Phone Service Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 12:00:29 -0500 From: Monty Solomon WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court said Wednesday that states may block cities and other local governments from setting up shop as phone service providers. http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/0304/24phone.html NIXON, ATT'Y GEN. OF MO v. MO MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, ET AL. No. 02-1238. Argued January 12, 2004 -- Decided March 24, 2004 http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-1238.ZS.html Nixon v. Missouri Municipal League http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/03pdf/02-1238.pdf ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 22:43:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Public Knowledge Demystifies Digital Rights Management Public Knowledge has published a comprehensive resource that makes understandable for everyone the increasingly complex and highly technical issue of digital rights management. Digital Rights Management (DRM) is the term applied to technologies that prevent you from using a copyrighted digital work beyond the degree to which the copyright owner wishes to allow you to use it. The technologies can be applied to digital movies, television programs, books or music. The 40-page primer, "What Every Citizen Should Know About DRM, a.k.a. Digital Rights Management," was written by Mike Godwin, senior technology counsel at Public Knowledge. Godwin is a veteran of Internet law, and the author of "Cyber Rights: Defending Free Speech in the Digital Age" (MIT Press, 2003). http://www.publicknowledge.org/content/press-releases/press-release-2004-03-19 What Every Citizen Should Know About DRM a.k.a. "Digital Rights Management" http://www.publicknowledge.org/content/overviews/citizens-guide-to-drm/view ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 23:35:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Thumbs up For APTS Digital-Only Strategy But first, another test: linking with PBS dues Originally published in Current, March 8, 2004 By Steve Behrens With a show of hands, all but a few public TV station chiefs attending an APTS Capitol Hill Day meeting Feb. 24 [2004] said the lobbying group should keep developing its "digital-only broadcasting," or DOB, strategy. Instead of continuing to use analog TV channels for the next decade or more, the strategy goes, public TV would make a concerted effort to speed viewers' move to digital over-the-air broadcasting, cable or satellite reception. The government, pleased to earn billions from early auctions of the channels, would give public TV special assistance in exchange. Public TV would not only save transmitter power bills but could also win mandated cable carriage and an endowed trust fund from Congress, APTS President John Lawson told station execs. http://www.current.org/federal/fed0404apts.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 23:35:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DTV: Should we Bet the Farm on a Digital-Only Strategy? APTS plan is creative, but is it wise to rely on the kindness of cable? Originally published in Current, Feb. 23, 2004 Commentary by Dennis L. Haarsager No segment of the broadcasting industry has worked harder to make the digital transition work than has public broadcasting. For example, NPR's Tomorrow Radio project may keep digital radio from joining the dustbin of failed technology innovations. Many public television stations offer enhanced DTV services to realize promises they made to the public and to funders. Both public media are expanding the frankly limited conception of the designers of digital radio and television. In spite of these innovations, there is so much going on in the development of alternative digital distribution platforms that neither medium should bet the farm on over-the-air digital broadcasting. On the television side, here's why. When the FCC began a rulemaking to anoint an "advanced television'' standard in 1987, the focus was on stuffing a high-definition television signal into a 6-MHz channel. It was a different world. MS-DOS was still the dominant computer operating system, the Internet and World Wide Web were as a practical matter about six years away, and the first DTV station (WRAL in Raleigh, N.C.) eight years away. Cable was less developed and DBS didn't exist. We still live with the vision of digital TV distribution set in that context 16 years ago. In 1987, many knowledgeable people thought HDTV couldn't be stuffed into the 6-MHz channels stations had available. But the designers of the 8-VSB system were determined to fool Mother Nature. They succeeded heroically and the FCC adopted the system as a standard. http://www.current.org/dtv/dtv0403dob.shtml ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 05:59:53 GMT In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About fifty years ago, when Hammond, IN > was just getting converted to dial, to reach Whiting, IN (still manual) > one dialed '911' and talked to the Whiting operator to get the desired > number. But in Whiting when you asked the operator for a Hammond > number you would then hear 'beep beep beep' as she punched it in to > get the Hammond number. PAT] Sure, routing calls using MF signalling has been around since the 30's. But I think the biggest challenges in the Bell System were definitely signalling. Supervision and routing had to understand all sorts of different signals (Ie. revertive pulse, MF and who knows what other bastardized signalling systems were around.) ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 05:54:13 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Lisa Hancock wrote: > One of the tough challenges the Bell System faced in the 1950s was the > vast variety of equipment in its switching centers -- most dating from > a time switches were installed to meet a community's needs only > without much concern to a bigger picture. Converting to dial in the > mid 1950s meant not only replacing existing equipment in kind, but > assessing future growth and providing a building and equipment > accordingly. Plenty of towns undoubtedly got second-hand SxS gear > from other towns upgraded to XBar, and probably a few got additional > manual board positions to tide them over for a while. Remember that > SxS lines didn't peak out until 1974. In urban and suburban areas Bell got at least one office code on a XBAR machine, even though the remainder of the office was SxS. The XBAR not only provided service to one office code, it provided common control for the steppers' toll calls, thus avoiding the call director fiasco that almost buried General Telephone from 1965-1980, or so. ------------------------------ From: George Adams Subject: Re: Lafayette, IN long distance Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 23:18:53 -0500 On Mar 23, 2004, at 10:29 PM, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wasn't Lafayette, Indiana and its > neighbor West Lafayette a similar situation? Long after that part of > Indiana was in the 317 area code, and largely dialable, I recall we > still had to go through the operator to get Lafayette from the Chicago > area. So was Fort Wayne, Indiana I think, in the 219 area. PAT] Pat, you are correct. It was also interesting from Lafayette, dialing out. In the fall of 1978 I moved to West Lafayette, IN. Long distance calls were dialed with 1 plus 10 digits, you would hear ringing, then the operator would come on and ask "What number are you calling FROM, please?" It was an honor system for billing the call. You would state your number, and then your call would ring out to the intended destination. Per minute long distance rates in those days dropped sharply for calls that started at or after 11:00 pm; calls that started at 10:59 pm were billed for all minutes at the high rate. So there was a nightly rush of calls when people felt sure the cheaper rate was in effect. This often swamped the system, and instead of getting the operator you would hear a few rings and then be connected to many other poor souls wanting to call long distance but also not reaching the operator. You could talk to all of them as a giant chat until you got tired, hung up, and tried again. An accurate clock was very valuable in guiding your dialing to reach the operator just at 11:00 so your entire call would benefit from the cheap rate, yet reliably go through, since you were a minute or two ahead of the "rush hour". As I recall, some time in 1980, the central office was upgraded to capture caller numbers, and ringing to the destination phone was not longer interrupted by the operator's billing question. Capacity was also upgraded and I don't recall failing to get a long distance call to go through after that time. George [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You may remember when the telco there had a real funky system for calling Purdue University from anywhere in Lafayette or West Lafayette. Callers dialed '90' (only!) and reached the Purdue operator then verbally passed her a five digit extension. Or, people could dial '92' and the desired five digit extension if they knew it. Purdue took up six or eight entire pages in the Lafayette phone directory. At some point, I suppose around 1980, they did away with that system. Fort Riley, in Junction City, Kansas also had a peculiar arrangement. They were served by United Telephone in those days, and had something like thirty or forty pages in the center of the Junction City phone book. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: Google Local is Cool Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 01:26:00 -0700 Organization: Kaos OnLine Coalition On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 07:15:07 -0600, John Cummings wrote: >>> One wonders what countermeasures the Baby Bells -- and other >>> owners of Yellow Pages services -- will launch. >> SmartPages.com is an SBC operation. > RealPages.com is a BellSouth operation. And Qwest's service -- the one they sold -- is called dexonline.com. What are these services providing beyond a computer interface to the traditional Yellow Pages mechanism? I've messed with a couple of these services, but haven't seen anything at all remarkable. AFAICT, each of these services has access to (the same?) national database. That's interesting, but is hardly remarkable. BTW: local.google definitely has problems, too. My chiropracter moved her practice to a new city well over a year ago, but Google has her located in the old town. And I don't know why -- she has her address specified on her webpage. > John Cummings --phil ------------------------------ From: Joel Keck Subject: Review of Norvergence Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 10:25:55 -0500 Mr. Townson, Working in the telecom industry this company has recently been brought to my attention. Here is a fairly detailed and in depth assessment from what I've read. It's rather lengthy so I hope it goes through, and I have a copy backed up on word. You can reach me at the above email address, though I ask that you remove it if you post this on your digest. Anyone else wishing to contact me in regards to this can email me at Crane999@yahoo.com with the title "Norvergence" and I should catch it. Gotta love those spam filters. In response to the recent queries and various boards I've read that deal with the telecommunications company Norvergence I would like to supply the following opinion. I work for a competitor of this company, however I have learned to respect competitors. While I have not come up against a deal with this company, nor have I seen any of the paperwork they produce I do have some points that might be of interest. First I must point out that these opinions are based solely on hearsay. I am taking this information from what I have read on these bulletin boards. 1. If it saves you money, it's worth looking into. It appears that Norvergence can, and does save companies money on their telecom bills. 2. If at the same time as saving you money it provides a service that is better than what you have, or exactly what you need then go for it. Here are some concerns I have from a business standpoint, and also from what I would ask as a consumer looking into these services. 1. Why am I signing a loan application and not a credit verification form? 2. If you can't tell me about what kind of service you provide, who can? 3. How is your customer service? 4. What is your service level agreement (what happens if/when I lose service?) 5. Why do I have to purchase the equipment, can't I just rent it? 6. If I'm purchasing the equipment and it breaks, what recourse do I have? 7. Why should I have to leave my current carrier up for redundancy? 8. All the other telecom companies only offer a 3 year deal maximum, why am I signing a 5 year deal? Some of the issues mentioned, that I want to provide some measure of clarity on. * Reselling of services. In the case of Norvergence there appears to be an issue with their reselling the cellular services. Each company (aside from the Incumbent carriers - Bell, Sprint, Verizon) must in some manner "resell" some measure of their business. If you have an analog line at your business and you don't have service with one of the Incumbents, chances are that line is resold. Same situation, the difference is you're dealing with Cell phones which most companies don't do. * From what I've read, the customer service is terrible. Ok, admittedly every company has at some point or another been known for bad customer service. There are growing pains, especially if Norvergence is growing as fast as it seems. My only statement on this subject currently (I address this further, later on) is that they will need to improve this area to keep customers. Any company with a continued record of horrible customer service often gets in trouble with state agencies. I'm sure they are aware of this issue and there was some indication from the posts I read that they had improved to some measure. * Raising the rates of services with 30 days notice. I am not aware of any company (other than perhaps the Incumbent Carriers) that do not have some form of this. Your initial response even from most of the companies will be that they do not, because you signed a contract. Your thoughts are, I signed a contract that guarantees me a price for the specified amount of time. o Each company must file tariffs within each state they elect to provide services in. These tariffs are reviewed by the Utility Commissions or Regulatory agencies within that state. Due to the lengthy nature of these legal documents (think taxes) they are not given to customers but are readily available. My company has them located on the internet for anyone to view. Within these tariffs are the regulations of how the company would go about raising the rates. o The tariffs do also have limits to raising the rates. So while the rates can be raised, it cannot be done without limit. o If you wish to contact your current provider, ask them if you can view a copy of their tariff's for your state. Hopefully they will have it in a format that will allow you to do so at your leisure. * The "MATRIX" box. According to the website information I viewed (there is a link to Adtran on the Norvergence website) this equipment was specifically designed by Adtran for what Norvergence wanted. This does mean that what Norvergence claims is technically true. However, it's still an Adtran. Look around and see what other Adtran may cost anywhere near what they are apparently selling it to you for. * The equipment is purchased. Most telecom companies do not sell the equipment they use to customers. There are exceptions, since the right amount of money really can get you just about anything. o The reason behind not selling the equipment is the concern that if anything happens to your services that is equipment related it can be repaired or replaced by the provider. If you own the equipment, the provider can do nothing to assist you (other than selling you another one) due to liability issues. o This is still a business, and yes we will make some money off of renting or selling you the equipment. I will say though, that nowadays many companies are simply building the cost of the equipment into the pricing so you'll never see it. * Norvergence's alleged denial of using Voice over IP (VoIP) technology. If you go to their website you will see at the top of the web browser a description of the page. It does state there, that they use this technology. I find it difficult to believe that they would deny using this as it is one of the most current out there. o You have 3 choices of phone services right now, based on two types. Analog, which is the same as what you have at home. Or digital, which is broken down by how the packets are dealt with. That is very important, because of the digital types you have VoIP, and VoATM (Voice over ATM). o The age old adage of paying for what you get is very true in this case. VoIP tends to be cheaper, because it is overall not as good as VoATM. VoIP sends the signal and that's it. If it has nowhere to go, it doesn't matter. VoATM does a little more. Generally it will attempt to recover more of any lost packets, and will try to make sure the signal has somewhere to go. The end difference is usually minimal. In some cases, the difference is quite telling. o The idea of the digital services has an innate difference in what can be done on the higher end. Norvergence is offering a voice/data solution to give plenty of voice lines, while maintaining data access to a broadband level. VoIP will lose data bandwidth with each voice line that is in use. VoATM will lose data bandwidth to a specified level, and then maintain that level no matter how many voice channels are used. o Please note that the term "broadband" is not completely defined. It generally means anything that is faster than what a dial up connection on an analog line can provide. If it's above 56k it can probably be called "broadband". Their web page says the following: "NorVergence is a $200 Million Dollar Business Equipment and Systems Engineering Company ...." The issue I have with this statement is the manner in which Norvergence apparently receives their earnings. From what I've read, the bank pays the loan amount to Norvergence, and the customer is set for a 5 year period of paying up. None of the actual financial numbers I've seen tossed around on the boards seems to fit exactly with what everyone is saying, so I can't provide any truly accurate measure or financial assessment. However, what this means to me is that Norvergence can do well quickly because they have all of their next 5 years of revenue from the customer up front. There is an ingrained problem with this. All of the money they will make from you over the next 5 years is already in their pockets. There is little or no incentive to provide any type of customer service because they are not depending on the residual revenue you provide. It seems, or has been claimed that a small portion of the monthly payments goes to Norvergence and the remaining to the bank. All this seems to provide for Norvergence is their cost of services and goods to the customer. This is how I would guess they will be able to maintain services for some time. Lack of residual cost is a good thing, especially in a business that is based off of that very thing. Overall I think that as long as you feel the risk is worth it, this may very well be the best decision you ever make. It seems that currently, if you have a problem Norvergence is slow to provide any type of customer service or assistance. That may change. The issues and warning signs I see are that they use very high pressure sales tactics. They provide few answers to legitimate questions that are quite valid. You're signing a 5 year loan. They have all their money up front. It doesn't sit right with me, but for you it very well could be the best deal you find. Joel Keck ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #138 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 24 15:32:57 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2OKWvx15109; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 15:32:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 15:32:57 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403242032.i2OKWvx15109@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 #139 TELECOM Digest Wed, 24 Mar 2004 15:33:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 139 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Vonage(R) Selects Xten's X-Pro as The 'Softphone of Choice' (VOIP News) TCS Enhances E9-1-1 with Trustworthy, Reliable Emergency (VOIP News) FierceMarkets Launches 'The VoIP Report' (VOIP News) Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service not Rendered (yy#ui) Re: Call Centers' Early Warning Systems (Tony P.) Re: Western Union Clocks (Mike Riddle) Poisson Tables (Fred Atkinson) 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: VOIP News Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 12:25:22 -0500 Subject: Vonage(R) Selects Xten's X-Pro as The 'Softphone of Choice' Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-23-2004/0002133145&STORY&EDATE= Vonage's cutting-edge Voice-over-IP service now available with X-PRO, the leading SIP Softphone from Xten EDISON, N.J. and SANTA CLARA, Calif., March 23 /PRNewswire/ -- Vonage, the fastest growing telephony company in the US, and Xten Networks, publisher of the award winning X-PRO SoftPhone, announced today that Vonage and Xten have completed interoperability testing of an OEM version of Xten's X-PRO SIP SoftPhone for use on Vonage's Voice-over-IP (VoIP) service. Vonage customers can now sign up for Vonage, download and install the Vonage X-PRO softphone, and start making and receiving telephone calls immediately on their computers, while maintaining the same quality of service they have come to expect. Full press release at: http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-23-2004/0002133145&STORY&EDATE= How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For persons interested in Vonage service, I still provide e-coupons good for a month of free service (the second month) of whatever kind of Vonage service plan you choose. Just write not-for-pub to ask me for e-coupon. Write to ptownson@telecom-digest.org . PAT] ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 10:12:25 -0500 Subject: TCS Enhances E9-1-1 with Trustworthy, Reliable Emergency Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20040324005226&newsLang=en ANNAPOLIS, Md.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 24, 2004-- Superior Technology vs. Existing Voice Over IP 9-1-1 Solutions Brings Reliable 911 Calls to IP Networks - Resolving Impediment to VoIP Adoption TeleCommunication Systems, Inc. (TCS) (NASDAQ: TSYS), a global leader in wireless data technology, today announced that it has launched its VoIP E9-1-1 Service, a set of comprehensive capabilities meant to address the broad range of challenges for emergency services which are currently posed by Voice Over IP technologies. Existing VoIP solutions for 911 calling are hampered by several limitations. Unlike 911 calls originating from wireline or wireless phones, VoIP 911 calls may be routed to an administrative line and are sometimes answered by a front desk receptionist or administrator instead of an actual emergency operator -- costing valuable seconds in case of an emergency. TCS' technology solution resolves this problem, routing 911 calls directly to the emergency operator. In addition, existing VoIP solutions are frequently unable to determine the geographic location of callers dialing 911. For example, if an individual is using a virtual private network to tunnel into a corporate server and make a VoIP call through that server, a 911 call will provide no location information unless manually entered before the call. Again, TCS' technology resolves this issue, providing accurate location information to operators - as well as a call-back number in case the caller is disconnected. Single Solution, Multiple Configurations Voice Over IP is not a single technology, but rather four distinctive applications targeted at distinct market segments in either static, portable, or mobile environments: -- Cable and DSL VoIP, often deployed in static configurations in which the end user stays at a fixed location and uses the standard North American Numbering Plan; examples of this service include residential line replacement using cable or DSL connections; -- Enterprise VoIP, usually deployed in static configurations with occasional portability, a circumstance in which the end user can easily move his telephony connection anywhere within the enterprise campus; -- Internet Service Provider (ISP) VoIP, usually provided as a highly portable telephony configuration which allows the end user to establish a telecommunications connection wherever she can obtain an internet-based connection to her ISP provider; and -- Wireless Fidelity (WiFi) VoIP, expected to be a mobile telephony configuration that allows the end user to take a home-based telephony connection and roam within an interconnected WiFi network, much like cellular technologies allow today. Problems - and a Solution TCS has applied its data and telephony engineering expertise to construct an emergency services solution that provides superior capabilities over the current solutions deployed. Today's VoIP solutions for portable environments terminate calls to the administrative lines at a Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP). Not all PSAPs support direct-dial administrative lines, many are not answered 24 hours-a-day or during periods of heavy call volume, and none of the administrative lines support the ability to automatically identify the location of the calling party - location is typically conveyed verbally or through alternative data entry methods that not all PSAPs support. Building upon the broad range of capabilities currently implemented to support Wireless E9-1-1 services and using the deep knowledge of the wireless infrastructure into which many of TCS' location and messaging products are deployed, TCS has defined an approach which will allow static, portable, and mobile VoIP c alls to be routed to PSAPs while automatically providing the location and identity of the caller. "The International VoIP Council is pleased to have Council member TeleCommunication Systems take a lead role in developing a wide-ranging delivery service solution for emergency services via VoIP," said Neal Shact, Co-Founder of the International VoIP Council. "The current lack of a complete solution for enhanced emergency services over VoIP may slow adoption. Having a robust solution for emergency services helps to guarantee the future success and growth of this revolutionary and disruptive technology." Broad Suite of Solutions TCS' VoIP E9-1-1 Service provides a broad set of capabilities to solve the static, portable, and mobile VoIP challenges and includes: -- VoIP E9-1-1 ALI Service - a capability which allows any fixed, portable, or mobile VoIP directory number to be correlated with current geographic coordinates and nearest street address as provided by a standard Automatic Line Identification (ALI) database; -- VoIP E9-1-1 ESRK Service - a Emergency Services Routing Key (ESRK) capability which handles call routing management, ensuring that the originating location of the call will determine the subsequent routing of the emergency call to the closest PSAP; -- VoIP E9-1-1 ALI Link Service - a capability which allows any VoIP Service Provider to interconnect to any existing PSAP connection currently supporting basic wireless E9-1-1 services (currently estimated to be greater than 65% of all existing PSAPs); and -- VoIP E9-1-1 VPC Service - a Positioning Center supporting VoIP calls which will interact with a wide variety of VoIP switching infrastructure to pass the current known location information. "TCS is excited to provide a superior technology solution to a marketplace which is just beginning to grow and that promises to be a significant advancement in the existing wireline infrastructure," said Drew Morin, Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer of TCS. "TCS has applied its inside-the-network telephony and data prowess to construct a solution that combines the strengths of landline 911, wireless E9-1-1, and wireless data. The result is a unique solution which has been well received by the VoIP community and recognized as a superior approach to current proposals. As an added benefit, this enhancement to our wireless E9-1-1 service is the framework for TCS providing an alternative in the traditional 911 market." TCS is working with leading VoIP vendors and standards bodies to position the solution for the broadest industry adoption and expects the full suite of VoIP E9-1-1 services to be available to VoIP service providers later this year. ABOUT TELECOMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, INC. TeleCommunication Systems, Inc. (TCS) (NASDAQ:TSYS) is a leading provider of mission critical wireless data solutions to carriers, enterprise and government customers. TCS' wireless data offerings provide location-based Enhanced 9-1-1 services and messaging infrastructure to wireless operators, real-time market data and alerts to financial institutions, mobile asset management and mobile office solutions for enterprises, and encrypted satellite communications to government customers. For more information visit www.telecomsys.com. This announcement contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These statements are based upon TCS' current expectations and assumptions that are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that would cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated. The actual results realized by the Company could differ materially from the statements made herein, depending in particular upon the risks and uncertainties described in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). These include without limitation risks and uncertainties relating to the Company's financial results and the ability of the Company to (i) reach profitability as early as anticipated, (ii) continue to rely on its customers and other third parties to provide additional products and services that create a demand its products and services, (iii) conduct its business in foreign countries, (iv) adapt and integrate new technologies into its products, (v) expand its business offerings in the new wireless data industry, (vi) develop software without any errors or defects, (vii) protect its intellectual property rights, and (viii) implement its sales and marketing strategy. Existing and prospective investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. The Company undertakes no obligation to update or revise the information in this press release, whether as a result of new information, future events or circumstances, or otherwise. Contacts TeleCommunication Systems Rita Thompson, 410-295-1865 thompsonr@telecomsys.com or Edelman Ethan Rasiel, 212-704-4521 ethan.rasiel@edelman.com ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 10:27:49 -0500 Subject: FierceMarkets Launches 'The VoIP Report' Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-24-2004/0002133994&EDATE= FierceMarkets Launches 'The VoIP Report' New Weekly Email Service Makes It Easy to Follow Voice-Over-IP Market WASHINGTON, March 24 /PRNewswire/ -- Keeping track of the fast-emerging voice-over-IP (VoIP) market just got easier thanks to a new publication launched today by FierceMarkets Inc. The publication, called The VoIP Report, is a free weekly email briefing that summarizes the latest business and technology developments in VoIP. It is designed for top-level telecom executives and comes out every Wednesday. Sign up is free at http://www.thevoipreport.com. You can read the full press release at http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-24-2004/0002133994&EDATE= One thing I will say is that I do not understand why certain e-mail publications like this one insist on trying to collect an intrusive amount of data from people -- you would think you were signing up for a print publication that is to be delivered by snail mail, rather than a once a week e-mail service. When a company asks for that much information, it makes me very reluctant to even give them my e-mail address, because I wonder how they're going to use all this data -- but then again, I'm probably not one of the "elite executives" they are trying to target. So, while I'll let you know that this publication exists, please don't consider this mention as any sort of recommendation. How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: Subject: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Not Rendered Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 20:46:28 -0800 Organization: Astound Broadband Received an incoming phone call from unknown person. This unknown caller said that the operator gave them the number, but this number has supposedly been unlisted for about six months (for small monthly charge). There are multiple local phone companies, and the caller may not have been local. So, is it possible I have no way of knowing what number information service the caller used? How can anyone verify whether that monthly "unlisted" charge is doing anything? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is no real way to assure anything about your unlisted status under the circumstances. Any telco you make inquiry from, i.e. 'did you fail to unlist me?' is obviously going to lie and say 'yes, you are unlisted through here', even if you are not unlisted. Its like the old anecdotal story going back to the early days of long distance calls when several operators had to be involved in connecting your call: A man in a hotel room in New York City wants to call his office in Los Angeles. He gives his call to the local hotel switchboard operator who would tell the New York City operator who in turn told the Cleveland operator and then the Chicago operator and the St. Louis operator and the Denver operator and the Salt Lake City operator and the Los Angeles operator and the operator at his company in Los Angeles. The connection is put up, the man is talking for thirty seconds or a minute, then a dead line, because some oper- ator along the way mistakenly yanked the cord. The man in the hotel room in New York raises hell with the hotel operator; she in turn with the local New York operator and every operator down the line would respond 'not me; you are still up here!' (and ringing furiously to the next connection point) would say 'operator! you disconnected my party!' and the routine would go on right down the line and across the nation. The final operator would get the brunt of it, she had no one further down the line to blame. Ultimatly, some telco in the line (probably New York since they acted as the originator and the billing agent for the whole thing would wind up writing it off and making a new connection, even if it was the company operator in Los Angeles who did the actual dirty deed. No one ever confessed, and it was up to the originating company (who was the 'billing agent' for all the other telcos down the line) to issue the credit, etc. I think all you can do is go to whoever -- whichever company -- you are paying for the unlisted service and ask them to double check and be **certain -- absolutely positive** that your number is non-pub or unlisted, whichever it is supposed to be **in all sources, in all directories, published by whomever** . If it really matters, change your number once again (the telephone company or other originating agent will probably write off any charges to make that change for you) then start again. You said the caller claimed 'the operator' (whoever that is) gave him the number, but the 'operator' may have consulted an old, ancient online directory on the web somewhere. Did you change your number when you went unlisted, or keep the number but ask for unlisting? Assuming the former, have you given the number to **anyone** who could had put it in a directory database, such as on the net? Telcos pretty much all follow the rules, but some of these independent directory publishers have no such compunctions. As long as all the telco publishers (of directories) or managers of DA call centers played by the rules (meaning some pirate DA service or directory publisher somehow got your number) you have no real recourse against the telco with whom you placed your original instructions, although many of them will give a good will credit to you on yet another number change. But don't expect any of them to own up to it if it was a telco error. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Call Centers' Early Warning Systems Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 06:22:15 GMT In article , friedebach@yahoo.com says: > Michael Freedman, 03.23.04, Forbes.com > LONDON - You've heard the refrain: "This call may be recorded for > quality assurance purposes." Chances are good the company behind it is > NICE Systems. > A leader in the call center market, this Israel-based company was > established a decade ago, and its recording devices and software > packages are now used in some 30,000 call centers, financial > institutions and government outfits and emergency hot lines like 911. > More could be on the way. Every year, companies and government > agencies spend an estimated $500 million buying equipment to record > telephone calls, data and screen images. The information is used to > analyze customer behavior and to train call center agents. > http://www.forbes.com/networks/2004/03/23/cz_mf_0323nice.html > [Note from Eric: I had to call the FCC this afternoon when I was > having trouble logging into their ULS website. After the standard > "your call will be recorded" announcement, I had to listen to a loud > beep every few seconds as if I was calling a 911 center when a tech > came on line. I wonder why the announcement at the beginning of the > call was not sufficient.] > Eric Friedebach > /Tonight's Skywarn training cancelled due to... weather?/ Not everything should be recorded, particularly in public safety. When the Providence Police Department moved from LaSalle Square to their new building right on the edge of I-95 (It's only a block and a half from the old station.) I had occasion to check out their I.T. and telecom systems. When I went into the telecom room I noted the G3iV10 Definity switch and a set of boxes next to it that looked suspiciously like recording equipment. Sure enough, I was right. Ridiculously the department had paid for VoIP on the Definity but didn't use it. Go figure. At the AG's office we had to beg to upgrade from G3iV2 and by the time I'd left they STILL hadn't upgraded. In any case the recording system monitored EVERY line in the department, including lines used by arrested parties, the chief, everybody. When the new chief was sworn in the proverbial crap hit the fan. How they weren't aware of it is beyond me. Their I.T. and comms guys knew it was there, the previous administration had approved it. So sometimes recording is a BAD thing. ------------------------------ From: Mike Riddle Organization: Solitary, Poor,Nasty, Brutish and Short Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 20:52:43 -0600 Thanks--I think this might just do it! Mike Chuk Gleason wrote: > Might this link be to an external device to keep your clocks on time? > http://www.piexx.com/imp1/imp1dc.html > Chuk G. > Cary, NC >> Mike Riddle wrote: >>> Several years ago our esteemed moderator ran several articles on >>> Western Union Clocks. These were typically installed in train >>> stations and other public places. They were electrically powered, >>> self-winding (made by the "Self-Winding Clock Company") and >>> synchronized with the Naval Observatory on a periodic basis through >>> a 20 or 60 ma (I'm not sure which right now) circuit to Western >>> Union. Mike Riddle /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign mriddle%nospam@ivgate.omahug.org \ / Respect for open standards "To Reply Remove the Obvious" X No HTML/RTF in email http://www.mikeriddle.com / \ No M$ Word docs in email [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your esteemed moderator running those articles on those clocks caused so many people to look for them that today they are considered collector items. Bah, humbug! Me and my big mouth, I guess. Now I cannot find one anywhere for less than about three hundred dollars. I made a big leap (for me!) and bid on one slightly banged up one on EBay last night going at auction for a 'mere' $125, and after I worked the bid up to $150 (which I can ill-afford but somehow would have paid for) some bozo came along and out-bid me on that. I was too scared to bid any higher. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 10:41:02 -0800 (PST) From: Fred Atkinson Subject: Poisson Tables Reply-To: fatkinson@mishmash.com Does anyone know of any good URLs where I can find a Poisson table showing both CCS and Erlang? I've searched all over the Web and have struck out. I did find one in a book in the college library, but when I scanned it, the images didn't turn out so good. PDF would be preferable. An Excel spreadsheet would be even better. But, I'll take what I can get as long as it is good image quality. Fred Atkinson ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #139 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 25 01:52:42 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2P6qgV19868; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:52:42 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:52:42 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403250652.i2P6qgV19868@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 #140 TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:52:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 140 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cablevision to Hike Rates, Panel Rules For YES (Monty Solomon) Cellular Execs Say Go Slow on High-Speed Wireless (Monty Solomon) AOL Sees Future in Web Standards, Digital Media (Monty Solomon) AT&T Wireless Opens For Transatlantic Texting (Monty Solomon) PluggedIn: RSS Readers Offer New Ways to Read the Web (Monty Solomon) U.S. Cable Industry to Offer Free Channel Blocking (Monty Solomon) Remedy Debated as Nextel, Safety Channels Clash (Monty Solomon) Congress Let Privacy Programs be Cut (Monty Solomon) EPIC Alert 11.06 (Monty Solomon) EFFector 17.10: Let the Sun Set on PATRIOT-Section 212 (Monty Solomon) Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Not (Bit Twister) 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (AES/newspost) Re: Western Union Clocks (John Bartley) Australia: People Telecom Takes First Steps Into VoIP (VOIP News) Share Day for March (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, 24 Mar 2004 22:52:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cablevision to Hike Rates, Panel Rules For YES NEW YORK, March 24 (Reuters) - Cablevision Systems Corp. will hike monthly subscriber rates by 95 cents to partly cover the cost of carrying New York Yankees games, after an arbitration panel ruled it must offer the Yankees network to all of its subscribers on its expanded basic package of cable channels, the company said on Wednesday. The decision puts a temporary end to the maelstrom of controversy that has dragged New York regulators, politicians and media power brokers into a vicious brawl between the companies that create shows and those that distribute them. But emotions ran high on Wednesday, even after a deal was struck. "This ruling is a significant step backward that ignores the consumer's desire for fairness and choice," James Dolan, Cablevision's (NYSE:CVC) president and CEO, said in a statement. The arbitrators' decision appears to tip the balance of power in favor of programmers, at least for the time being, media executives said. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40927398 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 23:10:43 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cellular Execs Say go Slow on High-Speed Wireless By Justin Hyde ATLANTA, March 24 (Reuters) - U.S. wireless companies are wary of pouring billions of dollars into faster networks to accommodate high-speed data, noting that it may be years before consumers widely adopt the technology. High-speed wireless data technology claimed much of the limelight at this year's Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association industry show here, but executives want more time to evaluate the technology and wait for more advanced consumer devices, such as phones that can send and receive video clips. High-speed wireless data "is here, it's here to stay and it's going to be a big part of our business," Tim Donahue, Nextel Communications (NASDAQ:NXTL) president and CEO said during a panel discussion on Wednesday. But with the telecom spending boom and bust of the past few years in mind, several cellular companies say they want a clear picture of the high-speed business before they resume spending. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40924691 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 23:15:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL Sees Future in Web Standards, Digital Media By Kenneth Li NEW YORK, March 24 (Reuters) - America Online, long content to rule the Web world from its ivory tower, is lowering the drawbridge. Since its inception, the world's largest Internet service provider has used its proprietary software as a gateway to its e-mail, busy chat rooms and exclusive features from sister properties such as the popular magazines People and Sports Illustrated. The problem for the Time Warner Inc. (NYSE:TWX) unit is that it may be driving away customers seeking cheaper, more customized services by basing its flagship service on an isolationist model accessible only to members who pay $23.95 a month. Now, ahead of a critical board meeting in April, AOL Chief Executive Jonathan Miller has to convince Time Warner that its online unit can recover from disappointing advertising sales and subscriber defections of 2.2 million, or about 10 percent, in 2003 alone. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40923954 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 23:27:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Wireless Opens For Transatlantic Texting AMSTERDAM, March 23 (Reuters) - U.S.-based mobile telecoms carrier AT&T Wireless (NYSE:AWE) said on Tuesday its 22 million United States customers could send and receive short SMS text messages to over 263 million mobile phone users in Europe. The company, the country's third largest mobile carrier, said it was the biggest effort to date to open up the mobile texting market between the two continents. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40914446 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 23:30:27 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: PluggedIn: RSS Readers Offer New Ways to Read the Web By Reed Stevenson SEATTLE, March 23 (Reuters) - Noticed those little orange boxes on the Web lately with the letters "XML"? It's not a mystery or an obscure engineering feature, but rather a new way to get news and information delivered to your PC without having to browse through page after page of Internet sites. Called RSS, for Really Simple Syndication, these feeds are used to send information across the Internet using XML, or eXtensible Markup Language, the de facto new standard in formatting Web pages and information to be sent over networks. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40916870 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 23:29:28 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Cable Industry to Offer Free Channel Blocking NEW YORK, March 23 (Reuters) - Top U.S. cable television companies on Tuesday pledged they would not charge cable customers to have some channels blocked so they can avoid programming they find offensive. The industry is pushing its new campaign to give consumers more control over programming amid efforts to extend broadcast indecency limits to pay television systems and calls for allowing consumers to pay only for the channels they want to receive. The crackdown on indecency follows several high-profile incidents, including swear words uttered on broadcast television and pop singer Janet Jackson exposing her bare breast on national television. The industry's trade group, the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, unveiled the pledge and a new Web site, www.controlyourtv.org, aimed at giving families more information on programming choices, as well as instructions on how to block channels. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40916257 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 00:45:46 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Remedy Debated as Nextel, Safety Channels Clash By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 3/24/2004 Making a pre-dawn raid to execute an arrest warrant seven months ago, three Cambridge police officers found their radios would not work inside the suspect's building -- leaving them unable to call for backup if the arrest turned violent. Several weeks later, police breaking up a 2 a.m. brawl at an apartment building suffered the same lost coverage. So did a fire engine crew calling for a paramedic and a deputy chief investigating a smoke-filled building. In each case, the source of trouble identified by Cambridge Fire Chief Gerald R. Reardon, who oversees the city's public safety network, was interference from Nextel Communications Inc. cellphone sites. Last month, when Nextel activated a temporary signal amplifier at a construction project, Reardon said it caused so much interference that fire officials had to shut down the main city radio system for hours to fix it. Cambridge exemplifies a growing problem across the state and nation. As Nextel's walkie-talkie cellphones have boomed in popularity, growing to over 13 million subscribers, so has reported interference with public-safety radio systems that operate in radio channels closely interlaced with Nextel's. The Federal Communications Commission, after two years of review, is close to voting on a $850 million-plus proposal from Nextel to solve the problem by reshuffling spectrum licenses and reprogramming tens of thousands of emergency officials' radios. But the plan is coming under mounting criticism from rivals, particularly Verizon Wireless, who contend Nextel would grab a $7 billion windfall in new radio-spectrum licenses. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/03/24/remedy_debated_as_nextel_safety_channels_clash/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 00:50:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Congress Let Privacy Programs be Cut By Michael J. Sniffen, Associated Press, 3/16/2004 WASHINGTON -- When Congress curtailed Pentagon research it feared would ensnare innocent Americans in the terrorism fight, it also allowed the Bush administration to eliminate two projects to protect citizens' privacy from futuristic tools. As a result, the government is quietly pressing ahead with research into high-powered computer data-mining technology without the two most advanced privacy protections developed for those terror-fighting tools. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/03/16/congress_let_privacy_programs_be_cut/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 22:17:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EPIC Alert 11.06 ======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 11.06 March 24, 2004 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_11.06.html ====================================================================== Table of Contents ====================================================================== [1] Supreme Court Hears Compelled ID Case [2] EPIC Testifies on Air Profiling System [3] DC Council Unveils DC Police's Spying Practices [4] More States Back Out of MATRIX [5] EPIC's Open Government Work Recognized With Madison Award [6] News in Brief [7] EPIC Bookstore: Ben Franklin's Web Site [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_11.06.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 22:19:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 17.10: Let the Sun Set on PATRIOT-Section 212 EFFector Vol. 17, No. 10 March 24, 2004 donna@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 282nd Issue of EFFector: * Let the Sun Set on PATRIOT - Section 212 * Cory Doctorow to Participate in Barcelona Forum 2004 * Deep Links (23): The Other Silver Lining in Janet's Bustier * Staff Calendar: 03.25.04 - Fred von Lohmann speaks at GW Honors Program Symposium, Washington, DC; Seth Schoen speaks on Trusted Computing, Providence, RI; 03.26.04 - Jason Schultz speaks at Duke Law School's IP Society Symposium, Durham, NC * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/17/10.php ------------------------------ From: Bit Twister Subject: Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Not Rendered Organization: home user Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 20:40:46 GMT On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 20:46:28 -0800, wrote: > Received an incoming phone call from unknown person. This unknown > caller said that the operator gave them the number, but this number > has supposedly been unlisted for about six months (for small monthly > charge). > There are multiple local phone companies, and the caller may not have > been local. So, is it possible I have no way of knowing what number > information service the caller used? > How can anyone verify whether that monthly "unlisted" charge is doing > anything? My solution. When I moved my phone service from Version to a cable company, I dropped the unlisted feature and had the shown ID owner to be RJ instead of my name. Now my name is not in the phone book and anyone calling RJ has the wrong number. ------------------------------ From: AES/newspost Subject: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 12:22:22 -0800 Just acquired a Konica Minolta DiMAGE Xg pocket camera -- seems very nice so far, but brings up some queries that experts on these groups may be willing to answer: 1) The USB cable that comes with the camera has the standard USB connector on the computer end and a "mini" USB device connector (similar to but smaller than the standard computer device connectors that I'm used to) on the other end. Is this "mini-USB" connector also a general USB standard, used for physically small devices? Will I be able to just keep one or two such cables around for use with a variety of USB-enabled "mini-peripherals"? Or is this some non-standard Minolta-only connector? Where can I learn more about USB standard device-end connectors? 2) Similar query for the 110 V cord for the battery charger. The charger end of this cord has a connector that seen head on looks something like a squared-off figure 8 (or an infinity sign) with two circular holes about 2 mm in ID and 9 mm apart. [The connector itself is stamped "Kawasaki KS-15F".] Is this also a "standard" 110 V connector? Does it have a name? I've seen similar power cords on stereo systems and small printers and electronic gadgets -- though they don't always .seem to want to be shared among different gadgets. [P.S.--I've posted this query to these groups because I read them and there seem to be a lot of informed people on them. Other places I should post it? Email cc of replies welcomed.] ------------------------------ From: John Bartley Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 14:54:26 -0800 Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks There are off-the-shelf receivers for this purpose, but likely spendy. How about adding an X-10 computer interface, plus an X-10-controlled relay, and programming the X-10 computer interface to signal the relay hourly?  Then, time sync the PC, and you've got what you want. On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 06:56:01 -6, in comp.dcom.telecom Mike Riddle wrote: > Several years ago our esteemed moderator ran several articles on > Western Union Clocks.  These were typically installed in train > stations and other public places.  They were electrically powered, > self-winding (made by the "Self-Winding Clock Company") and > synchronized with the Naval Observatory on a periodic basis through > a 20 or 60 ma (I'm not sure which right now) circuit to Western > Union. > I've looked in the archives and while I found several of the old > messages, I couldn't locate any detailed information on how to actual > sync them now that WU is no longer in the time business. > So I'm looking for an affordable ("cheap") WWV receiver or other > timing device that could give at least a contact closure daily or > hourly at the top of the hour so I could use one or two of these old > beauties as they were truly designed.  A manual circuit is simple and > described in the archives.  An automagic one quickly gets past my > knowledge of available products/techniques.  ;-( > TIA. > Mike Riddle > mriddle%nospam@ivgate.omahug.org > http://www.mikeriddle.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Quite honestly, I am looking *even for > a single clock* right now. I had three (one wooden case, two metal > case ones) several years ago, but some one or more persons stole them > from me around the start of 2000. Mike, *unless you have sweep second > hands on your clock(s) -- not all that common -- those clocks can be > manually calibrated quite easily -- well, it takes a couple days of > very close observation -- to within a few seconds, maybe 10 seconds > per **month**, meaning with the naked eye, any discrepancy in the time > is so negligible it does not matter. They *are* beautiful old clocks, > but hardly the world's most accurate; but to the casual observer or even > some one who stand there and looks at them closely, they can be quite > accurate. > I had all three of my clocks wired in parallel to a 4.5 volt battery > eliminator; since it never happened that all three of them (and quite > rare that even two of them) chose to wind at the same time, that > little battery eliminator was quite sufficient. As the clock(s) would > wind once per hour, I also had the little red light bulb illuminate on > the winding circuit. To set the clocks, I had the setting circuits all > wired in parallel also to a nine-volt battery which was taped under my > desk through a doorbell button. Once a month or so, when I happened to > look at the clocks *and* my radio controlled wristwatch at the same > time and see the digital wristwatch approach an even hour and could > actually see with my eyes where one or more of the clocks was a thin > hair off the correct time, as the proper second approached I would tap > that doorbell button and listen to the ker-chunk as all three clocks > would jerk their minute a tiny fraction of an inch backward or > forward as needed. > How to get the clocks that accurate to start with?  Well, they have > to be ***totally level*** both flush against the wall and from the > floor or ceiling. Make sure the hands are screwed on tight. Not so > tight they bend or fall off, but make the little screw fasten on there > snuggly. Starting at midnight or noon, make both hands evenly point > at the '12'. Look again at 12:05; if you can see even the tiniest > discrepancy, then tweak the pendulum set screw just a tiny bit, mark > the *exact* time with a digital time piece and start again. Do that > every five minutes until you can no longer detect any discrepancy with > our naked eye. Then wait 30 minutes or so and check again, and repeat > as needed. No noticeable discrepancies? Then check it again in a > couple hours. Then go off to bed; when you wake up in the morning go > look again. If the discrepancy wasn't really gross to start with, > then after a day or two of looking and making little tweaks of the > pendulum as needed, you will have the clock very, very,very close, > close enough that you can ignore it for at least a few days at a time. > Train your ears also to listen to the beat. > If your clock(s) have a 'sweep second' hand as well, the setting arm > does both the second hand and the minute hand. But even WUTCO techs > had a hard time calibrating the second hand; if it was between 1 > second and around 20 seconds it would jump backward; between about > 35 seconds and 60 seconds it would jump forward. If it was between > about 20 seconds and 35 seconds more or less when the pulse came down > the line, well then you had a problem. The mechanical finger would > try to pull it one way or the other, but often times miss entirely. > (Remember, WUTCO clocks were more glamorous than they were 'to-the- > split-second' accurate.) > My wooden case clock arrived with a broken glass on the front, and > fifty years of paint covering up an original varnish finish. It spent > the first fifty years of its life hanging in the Board of Education > Building lunchroom (downtown Chicago), then I had it in service for > another *25 years* (1973-1998) in my office. The finest clock I ever > saw was a grandfather clock in a large case which stood on the floor > in the Chicago Temple Building third floor library; it also had > Western Union works in it, and I think its original smooth varnish > finish and the original glass in it, and door latches. > I sure miss those three clocks I had since they were stolen. If > **anyone** is willing to part with one, please let me know and > how much. No total basket cases please, but small repairs are quite > acceptable. Write to ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu and thanks.   PAT] ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 19:47:50 -0500 Subject: Australia: People Telecom Takes First Steps Into VoIP Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.arnnet.com.au/index.php?id=1946546231&fp=2&fpid=1 People Telecom Takes First Steps Into VoIP Nadia Cameron, ARN People Telecom is in the process of fine-tuning both residential and business voice over IP (VoIP) services to launch this year. People Telecom CEO, Ryan O'Hare, said while the business-oriented VoIP service was still four to five months away, the carrier planned to launch a basic residential IP-based voice service from next week. O'Hare was hopeful the carrier could sign up around 10,000 residential customers to its forthcoming IP-based voice service through its affiliation with Perth-based ISP Swiftel. Business interest in VoIP would, however, take a lot longer, he said. Full story at: http://www.arnnet.com.au/index.php?id=1946546231&fp=2&fpid=1 How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Share Day For March Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 0:00:00 EST Instead of changing the Digest over to an advrtising supported forum, I have always elected to keep it as a user supported forum, and for the most part keep it spam and virus free. I am *only* able to do this because of financial support from readers here, and if you would rather not see these messages every month, then please pitch in and help now and then! Consider it sort of like public radio, which goes on for days at a time trying to raise money ... and maybe I should adopt the same system. Turn over the entire Digest once or twice a year to fund raising (entire issues, etc) and stop doing it when the budget for the year has been raised. But for now, I will stick with the present system of devoting a few messages during the month to raising money for the Digest publication expenses. Out of 400-500 messages per month, in a spam, virus free environment, two or three (only) devoted to fund raising. You know who you are; please provide some help here financially. You can use Pay Pal to donate with a credit/debit card by going to our web site http://telecom-digest.org and at the bottom of the home page look for the PayPal 'donate' button. Or if you prefer, send a check or money order to Patrick Townson/TELECOM, Post Office Box 50, Independence, Kansas 67301-0050. The amount you send is entirely up to you. You know best how much you can afford and whether or not this Digest has any value for you. Thank you very much. Patrick Townson, Editor/Publisher TELECOM Digest ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #140 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 25 20:43:15 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2Q1hEj00941; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 20:43:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 20:43:15 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403260143.i2Q1hEj00941@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 #141 TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Mar 2004 20:43:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 141 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Best Practices in Internet Commerce Security" (Rob Slade) Netsky.P and iframe src cid Variant (Rob Slade) VoIP Sends a Warning Signal (VOIP News) Experimenting With Cell Phones (Eric Friedebach) Comcast Agrees to Purchase TechTV (Monty Solomon) Help Needed in Finding a Creed Telex Machine (iop890 _25) Help Needed: Finding Replacement Parts for Telecom Cabinet (B. Haskin) Headset mp3 Player Comes Out with a Very Good Price! (Emma) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Connectors (Michael D. Sullivan) Last Laugh! Re:Correcting 411/555-1212 Info Unlisted Service (Cryderman) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 08:41:56 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Best Practices in Internet Commerce Security" BKBPIICS.RVW 20031205 "Best Practices in Internet Commerce Security", Charles Cresson Wood, 2001, 1881585050, U$295.00 %A Charles Cresson Wood %C 1800-1233 West Loop South, Houston Texas 77027 %D 2001 %G 1881585050 %I PentaSafe %O U$295.00 800-829-9955 infopolicy@pentasafe.com www.pentasafe.com %O http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1881585050/robsladesinterne http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1881585050/robsladesinte-21 %O http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/1881585050/robsladesin03-20 %P 92 p. %T "Best Practices in Internet Commerce Security" The management summary (also known as chapter one) states that this book outlines the major controls necessary to perform business functions over the Internet. Chapter two, titularly asking "what's new about Internet commerce," simply lists potential problems. The heart of the book is chapter three, a listing of 240 suggestions most of which are in the form of "this practice prevents that risk." Not all are either terribly clear or useful, such as the statement that "payment protocol with integrated digital certificates prevents fraud," which adequately describes making a purchase using a credit card over an SSL (Secure Sockets Layer) link to a Website, a practice that would prevent neither merchant fraud, nor fraud involving stolen credit cards. (I assume that the author was thinking of the SET [Secure Electronic Transactions] protocol, but the wording is not specific.) The bulk of the recommendations are reasonable in terms of improving security, but the explanations are extremely limited. As a quick once over lightly introduction to the requirements for online commerce the book may have its uses, albeit in a very restricted compass. copyright Robert M. Slade, 2003 BKBPIICS.RVW 20031205 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca rslade@sun.soci.niu.edu To make no mistake is not in the power of man; but from their errors and mistakes the wise and good learn wisdom for the future - Plutarch http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 12:31:27 -0800 Subject: Netsky.P and Iframe src=cid Variant I assume that everyone is, by now, well aware of the Bagle.Q virus that used an interesting trick to spread a virus via email without an attachment. Netsky, in its latest incarnation, appears to reverse that in an intriguing twist. I have noted, in the past few days, the sudden spurt of Netsky.P messages, and, simultaneously, queries about messages containing the string "iframe src=??cid:" in the body. (In the samples I've got the ?? has been 3D, but I don't know if this is the same in all cases.) In the Netsky.P infected messages as they are described in the virus encyclopedias (I have checked F-Secure and Sophos in detail), the message carries a standard attachment, in the normal MIME format as: Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="photo.zip" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="photo.zip" There are a few twists on this: occasionally the filename has the username in it, such as document_rslade.zip. In some cases the filename a multiple extensions and a large number of spaces, such as: document.txt .exe which is a fairly obvious attempt to convince people that the attachment is a harmless text file. (Netsky, like most other recent email viruses, uses a wide variety of subject lines and message bodies, and spoofs the "from" line using addresses harvested from the infected machine.) From samples I have extracted of the "cid" postings, these messages are a version of Netsky.P: the executable file is the same size (29,568 bytes) and a quick look at the internal contents seems to be the same. F-Prot DOS with signatures as of 20040321 identifies it as Netsky.P. The important part of the internal structure of the message follows the general form: bgColor=3D#ffffff If the message will not displayed automatically,
follow the link to read the delivered message.

Received message is available at:
www.sprint.ca/inbox/rslade/read.php?sessionid-1165
 
Content-Type: audio/x-wav; name="message.scr" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID:<031401Mfdab4$3f3dL780$73387018@57W81fa70Re> Note that, in a reverse of the Bagle.Q trick, the URL does not actually point to an external website, but to a subsequent part of the same message. (In all the samples I have received the filename used is message.scr.) The structure of the message appears to use two different known vulnerabilities in Outlook. (Given the numbers of Netsky.P that I am receiving, it is rather depressing to note that vulnerabilities that were known, in general terms, as far back as 1997, and specifically patched as early as 2001, are still effective. People, if you must use MS products, please keep them patched!) Because of the use of the iframe vulnerability, users of mailers other than Outlook may see the message appear in various ways. In Pegasus (which I use) the message has no body, but does have a normal attachment. (In most viruses that use iframe to directly invoke the attachment, Pegasus doesn't show any attachment.) I note that neither the Sophos nor the F-Secure encyclopedias mention this version of the message. The Trend advisory does mention the iframe vulnerability (without giving details) but not the second, and also does not mention the non-iframe version of the messages. (Having two radically different forms of messages appears to be similar to Swen.A and Swen.B, both of which produce two different types of messages, each of which is somewhat polymorphic within the version.) ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca rslade@sun.soci.niu.edu The magnificent and the ridiculous are so close that they touch. - Le Bovier de Fontenelle http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 17:39:39 -0500 Subject: VoIP Sends a Warning Signal (VOIP News) Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com Note: This opinion piece was written by a senior fellow and director of communications policy studies at the Progress & Freedom Foundation, which is a libertarian think tank. You have to be careful of these folks because they believe that free markets can solve almost any problem, which totally ignores the fact that companies can and do attempt to achieve monopolies (or at least, to limit competition) so they can jack up prices to consumers and do other Bad Things. Arguing their basic philosophies is beyond the scope of this list, and some of their ideas are good ones despite their underlying beliefs, but when opinion pieces are published it's always instructive to know about any biases that the writer might have. http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107_2-5179376.html VoIP sends a warning signal By Randolph J. May Special to ZDNet COMMENTARY--In his classic 1942 work, "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy," economist Joseph Schumpeter described capitalism as a "process of industrial mutation ... that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one." He famously called this relentless process Creative Destruction -- and it is an essential characteristic of free markets. Services and applications using voice over Internet Protocol capabilities, commonly called VoIP or Internet telephony, are gaining momentum, as cable operators, wireline telephone companies and wireless providers install Internet Protocol throughout their broadband networks. What's also clear is that VoIP's accelerating proliferation will push existing regulatory paradigms to the breaking point -- sooner rather than later. In other words, all of the brouhaha about VoIP is a blast from Schumpeter's trumpet, warning that old regulatory regimes are about to be destroyed. Far better that policymakers act with dispatch to construct new approaches attuned to present-day realities. Here are four suggestions for creatively replacing old ideas with new ones: Full commentary at: http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107_2-5179376.html How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: Experimenting With Cell Phones Date: 25 Mar 2004 10:28:42 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Aude Lagorce, 03.24.04, Forbes.com NEW YORK - In ten years, your cell phone, wirelessly connected to a calorie intake monitor on your wrist, will automatically detect if you're hungry, order your favorite food and have it delivered to your exact location. The process will generate billions of dollars in additional revenue for telecom operators. Sound outlandish? It shouldn't. In fact, the technology required to make the described sequence of events possible already exists; it simply hasn't been fully integrated and marketed yet. Before it is, handset makers and cell phone carriers are trying to gauge consumers' interest in the new features. The flow of announcements made at the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association (CTIA) trade show this week confirmed that the race to get multimedia equipped handsets on the market is heating up. Siemens announced three new upscale models with high-resolution screens and enough memory for users to download games, movie trailers and other applications. On the CX66, menu navigation is achieved by means of a joy stick. Networks are adapting too: At the beginning of the week Samsung and UTStarcom showed off a new technology called 1xEV-DV, which could, among other things, allow DVD and movie preview downloads. http://www.forbes.com/personaltech/2004/03/24/cx_al_0324cellphones.html Eric Friedebach /Tonight's Skywarn training cancelled due to... weather?/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 18:36:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Comcast Agrees to Purchase TechTV PHILADELPHIA, March 25 /PRNewswire/ -- Comcast Corporation (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) announced today that it has signed an agreement with Vulcan Programming Inc. to acquire TechTV, Inc. Upon closing, Comcast will merge TechTV with G4, the Comcast-owned television network devoted to video games and the gamer lifestyle. Building on the complementary strengths of two niche programming networks that combine the worlds of technology and entertainment, the acquisition of TechTV would create a network that complements Comcast's growing content portfolio and expands G4's distribution. The combined channel would be available to 44 million cable and satellite customers nationwide. Charles Hirschhorn, founder and CEO of G4, will be the CEO of the combined network. "This merger is a win for G4; a win for TechTV; and a win for our advertising and affiliate partners," said Hirschhorn. "The result will be one compelling TV channel that showcases the fun and entertaining side of games and technology with the distribution necessary to achieve broad appeal." EchoStar Communications Corporation (Nasdaq: DISH) will have an equity interest in the combined entity and has agreed to make the channel available to its DISH Network customers who subscribe to its mid-level America's Top 120 programming package or greater. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40930681 ------------------------------ From: iop890 _25 Subject: Help in Finding a Creed Telex Machine Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 15:56:13 +0000 Dear Sir/Madam, I got your name from and Internet site, I am desperately trying to find a High Speed-Creed Telex Machine. These were supplied by the General Post office in the late 50's 60's. Do you know of any where I could try or do you know any on that could have one?? I am opening a Museum and this would be on show there. Please let me know if you could be of any help? Thanks, Sammy ------------------------------ From: lightforce3@hotmail.com (B. Haskin) Subject: Need Help: Finding Replacement Parts for Telecom Rackmount Cabinet Date: 25 Mar 2004 06:42:41 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I'm a member of the Linux Users Group at the university I attend. We were recently given an old, large rackmount cabinet with removable sides for our new server. I am looking for information on (or a source for) the clips/pins/connectors (I'm not exactly sure what they are) that are used to attach the sides to the cabinet at the bottom. These parts are missing, and I doubt that we will be able to get them from the donator. There is a receptacle on the cabinet itself that is rectangular with two flat, recessed prongs that pull apart. There is a small rectangular hole in the removable side panel that lines up with each receptacle on the cabinet. I imagine there must be something that connects the two, but I have no idea what it's called or where to find it. There are no distinguishing marks on the cabinet (like model numbers, etc) except for "EIS International, Inc." on the power supply. After some Googling, I found that EIS (who makes call center equipment) is now a part of SER. I've contacted SER via phone and email, but have not received any reply. If anybody has information on how exactly the sides attach, what hardware (as in connectors/clips/pins/whatever) I need, and/or where I can get it, please submit it here. Thanks very much! ~~LightForce ------------------------------ From: Emma Subject: Headset mp3 Player Comes Out With a Very Good Price! Reply-To: frankhe1978@163.com Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 02:11:34 +0800 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Is this spam or not? I am sort of suspicious of it, but got to thinking maybe it will be useful for some readers. PAT] Dear friends, Good day! Just a short message from HY Technology Co, Ltd. We just updated our Mp3 players with internal FM radio function to support 8 languages, English, Chinese, French, Italian, German, Spanish, Czech, Swede. From now on, our BX1002Na, BX1002Nd and BXKing can come with internal FM radio function and support 8 languages also. The price is only 50 USD for 128M and 68 USD for 256M. By the way, did you get our introduction about our latest Mp3 player -- Butterfly, the headset Mp3 player? The Mp3 IC and pc board are already installed in headphone. You can enjoy music completely free now, without any wire around you! The price is only 54 USD for 128M and 75 USD for 256M. We have 20 kings of mp3 players to satisfy your demand. And the smallest mp3 player in the world -- BXDIOMAND! If you need catalogue and price list, please kindly tell us and we will send them to you. Looking forward to any comment from you. Have a nice day! Emma HY Technology (Hong Kong) Company Ltd. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 00:49:50 GMT In article , siegman@stanford.edu says... > 1) The USB cable that comes with the camera has the standard USB > connector on the computer end and a "mini" USB device connector > (similar to but smaller than the standard computer device connectors > that I'm used to) on the other end. > Is this "mini-USB" connector also a general USB standard, used for > physically small devices? There are Type A and Type B standard USB connectors. The wide ones are Type A, the mini ones are Type B. Type B are typically used on cameras, scanners, etc. Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. Michael D. Sullivan ------------------------------ From: Charles Cryderman Subject: Last Laugh! Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 10:38:02 -0500 Our esteemed moderator told us a wonderful story about the old manual days off calling across country. This reminded me of an old joke back in my Army communications days. It seems a Army communications tech lost his clearance and was sent to Artillery school. One day at the range every battery was hitting the target but one. When they asked this old communications tech what the problem was with hitting the target his response was "I don't know, they are leaving here 5 by 5. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not a bad story, Charles. An idea just occurred to me also which may help our original correspondent. Every- time he is around a phone, and does not mind spending the two bucks for a directory inquiry, or whatever they charge these days, use a small tape recorder to tape a call of himself asking the operator for his number. Be sure to have the tape running from the very second the DA connection is established, so you can get on tape the answering phrase which may be something like this: "Taco Bell Directory, May I Help You" (or whatever). In the event one of them blurts out your number, its good to catch not only the recitation on tape, but also the identification of the company/call center that has it. No need to get into a discussion of the matter; the operator, nor her supervisor nor anyone else at that level can (or will) do anything about it. But now you have the 'ammunition' you need when you go back to *your* telco to inquire about the matter. Be sure the tape hears you asking for the number of John Q. Citizen, some address, city, state. Also, anytime you are around a computer, try the various web lookup services. You cannot *prove* that telco was at fault, and in fact the directories on the web are woefully out of date many times, but you might be able to figure out who the 'operator' was who gave out your number to start with. 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: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #141 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 26 19:38:50 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2R0coH02932; Fri, 26 Mar 2004 19:38:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 19:38:50 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403270038.i2R0coH02932@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 #142 TELECOM Digest Fri, 26 Mar 2004 19:39:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 142 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Steps Up Biz VoIP Activities (VOIP News) FCC Chief Wants 'Light Regulatory Touch' on VOIP (VOIP News) Wi-Fi and VoIP: Do Them Together or Not at All (VOIP News) VoIP Related Topics in Communications Law Bulletin (VOIP News) Pulver Hopes .tel Will Promote ENUM, VoIP (VOIP News) Has Covad Changed The VoIP Rules? (VOIP News) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (Johnnie Leung) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (Clark W. Griswold, Jr.) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (Ben Ficus) Re: Telephone Switchbox (Will) Re: Western Union Clocks (Al Gillis) Vonage Cisco a t a Internal Voice (Paul Migliorelli) Fast Pass at Airport Security (Monty Solomon) DirecTV Takes Stand On Costs (Monty Solomon) GMAC Customers' Data Put At Risk By Laptop Theft (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 are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: VOIP News Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 12:13:20 -0500 Subject: AT&T Steps Up Biz VoIP Activities Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.phoneplusmag.com/hotnews/43h2581254.html AT&T this week announced a variety of new business VoIP activities, which it says represent an acceleration of its strategy on this front. That includes an equipment interoperability effort including three new suppliers -- Alcatel, Nortel Networks and Siemens, making AT&T "the first and only service provider committed to deliver interoperability with the five leading IP PBX providers in the industry." AT&T previously announced interoperability with Avaya and Cisco. Full story at: http://www.phoneplusmag.com/hotnews/43h2581254.html How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 12:55:25 -0500 Subject: FCC Chief Wants 'Light Regulatory Touch' on VOIP Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.detnews.com/2004/technology/0403/24/technology-99753.htm Associated Press ATLANTA -- Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell called Monday for a "light regulatory touch" on Voice over Internet Protocol technology. "I think the government will take a hands-off approach to it," he said, speaking to a crowd of several thousand wireless industry professionals at the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association's annual meeting. Full story at: http://www.detnews.com/2004/technology/0403/24/technology-99753.htm ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 11:26:44 -0500 Subject: Wi-Fi and VoIP: Do them together or not at all Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.silicon.com/networks/wifi/0,39024669,39119587,00.htm Wi-Fi and VoIP: Do them together or not at all by Jo Best And stop banging on about how cheap it is, vendors told. While VoIP and Wi-Fi have been getting tech sellers and users alike stirred up over the possibilities for converged communications, a new report warns that promoting individual technologies rather than collaborative technology could leave businesses wondering where the benefits are. There's no getting away from the advent of VoIP with previous security and standards hurdles now largely overcome but vendors' short-sighted approach has gone down badly with users and may even be holding up adoption, said Mark Blowers, senior research analyst at Butler Group. "There's a tendency for vendors to focus on specific technology when enterprises want solutions to problems not just to install some technology ... This year was meant to be the year for VoIP and it's not taken off as much as expected," he said. Full story at: http://www.silicon.com/networks/wifi/0,39024669,39119587,00.htm ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 14:37:33 -0500 Subject: VoIP related topics in Communications Law Bulletin-March 2004 Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com It seems that the law firm of Morrison & Foerster LLP publishes a monthly Communications Law Bulletin covering the United States. This months' bulletin is at the following URL, but you have to complete a free registration process in order to read it. http://www.mondaq.com/i_article.asp_Q_articleid_E_25137 Some of the subject headings in this issue are: Joint Board Recommendation Would Limit Universal Service Support To Primary Line FCC Considers Regulation of IP-Enabled Services Senate Asks Questions About VOIP Inflexion Asks FCC to Exempt VOIP Companies Serving Underserved Markets from Access Charges U.K., Canada to Seek Input on VOIP Regulations Law Enforcement's Request for Rulemaking on CALEA Issues Will Broadly Impact Internet Telephony and Other Broadband Services [Comment: If you don't read anything else in this issue, please at least read this section - you need to know what our government is trying to do!] The entire bulletin can be found at: http://www.mondaq.com/i_article.asp_Q_articleid_E_25137 ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 11:24:49 -0500 Subject: Pulver Hopes .tel Will Promote ENUM, VoIP Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.cbronline.com/currentnews/2b1266009386af4580256e6300385741 By Kevin Murphy Pulver.com Inc wants to market voice over IP services using a new internet domain, but it first must be given the okay by the Internet Corp for Assigned Names and Numbers and could face opposition from the International Telecommunications Union. Pulver.com last week applied to ICANN for the right to offer .tel domain names to IP communications service providers using ENUM, a standard for mapping telephone numbers into the internet domains name system. Pulver.com is an early leader in the PC-to-PC VoIP communications space, and has been heavily involved in the VoIP regulatory debate in the US. ENUM is expected to be the de facto standard for addressing voice calls over the internet. "We're trying to provide legs for ENUM," said Pulver.com CEO Jeff Pulver. The ENUM standard has been around for a few years, and while there are many test-beds underway, mostly in Europe, there are no widespread commercial services based on it. Full story at: http://www.cbronline.com/currentnews/2b1266009386af4580256e6300385741 ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 11:42:51 -0500 Subject: Has Covad Changed The VoIP Rules? Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.telecomweb.com/broadband/feature.htm The first IP-based competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC) with a nationwide reach is about to be born, an event that could change the VoIP landscape. Covad Communications Group [COVD] is buying VoIP provider GoBeam for $48 million in stock. The deal is expected to close in about 60 days. The deal mates GoBeam's VoIP phone service and Covad's national broadband network. That contrasts sharply with the current situation, where just about every would-be VoIP player is forced to ride the wires of an ILEC. "For really the first time there's actually going to be a company that's going to be able to provision all aspects of the VoIP business over their own facilities," says Steve Lail, Covad's vice president of voice deployment. Moreover, Lail says Covad still is willing to accommodate competing VoIP carriers, even though it will be a VoIP carrier itself. That gives the VoIP industry an alternative to dealing with the ILECs. That, in turn, has significant implications for the current battle at the FCC and in the courts over whether ILECs should be required to open up their newest broadband networks to VoIP carriers. With Covad sitting as an alternative, it is reasonable to assume that at least some of the ILECs may reconsider their refusal to accommodate VoIP competitors, rather than see the revenue go to Covad. Although it hasn't been offering VoIP services, Covad has been quietly running some small VoIP trials for close to 18 months, Lail confirms. Full story at: http://www.telecomweb.com/broadband/feature.htm ------------------------------ From: Johnnie Leung Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 19:50:17 -0800 Michael D. Sullivan wrote in message news:telecom23.141.9@telecom-digest.org: > In article , siegman@stanford.edu > says: >> Is this "mini-USB" connector also a general USB standard, used for >> physically small devices? > There are Type A and Type B standard USB connectors. The wide ones are > Type A, the mini ones are Type B. Type B are typically used on cameras, > scanners, etc. Almost right. There are actually two types of B connectors: the garden-variety squarish type, and 'mini-B', which measures approximately 7 mm by 3 mm. He's talking about the mini type, which is commonly used on portable devices such as digital cameras, MP3 players, NetMD Walkmans and 2.5-inch hard drive enclosures. JL ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <73115.1041@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 21:44:55 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > There are Type A and Type B standard USB connectors. The wide ones are > Type A, the mini ones are Type B. Type B are typically used on cameras, > scanners, etc. Well, yes, but I do not think that is what the OP was referring to. Type A connectors are the classical rectangular USB ones. Type B are square, about 1/4 the size of Type A, with two corners rounded off. The micro USB connector is even smaller than a Type B - maybe 1/2 the size, and back to being a bit rectangular. There is a similar micro Firewire connector -- they look similar, but are not interchangable. The micro connectors are found on the newer digital camcorders. ------------------------------ From: benficus@hotmail.com (Ben Ficus) Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Date: 26 Mar 2004 10:51:03 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Speaking of which ... Last time I was at Best Buy, they were telling me that I should buy the expensive "gold" USB connector for my printer ... the other cable will affect the quality of my prints. Any thoughts, opinions? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Radio Shack *used to* (maybe still does in some places) make that claim about the expensive gold-plated connectors in almost all applications, coax connectors, etc. I have never been able to figure out *why* the gold-plated versions of the various size/type connectors are supposed to be better. Our local Radio Shack store no longer makes that claim, however. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mlliw@joimail.com (Will) Subject: Re: Telephone Switchbox Date: 25 Mar 2004 18:21:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am a newbie to this type of thing. The OfficeLink Solo looks good, but its a bit pricy for my budget. Could you please explain the " > I setup DISA on a Samsung DCS." I don't really understand this. Thanks mlliw P.S. The line I would be accessing would not be on a phone system, just a direct line. Tony P. wrote in message news:: > In article , cnavarro@wcnet.org > says: >> On 19 Mar 2004 19:05:27 -0800, mlliw@joimail.com (Will) wrote: >>> Is there a box that when called to normally, it sends through, but >>> when a code such as #22, It brings the caller to a _dialtone_ on >>> another line? I have seen several boxes that do this (for >>> computer/fax/telephone) that when #22 is dialed, they send to a >>> separate place, but they don't give a _dialtone_ on a separate >>> line. Thanks! >> It might depend on what type of phone system you have. Some systems >> have Direct System Inward Access (DISA) available. Teltone used to >> make a 106 box that was a bridging unit with amplifiers. They still >> make an Officelink Solo, but I bet it's a bit pricey. >> http://www.teltone.com/products/remotevoice/solo/home.htm >> One thing to keep in mind, DISA and the 106 is highly hackable. A >> teenager with a lot of time on his hands can key the universe of 3 >> digit numbers as a hobby to find out what makes it work. The >> Officelink is a callback device. > I setup DISA on a Samsung DCS. It requires a seven digit passcode. So > that ups the possibilities. > The way the system was configured, the first digit had to be a 2 or 3, > the next six could be 0 thru 9. So 2x10x10x10x10x10x10 = 2,000,000 > possible combinations. ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 19:59:41 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com DevilsPGD wrote in message news:telecom23.134.14@telecom-digest.org: > In message <> > hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) did ramble: >> I don't know why it's so hard to keep time coordinated. In the >> Philadelphia area, the transportation authority tells riders to use >> Bell (Verizon) time, 215-846-1212, as a standardized source. My $20 >> Casio "50M" watch is pretty reliable. Bell has offered that service >> since at least the 1960s (846 was TIme 6). > This always confuses me. One of my servers pulls from NTP sources on > the next, the rest synch from there. My phones all set themselves > (Analog, via CID/CND data). My bedroom clock not only has a backup > battery, but it also receives over the air signals, and is able to set > itself as well. So who can explain this about time: Most modern DVD/VCR machines can set the time based on signals from a TV station, most frequently a public broadcasting stations (CPB?) So how does that work? And why does it take so long to set the time? I'd guess there is some sort of signal during the vertical retrace interval or something like that but I've not been able to find any authorative referances to this feature. Explain it, please!! Thanks, Al ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 21:37:40 -0700 From: Paul Migliorelli (+1 3 0 3 5 4 3 2 3 1 1) Subject: Vonage Cisco a t a Internal Voice Hi all. As a blind user, I've been curious about the voice in the Vonage a t a. Just wondering if it has any features that we are not aware of. I know you can push the button, hear the config menu; you can enter 80 for the i p address. Push anything else and it pronounces p a s s w d (Hmmm. Wonder it doesn't say password?) Can the box enlighten us with anything else?? Talking caller i d would be cool, I figure, to save you having to add on another peripheral. Just curious. It's always neat to find items that speak. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Try pressing the button, listening to the introduction then pressing 123 pound sign. It will then tell you its name; mine says 'Cisco ATA 186' and the firmware version number. I think the reason it spells out p a s s w d is because it reads and has no actual word for those letters; I mean how would YOU pronounce 'passwd' in English? When it is asking for a 'passwd' it expects you to enter a code to override the lock that Vonage put on the firmware if you wish to examine/change the value stashed there. Paul, I sent you the e-coupon you requested for a month of free Vonage service, and will do the same for any reader who asks me. Its actually the *second* month of whatever type of service you wish to purchase. Other readers can do like Paul did, and send email marked 'not for pub' to ptownson@telecom-digest.org PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 23:14:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Fast Pass at Airport Security By Ryan Singel Business travelers may soon have one more item to stuff in their carry-on: a trusted-traveler card to speed them through security lines. The Transportation Security Administration plans to start testing a registered-traveler identification program in June, which will let those who volunteer for a background check avoid tight screening at the airport. While civil liberties groups have questioned the plan's merits, travel industry groups have welcomed it, calling the proposal a way to expedite travel and increase security without the costs and privacy concerns associated with CAPPS II, the TSA's ongoing attempt to create a new computerized passenger-screening program. Currently, passengers who book one-way flights, pay with cash or buy their tickets close to their departure date are flagged by a computerized passenger-screening system as potential terrorists. Those passengers, along with a random selection of other travelers, have the code "SSSS" printed on their boarding passes, which leads to intensive scrutiny that can cause them to miss their flights. http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,62777,00.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My questions would be these: If in fact you miss your flight because of the stupidity of the screening process, does the airline at least give you your money back or put you on another plane leaving *soon* to your destination, or are you just out of luck. Question two: So with the 'trusted traveler' plan, what is to prevent (not meaning to stereotype or stigmatize any nationality) your 'typical' suicide bomber -- if there is such a category of person -- from being on his best behavior long enough to get one of those cards, *then* on one of his trips abroad or wherever, smuggling in a gun and using it en-route? The last time I took an airplane anywhere was from Tulsa to Chicago in May, 2000, and with conditions as they are now, I sincerely doubt I will ever board a plane again. I *much prefer* riding a bus for long trips. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 23:32:11 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DirecTV Takes Stand on Costs By Michael McCarthy, USA TODAY The angry 48-hour standoff between Viacom and EchoStar Communications (DISH) that recently left more than 9 million Dish Network subscribers without many channels could be just a warm-up for the main event. News Corp.'s (NWS) DirecTV, the nation's largest satellite TV operator, will hold the line on programming costs in 2004, accepting only monthly price increases per subscriber that are roughly equal to inflation, at a four-decade low of 1%. http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/2004-03-24-directv_x.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 07:54:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: GMAC Customers' Data Put At Risk By Laptop Theft By Paul McDougall, InformationWeek A division of GMAC Financial Services has been quietly informing about 200,000 of its customers that their personal data may have been compromised due to the theft of two laptop computers from an employee's car at a regional office near Atlanta. In a letter to its personal insurance customers, GMAC Insurance indicates that "a random theft" of the laptops from a locked vehicle may have left them vulnerable to identify theft. The letter -- obtained by InformationWeek --indicates that the stolen laptops contained customers' names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, credit scores, marital status, and gender. "For incidents like this, government regulatory agencies recommend that you place a fraud alert on your credit file," the letter advises customers. The letter was dated March 12. The theft took place on Jan. 26. http://www.internetwk.com/allStories/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=18402712 ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #142 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 26 20:45:06 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2R1j5D04788; Fri, 26 Mar 2004 20:45:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 20:45:06 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403270145.i2R1j5D04788@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 #143 TELECOM Digest Fri, 26 Mar 2004 20:45:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 143 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 19th-Century Telegraphers (Digest Archives) Re: VoIP Sends a Warning Signal (VOIP News) (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: Finding Replacement Parts for Telecom Rackmount Cabinet (S Dorsey) Harris ws3000 Environmental Alarm Panel (foobar) Re: Netsky.P and Iframe src=cid Variant (Joel B. Levin) Re: Headset mp3 Player Comes Out With a Very Good Price! (Carl Navarro) Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service (Lisa Hancock) Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? (Joel B. Levin) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Editor Subject: 19th Century Telegraphers Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 18:45:00 CST For your weekend reading this time around, from our archives, the book review by Jim Haynes about telegraphy in the 19th century, which appeared originally in this Digest about ten years ago. You may enjoy seeing it again. PAT From: haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU (Jim Haynes) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 18:20:09 -0700 Subject: 19th Century Telegraphers (Book Review) Book Review The American Telegrapher: a social history 1860-1900 Edwin Gabler Rutgers University Press, 1988 ISBN 0-8135-1284-0 (hardbound), 0-8135-1285-9 (paperback) I seem to read a lot of books which are at the same time both interesting and tedious. This is one such book. Written by an academic historian for reading by other academic historians, it is long on footnotes, theories, and statistics and short on flesh-and-blood storytelling; yet there is enough of the latter to entertain the casual reader. Part I of this review is an attempt to convey the general message of the book. Part II is for fun: a selection of stories about the lives and times telegraphers a century ago. Part I There are five chapters: a history of the Great Strike of 1883 as an introduction to the world of the operators; a description of the telegraph industry and especially Western Union; a social portrait of the telegraphers; a study of women telegraphers; and a summary of the labor movement and politics of telegraphers. An epilogue compares the situation of telegraphers in the 1880s with that of the air traffic controllers a hundred years later. Telegraph and railroad companies following the Civil War represented an entirely new kind of business, one in which the company's assets are strung out for hundreds or thousands of miles with offices and employees sprinkled along the lines. There were other affinities between the two kinds of companies. Railroads used telegraphy to support their own operations. Railroad rights-of-way were ideal places to run telegraph lines, affording easy access for construction and maintenance at a time when there were few roads. Telegraph business was likely to be found in the same places the railroads served. In many small towns the railroad station served as the public telegraph office, as there was not enough telegraph business to support an office for telegraph alone. Some railroads such as B & O operated their own public telegraph businesses. (cf. Southern Pacific a century later getting into the communications business.) Other railroads had contract arrangements with the telegraph companies, principally Western Union, for use of rights of way, interconnection of circuits, and providing public telegraph service at the railroad stations. These new kinds of businesses needed a new kind of management. The military became their model. Many of the top managers were alumni of the Civil War military telegraph system. The companies had divisions, rule books, general orders and special orders, and chains of command. Management style was authoritarian. As is the case with some companies today, the telegraph and railroad companies then were headed by a mixture of people who knew the business and those who were primarily financial wizards. Telegraph operators represented the beginning of a new social class, the lower-middle-class white-collar employees of large corporations. Many were the children of farmers or of city blue-collar workers. A great many were of Irish lineage. For all of these telegraphy offered a step up the social ladder as well as an escape from hard physical labor and city slums or rural isolation. Telegraphy was an occupation open to women, although the majority of operators were male (and, like the women, young and unmarried). The national economy was fairly flat or even deflationary during the period 1860-1890. Western Union profits rose handsomely throughout the period. The operators did not share in this prosperity. For one thing, there was an oversupply of them. First-class operators, who could send and receive thirty to forty words per minute for hours on end, were assigned to press and market reporting circuits. They could command pay two to three times as great as that of the second-class operators who made up the bulk of the force. Many operators learned the craft by hanging around small railroad and telegraph offices; others worked their way up from messenger and clerk jobs in larger offices; still others were trained at a number of schools that sprang up around the country. Most of the latter seem to have been disreputable if not completely fraudulent, operating for profit and promising high pay and mobility to rural youth. They were the century-ago counterparts of the for-profit data processing schools of our own times, the kind that advertised on matchbook covers and turned out an oversupply of under-qualified graduates for high tuition fees. Another financial problem for the telegraphers resulted from their new social class. Telegraphers' pay was on a par with that of skilled blue-collar workers; but their living expenses were greater. With the move to suits and ties and shined shoes they felt a need to live in middle-class housing, eat middle-class meals, and partake of middle-class entertainments. A few of the operators' perceptions of mistreatment by the companies were more apparent than real. The 1840s through 1860s had been a period when telegraphy was just getting started. Job opportunities were abundant and promotions were rapid. As the industry matured there were fewer spectacular success stories; telegraphy even seemed to be a dead-end job. Other complaints had a more solid foundation. Mergers of telegraph companies eliminated jobs. An economic downturn in the 1870s caused Western Union to institute across-the-board salary reductions, which were partially offset by monetary deflation. Operators tended to move around a lot, which allowed the company to hire cheaper replacements for those who left. The first attempt of telegraph workers to organize was the National Telegraphic Union of 1863. This was more of a mutual benefit society than a labor union. It provided members with sickness and funeral benefits and aimed to elevate the character of the members and promote just and harmonious relations with employers. With conditions for telegraphers growing worse after the Civil War the Telegraphers' Protective League was formed in 1868 as a very different kind of organization. It was a secret organization, because there was nothing at the time to protect its members from the unbridled power of their employers. Rather than relieving the sick and burying the dead it proposed to raise the members to a financial position in which they could take care of themselves. The TPL felt strong enough by January, 1870 to risk a strike against Western Union. It failed after about a week. There were just too many operators seeking work, especially in the winter season; the company was too strong; and the union was too poorly organized. The operators' situation continued to deteriorate through the 1870s as Western Union reduced wages, the number of would-be operators increased, and the company absorbed its competitors. An attempt to form another union in 1872 fizzled. In 1881 Jay Gould took over Western Union, moving the company closer to being a true national monopoly. By the summer of 1882 a number of regional labor organizations put aside their differences to form the Brotherhood of Telegraphers of the United States and Canada under the aegis of the Knights of Labor. The Brotherhood, unlike its predecessors, accepted the female operators as members. In July, 1883 the Brotherhood presented a list of grievances to Western Union and some other firms, hoping for at least a compromise settlement and at worst a short strike. When the company made no meaningful concessions the telegraphers walked out on July 19. At first things looked good for the Brotherhood. About three fourths of Western Union operators honored the strike. Public opinion was much on the side of the telegraphers, at least to the extent that it was against the side of Jay Gould and the W.U. monopoly. One competing telegraph company settled quickly with the union; and another (B & O) came close to, but never close enough. Union leaders worked hard to keep the public on their side, urging the strikers to be models of dignity and sobriety. The women were as valiant as the men, if not more so, in upholding the strike. Still, public sympathy did not feed the hungry; and the strike dwindled until it was officially called off August 17. Operators wishing to return to work had to sign a pledge of loyalty; those considered militant unionists were blacklisted by the company. Still, it appears the company was somewhat humbled by the power of the union and made a few concessions to the operators. Failure of the strike led to some ill feeling in the larger labor movement. The telegraphers accused the Knights of insufficient support; the Knights leadership felt the telegraphers had acted impulsively and without sufficient preparation. The Brotherhood soon withdrew from the Knights; and union activity reverted to local groups. Yet by 1885 there was a new organization, the Telegraphers' Union of America, which rejoined the Knights in 1886. This seems to have faded away by the early 1890s along with the Knights. Railroad telegraphers formed the Order of Railway Telegraphers in 1886. An Order of Commercial Telegraphers was formed in 1890 but never amounted to much, and allied itself with the railway telegraphers in 1897-98. The next attempt to form a union didn't happen until 1907, with the Commercial Telegraphers' Union of America, which also suffered disaster in a strike against Western Union. Gabler concludes with a discussion of a number of labor and political issues affecting telegraphers. One of the Brotherhood's demands had been equal pay for equal work, male and female. This seems to have been widely hailed as the Right Thing to do. I wonder whether the male telegraphers supported the demand because it was right; or if they supported it because they knew if the companies had to pay men and women the same they would hire only men. Some wanted a craft union, with membership limited to telegraphers, with an apprenticeship program that would raise the quality of operators while reducing their numbers. There was some interest in government licensing of operators. Others favored an industrial union, open to all Western Union employees. Some objected to the secret fraternal rites that were a feature of the Knights of Labor; Catholic workers were forbidden to become members of secret organizations of any kind. The operators wanted to protect their new middle-class image by being models of respectability and sobriety; some of the linemen on the other hand had no scruples about cutting wires to increase pressure on the companies during a strike. Some felt that telegraphy should be a government monopoly, as was and still is the norm in Europe. Some saw salvation in a worker-owned cooperative, if they could only convince the banks or the government to put up the money necessary to establish the system. Others sought to improve the status of the working classes through political action; quite a number were attracted to the United Labor Party of Henry George. A hundred years later issues like these are still with us. Part II Dr. Gabler had access to a vast amount of material: census records, archives of the telegraph companies, contemporary newspaper accounts, magazines published for the edification and amusement of operators, and even novels in which telegraphers were used as characters. The footnotes and bibliography take up 48 pages. One page in the book is an illustration of advertisements in a telegraphers' magazine of 1883. They include a book on shorthand, a book of money-making secrets, a book on the mysteries of love-making, a book on fortune telling, watch charms with microscopic pictures, a book of advice to the unmarried, a package of stationery, a book on politeness, a book of letters for all occasions, playing cards with marked backs, a book of magic tricks, a book on business, and a book on ballroom dancing. The theme is that these appealed to working-class young adults who felt a need to learn how to behave properly as members of the middle-class. A number of telegraph operators rose to prominence. Thomas Edison and Andrew Carnegie are the best known; Theodore N. Vail was a founder of AT&T; others found success in business or politics; and almost all the upper management of Western Union was drawn from the ranks of operators. In 1885 there were five doctors and one dentist moonlighting as telegraph operators -- maybe medicine and dentistry didn't pay all that well in those days. Thomas Edison, as a young telegrapher in the 1860s, would work a full day and then stay in the office at night, listening to a press circuit to get high speed code practice. Later he worked the Boston end of a New York circuit with an operator named Jerry Borst. Operators formed friendships with their counterparts at the other end of the wires. The telegraph companies insisted that operators should work at whatever circuits they were assigned. Edison and Borst conspired to change three characters of the code, so that nobody else could copy their transmissions and they could always work together. Cockroaches were such a problem in the office that Edison devised a bug zapper to protect his lunch from the little beasties. Friendships over the wires were nourished during lulls in traffic by exchanges of jokes and local news, and by checker games. Sometimes love and courtship blossomed too. At other times operators were rude to one another. On one occasion two operators got so angry at each other that they arranged to meet at a town halfway between their posts and settle the matter with fists at 1:00 AM. "Salting" (sending too fast for the receiving operator) was a frequent source of irritation. Salting was also part of the common practice of hazing new operators. Operators frequently got privileges, such as free passes to theaters and on trains. With the chronic oversupply it was common for operators to travel back and forth across the country looking for work, or for better conditions. Operators didn't get vacations, paid or otherwise; but in the summer months telegraph offices would open in the resort towns where the rich took their vacations, and operators could find work there. In 1883 Western Union employed 444 telegraphers in New York City, 96 in Boston, 88 in St. Louis, and 83 in Chicago. This seems to support a conjecture of mine that W.U. was weakened all its life by overattention to serving New York City and insufficient effort to develop the business in other parts of the country. There was friction between the city operators and the rural operators. The city operators were proud of their skills, and wanted to move the traffic. They resented they way country operators would frequently interrupt transmissions. The country operators, usually working in railroad depots, countered that telegraphy was but a small part of their duties. They had to answer questions from the public, sell tickets, meet trains, tend switches and signals, handle freight, and keep the lamps burning. They commonly worked shifts as long as twelve or even sixteen hours. Development of duplex and then quadruplex operation greatly increased the pressure on operators, as the receiving operators could not interrupt the senders. Gender stereotyping held that only male operators had the stamina to handle these heavily-loaded circuits; yet the book cites a number of examples of women who worked these circuits. Women were consistently paid less than men. The companies were well aware that women were a bargain compared with men, and continually tried to replace men with women. Nellie Welch had full charge of the telegraph office in Point Arena, California in 1886. She was eleven years old. Western Union and the Cooper Union Institute in 1869 jointly started a free eight-month telegraphy course for women. It lasted through the early 1890s, turning out about 80 graduates a year. They would first take non-paying jobs assisting regular operators, and then be hired as operators on lightly loaded city circuits. This school was much despised by men for its contribution to the oversupply problem, thought it probably hurt the opportunities for women more than those for men. Beginner and less-skilled operators were called "plugs" or "hams." (Note the endless controversy over the origin of the term "ham" for amateur radio operators.) The schools that turned out these operators were called "plug factories." Craft magazines sought to shame operators who taught telegraphy. They were urged to pass on the secrets of Morse only to brothers, sisters, sons, and daughters. At least one railroad operator quit his job rather than cooperate with a student placed with him by the company. ---------------- [Moderator's Note: My thanks for this very interesting article. Digest readers are encouraged to send book reviews and other special articles like this to Telecom for distribution on the net. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: VoIP Sends a Warning Signal (VOIP News) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 00:50:58 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications VOIP News wrote: > Note: This opinion piece was written by a senior fellow and director > of communications policy studies at the Progress & Freedom Foundation, > which is a libertarian think tank. You have to be careful of these > folks because they believe that free markets can solve almost any > problem, which totally ignores the fact that companies can and do > attempt to achieve monopolies (or at least, to limit competition) so > they can jack up prices to consumers and do other Bad Things. Arguing > their basic philosophies is beyond the scope of this list, and some of > their ideas are good ones despite their underlying beliefs, but when > opinion pieces are published it's always instructive to know about any > biases that the writer might have. > http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107_2-5179376.html > VoIP sends a warning signal The point the author misses, at least about places like tax-crazed California, is the need for government to regulate so they can tax, tax, and tax some more. ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Finding Replacement Parts for Telecom Rackmount Cabinet Date: 26 Mar 2004 12:19:32 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) B. Haskin wrote: > I'm a member of the Linux Users Group at the university I attend. We > were recently given an old, large rackmount cabinet with removable > sides for our new server. I am looking for information on (or a source > for) the clips/pins/connectors (I'm not exactly sure what they are) > that are used to attach the sides to the cabinet at the bottom. These > parts are missing, and I doubt that we will be able to get them from > the donator. Get the BUD catalogue. If it's not a BUD cabinet, you can probably find something appropriate. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: foobar Subject: Harris ws3000 Environmental Alarm Panel Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 17:11:54 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net I have been asked to do some discovery work on monitoring a Harris ws3000/ws2000 dry contact alarm panel. Google has been of no help. Our goal is to eventually to polling of this device and return alarm conditions by TCP/IP to a network monitoring application. Anyone know where some information about these devices can be found? Thanks Sean ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: Netsky.P and Iframe src=cid Variant Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 12:08:16 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , Rob Slade wrote: > I have noted, in the past few days, the sudden spurt of Netsky.P > messages, and, simultaneously, queries about messages containing the > string "iframe src=??cid:" in the body. (In the samples I've got the > ?? has been 3D, but I don't know if this is the same in all cases.) The =3D is merely the "quoted-printable" version of the character "=" /JBL ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Headset mp3 Player Comes Out With a Very Good Price! Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:13:47 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 02:11:34 +0800, Emma wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Is this spam or not? I am sort of > suspicious of it, but got to thinking maybe it will be useful for > some readers. PAT] > Dear friends, > Good day! > Just a short message from HY Technology Co, Ltd. Pat, This is spam. I've asked this idiot politely to remove me from his list. Now I'm not so polite. Please do us all a favor and don't let this appear here too. Thanks, Carl Navarro [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I had bad vibes about that message to start with. Thanks for the guidance on it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Date: 26 Mar 2004 08:08:53 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Charles Cryderman wrote > the problem was with hitting the target his response was "I don't > know, they are leaving here 5 by 5. In a recent TV show, one of the characters, when asked how things were, replied "5 by 5" meaning ok. The newgroup for that show was flooded with inquiries asking what that meant. (The show was oriented toward young people). > Also, anytime you are around a computer, try the various web lookup > services. You cannot *prove* that telco was at fault, and in fact the > directories on the web are woefully out of date many times, but you > might be able to figure out who the 'operator' was who gave out your > number to start with. PAT] I tried that and was shocked to discover how bad online listings were. I found: 1) A phone number I had disconnected three years ago from a residence I'm no longer at remains available. 2) A phone number a member of my family had for only a brief time and disconnected over a year ago remains available. 3) My main home number which I've had for a long time is not shown. I did a number search and found they spelled my last name wrong. The regular phone company telephone directory is correct in all instances. Because of privacy and safety concerns today, a lot of people prefer unlisted telephone numbers which I think isolates people. But I don't blame them because today those concerns are valid. I think the phone company should omit street addresses from listings -- in other words, simply say "Main St" instead of "1234 Main St". If there is only one full name of that person in the directory, omit the street altogether. For myself, the phone company lists my development's address rather than my specific address. If they insisted on my specific address, I'd be unlisted too. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Most people are unaware of this, but one of the things that happened with divestiture was that not only are people able to choose their own long distance carriers, but they can *in theory at least* also choose their own directory assistance pro- viders. Just as your one plus dialing can go to the carrier of your choice, so can your '411' (or 555-1212) dialing go to the service bureau of your choice. At least, that's the way it was to be set up. But hardly anyone has stepped in to fill that gap, which would make the horribly out of date listings on the web (which is where I suspect the original writer's 'operator' was located who gave out his number) almost moot. You can get current (within last 48 hours or so) listings on the web if only one of the entrepreneurs (like George, at Teledeal in Chicago for example) could find an *easy* way to do the billing for same. All the entrepreneurs are more than willing to deal with the high volume users of directory assistance, but how can any of them deal with millions of casual users at twenty or fifty cents each unless the telcos agree to help with the routing **and the monthly billing for same**. George at Teledeal has 800 numbers going to a service bureau for directory; a company that does regular updates. I had asked him at one point if he was ever going to develop something like a prepaid system so casual users could use it. Either a web interface or an 800 phone number where you entered your passcode, and got directory help, then replenish your passcode from time to time. I have thought about getting into that business myself, brokering it through one of the service bureaus for same, then setting up a small shop; taking calls on an 800 number; decrementing the callers passcode by one, and providing the desired information. Or, better still, setting up a front end web page to collect the fee, and letting the person do their own lookups. But it is not as easy as it would appear, actually quite technical and sophisticated, to say nothing of being in a position to guarentee the service bureau a few million lookups per month, **and having the money to back up my guarentee**. That is maybe the reason no entrepreneur has yet developed it on a residential, casual phone user basis. Its essentially an untapped gold mine, the provision of directory assistance for small users, waiting for the right person to come along. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: Last Modern Towns to Go Dial? Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 11:56:54 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , John R. Covert wrote: > Along the Salmon River, near Shoup, Idaho, there was one of the last > "Farmers' Lines". This was neither a manual exchange nor a toll > station. It was a single wire ground return magneto system. > Subscribers to the service were all on the same wire, and could call > each other by dialing their neighbors' ringing codes (2 longs and a > short, etc.) and made outside calls with a long continuous ring, which > would summon the operator at a local toll board. Incoming calls were > placed via this same operator. This must have been the kind of phone that they used in the original "Lassie" TV series -- the ones with Tommy Rettig as the boy Jeff and Jan Clayton (I think) as his mother, which were later reissued as "Jeff's Collie". They had a candlestick wall phone. To make a call they would pick up the phone and listen, then hang up and crank the generator, then pick up the phone and listen for the operator. > There were also, until some time in the mid-80s, a number of towns > (particularly in California) which had dial service which was not > compatible with the toll network, which meant that incoming calls had > to be placed through an operator. > There were at least two reasons that inbound service would not be > provided. ... Second, unless it was possible to dial calls > within the local exchange on a seven digit basis, AT&T would not > officially connect the exchange to the toll network. [snip] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wasn't Lafayette, Indiana and its > neighbor West Lafayette a similar situation? Long after that part of > Indiana was in the 317 area code, and largely dialable, I recall we > still had to go through the operator to get Lafayette from the Chicago > area. So was Fort Wayne, Indiana I think, in the 219 area. PAT] This is the case I was thinking about also; in the late '60s I had a roommate who occasionally called a friend at Purdue. When placing the call to a Lafayette six-digit number one had to go through the operator. Rate & Route would pass her the dialing instructions, something like: "317 + 0nn + 6d". From the operator's position arbitrary sequences of varying lengths could be dialed. /JBL ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #143 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 26 23:51:05 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2R4p5b06134; Fri, 26 Mar 2004 23:51:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 23:51:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403270451.i2R4p5b06134@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 #144 TELECOM Digest Fri, 26 Mar 2004 23:50:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 144 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson VOIP Mentioned on Fox News Tonight (TELECOM Digest Editor) Internet Phones: Clear Winners (VOIP News) VoIP Heads for the Mainstream (VOIP News) Norstar Voicemail Toll Fraud Using 1010 Dial Arounds (Marc Bequette) Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service (Nick Landsberg) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (Gene S. Berkowitz) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (John Levine) Mythtv PVRs For Sale (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 are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 23:22:16 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: VOIP Mentioned on Fox News Tonight VOIP phones in general, but specifically Vonage, since they are the leaders in that area at present, were the topic of discussion Friday night news at 9 PM on KOKI, Channel 23, Fox in Tulsa. The Fox report said that indeed, 'full phone service' (meaning all the bells ahd whistles on local and long distance service) was much less expensive on Vonage than SBC (the local telco of record in Tulsa) or various other CLECs. They quoted a typical price for SBC 'full service' of $53 per month versus the $35 or so from Vonage. But, they pointed out the one major (for many people) problem with VOIP was that E-911 was unreliable or non-existent. They did admit that 'for those folks who rarely if ever travel out of the area or take their computer along, this poses little or no problems, since the Safety Point of Presence (?) system used by Vonage and other VOIPs is reasonably accurate.' Fox got their terms wrong a little bit, but the idea is mostly accurate. For example, take my situation: I cannot percieve a time when I would travel somewhere and want to take along the ATA box *and* need to use 911 at the distant location. So it all works pretty well for me. However Fox had a demonstration of someone making a 'test call' on their Vonage to the 911 center; something that Vonage strongly discourages doing. Fox also noted that 'as SBC continues to price itself out of the market for so many Tulsa residents, Vonage begins looking more and more like a good alternative for many folks.' To try a month of Vonage free, ask for an e-coupon and see if it works well for you also. ptownson@telecom-digest.org Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 21:02:38 -0500 Subject: Internet Phones: Clear Winners Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,115053,00.asp With improved call quality and low rates, the best Net phone services may finally be ready to replace your Baby Bell. By Jeff Bertolucci From the May 2004 issue of PC World magazine Internet phones have come a long way since the early days. A few years ago, you had to use software and a PC microphone to initiate a call from your PC to a regular phone. And you probably encountered some of the most garbled, inaudible conversations since tin can met string. Thanks to advanced technology, the call quality of Internet phones has improved dramatically. The upsurge in affordable broadband service, combined with a new breed of hardware adapters, has led to a slew of Internet phone (aka Voice-over-Internet-Protocol, or VoIP) services eager to woo you away from your phone company. The Internet phone market includes telecommunications titans such as AT&T and Time Warner Cable, Net phone veterans like Dialpad and Net2Phone, and upstarts like VoicePulse and Vonage. So is the Internet phone a viable alternative to your trusty landline? To find out, we tested eight broadband-phone services (see the chart "Internet-Phone Calling Plans: Choose Your Provider Carefully"). For one month we made a series of local, long-distance, and international calls, morning, noon, and night, and rated each service on its ease of use, audio clarity, and value for the money. Our verdict: Net phones vary considerably in price and performance, but the best--VoicePulse and Vonage--offer near-landline dependability, as well as a host of advanced features (voice mail, call forwarding, and so on) for much less money. (And as of press time, Net-phone customers pay minimal taxes and surcharges, in part because of the ongoing regulatory debate.) Still, we did encounter some setup problems and choppy calls. Full story at: http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,115053,00.asp How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 19:44:14 -0500 Subject: VoIP Heads for the Mainstream Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://crm-daily.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_title=VoIP_Heads_for_the_Mainstream&story_id=23554&category=contact_centers By Erika Morphy Contact Center Today "Once consumers realize how easy it can be to make calls on an Internet broadband connection -- basically, all one has to do is install an adapter to make calls on a regular phone -- adoption will increase significantly," says Jon Arnold, telecommunications analyst with Frost & Sullivan. For the most part, VoIP has been a tool to help call-center managers deploy agents more efficiently at lower cost. Some brave businesses also have deployed this technology, but they are relatively few in number. Now, though, that is set to change, as AT&T has announced plans to accelerate and expand its VoIP rollout for business users. Full story at: http://crm-daily.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_title=VoIP_Heads_for_the_Mainstream&story_id=23554&category=contact_centers [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, Jack, recently you commented that you were among the first generation of Americans to have never sent or recieved a 'telegram' and you suggest that the children of today may well be among the first generation of Americans to have never seen a wired, landlane phone. It really would be great if we could, in our lifetime (well, maybe for some of you; I am such an Olde Farte) see a total end to the tyranny of the telephone company. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ringding@comcast.net (Marc Bequette) Subject: Norstar Voicemail Toll Fraud Using 1010 Dial Arounds Date: 26 Mar 2004 13:49:29 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Is this a place I can ask for help? I work for a building of executive office suites, and our Norstar was raped by intruders -- they were calling into our system and then from the voicemail they could get dialtone and were using 1010-nnn carriers to make international calls (on our dime!). I have tons of raw data form the CTA100 utilizing call accounting software, but DISA was never enabled, and the RAD has been unplugged for months ... yet someone still must have had some form of a "chinger" that gave them dialtone. They at first tried dialing 9-011 international calls, but when they found that was blocked (via Norstar destination codes), they used 9-1010-nnn dialaround numbers to call HOURS AND HOURS of calls to India, Pakistan, Phillipines, Kyrgyzstan and a few other countries. The intruders "spoofed" their caller IDs, of course. I have TONS of documentation on this, as well as all the blocks and restrictions we tried to use to stop the calls. NOTHING WORKED!! Blocking our voicemail line (internal extention 2000) from dialing more than 7 digits finally seemed to stop the calls. Or, they may have coincidently stopped because the 1010 carriers wouldnt allow any more calls (since they never received payment). I have a HUMUNGOUS "calls database" in raw format and in archived DB. Our vendors all were baffeled -- about 5 diffrent techs tried to stop these calls, all of them saying they couldn't tell me how it was being done -- they had theories, but when I asked them to show me, they couldn't do it. These techs were Nortel certified. I am wondering if anyone with a Norstar ICS system going over a PRI (no csu/dsu) out there has heard of this happening, or knows who should be held liable for this fraud. Our Norstar/Voicemail system is RENTED, and the vendor denies responsibility, as does the company that we PAY to 'maintain and update' the system (maintnance contract company). Our Local/LD carrier claims that we owe them for "INTERNATIONAL TERMINATION FEES" from these calls, and since they claimed to not be able to block 1010-nnn calls from the CO, they want us to pay them, and the worst thing is they want a HUGE amount of money just to "terminate" the 1010 calls. Please if you have heard of such a situation, or you know the federal/state laws on toll fraud like this, or better yet, if you know that Norstar systems have a "BUG" that allows this abuse and maybe there is a class action out there on this, please please contact me. Even if you know where I can inquire on this and get some official answers, please let me know. It would be greatly appreciated. Please contact me at ringding@comcast.net if you can help. Thanks, Marc Bequette ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net Subject: Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:50:02 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Lisa Hancock wrote: > Charles Cryderman wrote >> the problem was with hitting the target his response was "I don't >> know, they are leaving here 5 by 5. > In a recent TV show, one of the characters, when asked how things > were, replied "5 by 5" meaning ok. The newgroup for that show was > flooded with inquiries asking what that meant. (The show was oriented > toward young people). Dern ... this brings back ancient memories. I believe (but am not sure) that the "5 by 5" term cam from radio DX'ers (folks who would try to pick up distant radio channels on their AM radios.) There was a code, which I recall as "SINPO". I think the "S" stood for signal strength, but don't remember what the rest stood for. If the station was coming in clear as a bell you would rate that as all characteristics being a 5, thus the "five by five." (Check a ham-radio group for more info.) As a kid, I would try to pick up AM stations from wherever, log what I had heard, and send them a postcard about it using the SINPO rating. Most folks at the stations were nice and would respond with a postcard of their own with the stations logo and such. I had my corkboard full of these. I was in NYC at the time and picked up KFAX in San Francisco once (but only once.) "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ From: Gene S. Berkowitz Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 21:10:15 -0500 In article , benficus@hotmail.com says... > Speaking of which ... > Last time I was at Best Buy, they were telling me that I should buy > the expensive "gold" USB connector for my printer ... the other cable > will affect the quality of my prints. > Any thoughts, opinions? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Radio Shack *used to* (maybe still > does in some places) make that claim about the expensive gold-plated > connectors in almost all applications, coax connectors, etc. I have > never been able to figure out *why* the gold-plated versions of the > various size/type connectors are supposed to be better. Our local > Radio Shack store no longer makes that claim, however. PAT] Because gold doesn't oxidize, so the resistance of the connector doesn't change with time. ... and, no, it won't makes a gnat's whisker difference in a print, because the data is digital, and corruption of the signal would likely cause it to not print at all, or print gibberish. ... as to the 110V plug, those are standardized also. The figure-8 is sometimes squared off on one side to make it polarized. --Gene ------------------------------ Date: 27 Mar 2004 03:44:50 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Last time I was at Best Buy, they were telling me that I should buy > the expensive "gold" USB connector for my printer ... the other cable > will affect the quality of my prints. > Any thoughts, opinions? USB is digital, not analog. Even if gold contacts improve signal quality, which is debatable, it doesn't matter. Any cable will do. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 16:33:25 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mythtv PVRs for sale http://www.boingboing.net/2004/03/26/mythtv_pvrs_for_sale.html posted by Cory Doctorow at 04:12:29 AM An Aussie company is shipping prebuilt mythtv-based PVRs. These are souped-up TiVo-like boxen built out of commodity hardware with all the features that I want, not just the ones that make the Luddites who run the movie studios comfortable. This analysis of the features (including several features that the manufacturer lamely decided to "hide") makes this box pretty drool-worthy indeed. Link (via /.) http://www.boingboing.net/2004/03/26/mythtv_pvrs_for_sale.html A quick analysis of d1.com.au's Home Media Center 'update iso' http://miscname.com/public/HMC/ Home Media Centre http://www.d1.com.au/hmc/ A Ready-Made MythTV Set-Top Box in Australia http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/03/25/2222240 ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #144 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 27 13:52:00 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2RIq0e12159; Sat, 27 Mar 2004 13:52:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 13:52:00 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403271852.i2RIq0e12159@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 #145 TELECOM Digest Sat, 27 Mar 2004 13:51:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 145 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson SBC Settles Voicemail Lawsuit (Monty Solomon) Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law (Monty Solomon) A Better Way to Squelch Spam (Monty Solomon) PanAmSat Attracts Interest From LBO Groups - Sources (Monty Solomon) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (Dave Garland) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (Jack Hamilton) Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service (Tony P.) Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service (Joel B. Levin) Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service (Stanley Cline) Re: Cablevision to Hike Rates, Panel Rules For YES (Tom Betz) Re: Fast Pass at Airport Security (William Warren) Re: Telephone Switchbox (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 are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 10:19:07 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: SBC Settles Voicemail Lawsuit NEW YORK, March 26 (Reuters) - A U.S. regulatory watchdog group on Friday said SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) has agreed to settle a lawsuit against it for allegedly misleading marketing on its voice mail product. The Chicago-based telephone company will pay up to $40 million in compensation, according to Citizens Utility Board, a state nonprofit group. The suit dates back to 1999, when some customers sued the phone company for not disclosing that it tacked on an additional 5 cents per message fee on top of a monthly $5 charge. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40943356 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 13:13:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law by Lawrence Lessig Mar 2004 http://free-culture.org/get-it/ http://free-culture.org/freecontent/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 13:23:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A Better Way To Squelch Spam? An open-source scheme would impose a computational "cost" on junk mailers while leaving legitimate users of e-mail alone. By Eric S. Johansson and Keith Dawson Over the past few months, major players in the world of e-mail have proposed schemes for combating the rising tide of spam. In December, for example, Yahoo! proposed an approach called DomainKeys for validating which messages come from which e-mail servers. In January, speaking to journalists at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Microsoft chairman Bill Gates suggested using a sender-pays system, with money-based e-mail stamps. And at the RSA security conference in February, Gates touted as a spam solution Microsoft's Caller ID-a variation on the Sender Policy Framework (SPF), which is an anti-spoofing technique that reduces the ability to falsify "From" addresses in e-mail messages. Unfortunately, upon close examination these techniques turn out to be unworkable or ineffective. They represent centralized solutions that serve the needs of large Internet service providers and, less directly, of large advertisers. Such ideas would be only marginally effective against spam. Worse, they would break services users count on. http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/wo_johansson032604.asp ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 10:21:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: PanAmSat Attracts Interest From LBO Groups - Sources By Dane Hamilton NEW YORK, March 26 (Reuters) - Satellite operator PanAmSat Corp. (NASDAQ:SPOT), which was put up for sale in the last year, has attracted initial offers from at least two groups of large private equity firms and several competing satellite companies, people close to the auction said on Friday. The Wilton, Connecticut-based company could sell for at least $4.6 billion in a sale process that is being managed by Credit Suisse First Boston (VX:CSGN), the sources said. PanAmSat, which feeds entertainment programming to cable companies and others, is 81-percent owned by Hughes Electronics Corp. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40943706 ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 22:19:01 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when PAT wrote: > Radio Shack *used to* (maybe still does in some places) make that > claim about the expensive gold-plated connectors in almost all > applications, coax connectors, etc. I have never been able to figure > out *why* the gold-plated versions of the various size/type > connectors are supposed to be better. Gold does not oxidize/tarnish, so gold plating is used to make low-voltage connections that are less prone to bad-connection problems. It's most useful on things that need to be high-reliability. But note that if you're getting a good connection already, gold will not make it better, just (maybe) more reliable. There are other ways to accomplish the same thing. In my tool box I carry a 15ml vial of "Stabilant 22A" (http://www.stabilant.com), which used to be available (in a different dilution) under the tradename "Tweek". It is an "Electrical Contact Enhancer" and turns bad connections into good ones (and prevents good ones from going bad), but won't short things out. It came with a NATO part number in case I wanted to use it on my jet fighter. At the time I bought it, the only vendor in the US seemed to be NAPA Auto Parts stores(! part#CE-1), though the store had never heard of it and had to order it from the warehouse. That 15ml cost me $50 15 years ago, but you use it in such small quantities that it will probably last the rest of my life. ------------------------------ From: Jack Hamilton Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 21:01:49 -0800 Organization: Copyright (c) 2004 by Jack Hamilton. Reply-To: jfh@acm.org benficus@hotmail.com (Ben Ficus) wrote: > Speaking of which ... > Last time I was at Best Buy, they were telling me that I should buy > the expensive "gold" USB connector for my printer ... the other cable > will affect the quality of my prints. > Any thoughts, opinions? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Radio Shack *used to* (maybe still > does in some places) make that claim about the expensive gold-plated > connectors in almost all applications, coax connectors, etc. I have > never been able to figure out *why* the gold-plated versions of the > various size/type connectors are supposed to be better. Our local > Radio Shack store no longer makes that claim, however. PAT] The theory is that gold is less likely to corrode. Also, there's the mental effect that if you pay more for it it must be better. I don't think there's any advantage if you know how to make really good connections. Gold doesn't conduct as well as copper, so that's a small disadvantage. Pure silver is the best conductor among common metals, but silver wiring would be pricy. www.homegrownaudio will sell you a 1 meter cable for $109.95; www.the-discount-store.com will sell you 14 gauge silver wire for $8/foot. Monster Cable Sigma Retro Gold Speaker Cables retail for $1250 for a 5 foot pair. As far as I know, there are no independently verified double-blind studies showing that such cables convey sound any better than plain copper from Home Depot properly installed. Jack Hamilton jfh@acm.org In the end, more than they wanted freedom, they wanted comfort and security. And in the end, they lost it all - freedom, comfort and security. Edward Gibbons [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now isn't that something! $1250 for a five foot pair. Perhaps someone with virgin ears -- it would take a pair of those -- will help me do an independent verification of this claim. Bring one of those cables; I will provide the Mahler symphony and we will check it out relative to my little old Bose radio/CD (which, by the way, did not come cheap either unless you feel that a four hundred plus dollars radio/CD combination is cheap.) The Bose claim to fame is the quality audio from little speakers close together. And it does sound good, just like one of the old Grundigs from years ago. It also has a place for an external antenna to be connected, if I were brave and wanted to climb on the roof of my house to install one. Instead, I use the connection to Cable One and let them handle it. Not 'cable radio' as such, but as an 'antenna' for over the air radio from their local tower over at 14th and Oak Streets where a totally free (of any charges) crystal-controlled radio sits in the tower and retransmits Tulsa PBS (89.5) and classical music KRPS (89.9) at no charge to interested parties. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 05:57:36 GMT In article , hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net says: > Lisa Hancock wrote: >> Charles Cryderman wrote >>> the problem was with hitting the target his response was "I don't >>> know, they are leaving here 5 by 5. >> In a recent TV show, one of the characters, when asked how things >> were, replied "5 by 5" meaning ok. The newgroup for that show was >> flooded with inquiries asking what that meant. (The show was oriented >> toward young people). > Dern ... this brings back ancient memories. > I believe (but am not sure) that the "5 by 5" term cam from radio > DX'ers (folks who would try to pick up distant radio channels on their > AM radios.) There was a code, which I recall as "SINPO". I think the > "S" stood for signal strength, but don't remember what the rest stood > for. If the station was coming in clear as a bell you would rate that > as all characteristics being a 5, thus the "five by five." (Check a > ham-radio group for more info.) Indeed -- it's RST -- Readability, Signal and Tone. Tone only applicable for CW stuff. ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:38:13 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , Nick Landsberg wrote: > I believe (but am not sure) that the "5 by 5" term cam from radio > DX'ers (folks who would try to pick up distant radio channels on their > AM radios.) There was a code, which I recall as "SINPO". I think the > "S" stood for signal strength, but don't remember what the rest stood > for. In ham radio, the signal check is "RST" for Readability, Signal (strength) and Tone, used for CW ("Morse" code transmissions). The best (nominal) RST value is 599. Voice transmissions do not use the "Tone" component, as it doesn't apply, so the best signal transmission is 59. I would guess, because I don't know, that the "five by five" may be an older military version of this sort of thing. /JBL KD1ON/7 ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 05:50:46 GMT On 26 Mar 2004 08:08:53 -0800, PAT wrote: > I have thought about getting into that business myself, brokering it > through one of the service bureaus for same, then setting up a small > shop; taking calls on an 800 number; decrementing the callers passcode > by one, and providing the desired information. Or, better still, Someone's already beat you to it: www.infone.com :) Infone is the child of Metro One, which has provided directory assistance for many cell phone companies and a few CLECs for years. Quite a few cell phone companies have pulled their contracts with Metro One, so they came up with the idea of selling their service on a retail basis and not just on a wholesale basis to other carriers -- thus Infone. I have an account with Infone and have for awhile, and have been rather pleased with them; they seem to get listings from the same places the LECs do, so accuracy hasn't been a problem. In fact, by far the worst directory assistance I've found is from Ma Bell -- the DA company AT&T long distance routes NPA-555-1212 to is absolutely rotten. (All major LD carriers and wireless carriers now route NPA-555-1212 to companies of their choosing rather than to LECs in the dialed NPA. LD and wireless carriers associated with LECs, such as Qwest and BellSouth long distance and Cingular Wireless in SBC and BellSouth LEC areas, route DA calls to their LEC division DA bureaus, while other carriers, including AT&T, MCI, T-Mobile, etc., use third-party companies. VoIP company VoicePulse uses Qwest for DA; I don't know who Vonage or others use.) 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 ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: Cablevision to Hike Rates, Panel Rules For YES Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 16:54:47 +0000 (UTC) Organization: XOme Quoth Monty Solomon in news:telecom23.140.1@telecom- digest.org: > NEW YORK, March 24 (Reuters) - Cablevision Systems Corp. will hike > monthly subscriber rates by 95 cents to partly cover the cost of > carrying New York Yankees games, after an arbitration panel ruled it > must offer the Yankees network to all of its subscribers on its > expanded basic package of cable channels, the company said on > Wednesday. What an effing waste. Who do I have to bribe to stop getting (and paying for) ALL the useless sports channels that I just program the TV to skip? It could easily cut my cable bill in half. "I am afeard there are few die well that die in a battle; for how can they charitably dispose of anything when blood is their argument? Now, if these men do not die well, it will be a black matter for the King that led them to it; who to disobey were against all proportion of subjection." - W.S. ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: Fast Pass at Airport Security Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 04:29:47 GMT Monty Solomon wrote in message news:telecom23.142.13@telecom-digest.org: > By Ryan Singel > Business travelers may soon have one more item to stuff in their > carry-on: a trusted-traveler card to speed them through security > lines. [snip] Bruce "Secrets and Lies" Schneier recently panned a similar idea, albeit one backed by a private company: http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0403.html#10 FWIW, I don't think this is a good idea, but it _will_ have a positive result: the _uncertified_ members of the public will howl to their congressman when they see _those_ people in line ahead of them, and the system will have to look at ways to speed things up for everybody. Schneier has written at great length on the tradeoffs involved with real security -- things like decompressing the hold baggage to trigger altitude-sensitive bombs, which El Al does routinely -- and I agree with him that the current "security" system is just window dressing, designed to fill the seats while not costing the airlines any money. Bill ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Telephone Switchbox Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 05:12:41 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On 25 Mar 2004 18:21:55 -0800, mlliw@joimail.com (Will) wrote: > I am a newbie to this type of thing. The OfficeLink Solo looks good, > but its a bit pricy for my budget. Could you please explain the > "I setup DISA on a Samsung DCS." I don't really understand this. The point is that you only told part of the story. Is this maybe, "I set up a line at a friend's house and I'd like to use it to dial free service points that I can't dial from my house"? Where I live, spending $100 or $500 to bypass local toll calls at 4.25 CENTS per minute is not very productive, especially when my outbound LD bill is less than $5 per month.. The old Teltone 106 box IIRC had THREE digit security and once you broke the code, no dialing restrictions whatsoever. So, a compromised code could bring out a TON of misery. That brought the response from Tony P. that a Samsung DISA trunk had 2 Million possible codes (the universe of 2,000,000,000 to 3,999,999,999) as its password protection. It didn't apply to you so you could ignore it, but, I hope, most of us understood. Outside of that, Teltone was never inexpensive. Carl Navarro > Thanks > mlliw > P.S. The line I would be accessing would not be on a phone system, > just a direct line. > Tony P. wrote in message > news:: >> In article , cnavarro@wcnet.org >> says: >>> On 19 Mar 2004 19:05:27 -0800, mlliw@joimail.com (Will) wrote: >>>> Is there a box that when called to normally, it sends through, but >>>> when a code such as #22, It brings the caller to a _dialtone_ on >>>> another line? I have seen several boxes that do this (for >>>> computer/fax/telephone) that when #22 is dialed, they send to a >>>> separate place, but they don't give a _dialtone_ on a separate >>>> line. Thanks! >>> It might depend on what type of phone system you have. Some systems >>> have Direct System Inward Access (DISA) available. Teltone used to >>> make a 106 box that was a bridging unit with amplifiers. They still >>> make an Officelink Solo, but I bet it's a bit pricey. >>> http://www.teltone.com/products/remotevoice/solo/home.htm >>> One thing to keep in mind, DISA and the 106 is highly hackable. A >>> teenager with a lot of time on his hands can key the universe of 3 >>> digit numbers as a hobby to find out what makes it work. The >>> Officelink is a callback device. >> I setup DISA on a Samsung DCS. It requires a seven digit passcode. So >> that ups the possibilities. >> The way the system was configured, the first digit had to be a 2 or 3, >> the next six could be 0 thru 9. So 2x10x10x10x10x10x10 = 2,000,000 >> possible combinations. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #145 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 29 14:59:07 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2TJx7J01450; Mon, 29 Mar 2004 14:59:07 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 14:59:07 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403291959.i2TJx7J01450@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 #146 TELECOM Digest Mon, 29 Mar 2004 14:59:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 146 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Stern Fans Filing Complaints to FCC Against Oprah (Monty Solomon) Shock-Jock Turns Tables; Takes Oft-Complaining Listener (Monty Solomon) Sorry -- No a la Carte Cable (Monty Solomon) Cable Industry on High Alert in Rush to Legislation (Monty Solomon) Customer Disservice (Monty Solomon) Policy Post 10.05: Privacy Guidelines Needed Counter-Terror (Solomon) GILC Alert v8i2 (Monty Solomon) Tensions of Securing Cyberspace: Internet, State Power (Monty Solomon) HDTV - Looking at an All-Digital World (Monty Solomon) Recordable HD: A Clearer Picture (Monty Solomon) Comcast to Beef Up On-Demand Video But Plans no Big Net Phone (Solomon) Online Symposium on the National "Do Not Call List" (Monty Solomon) Turning Online Privacy Into a Joke (Monty Solomon) When the Network Meets the Net (Monty Solomon) Black Star: Ghana, Information Technology and Development (M Solomon) When You Hear The Heavy Accent & The Poor Connection (Dave Garland) Re: GMAC Customers' Data Put At Risk By Laptop Theft (Sammy@nospam.biz) Re: Norstar Voicemail Toll Fraud Using 1010 Dial Arounds (Scott Dorsey) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 22:23:29 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Stern Fans Filing Complaints to FCC Against Oprah By: Scott Ross WASHINGTON - The first step of Howard Stern's call to action against the FCC crackdown on indecency is underway - the FCC today confirmed that they have received a number of complaints against the Oprah Winfrey Show for an episode that defined a number of sexual terms popular among teenage girls. After Infinity Broadcasting was fined earlier this month for a Stern show that aired in 2001, Stern became furious when an episode of Oprah was rerun last week that contained terms comparable to the terms that led to Stern's fine and requested that fans complain about Oprah to the FCC. http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Articles&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=78201 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I always did thing Oprah always tried to act so goody-goody; once she claimed that 'my guests are nothing like the ones Jerry Springer has on his show; mine are so much better.' Fact is, many of her guests are a bit more sophisticated (many times Springer's guests are downright ignorant and crude) but her guests do not act out right there on the stage (as Springer's do) but they are not any better, IMO, than the people about whom *she* complains. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 22:25:54 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Shock-Jock Turns Tables and Takes Oft-Complaining Listener to Court By P.J. Huffstutter, Times Staff Writer CHICAGO - A nationally syndicated radio disc jockey has filed a $3-million lawsuit against a Chicago listener who repeatedly has complained about the shock-jock's show to the Federal Communications Commission. Erich Muller, who goes by the on-air name "Mancow," claims that David E. Smith has been trying to harass him by filing more than 60 "spurious" FCC complaints in the last two years. The complaints were designed to interfere with Muller's business and to drive advertisers away from his show, "Mancow's Morning Madhouse," according to the suit. Muller broadcasts out of a Chicago radio station, WKQX 101.1 FM. The lawsuit, filed last week in Cook County circuit court, also seeks to block Smith and his organization -- Citizens for Community Values of Illinois -- from submitting further complaints to the FCC. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-djsuit28mar28,1,2655098.story ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 22:31:37 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sorry -- No a la Carte Cable Channel Packaging Is So Much Cheaper, Incredulous Senators Are Told By Frank Ahrens Washington Post Staff Writer In the dream world of some television viewers, they would pay their cable or satellite companies only for the channels they want. Some might not pay for MTV, because they don't want their 8-year-olds watching it. Others would turn down ESPN Classic, because they've already seen the 1975 World Series. Others would eschew TeleFutura, because they don't speak Spanish. Reality is far different. No U.S. cable or satellite company offers what are called "a la carte" plans. In order to get the Discovery Channel from Comcast Corp. cable company, for instance, Washington viewers have to pay for an "expanded basic" package that includes MTV, FX, MSNBC and 33 other channels. That may change, if some lawmakers and consumer groups get their way, as the cable industry finds itself under increasing scrutiny. Lawmakers report that their constituents are angry about cable bills that have risen at three times the rate of inflation since the industry was largely deregulated in 1996. Others want government to do something about the rising incidence of profanity and nudity found on pay-television systems. One possible solution being proposed is a la carte cable, a way to give consumers more choice over what they watch and how much they pay for it. But it's not an answer the cable industry will swallow easily, if a Senate Commerce Committee hearing yesterday on cable rates is any indication. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25188-2004Mar25.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 22:34:11 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cable Industry on High Alert in Rush to Legislation By Andrew Wallenstein As broadcasters brace for a new era of tightened federal indecency regulations, the cable industry is worrying whether it might be next. Congress is weighing whether to extend its scrutiny of indecent programming beyond over-the-air stations to basic cable and satellite channels. In addition, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., chairman of the powerful Senate Commerce Committee, raised hackles in the cable biz Thursday by suggesting that the industry should be forced to allow consumers to assemble their own basic channel packages on an "a la carte" basis. Although seemingly unrelated, the recent hearings on indecency -- sparked by Janet Jackson's breast-baring incident during CBS' Super Bowl telecast last month -- helped lawmakers dust off McCain's long-dormant advocacy of a la carte pricing and the potential formation of a family-friendly programming tier. The double dose has upped anxiety levels among programmers and operators who have their lobbyists on high alert on Capitol Hill. Although self-regulation is the preferential option even to politicians, concern is growing over the combustible nature of federal policy in the wake of the Super Bowl incident. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000473849 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 22:38:11 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Customer Disservice These Days, Consumers May as Well Keep Their Complaint To Themselves By Caroline E. Mayer Washington Post Staff Writer When Mary Culnan's three-year-old Kenmore washing machine broke in February, it took three appointments before a Sears repairman showed up. Before he even examined the machine, he blamed the problem on Culnan, telling her that she had not only used the wrong detergent but also the wrong cycle. The permanent press setting, he said, could have burned out the machine's contacts. "I have no idea what that means," said Culnan, a Boston area professor. The repairman finally traced the problem to a defective circuit board, which fixed things -- for a while. When Scott Rozett bought a family cell phone plan last June, the salesman assured him he could make and receive calls in San Francisco at no extra charge. But in November, one month after the Idaho resident visited the Bay area, he received a $160 bill for roaming charges. When he called AT&T Wireless to protest, a customer service representative told him the company was not responsible for promises made by a salesman. When an error in Manon Matchett's Sprint PCS bill caused her service to be disconnected in December, she spent three days trying to get it restored. She called at least twice a day, she says, and each time was transferred from one department to another as she tried to get credit for payments that had never been posted to her account. She talked to at least nine people, but "no one could make a definitive decision," said Matchett, an office manager in the District. Nor could she ever reach a manager, even in the middle of the day. "I was told no managers were available. It was pure hell," Matchett said. Forget voice-mail hell. As Culnan, Rozett and Matchett have discovered, customer service has deteriorated into a new kind of purgatory, one in which companies pass the buck, frequently from one corporate division to another. Or customer service representatives pin the blame on other companies. Or even, worse, they fault their customers. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28784-2004Mar27.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 00:48:34 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Policy Post 10.05: Privacy Guidelines Needed for Counter-terror CDT POLICY POST Volume 10, Number 5, February 26, 2004 A Briefing On Public Policy Issues Affecting Civil Liberties Online from The Center For Democracy and Technology (1) GAO Echoes CDT Criticisms of CAPPS II; Coalition Calls for Hearings (2) DHS Privacy Office Issues Report Criticizing JetBlue Disclosure (3) Privacy Plans for US-VISIT Need Further Attention http://www.cdt.org/publications/pp_10.05.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 00:51:22 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: GILC Alert v8i2 Welcome to the Global Internet Liberty Campaign Newsletter. Welcome to GILC Alert, the newsletter of the Global Internet Liberty Campaign. We are an international organization of groups working for cyber-liberties, who are determined to preserve civil liberties and human rights on the Internet. We hope you find this newsletter interesting, and we very much hope that you will avail yourselves of the action items in future issues. If you are a part of an organization that would be interested in joining GILC, please contact us at . If you are aware of threats to cyber-liberties that we may not know about, please contact the GILC members in your country, or contact GILC as a whole. Please feel free to redistribute this newsletter to appropriate forums. =============================================== Free expression [1] Chinese gov't formally charges Net dissident [2] Vietnamese Net dissident faces trial [3] Vote coming on EuroDMCA proposal [4] New trade pact may bring DMCA-type laws to Australia [5] Belarus court fines journalist over Net writings [6] Iranian Net users continue struggle against gov't censors [7] File-sharing legal battles spread to Canada, Australia [8] Canadian ruling poses Net jurisdictional speech issues [9] DVD copying equipment maker loses initial court battle Privacy [10] South Korean wiretapping surges upward [11] U.S. Net telephony spy rules controversy still unresolved [12] U.S. President threatens veto of privacy restoration bills [13] WebFountain Internet trawling device: TIA-lite? [14] Major privacy problems found in South Korean websites [15] U.S. universities suffer online security breaches [16] Microsoft criticized over slow security patch rollout [17] MyDoom computer bug hits hard http://www.gilc.org/alert/alert82.html http://www.hrea.org/lists/huridocs-tech/markup/msg01114.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 02:22:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Tensions of Securing Cyberspace: the Internet, State Power The tensions of securing cyberspace: the Internet, state power & the National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace by Michael T. Zimmer Abstract The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace exposes a growing tension between the nature of the Internet and the regulatory powers of the traditional nation-state. The National Strategy declares, with all the strength and authority of the United States government, the desire to secure a space many consider, by its very nature, chaotic and beyond the reach any organized or central control. This paper will argue that both the structural architecture of the Internet and the substantive values codified within it clash with governmental efforts to "secure cyberspace." Contents: Introduction: A brief history of the National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace. The architecture of the Internet. The structural tensions with state power. The substantive tensions with state power. Conclusion http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue9_3/zimmer/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 10:03:28 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: HDTV - Looking at an All-Digital World The digital television (DTV) transition is moving into more American homes via over-the-air broadcasting, cable TV, satellite and other formats. Nearly 7 million U.S. households have bought digital TV monitors and other display devices to take advantage of this opportunity. Another 11 million homes are expected to buy DTV equipment this year, and the number will grow to about 34 million households by the end of 2006. To discuss the opportunities and challenges, Vision spoke with a true DTV pioneer, Peter Fannon, vice president, technology policy and regulatory affairs, Panasonic/Matsushita Electric Corp. of America. http://www.ce.org/publications/vision/2004/marapr/p04.asp ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 09:59:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Recordable HD: A Clearer Picture By Phillip Swann Sam Diaz knows something about technology. After all, he's the personal technology reporter for the San Jose Mercury News . However, after recently trying to master the seemingly endless number of DVD recording formats while helping a cousin record a home movie, Diaz wonders about his chosen profession. With look-alike formats such as DVD+R and DVD-R, and DVD-RW and DVD+RW, it's enough to make a grown man cry. What works on one DVD player may not work on the next. "The movie turned out great, and being able to pop it into the living room DVD player to watch it on the TV set-just like a Hollywood motion picture-made it that much better," Diaz says. "But when he took the DVD to the grandparents' home and pressed Play on their DVD player, nothing happened. The older DVD player wouldn't recognize the homemade DVD." Of course, technology companies are not deliberately trying to confound people, despite what some might think. Multiple formats exist for many legitimate reasons, from feature differences to company disagreements over what should be the industry standard. But Diaz is not alone in his frustration. Industry research suggests that some consumers are not buying new CE products, such as DVD recorders, because of format confusion. They are afraid that today's hot product could be obsolete tomorrow. They also fear that the product might not be compatible with similar machines. For instance, as Diaz learned, some recordable DVDs will not work with certain DVD players. The war over formats-and feature differences-is expected to heat up during the next year as technology companies launch various products that permit the recording of high-definition TV (HDTV) programs. From new DVD formats to hard-drive HD recorders, the industry hopes the new services will further boost sales of HD sets. For the first time, an HDTV owner will be able to make a copy of a HD show and play it back for friends at any time, creating more awareness of the technology. However, could the explosion of new products and formats add to consumer confusion, as seen with past technologies, such as the DVD recorder? With that in mind, here's a look at the future of recordable HD formats, services and products-and their likely impact on HDTV sales. http://www.ce.org/publications/vision/2004/marapr/p20.asp ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 10:12:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Comcast to Beef Up on-Demand Video But No Big Net Phone Discounts By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 3/25/2004 Comcast Corp.'s New England customers can expect to see thousands more hours of "video on demand" programming this year, and cable boxes with Tivo-like recording features, chief executive Brian L. Roberts said yesterday. But as Comcast prepares to launch a trial offer of voice-over-Internet service in Western Massachusetts and Hartford that could expand nationally next year, Roberts said, it will probably be priced in the $40 to $45 range for unlimited monthly service, rather than at a steeper discount to conventional phone service. Some cable companies and independent providers charge as little as $20 to $35 for unlimited monthly calls carried over the Internet. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/03/25/comcast_to_beef_up_on_demand_video_but_plans_no_big_net_phone_discounts/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 11:39:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Online Symposium on the National "Do Not Call List" Richmond Journal of Law & Technology Volume X, Issue 4, Spring-2004 http://law.richmond.edu/jolt/index.asp ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 13:07:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Turning Online Privacy Into a Joke By Donald Daly Online privacy: It is at once both a libertarian's "cause celebre" and a thorn in the side of business and government. Consumers' passions erupt as marketers seek to "leverage" market intelligence, sometimes questionably gained. Privacy and its attendant concerns are shaping where dollars are spent -- particularly on the Internet -- and businesses better sit up and take notice. In a survey of the adult online population, conducted by The Customer Respect Group in February 2004, the importance of respectful treatment of consumers' privacy concerns was underlined by some dramatic findings. When survey participants were asked how much they care about a company's privacy policy when invited to enter personal information to a Web site, 22.4 percent responded that in the absence of a privacy policy, they would not offer the information. A further 26.6 percent echoed this sentiment by indicating that if they were unhappy with a company's privacy policy they would leave the site. http://news.com.com/2010-1025-5180140.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 13:08:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: When the Network Meets the Net TiVo's Mike Ramsay wants to plug viewers into more than cable and satellite -- and bets his digital video recorder can make the connection. By John Battelle, April 2004 Issue TiVo (TIVO) is under siege. From Hollywood to Madison Avenue, the word itself is almost a curse. And those who aren't muttering it are copying it. In the latter camp are most of the cable and satellite companies, which are mimicking TiVo's groundbreaking digital video recorder -- the Internet-era successor to the VCR that finds the TV programming you want, when you want it. Some 830,000 Time Warner (TWX), Comcast (CMCSK), and other cable subscribers now use cheap DVRs from Scientific-Atlanta (SFA), which has orders for hundreds of thousands more. You'd think all of this would spook CEO Mike Ramsay. But Ramsay, a veteran of Silicon Graphics, is ready for the fight; he cheerfully mentions that TiVo has already battled Microsoft (MSFT) and won (Microsoft canceled UltimateTV, a competing DVR, in 2002). He's bolstered TiVo's subscriber ranks to 1.3 million with the help of DirecTV; half of them now come through the satellite-TV company. And he's suing EchoStar, the other major satellite provider, for patent infringement. Ramsay's offensive plan is even more interesting. He's trying to make friends on Madison Avenue by putting tiny video commercials, similar to movie trailers, in TiVo's programming guide. (Fox and BMW are among the advertisers that have tried the new format.) Nielsen is adding TiVo viewers to its ratings panels. Despite the common wisdom that TiVo was toast, the little company based in Alviso, Calif., has thrived: Its stock has soared from a low of $4.50 a year ago to nearly $12 today. http://battellemedia.com/archives/000506.php http://www.business2.com/b2/web/articles/0,17863,599229,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 11:47:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Black Star: Ghana, Information Tech and Development in Africa by G. Pascal Zachary Abstract Accra, the capital of the West African country of Ghana, is technologically marginalized by any measure. But over the past ten years, the introduction of the Internet, wireless technology and freer radio broadcasts have vastly expanded communications and information. The Internet is widely available. E-mail usage is soaring. Wireless telephony is growing rapidly. Radio stations are proliferating. Once mired in information poverty, the people of Accra, Ghana now face the challenge of using information and connectivity to their best advantage. In examining how Accra adapts to technological change, we gain a better understanding of how people in poor African cities use technology and what they want from it. Debates over the so-called "digital divide" can be enriched by close studies of lived experience in parts of the world where the revolution in information technology remains more prospect than reality. Contents Preface Chapter one - To the promised land Chapter two - Virgin territory, distant shores Chapter three - The human factor Chapter four - Revolt of the elites http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue9_3/zachary/index.html ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: When You Hear The Heavy Accent The Poor Connection, HANG UP!!! Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 15:11:07 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We did NOT get the original on this thread here at telecom. But it discussed the Nigerian spam phone calls. PAT] It was a dark and stormy night when Victim_Of_Hype@vuvbyjuk.ks.us wrote: > When You Hear The Heavy Accent & The Poor Phone Connection... HANG UP!! Spam. Though the irony is, if the spammer had just left off the random text at the end, it would probably have been somewhat on-topic. ------------------------------ From: Sammy@nospam.biz Subject: Re: GMAC Customers' Data Put At Risk By Laptop Theft Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 06:04:13 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Monty Solomon wrote: > By Paul McDougall, InformationWeek > A division of GMAC Financial Services has been quietly informing about > 200,000 of its customers that their personal data may have been > compromised due to the theft of two laptop computers from an > employee's car at a regional office near Atlanta. > In a letter to its personal insurance customers, GMAC Insurance > indicates that "a random theft" of the laptops from a locked vehicle > may have left them vulnerable to identify theft. The letter -- > obtained by InformationWeek -- indicates that the stolen laptops > contained customers' names, addresses, dates of birth, Social > Security numbers, credit scores, marital status, and gender. "For > incidents like this, government regulatory agencies recommend that > you place a fraud alert on your credit file," the letter advises > customers. The letter was dated March 12. The theft took place on > Jan. 26. Well, I guess if anyone of those so notified subsequently becomes a victim of identity theft they will have a deep pocket from which to seek redress. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, no! I think if you look at the terms and conditions for the 'priviledge' of being in debt to GMAC you'll see one of the conditions you agreed to when you first signed somewhere on the dotted line was that GMAC did not guarentee you any privacy at all; that in fact they disclaimed and disavowed any responsibility for anything at all. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Norstar Voicemail Toll Fraud Using 1010 Dial Arounds Date: 29 Mar 2004 11:33:13 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Marc Bequette wrote: > Our vendors all were baffeled -- about 5 diffrent techs tried to stop > these calls, all of them saying they couldn't tell me how it was being > done -- they had theories, but when I asked them to show me, they > couldn't do it. These techs were Nortel certified. You need to put a recorder on the line that they are coming in on and actually listen to what they're doing to the PBX so you have some notion of what is actually going on. Once you have an actual record of a call, you should have no problem identifying the blame. > I am wondering if anyone with a Norstar ICS system going over a PRI > (no csu/dsu) out there has heard of this happening, or knows who > should be held liable for this fraud. Our Norstar/Voicemail system is > RENTED, and the vendor denies responsibility, as does the company that > we PAY to 'maintain and update' the system (maintnance contract > company). Our Local/LD carrier claims that we owe them for > "INTERNATIONAL TERMINATION FEES" from these calls, and since they > claimed to not be able to block 1010-nnn calls from the CO, they want > us to pay them, and the worst thing is they want a HUGE amount of > money just to "terminate" the 1010 calls. Until you have an actual record of a transaction, you don't know who is really to blame. --scott Sorry I couldn't send you e-mail ... Comcast is blocked at the firewall here because of the huge volume of open relays in their space. "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #146 From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 29 16:48:14 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2TLmE014622; Mon, 29 Mar 2004 16:48:14 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 16:48:14 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403292148.i2TLmE014622@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 #147 TELECOM Digest Mon, 29 Mar 2004 16:46:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 147 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #426, March 29, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Western Union Clocks (Alan Burkitt-Gray) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (William Robison) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (Paul A Lee) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (Dave Garland) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (Dale Farmer) Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service (Tony P.) Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service (Joel B. Levin) Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service (Stanley Cline) Re: Cablevision to Hike Rates, Panel Rules For YES (Tom Betz) Re: Fast Pass at Airport Security (William Warren) Re: Telephone Switchbox (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 are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 10:03:39 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #426, March 29, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 426: March 29, 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: ** Shareholder Challenges MTS-Allstream Deal ** Telus Quebec Absorbed by Telus ** CRTC Launches Deferral Account Review ** RIM, Good Settle Patent Suits ** CATA Praises Budget Incentives ** CRTC to Issue Expedited Rulings This Week ** Dark Fibre Ruling Explained ** Pennefather Reappointed to CRTC ** 724 Solutions Downsizes ** Slipstream Claims Lead in Enhanced Dial-Up ** U.S. Cellcos Report Big Growth ** U.S. Court: States Can Ban City-Owned Carriers ** Cisco Buys Security Supplier ** Iridium Offers Satellite Fax ** Telus to Offer Textpad on Cellphones ** 100-Year Domain Registration ** Contact Centre Seminar Booking Now ============================================================ SHAREHOLDER CHALLENGES MTS-ALLSTREAM DEAL: Enterprise Capital, a Toronto investment group that owns 5% of Manitoba Telecom Services, has asked the Toronto Stock Exchange to order MTS to allow shareholders to vote on its proposed acquisition of Allstream. (See Telecom Update #424a, 425) TELUS QUEBEC ABSORBED BY TELUS: All the assets of Telus Communications (Quebec) will be transferred to Telus Communications Inc. by July 31. TCI is the incumbent telco in BC and Alberta. Telus Quebec, formerly QuebecTel, is the incumbent in northeastern Quebec that Telus acquired in 2000. CRTC LAUNCHES DEFERRAL ACCOUNT REVIEW: Telecom Public Notice 2004-1 invites proposals for spending the surplus funds accumulated in the incumbent telcos' deferral accounts, established in the 2002 Price Cap decision. To participate, notify the Commission by April 7. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2004/pt2004-1.htm RIM, GOOD SETTLE PATENT SUITS: Under a settlement reached last week, Good Technology has agreed to pay Research in Motion a lump sum settlement in fiscal 2005 and quarterly royalties. CATA PRAISES BUDGET INCENTIVES: The Canadian Advanced Technology Alliance has hailed measures in last week's federal government budget that encourage technology development, including increases in the capital cost allowance rates and improvements in funding for venture investment. www.cata.ca CRTC TO ISSUE EXPEDITED RULINGS THIS WEEK: On Friday, March 26, the CRTC held an oral hearing to deal with three longstanding contentious issues under its new procedure for expediting competitive disputes (see Telecom Update #420, 423). The Commission intends to rule on all three disputes on Friday, April 2. www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/process/2004/mar26.htm DARK FIBRE RULING EXPLAINED: Last November the CRTC denied most of Bell Canada's proposals to provide dark fibre to Quebec school boards (see Telecom Update #410). Telecom Decision 2004-20 gives the reason: the proposed rates were lower than Bell's General Tariff rates for the same service. A few were approved because they were already installed and operating. ** In sharply worded dissents, Commissioners Barbara Cram and Stuart Langford say the Commission should have turned down all the proposals. They say the exceptions involve inappropriate cross-subsidies, and reward Bell for breaking the rules. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/dt2004-20.htm PENNEFATHER REAPPOINTED TO CRTC: The federal Cabinet has renewed Joan Pennefather's membership on the Canadian Radio- television and Telecommunications Commission for a three-year term. She was first appointed in 1998. 724 SOLUTIONS DOWNSIZES: Toronto-based 724 Solutions, whose software provides mobile access to financial services, has undertaken a "consolidation of facilities" that will bring its second-quarter cost base down to two-thirds of the previous level. SLIPSTREAM CLAIMS LEAD IN ENHANCED DIAL-UP: Waterloo-based SlipStream Data says its technology, which allows Internet Service Providers to speed up their customers' dial-up access, has now been adopted by 750 ISPs worldwide, including AOL Canada. U.S. CELLCOS REPORT BIG GROWTH: Speaking at CTIA Wireless 2004 last week, the president of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association reported that U.S. wireless subscribership grew almost 10% in 2003, reaching nearly 160 million, while minutes of use grew 30%. 92% of all subscribers now use digital phones. U.S. COURT--STATES CAN BAN CITY-OWNED CARRIERS: The U.S. Supreme Court last week ruled 8-1 that state governments have the right to prevent municipal and county governments from offering telecommun- ications services to residents. Nine states have such laws. CISCO BUYS SECURITY SUPPLIER: Cisco Systems has agreed to buy California-based Riverhead Networks, a developer of security technology that protects against Distributed Denial of Service attacks. IRIDIUM OFFERS SATELLITE FAX: Iridium now provides an interface that connects its satellite phones to fax machines or fax modems, enabling subscribers to send and receive faxes from any location in the world. TELUS TO OFFER TEXTPAD ON CELLPHONES: Telus Mobility has signed an agreement with LG Electronics and Digit Wireless to produce a wireless phone incorporating Digit's Fastap keyboard, which includes letter and punctuation keys as well as a standard phone keypad. 100-YEAR DOMAIN REGISTRATION? Network Solutions, one of the largest domain registration companies in the U.S., now offers to register domain names for 100 years, for US$999. ** The company does not say whether it will provide refunds if, sometime in the next century, the domain name system is changed, the Internet is superseded by something else, or Network Solutions goes out of business. www.networksolutions.com/en_US/name-it/popup-100-yr-term.jhtml CONTACT CENTRE SEMINAR BOOKING NOW: Angus Dortmans Associates is now scheduling client-site presentations of "Contact Centre Leadership," a new seminar developed and 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 Henry Dortmans at 1-800-263-4415 ext. 300 or go to the ADA's Contact Centre Seminar page. ============================================================ 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: Alan Burkitt-Gray Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 16:35:05 +0100 > Al Gillis asked > Most modern DVD/VCR machines can > set the time based on signals from a TV station, most frequently a > public broadcasting stations (CPB?) So how does that work? And why > does it take so long to set the time? I don't know how it happens in North America, where you use 525 lines/60 Hz/NTSC, but in Europe -- the land of 626 lines/50 Hz/PAL -- machines use the teletext signals, a 30+ year old text-based information system which uses spare lines in the vertical blanking interval. Teletext is used for news, weather, sports results, TV listings, and so on. The signals always include channel identification plus accurate date and time, which are displayed at the top of the teletext pages -- but for some years (I don't buy a VCR that often) VCRs have also used the data to set their clocks and to tune into the channels automatically. I last bought a VCR in the middle of last year. Within minutes of my plugging it in, the display was showing the correct time and the VCR had tuned into the five terrestrial channels available locally, plus the UHF output from my digital satellite receiver. And in the early hours of this morning, when Europe moved to summer time (a week ahead of North America), the clock automatically adjusted by an hour. At least it had by the time I got up this morning. 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 ------------------------------ From: William Robison Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Organization: Universitry of Iowa Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 15:23:40 GMT On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 22:19:01 -0600, Dave Garland wrote: > It was a dark and stormy night when PAT wrote: >> Radio Shack *used to* (maybe still does in some places) make that >> claim about the expensive gold-plated connectors in almost all >> applications, coax connectors, etc. I have never been able to figure >> out *why* the gold-plated versions of the various size/type >> connectors are supposed to be better. > Gold does not oxidize/tarnish, so gold plating is used to make > low-voltage connections that are less prone to bad-connection > problems. It's most useful on things that need to be > high-reliability. But note that if you're getting a good connection > already, gold will not make it better, just (maybe) more reliable. Uhh, if we're talking of USB connectors, they're all gold contacts (I seem to remember that is in the standard, but this is from memory). I can't see as gold plating the shell does much, it's probably connected through a resistor to anything internal, but it's doesn't carry current. -Willy ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 13:29:45 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V23 #140, wrote: > Is this "mini-USB" connector also a general USB standard, used for > physically small devices? > Will I be able to just keep one or two such cables around for use with > a variety of USB-enabled "mini-peripherals"? Or is this some > non-standard Minolta-only connector? Where can I learn more about USB > standard device-end connectors? You can see the different USB and FireWire connectors at the following locations (be sure to get the complete URL -- everything within the "<>"): These appear to be standard connectors. I have a USB mini-hub and a digital camera that have 5-position mini-B connectors. I believe I have seen the 4-position mini-B on newer camcorders. Lots of USB resources can be found through: . > 2) Similar query for the 110 V cord for the battery charger. The > charger end of this cord has a connector that seen head on looks > something like a squared-off figure 8 (or an infinity sign) with two > circular holes about 2 mm in ID and 9 mm apart. [The connector itself > is stamped "Kawasaki KS-15F".] > Is this also a "standard" 110 V connector? Does it have a name? It's probably an IEC 60320-C7 connector, which is often referred to as a "Panasonic power cord". It is a standard in North America, when there is a NEMA 1-15P plug on the other end of the cord. See a detailed drawing of an example at: http://www.quail.com/seriesPage.cfm?seriesID=17. If you look carefully and find that one of the lobes of the connector is squared off more than the other, then it's an IEC 60320-C7P connector, which is often referred to as a "polarized Panasonic power cord". This one is also standard in North America, with a NEMA 1-15P polarized plug (one of the flat blades is wider than the other). A drawing of an example of this one is at: http://www.quail.com/seriesPage.cfm?seriesID=97. You should be able to get these cords from a local electronics service company, or from online appliance service parts suppliers, such as MCM Electronics (http://www.mcminone.com). 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: Dave Garland Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 22:19:01 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response: > Radio Shack *used to* (maybe still does in some places) make that > claim about the expensive gold-plated connectors in almost all > applications, coax connectors, etc. I have never been able to figure > out *why* the gold-plated versions of the various size/type > connectors are supposed to be better. Gold does not oxidize/tarnish, so gold plating is used to make low-voltage connections that are less prone to bad-connection problems. It's most useful on things that need to be high- reliability. But note that if you're getting a good connection already, gold will not make it better, just (maybe) more reliable. There are other ways to accomplish the same thing. In my tool box I carry a 15ml vial of "Stabilant 22A" (http://www.stabilant.com), which used to be available (in a different dilution) under the tradename "Tweek". It is an "Electrical Contact Enhancer" and turns bad connections into good ones (and prevents good ones from going bad), but won't short things out. It came with a NATO part number in case I wanted to use it on my jet fighter. At the time I bought it, the only vendor in the US seemed to be NAPA Auto Parts stores(! part#CE-1), though the store had never heard of it and had to order it from the warehouse. That 15ml cost me $50 15 years ago, but you use it in such small quantities that it will probably last the rest of my life. ------------------------------ From: Dale Farmer Organization: Furry green fuzz in the back of the refrigerator Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 22:53:20 GMT Jack Hamilton wrote: > benficus@hotmail.com (Ben Ficus) wrote: >> Speaking of which ... >> Last time I was at Best Buy, they were telling me that I should buy >> the expensive "gold" USB connector for my printer ... the other cable >> will affect the quality of my prints. >> Any thoughts, opinions? >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Radio Shack *used to* (maybe still >> does in some places) make that claim about the expensive gold-plated >> connectors in almost all applications, coax connectors, etc. I have >> never been able to figure out *why* the gold-plated versions of the >> various size/type connectors are supposed to be better. Our local >> Radio Shack store no longer makes that claim, however. PAT] > The theory is that gold is less likely to corrode. Also, there's the > mental effect that if you pay more for it it must be better. > I don't think there's any advantage if you know how to make really good > connections. Gold doesn't conduct as well as copper, so that's a small > disadvantage. Pure silver is the best conductor among common metals, > but silver wiring would be pricy. www.homegrownaudio will sell you a 1 > meter cable for $109.95; www.the-discount-store.com will sell you 14 > gauge silver wire for $8/foot. Gold plating on the connectors does improve the connections. Firstly, the gold doesn't corrode forming less conductive layers. The next thing is that the gold is soft, so where the to mating surfaces press together, you have more metal to metal contact than you would with harder surfaces. Dale ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 16:37:46 GMT From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: 110 V Cord and USB Cable Standards? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services > Last time I was at Best Buy, they were telling me that I should buy > the expensive "gold" USB connector for my printer ... the other cable > will affect the quality of my prints. The only way the quality of the connector could affect the prints is if the protocol used to transfer the data has no error correction. It's hard to imagine USB transfering gigabytes of data without error correction ... At worst, noisy connectors would slow down the data transfer. -Joel ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 05:57:36 GMT In article , hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net says: > Lisa Hancock wrote: >> Charles Cryderman wrote >>> the problem was with hitting the target his response was "I don't >>> know, they are leaving here 5 by 5. >> In a recent TV show, one of the characters, when asked how things >> were, replied "5 by 5" meaning ok. The newgroup for that show was >> flooded with inquiries asking what that meant. (The show was oriented >> toward young people). > Dern ... this brings back ancient memories. > I believe (but am not sure) that the "5 by 5" term cam from radio > DX'ers (folks who would try to pick up distant radio channels on their > AM radios.) There was a code, which I recall as "SINPO". I think the > "S" stood for signal strength, but don't remember what the rest stood > for. If the station was coming in clear as a bell you would rate that > as all characteristics being a 5, thus the "five by five." (Check a > ham-radio group for more info.) Indeed - it's RST - Readability, Signal and Tone. Tone only applicable for CW stuff. ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:38:13 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , Nick Landsberg wrote: > I believe (but am not sure) that the "5 by 5" term cam from radio > DX'ers (folks who would try to pick up distant radio channels on their > AM radios.) There was a code, which I recall as "SINPO". I think the > "S" stood for signal strength, but don't remember what the rest stood > for. In ham radio, the signal check is "RST" for Readability, Signal (strength) and Tone, used for CW ("Morse" code transmissions). The best (nominal) RST value is 599. Voice transmissions do not use the "Tone" component, as it doesn't apply, so the best signal transmission is 59. I would guess, because I don't know, that the "five by five" may be an older military version of this sort of thing. /JBL KD1ON/7 ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 05:50:46 GMT On 26 Mar 2004 08:08:53 -0800, PAT wrote: > I have thought about getting into that business myself, brokering it > through one of the service bureaus for same, then setting up a small > shop; taking calls on an 800 number; decrementing the callers passcode > by one, and providing the desired information. Or, better still, Someone's already beat you to it: www.infone.com :) Infone is the child of Metro One, which has provided directory assistance for many cell phone companies and a few CLECs for years. Quite a few cell phone companies have pulled their contracts with Metro One, so they came up with the idea of selling their service on a retail basis and not just on a wholesale basis to other carriers -- thus Infone. I have an account with Infone and have for awhile, and have been rather pleased with them; they seem to get listings from the same places the LECs do, so accuracy hasn't been a problem. In fact, by far the worst directory assistance I've found is from Ma Bell -- the DA company AT&T long distance routes NPA-555-1212 to is absolutely rotten. (All major LD carriers and wireless carriers now route NPA-555-1212 to companies of their choosing rather than to LECs in the dialed NPA. LD and wireless carriers associated with LECs, such as Qwest and BellSouth long distance and Cingular Wireless in SBC and BellSouth LEC areas, route DA calls to their LEC division DA bureaus, while other carriers, including AT&T, MCI, T-Mobile, etc., use third-party companies. VoIP company VoicePulse uses Qwest for DA; I don't know who Vonage or others use.) 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 ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: Cablevision to Hike Rates, Panel Rules For YES Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 16:54:47 +0000 (UTC) Organization: XOme Quoth Monty Solomon in news:telecom23.140.1@telecom- digest.org: > NEW YORK, March 24 (Reuters) - Cablevision Systems Corp. will hike > monthly subscriber rates by 95 cents to partly cover the cost of > carrying New York Yankees games, after an arbitration panel ruled it > must offer the Yankees network to all of its subscribers on its > expanded basic package of cable channels, the company said on > Wednesday. What an effing waste. Who do I have to bribe to stop getting (and paying for) ALL the useless sports channels that I just program the TV to skip? It could easily cut my cable bill in half. "I am afeard there are few die well that die in a battle; for how can they charitably dispose of anything when blood is their argument? Now, if these men do not die well, it will be a black matter for the King that led them to it; who to disobey were against all proportion of subjection." - W.S. ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: Fast Pass at Airport Security Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 04:29:47 GMT Monty Solomon wrote in message news:telecom23.142.13@telecom-digest.org: > By Ryan Singel > Business travelers may soon have one more item to stuff in their > carry-on: a trusted-traveler card to speed them through security > lines. [snip] Bruce "Secrets and Lies" Schneier recently panned a similar idea, albeit one backed by a private company: http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0403.html#10 FWIW, I don't think this is a good idea, but it _will_ have a positive result: the _uncertified_ members of the public will howl to their congressman when they see _those_ people in line ahead of them, and the system will have to look at ways to speed things up for everybody. Schneier has written at great length on the tradeoffs involved with real security -- things like decompressing the hold baggage to trigger altitude-sensitive bombs, which El Al does routinely -- and I agree with him that the current "security" system is just window dressing, designed to fill the seats while not costing the airlines any money. Bill ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Telephone Switchbox Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 05:12:41 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On 25 Mar 2004 18:21:55 -0800, mlliw@joimail.com (Will) wrote: > I am a newbie to this type of thing. The OfficeLink Solo looks good, > but its a bit pricy for my budget. Could you please explain the > " > I setup DISA on a Samsung DCS." I don't really understand this. The point is that you only told part of the story. Is this maybe, "I set up a line at a friend's house and I'd like to use it to dial free service points that I can't dial from my house"? Where I live, spending $100 or $500 to bypass local toll calls at 4.25 CENTS per minute is not very productive, especially when my outbound LD bill is less than $5 per month.. The old Teltone 106 box IIRC had THREE digit security and once you broke the code, no dialing restrictions whatsoever. So, a compromised code could bring out a TON of misery. That brought the response from Tony P. that a Samsung DISA trunk had 2 Million possible codes (the universe of 2,000,000,000 to 3,999,999,999) as its password protection. It didn't apply to you so you could ignore it, but, I hope, most of us understood. Outside of that, Teltone was never inexpensive. Carl Navarro > Thanks > mlliw > P.S. The line I would be accessing would not be on a phone system, > just a direct line. > Tony P. wrote in message > news:: >> In article , cnavarro@wcnet.org >> says: >>> On 19 Mar 2004 19:05:27 -0800, mlliw@joimail.com (Will) wrote: >>>> Is there a box that when called to normally, it sends through, but >>>> when a code such as #22, It brings the caller to a _dialtone_ on >>>> another line? I have seen several boxes that do this (for >>>> computer/fax/telephone) that when #22 is dialed, they send to a >>>> separate place, but they don't give a _dialtone_ on a separate >>>> line. Thanks! >>> It might depend on what type of phone system you have. Some systems >>> have Direct System Inward Access (DISA) available. Teltone used to >>> make a 106 box that was a bridging unit with amplifiers. They still >>> make an Officelink Solo, but I bet it's a bit pricey. >>> http://www.teltone.com/products/remotevoice/solo/home.htm >>> One thing to keep in mind, DISA and the 106 is highly hackable. A >>> teenager with a lot of time on his hands can key the universe of 3 >>> digit numbers as a hobby to find out what makes it work. The >>> Officelink is a callback device. >> I setup DISA on a Samsung DCS. It requires a seven digit passcode. So >> that ups the possibilities. >> The way the system was configured, the first digit had to be a 2 or 3, >> the next six could be 0 thru 9. So 2x10x10x10x10x10x10 = 2,000,000 >> possible combinations. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #147 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 29 17:48:30 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2TMmTf27132; Mon, 29 Mar 2004 17:48:30 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 17:48:30 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403292248.i2TMmTf27132@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 #148 TELECOM Digest Mon, 29 Mar 2004 17:48:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 148 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 8x8 Announces Packet8 Virtual Office for Small Businesses (VOIP News) Level 3 Announces Residential VoIP Phone Services (VOIP News) Packet8; FreeWorld Dialup Now Offer Free Unlimited Calling (VOIP News) The Future is Calling (VOIP News) FTS Wireless Takes Voiceglo Retail (VOIP News) Pingtel Goes Open Source With IP Telephony Platform (VOIP News) Verizon Execs Get 911 Carpet Call (VOIP News) Help! No Incoming Calls, No Support (VOIP News) Free Web Tool Helps Gauge Companies VoIP Ability (VOIP News) Re: A Better Way To Squelch Spam? (Tom Betz) Re: GMAC Customers Put at Risk by Stolen Data (Steven J. Sobol) Re: Sorry -- No ala Carte Cable (Thomas A. Horsley) Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Directory (William Robison) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 09:42:13 -0500 Subject: 8x8 Announces Packet8 Virtual Office for Small Businesses Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-29-2004/0002136291&EDATE= 8x8 Announces Packet8 Virtual Office for Small Businesses Packet8 Enables Small to Medium Businesses to 'Sound As Big As They Want' With New Business-Class VoIP Service VOICE ON THE NET (VON) CONFERENCE AND EXPO, SANTA CLARA, Calif., March 29 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- 8x8, Inc. (Nasdaq: EGHT), the broadband voice over internet protocol (VoIP) and video communications service provider, today announced the immediate availability of Packet8 Virtual Office(TM), the industry's most affordable, complete business-class VoIP service tailored for small businesses. Packet8 Virtual Office(TM) is an easy-to-use business class telephone service alternative to traditional PBX systems or expensive Centrex class services from legacy telecommunications providers, while providing features and services that neither can provide. Packet8 Virtual Office allows users anywhere in the world to be part of a virtual PBX that includes auto attendants, conference bridges, extension-to-extension dialing and ring groups, in addition to a rich variety of other business class PBX features normally found on dedicated PBX equipment. Virtual Office also provides its users with access to Packet8's unlimited calling plans in the United States and Canada, and access to Packet8's low international rates. Packet8 Virtual Office subscribers have the ability to choose any phone number from the Packet8 universe (including number portability from other service providers) regardless of a user's geographic location. Each extension in the virtual PBX can be located anywhere in the world where there is access to the Internet. Packet8 Virtual Office extension-to-extension calls and transfers are accomplished over the Packet8 network, anywhere in the world, free of extra charges. "Packet8 Virtual Office proves that VoIP is ready for business -- big or small," said Bryan R. Martin, Chairman and CEO of 8x8, Inc. "Until now, most small businesses couldn't afford the PBX features they needed to sound like a large, multi-national company. With Packet8 Virtual Office, subscribers get the PBX features and long distance plans they need to grow their business without the huge cost of expensive telephone systems and exorbitant business-rate long distance phone bills. Packet8 Virtual Office customers also get access to the same unlimited and international calling rates that all Packet8 customers enjoy. Finally, Packet8 Virtual Office users will experience the easy-to-install simplicity, convenient billing, voice quality and service reliability of Packet8." Features and Benefits: Packet8 Virtual Office The Packet8 Virtual Office business class telephone service is targeted at the small business market consisting of greater than three and an unlimited number of Packet8 extensions. Packet8 Virtual Office offers the services small businesses need most, including: -- Auto-attendant providing dial by extension, name or by group; -- Unlimited calling to the US, Canada and other Packet8 subscribers, as well as low international rates; -- Unlimited 3 digit Packet8 extension-to-extension dialing anywhere in the world; -- Direct Inward Dial (DID) with any desired area code for each -- extension; -- Conference Bridge, 3-Way Conferencing, Music on -- Hold, Call Park/ Pick-up, Call Transfer, huntgroups, and Do Not -- Disturb; Business-class Voice Mail including email alerts, and -- direct transfer to mailbox; Call Waiting / Caller-ID; -- Distinctive Ringing; and Optional Receptionist console -- application offering: Multiple call viewing and handling; -- Direct transfer to extension's voicemail; Supervised transfers; -- and View of extension status. Mr. Martin continued, "In our trials of the service, the receptionist application module, auto-attendant functions and geographic independence were some of the most popular features of the service. Small businesses are not used to having access to these types of services with the PBX solutions that they can afford." Mr. Martin continued, "We will initially distribute Packet8 Virtual Office through our worldwide reseller channel. We want the PBX resellers and computer consultants that call on small businesses representing this product and convincing their clients to experience the new world of calling available from Packet8 voice over IP." Packet8 Virtual Office also offers an online, real-time consolidated monthly billing statement (with call logs of all extensions) to make it simple to manage your telecommunications bills. The Packet8 Virtual Office service is available today from http://www.packet8.net for $39.95/month per extension (with a 3 extension minimum). All extensions enjoy unlimited calls anywhere in the United States and Canada, and access to Packet8's low international calling rates. As always, calls between any two Packet8 subscribers anywhere in the world are included in the service. All Packet8 Virtual Office extensions include a business-class LCD screen phone with context sensitive menus pre- programmed for accessing the diverse feature set available from the Packet8 service. For a complete description of all the features of the new Packet8 Virtual Office, please visit http://www.packet8.net. About 8x8, Inc. 8x8, Inc. offers the Packet8 broadband voice over internet protocol (VoIP) and video communications service (http://www.packet8.net), Packet8 Virtual Office and videophone equipment and services. For more information, visit 8x8's web site at http://www.8x8.com. About Packet8 Launched in November 2002, Packet8 enables anyone with high-speed Internet access to sign up for voice over internet protocol (VoIP) and video communications service at http://www.packet8.net . Customers can choose a direct-dial phone number from any of the rate centers offered by the service, and then use an 8x8-supplied terminal adapter to connect any telephone to a broadband internet connection and make or receive calls from a regular telephone number. For $19.95/month, Packet8 subscribers can make unlimited calls to any telephone number in the United States and Canada, and unlimited calls to another Packet8 subscriber anywhere in the world. All Packet8 accounts come with voice mail, caller ID, call waiting, call waiting caller ID, call forwarding, hold, line-alternate, 3-way conferencing, web access to account controls, and real-time online billing. Packet8 Virtual Office allows users anywhere in the world to be part of a virtual PBX that includes auto attendants, conference bridges, extension-to-extension dialing, ring groups and a host of other high end business class PBX features while still following true to Packet8 unlimited calling anywhere in the United States and Canada. NOTE: 8x8, Packet8 and Packet8 Virtual Office are trademarks of 8x8, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 09:30:15 -0500 Subject: Level 3 Announces Residential VoIP Phone Services Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-29-2004/0002136162&EDATE= Level 3 Announces Residential VoIP Phone Services New Services to be Offered in More than 300 of the Largest U.S. Markets by End of 2004 through Cable Operators, ISPs and Enhanced Service Providers New Services to be Made Available in Second Quarter SANTA CLARA, Calif., March 29 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Level 3 Communications, Inc. (Nasdaq: LVLT) today announced that it is launching two new residential VoIP services to more than 300 of the largest markets in the U.S. by the end of 2004, with service availability beginning during the second quarter. The new services, (3)VoIP(SM) Enhanced Local service and HomeTone(SM), will enable cable operators, ISPs, enhanced service providers, IXCs and others to offer IP-based local and long-distance voice service to consumers via any broadband connection to the home. Level 3 formally unveiled the services at the Spring 2004 VON Conference & Expo. "The U.S. consumer voice market, which is valued at over $65 billion per year, is on the verge of fundamental change," said Sureel Choksi, president of Softswitch Services for Level 3. "The growth of residential broadband access, coupled with the increasing adoption of VoIP technology, is allowing a wide variety of companies to pursue the consumer voice market. We believe Level 3, with its extensive softswitch platform and local network infrastructure, is in a strong position to capitalize on this trend via these new complementary offerings. "Our new residential VoIP offerings are designed to enable new entrants and established broadband and communications companies to cost-effectively accelerate their deployment of carrier-quality VoIP services to millions of U.S. households," said Choksi. (3)VoIP Enhanced Local service essentially provides building blocks for "do-it-yourself" companies that want to manage their own residential telephone service. HomeTone is a complete turnkey solution for companies that prefer the ease and convenience that a "plug-and-play" service provides. HomeTone also gives providers of consumer VoIP services the ability to offer their own innovative and customized value-added features and applications to meet the specialized requirements of their end customers. (3)VoIP Enhanced Local Service (3)VoIP Enhanced Local Service, which Level 3 expects to begin offering during the second quarter of 2004, is ideally suited for cable operators, enhanced service providers, IXCs and others who are seeking to offer residential voice services but prefer to operate their own switching infrastructure. (3)VoIP Enhanced Local service allows companies to develop voice services using Level 3 provided building blocks, including local phone numbers, interconnection with the traditional telephone network for local and long distance services, local number portability and E911 emergency services. The service provides these essential components while enabling the voice service provider to retain the flexibility to manage and control the features offered to the residential market. "(3)VoIP Enhanced Local Service provides customers operating their own switching infrastructure the ability to deploy consumer VoIP services cost effectively with maximum control over the end-user experience and minimal involvement in complex interconnection issues," said Jack Waters, CTO and president of Voice Technologies for Level 3. "Customers are able to accelerate their time to market by leveraging Level 3's CLEC status in 48 states, local calling capability covering more than 93 percent of the U.S. population, and long-distance calling service worldwide." "We're encouraged by the level of interest we're seeing from cable operators, IXCs, and enhanced service providers," said Waters. "Level 3's IP backbone and softswitch platform allow us to offer superior cost and performance advantages with high quality of service." Key Features of (3)VoIP Enhanced Local Service * Local and long distance calling including access to the traditional telephone network * Local phone numbers * Operator assistance * Directory listings and assistance * E911 emergency services * Local number portability HomeTone HomeTone, which Level 3 expects to begin offering during the second quarter of 2004, is a turnkey, hosted VoIP alternative to traditional residential local and long distance phone service. It offers the benefits and functionality of (3)VoIP Enhanced Local service, plus calling features such as voice mail, call waiting, and three-way conferencing. In addition, HomeTone includes advanced calling features such as unified messaging, and a personal locator function that forwards the call until it reaches the designated party. HomeTone service gives channel partners, such as ISPs, cable operators, ILECs and enhanced service providers the ability offer a cost-effective, high-quality local and long distance telephone service to consumers with minimal upfront costs and accelerated time to market. Channel partners can develop unique calling features and functionality with HomeTone to differentiate their voice offerings to consumers. Key Features of HomeTone All of the (3)VoIP Enhanced Local service features noted above, plus many others including: * Voice mail * Call waiting * Three-way conferencing * Caller ID * Call forwarding * Enhanced features including unified messaging and personal locator * End-user, Web-based account management In addition to residential VoIP services, Level 3 offers a full range of wholesale and business voice services. For more information about Level 3's portfolio of VoIP services, please stop by VON booth #615, or visit http://www.Level3.com . About Level 3 Communications Level 3 (Nasdaq: LVLT) is an international communications and information services company. The company operates one of the largest Internet backbones in the world, is one of the largest providers of wholesale dial-up service to ISPs in North America and is the primary provider of Internet connectivity for millions of broadband subscribers, through its cable and DSL partners. The company offers a wide range of communications services over its 22,500 mile broadband fiber optic network including Internet Protocol (IP) services, broadband transport and infrastructure services, colocation services, and patented Softswitch managed modem and voice services. Its Web address is http://www.Level3.com. The company offers information services through its subsidiaries, Software Spectrum and (i)Structure. For additional information, visit their respective Web sites at http://www.softwarespectrum.com and http://www.i-structure.com. The Level 3 logo and (3)Voice are registered service marks and (3)VoIP Enhanced and HomeTone are service marks of Level 3 Communications, Inc. in the United States and/or other countries. ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 09:37:52 -0500 Subject: Packet8 and FreeWorld Dialup Now Offer Free Unlimited Calling Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-29-2004/0002136292&EDATE= Packet8 and FreeWorld Dialup Now Offer Free Unlimited Calling Between Subscribers Free Just Got 'More Free' for VoIP Customers VOICE ON THE NET (VON) CONFERENCE AND EXPO, SANTA CLARA, Calif., March 29 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- 8x8, Inc. (Nasdaq: EGHT), the broadband voice over internet protocol (VoIP) and video communications service provider, and FreeWorld Dialup (FWD), the world's leading free Internet Telephony community, announced today that they have interconnected their VoIP networks. Effective immediately, subscribers to 8x8's Packet8 service can call or be called by FWD subscribers. "The interconnection of voice over IP networks is a trend that will continue as more and more people incorporate VoIP calling into their lives," said Bryan R. Martin, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of 8x8, Inc. "We expect to see much more activity in this area in the near-term, as VoIP telecommunications service providers like Packet8 endeavor to lower the call routing costs for their customers even further," continued Mr. Martin. "VoIP interconnects also improve the voice quality over that possible on switched networks, so consumers will finally start to hear what they have been missing on the legacy telephone network," Mr. Martin concluded. "An increasing number of consumers are experiencing the tremendous benefits that VoIP can offer relative to traditional phone service first hand," said Jeff Pulver, Chief Executive Officer and founder of Free World Dialup. "As a result, Internet-based phone calls that do not touch the public switched telephone network -- will translate into lower costs and better services for all consumers," Mr. Pulver concluded. Effective immediately, Free World Dialup subscribers can call Packet8 subscribers by dialing "**898 + 1 + the Packet8 phone number, and the call will be routed directly over the Internet to Packet8's network. Packet8 customers can call any Free World Dialup customer by dialing the prefix 0351 before any 5-digit FWD phone number, and the prefix 0451 before any 6-digit FWD phone number. ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 03:04:47 -0500 Subject: The Future is Calling Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2004/03/29/the_future_is_calling/ The future is calling A huge array of services and features is revolutionizing the concept of 'telephone,' though many businesses remain leery of the technology By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 3/29/2004 The promise of big savings on phone calls has helped propel 'voice over Internet protocol' out of the telecommunications lab and into consumer consciousness. For Bill Costello's law firm, switching to a phone system that carries voice calls in the same format -- and on the same wires -- as e-mail and Web pages certainly has helped cut costs, by $3,500 to $4,200 a month. But it has also meant a huge new array of services and features that are revolutionizing the concept of 'telephone.' Recent VOIP converts tell stories like the one about the lawyer who took his laptop computer to Alaska and used it to make and take phone calls on his Chicago phone number. Or the accountants, suddenly flooded out of their office by a busted pipe, who simply unplugged their VOIP phones and computers, reinstalled them to a conference room, and got back to work -- within 60 minutes. "It's an exciting time to be able to replace a phone system," said Costello, the chief information technology manager for Banner & Witcoff Ltd., a 90-lawyer intellectual-property law firm with offices in Boston, Chicago, Washington, and Portland, Ore., that bought its IP phone system from Avaya Inc., the Lucent Technologies Inc. spinoff. "There's no question in our mind that VOIP is proven technology that is ready for mainstream corporate America. I wouldn't have said that two years ago, but we've got a lot of flexibility with this phone system that we didn't have before. It's been very cost-effective, and it's had a huge benefit in productivity for the partners." Full story at: http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2004/03/29/the_future_is_calling/ ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 09:39:54 -0500 Subject: FTS Wireless Takes Voiceglo Retail Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=64995 FTS Wireless Takes voiceglo Retail Emerging Wireless Retailer Partners With voiceglo to Bring Voice Over IP to Its Retail Customers FT. LAUDERDALE, FL -- (MARKET WIRE) -- 03/29/2004 -- Expanding its Voice over IP reach from online distribution into the brick and mortar retail sector, voiceglo -- a wholly owned subsidiary of theglobe.com, Inc. (OTC BB: TGLO) -- has engaged emerging wireless retailer FTS Wireless, Inc. (OTC BB: FLIP) to sell voiceglo products and services to its retail customers, it was announced today. FTS, a retailer that markets and sells next generation wireless products and services and operates Wi-Fi HotSpots, will be making the voiceglo GloPhone, the world's first web-based, browser-enabled telephone, available to its growing customer base. In addition, FTS Wireless will be selling voiceglo's home and business products. The voiceglo Unlimited residential plan provides unlimited free local and long distance calling to any phone in the US and Canada for only $29.99 per month. "Voice over IP is revolutionizing the way people connect with one another," said Scott Gallagher, president of FTS Wireless. "We wanted to make certain that our retail customers would be among the first to take advantage of this emerging market sector, and we wanted to do it with a solution that makes the most sense. The quality and price point of voiceglo's product and services are unsurpassed in this sector, and we're looking forward to adding their line to our customer offerings." Full press release at: http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=64995 How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 11:31:12 -0500 Subject: Pingtel Goes Open Source with IP Telephony Platform Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1554652,00.asp By Paula Musich IP telephony veterans on Monday will launch what is perhaps the first serious initiative to create a large open-source community around Voice over IP. As the networking industry moves toward a software model for IP PBXs, tiny Pingtel Corp. is spearheading the initiative by releasing its Session Initiation Protocol software platform into the open-source world and forming a nonprofit organization charged with providing the legal and technical foundation for advancing open-source work. Its mission: to do for IP telephony what Apache and Linux have done for enterprise servers. Full story at: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1554652,00.asp ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 12:00:53 -0500 Subject: Verizon Execs Get 911 Carpet Call Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com From New York City comes this reminder that even enhanced 911 delivered via traditional wireline telephone companies isn't 100% reliable -- something that misguided regulators need to be reminded of sometimes when they make noises about wanting to force VoIP companies to offer enhanced 911 with the same level of service as is offered over traditional phone lines. I'm certainly not suggesting that 911 isn't a desirable thing to have, but cell phone companies don't offer 911 in the same way as traditional wireline companies and nobody seems to be hassling them about it. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/178327p-155083c.html Aides to Mayor Bloomberg will grill Verizon honchos about Friday's 911 blackout at a private meeting this morning. "We're all over Verizon and we're doing everything we can to make sure we find out exactly what happened," Bloomberg said yesterday. "In a world of technology, you're never going to have 100% reliability, but that's our goal." The 911 system in Queens, Brooklyn and Staten Island was down nearly two hours Friday. Full story at: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/178327p-155083c.html More: Apparently Verizon admits that it was their fault -- "Technicians were making changes to reroute calls that night. One technician made a bad data entry that caused calls to be diverted away from an emergency center." http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=38238&rubrik1=Economy&rubrik1&rubrik2=Company%20News&rubrik1&rubrik2&rubrik3=All&rubrik1&rubrik2&rubrik3&sort=1&rubrik1&rubrik2&rubrik3&sort&sparte=4 ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 11:29:18 -0500 Subject: Help! No Incoming Calls, No Support Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/41461 Packet8 customers had calls routed directly to voice mail On Thursday, Packet8 VoIP customers experienced service problems in which they could not receive incoming phone calls for over 14 hours. Full story at: http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/41461 ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 14:19:47 -0500 Subject: Free Web Tool Helps Gauge Companies VoIP Ability Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2004/0329brix.html By Tim Greene Network World Fusion, 03/29/04 Brix Networks tomorrow is turning on a Web site where users can test whether their Internet connection is likely to support good-quality voice over IP. The site, www.TestYourVOIP.com lets users check whether latency, jitter and packet loss fall within the range that will support VoIP well, according to the announcement at the VON 2004 conference in Santa Clara, Calif. Full story at: http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2004/0329brix.html ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: A Better Way To Squelch Spam? Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 17:43:25 UTC Organization: Anything Monty Solomon wrote in news:telecom23.145.3@telecom- digest.org: > http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/wo_johansson032604.asp The same old 'hashcash' proposal, which penalizes everyone to try to stop spammers; and of course, when the spammer is abusing a hijacked Windows PC to send spam, which is the typical case these days, it doesn't penalize the spammer at all. |I always wanted to be someone,| Tom Betz, Generalist | |but now I think I should have | Want to send me email? | |been a wee bit more specific. | | ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: GMAC Customers' Data Put At Risk By Laptop Theft Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 15:56:49 -0600 Sammy@nospam.biz wrote: > Well, I guess if anyone of those so notified subsequently becomes a > victim of identity theft they will have a deep pocket from which to > seek redress. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, no! I think if you look at the > terms and conditions for the 'priviledge' of being in debt to GMAC > you'll see one of the conditions you agreed to when you first signed > somewhere on the dotted line was that GMAC did not guarentee you any > privacy at all; that in fact they disclaimed and disavowed any > responsibility for anything at all. PAT] They very likely did, but that won't save them if it was their screwup that caused a problem. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/ "someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Sorry -- No a la Carte Cable From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 22:28:03 GMT > In the dream world of some television viewers, they would pay their > cable or satellite companies only for the channels they want. Channels? We don't need no steenkin channels! In my dream world, TV shows get released to the great VOD archive of everything ever recorded, and I pay for just the individual shows I want to watch, when I want to watch them. We don't even have "channels" or "networks" :-). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: William Robison Subject: Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Organization: Universitry of Iowa Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 22:06:42 GMT On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 05:57:36 GMT, Tony P. wrote: > In article , > hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net says: >> Lisa Hancock wrote: >>> Charles Cryderman wrote >>>> the problem was with hitting the target his response was "I don't >>>> know, they are leaving here 5 by 5. These refer to "Loudness" and "Clarity". Rate each on a scale of 1 to 5. "5 by 5" means, in effect, "Loud and Clear". At time you may hear it shortened to "5 by", again, "Loud and Clear". Consider where we have station on a voice loop (i.e. dedicated copper) that spreads across the country (such as where launch control is in Florida and sapcecraft control is on Houston or up in Greenbelt). As stations are added and removed from the loop, everything needs to be readjusted, and testing of voice loops occurs on a daily/weekly basis. "ACE, station xxx, how do you read?" "station xxx, ACE,we read you 5 by, and me?" "ACE, station xxx, I read you 5 by 5, good day" -Willy ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #148 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 29 23:18:22 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2U4IM623947; Mon, 29 Mar 2004 23:18:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 23:18:22 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403300418.i2U4IM623947@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 #149 TELECOM Digest Mon, 29 Mar 2004 23:18:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 149 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Emerging VOIP Companies to Get Financial Assistance (VOIP News) DSP Filter Setup on LineJack/PhoneJack Card? (Mark) Easy to Use Intercom Systems (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Nuisance Recorded Phone Calls (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Western Union Clocks (S Falke) Re: Western Union Clocks (J Kelly) Re: Verizon Execs Get 911 Carpet Call (Nick Landsberg) Re: A Better Way To Squelch Spam? (Fred Goldstein) The High Volume of Press Releases on VOIP Today (VOIP News) Re: Sorry, no ala Carte Cable (Jack Hamilton) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 21:17:02 -0500 Subject: Emerging VOIP Companies to Get Financial Assistance from Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20040329005254&newsLang=en Emerging VOIP Companies to Get Financial Assistance from Industry Veterans; Peer 1 Network and Pulver.com Launch VOIP Acceleration Project VANCOUVER, British Columbia & MELVILLE, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 29, 2004--Two innovators in the Voice Over IP industry joined forces today to provide assistance to start-up companies in their industry. The result is the VOIP Acceleration Project -- a joint venture in which Peer 1 Network (TSX VENTURE:PIX) and Pulver.com subsidize new VOIP companies in their bandwidth and co-location needs. "To be successful, VOIP companies need reliable high-quality bandwidth and secure servers to ensure that their product or service is always available. Their consumers demand it," says Geoff Hampson, President & CEO of Peer 1 Network. "Peer 1's nation-wide backbone and fully redundant data centres guarantee this high level of performance." Peer 1's world-class Internet network is complemented by Pulver.com's knowledge of the industry. Together, the companies can provide a launching pad for VOIP entrepreneurs with the vision, but not necessarily the financial backing, to take VOIP to the masses. "The world is embracing VOIP," says Jeff Pulver, founder of Pulver.com, "and we are at the forefront of that movement. By identifying and nurturing some key start-ups, we aim to revolutionize the way the world communicates." For more information about the VOIP Acceleration Project, please visit the Web site at www.pulver.com/colo. Contacts Pulver.com Jeff Pulver, 631-961-8951 jeff@pulver.com www.pulver.com or Peer 1 Network, Inc. Katie Wilson, 604-683-7741 kwilson@peer1.net or Geoff Hampson, 604-683-7741 ghampson@peer1.net www.peer1.net ------------------------------ From: jjohnson@cs.ucf.edu (Mark) Subject: DSP Filter Setup on LineJack/PhoneJack Card? Date: 29 Mar 2004 16:32:17 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Can anyone tell me how the DSP filter parameters (for call progress tone detection) are set in Quicknet's LineJack/PhoneJack (VoIP card) Linux drivers? I want to enter some new filter coefficients for detecting other tones, and need more info about how the DSP implements its filters. Overview follows the questions below: QUESTIONS: 1) Are these coeffs for an IIR filter? 2) Do the coeffs correspond to the difference equation (order and assoc): y(n) = B0*x(n) + B1*x(n-1) + B2*x(n-2) - A1*y(n-1) - A2*y(n-2) ? (Do I have the A's & B's and index numbers mixed up? I don't see the expected frequency response when I run these filters.) 3) How are they selecting and computing the in-band energy threshold and in-band to broad-band ratio? Are they running an FFT or broadband filter every frame to get the broadband energy? 4) Why do they pass 3 separate groups of coefficients? How are they used in a call to the filter? Are they all used simultaneously? Or does the DSP just use one set, based on some other condition? 5) How is the overall scaling determined for the filter? Bit weights (in converting the floating-point coeffs to integer) appear to be scaled by either +/-16384 or +/-32768, but not exactly in some cases, and they differ by groups... Any help is much appreciated; many thanks in advance... MarkJ OVERVIEW: They initialize a tone table with the freq(s) they want to detect, thresholds, etc ... and then pass them as a struct to the DSP. The struct contains 19 words: COEFF GROUP 1 (A1, A2, B2, B1, B0) COEFF GROUP 2 (A1, A2, B2, B1, B0) COEFF GROUP 3 (A1, A2, B2, B1, B0) Internal filter scaling Minimum in-band energy threshold 21/32 in-band to broad-band ratio 0x0FF5 /* shift-mask 0x0FF (look at 16 half-frames) bit count = 5 */ As an example of one entry in the tone table: static s16 tone_table[][19] = { { /* f20_50[] 11, detect energy between 20Hz and 50Hz */ /* COEFF GROUP 1 */ 32538, /* A1 = 1.985962 */ -32325, /* A2 = -0.986511 */ -343, /* B2 = -0.010493 */ 0, /* B1 = 0 */ 343, /* B0 = 0.010493 */ /* COEFF GROUP 2 */ 32619, /* A1 = 1.990906 */ -32520, /* A2 = -0.992462 */ 19179, /* B2 = 0.585327 */ -19178, /* B1 = -1.170593 */ 19179, /* B0 = 0.585327 */ /* COEFF GROUP 3 */ 32723, /* A1 = 1.997314 */ -32686, /* A2 = -0.997528 */ 9973, /* B2 = 0.304352 */ -9955, /* B1 = -0.607605 */ 9973, /* B0 = 0.304352 */ /* Scaling & detection parameters? */ 7, /* Internal filter scaling */ 159, /* Minimum in-band energy threshold */ 21, /* 21/32 in-band to broad-band ratio */ 0x0FF5 /* shift-mask 0x0FF (look at 16 half-frames) bit count = 5 */ }, etc... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 01:42:19 +0000 (GMT) From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Easy to Use Intercom Systems Organization: Excelsior Computer Services My sister is intermittently disabled, and when she needs help, she's often confused. So I'm looking for a (wireless, probably) home intercom system that can page all the remote stations with one botton. Additionally, a baby-monitor feature would be nice, along with the usual station-to-station and broadcast features. I know nothing about intercoms. Can we do this wirelessly? Should we plan on wiring a house? Can the intercoms run over spare phone line? Can someone recommend a good model? Many thanks. -Joel [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You can run them over a spare phone line in many cases, but the easiest to use are the 'wireless' ones. You plug them in a power outlet and they talk to each other over the AC electric line. They will, in theory, talk to any other instrument of their kind on the same 'leg' of the power transformer. Depending on the size of your house, of course, three or four such units plugged into the wall socket in various rooms *should* work okay. I do not think the audio quality is all that good, but they may do what you want sort of inexpensively. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 21:14:35 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Nuisance Recorded Phone Calls I have lately been getting one or two calls daily from a recorded message which identifies itself as 'customer service' and claims to have an important matter to discuss with me. I am to call back to 'customer service' at 877-706-5624. For several days, I just ignored it, treated it as a nuisance to petty too complain about very much. I found is impossible to block the number from calling me. I was not even able to track down *who* owned the number. But I found something of value today and it may be useful for you as well. The 'Resporg' (or Responsible Organization) Identification Line can tell you which telco has the line in question. Dial 800-337-4194 (recorded menu) and enter the entire ten digit number (800,888,877, 866-xxx-xxxx) you are inquiring about. Confirm your entry when requested. The recording will then read out the name of the resporg and the number to call for troubles with it. I found out that my nuisance calls were originating via Allnet, in Dallas, TX and the number to call to report troubles, etc is 800-466-4600. I hope this detail will be of value to readers. PAT ------------------------------ From: S Falke Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 23:39:39 GMT Alan Burkitt-Gray wrote in message news:telecom23.147.2@telecom-digest.org: > I don't know how it happens in North America, where you use 525 > lines/60 Hz/NTSC, but in Europe -- the land of 626 lines/50 Hz/PAL -- > machines use the teletext signals, a 30+ year old text-based > information system which uses spare lines in the vertical blanking > interval. Teletext is used for news, weather, sports results, TV > listings, and so on. Teletext? Gnarley! I remember about 30 years ago when Wireless World magazine used to promote Teletext as the Next Big Thing what turned out to be a true precursor to the World Wide Web. --s falke ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:13:47 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 19:59:41 -0800, Al Gillis wrote: > So who can explain this about time: Most modern DVD/VCR machines can > set the time based on signals from a TV station, most frequently a > public broadcasting stations (CPB?) So how does that work? And why > does it take so long to set the time? I'd guess there is some sort of > signal during the vertical retrace interval or something like that but > I've not been able to find any authorative referances to this feature. > Explain it, please!! Participating PBS stations transmit the time signal on Line 21 of the Vertical Blanking Interval. My Sony VCR sets itself withing about 5 minutes. I doesn't make the DST changes until I cycle the power for some reason. ------------------------------ From: Nick Landsberg Reply-To: hukolau@NOSPAM.att.net Subject: Re: Verizon Execs Get 911 Carpet Call Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 23:31:10 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet VOIP wrote: > More: Apparently Verizon admits that it was their fault -- > "Technicians were making changes to reroute calls that night. One > technician made a bad data entry that caused calls to be diverted away > from an emergency center." Historical data from high-reliability systems has shown that only 20% of the failures are because of hardware faults. 40% come from software faults and another 40% are because of operator error. One could argue that the "system" should have prevented the operator error, but (see signature line). Then again, it could have been that there was a one character typo which still pointed to a perfectly legitimate network address. Even the ubuquitous "Are you sure?" dialog on most Windoze boxes would not have prevented this since the operator would naturally just hit "yes" or return when that popped up. For those morbidly curious, I have some second-hand info about a 10 hour outage on a 5ESS switch in Virginia during the early 90's which was caused by a single character typo (and a bunch of cascading errors after that.). "It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious" - A. Bloch ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:52:35 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: A Better Way To Squelch Spam? On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Tom Betz didst uttereth, >> http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/wo_johansson032604.asp > The same old 'hashcash' proposal, which penalizes everyone to try to > stop spammers; and of course, when the spammer is abusing a hijacked > Windows PC to send spam, which is the typical case these days, it > doesn't penalize the spammer at all. Indeed. The article says, > Money stamps raise other significant issues: Who redeems the stamp? Who > has taxing authority on the income? Who bears legal liability for > erroneous or absent stamp validation? Who controls access to your mailbox > and for how big a stamp? These questions make it clear why we and many > others distrust money stamps as a solution to spam. Well, there are obvious solutions to that problem. "Work stamps", like hashcash, just lead spammers to steal cycles, which, Moore's Law noted, keep getting cheaper. Money, though, is money. Here's a way to do it. Let anybody issue money stamps. Let the issuer keep the money. Let them use the money to build the necessary server infrastructure, and if it's profitable, fine. A "stampette" is, in effect, a one-time certificate, and the issuer is a certificate authority whose certificates can't be cached. I'm estimating a price of few thousand stampettes per dollar. The stamps would only be needed for mail from strangers. A user could create a whitelist of users whose mail would not require a stampette. Mailing lists would require their subscribers to whitelist them. Or maybe a permanent certificate (vs. a one-time stampette) would be used for mailing lists, to prevent spoofing. You wouldn't want a spammer to get around it by claiming to be telecom-digest, would you? Now the reason this works is that the recipient does not automatically accept anything passing itself off as a stampette. The recipient only accepts stampettes that are validated by an issuer that it knows and trusts (whitelists). If an issuer charges too little, its stamps may become attractive to spammers, but that will lead recipients to remove them from their whitelists, putting the issuer out of business. (An end user might have the ability to control their own whitelist, but more typically an ISP would pay attention.) If an issuer charges too much, nobody will buy its stamps. Very self-correcting. Very "Adam Smith", free market, decentralized, scalable, end to end, yadda yadda. Naturally, a lot of "mail must be FREE as in BEER" purists oppose this, and it has some potential issues, but I don't see how any cashless system can ever stay ahead of the spammers. More at http://www.ionary.com/ion-spam.html . ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 21:35:46 -0500 Subject: Number of Press Releases Today and This Week Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com I should probably explain that the high number of press releases today, and probably for the next couple of days at least, are triggered by the Spring 2004 VON Conference in Santa Clara, California. As Jimmy Durante said, "Everybody wants to get into the act", and that seems to be the case with VoIP companies issuing press releases. I've read quite a few of them and have chosen not to use several, either because they seemed to have no impact on consumer IP, or they basically said things that were already reported last week, or I just plain didn't understand what they were trying to promote. Remember that this is an open (albeit moderated) list, so if you think I left out an important press release you can always send it to the list address, VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com Please make sure to include the URL for anything that you've found on the Web. For everyone else, I'm really sorry about the number of press releases and such, but hopefully it's only for another day or two. How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: Jack Hamilton Subject: Re: Sorry -- No a la Carte Cable Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 20:05:48 -0800 Organization: Copyright (c) 2004 by Jack Hamilton. Reply-To: jfh@acm.org Monty Solomon wrote: > Channel Packaging Is So Much Cheaper, Incredulous Senators Are Told > By Frank Ahrens > Washington Post Staff Writer > No U.S. cable or satellite company offers what are called "a la > carte" plans. In order to get the Discovery Channel from Comcast > Corp. cable company, for instance, Washington viewers have to pay for > an "expanded basic" package that includes MTV, FX, MSNBC and 33 other > channels. That's not entirely true. Dish Network offers an a la carte plan, but it's for "international" channels only. http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/programming/international/a_la_carte/index.shtml If Telugu is your only language, you can get Telugu programming without having to pay for 100 channels of incomprehensible English. Jack Hamilton jfh@acm.org In the end, more than they wanted freedom, they wanted comfort and security. And in the end, they lost it all - freedom, comfort and security. Edward Gibbons ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #149 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 30 14:43:11 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i2UJhBW16030; Tue, 30 Mar 2004 14:43:11 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 14:43:11 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200403301943.i2UJhBW16030@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 #150 TELECOM Digest Tue, 30 Mar 2004 14:43:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 150 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Vonage to Offer Portable Wi-Fi Phones (VOIP News) VOIP Regulation May Heat up Next Year (VOIP News) VOIP at 'Tipping Point,' Execs Say (VOIP News) NetCentrex and TMNG Partner for Residential VoIP Deployments (VOIP News) Jackson Becomes First Tennessee City to Get VoIP Over FTTP (VOIP News) Voxilla To Issue Encrypted Calling Certificates (VOIP News) Re: A Better Way To Squelch Spam? (SELLCOM Tech Support) Re: A Better Way To Squelch Spam? (William Warren) Making One Spammer Pay (Joe Wineburgh) "Virtual" Call Forwarding (William) Avaya Question (Steven) Re: Customer Disservice (Henry) Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service (Scott Dorsey) Re: Western Union Clocks (Scott Dorsey) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 01:31:11 -0500 Subject: Vonage to Offer Portable Wi-Fi Phones Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://news.com.com/2100-7351_3-5181617.html By Ben Charny Staff Writer, CNET News.com SANTA CLARA, Calif.--Broadband phone service provider Vonage will make available portable Wi-Fi phones later this year to help defend itself against AT&T's expansion into its market, a Vonage executive said Monday. With the phone, Vonage subscribers can make and receive phone calls within range of Wi-Fi wireless access points normally found in homes, airports, cafes, fast food restaurants and other high-trafficked areas, Executive Vice President Michael Trembolet said. The phone could also work inside any home outfitted with Wi-Fi networks, he said. Vonage also will begin selling its $35-a-month unlimited local and long-distance services to broadband-enabled homes in the United Kingdom, Mexico City, Switzerland and some Pacific Rim territories later this year, he said. Vonage's moves are in response to the formal launch of AT&T's CallVantage phone service on Monday here at Spring 2004 VON Conference & Expo. AT&T, now selling CallVantage in Texas and New Jersey, represents a major threat to Vonage's market leading share of broadband phone subscriptions using voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology. Full story at: http://news.com.com/2100-7351_3-5181617.html How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you have not yet tried Vonage, you may like to to try it for a month of free service. Readers who ask me will receive an e-coupon for a month of service (the second month) at no charge. Whatever service plan you require gets you a second month, new users only. Write ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu and ask for your e-coupon. PAT] ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 11:13:57 -0500 Subject: VOIP Regulation May Heat up Next Year Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/03/30/HNvoipregulation_1.html Massive migration to VOIP could hurt government programs that rely on funds from carriers By Stephen Lawson, IDG News Service March 30, 2004 SANTA CLARA, CALIF. -- Next year may be a big one for regulation of VOIP (voice over Internet Protocol) in the U.S., according to some Monday speakers at the Voice on the Net (VON) conference here. Several petitions to the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to make decisions on the services are currently pending, and some of them legally should be decided within 12 to 15 months, according to Julie Veach, an assistant chief in the FCC's wireline competition bureau, who addressed a one-day policy summit at VON. However, major federal policy decisions on VOIP probably won't be made until at least after the November election, with the uncertainty of a possible administration change looming, said Blair Levin, a managing director at financial services company Legg Mason Inc. and a former FCC official. Full story at: http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/03/30/HNvoipregulation_1.html ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 11:24:48 -0500 Subject: VOIP at 'Tipping Point,' Execs Say Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1556940,00.asp By Mark Hachman SANTA CLARA, Calif. Voice-over-IP services have reached the "tipping point," executives said here Monday, shifting from international to domestic communications. Executives at the Voice On the Net show said that while users understand the advantage of IP calls that aren't metered by distance, cable and especially DSL providers need to offer "naked" DSL service that allows users the choice of what infrastructure they will use to make voice calls. Meanwhile, the consumer market for VOIP will be tested by legislation by Sen. John Sununu Jr. (R-N.H.) and Rep. Chip Pickering (R-Miss.), who plan to submit bills to "open up" DSL and other broadband providers, according to Jason Oxman, assistant general counsel for Covad Communications. "From the perspective of the broadband service providers, it's not in my best interest for someone to ride on my network when I can do it myself," he said. Full story at: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1556940,00.asp ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 11:17:17 -0500 Subject: NetCentrex and TMNG Partner for Residential VoIP Deployments Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-30-2004/0002137223&EDATE= NetCentrex and TMNG Partner for Residential VoIP Deployments Brings Project Management to Triple Play Implementations SANTA CLARA, Calif., March 30 /PRNewswire/ -- Today, NetCentrex(TM), the leading enabler of converged voice-video-data networks and next-generation services, and The Management Network Group (Nasdaq: TMNG), a leading provider of management consulting services to the global communications industry, announced a partnership through which TMNG will provide integration, deployment and project management services for NetCentrex' IPlay3 solution a residential triple play broadband voice and video communications solution. TMNG's extensive management, operational and technical consulting experience coupled with NetCentrex' expertise in carrier-grade network technologies and communications applications, enables the two companies to offer a unique service to FTTH deployments and regional LECs for VoIP and triple play installations. "The technological innovation is now at the point where VoIP offerings are beginning to gain market acceptance, and the winners will be those that can develop and implement in time-to-market," said Rich Nespola, CEO of The Management Network Group. "The IPlay3 solution will enable FTTH deployments and LECs to deliver advanced IP services to their subscriber base and establish themselves at the upturn of VoIP rollout." TMNG is taking a leadership role in helping service providers prepare and roll out VoIP services. With its extensive wireline and wireless market expertise, the company is positioned to help with market expertise in all aspects of the triple play bundle including; voice, video and data. "TMNG's global network and expertise with the telecommunications community is a significant asset for the IPlay3 strategy", said Alain Fernando-Santana, CEO at NetCentrex. "Working with TMNG enables us immediately to address a wider range of larger implementations." About NetCentrex (http://www.netcentrex.net): NetCentrex(TM) delivers next-generation networking solutions and network-based applications for Voice-over- IP (VoIP), PSTN and Mobile networks. The solutions enable service providers to build converged networks and to offer network-based multi-media services for the residential and enterprise markets. Solutions include multi-protocol residential IP applications, a media server platform, an application development and execution platform, and applications VoIP VPNs and IP Centrex services. With NetCentrex, service providers can build next-generation networks and drive network demand through innovative new services. With individual deployments that exceed 500,000 subscribers, NetCentrex is a true carrier-class VoIP solution. About TMNG (http://www.tmng.com): The Management Network Group, Inc. is a leading provider of strategy, management, marketing, operational and technology consulting services to the global communications industry. With more than 500 consultants worldwide, TMNG serves communications service providers, technology companies, and financial services firms. Since the company's inception in 1990, TMNG and its subsidiaries -- TMNG Strategy, TMNG Marketing, TMNG Technologies and TMNG Europe -- have served more than 600 clients worldwide, including all the Fortune 500 telecommunications companies. TMNG is headquartered in Overland Park, Kansas, with offices in Boston, Chicago, Columbus, Dallas, La Jolla, London, New York, San Francisco, Toronto, Utrecht and Washington, D.C. TMNG can be reached at 1-888-480-TMNG (8664) or online at http://www.tmng.com . SOURCE NetCentrex Web Site: http://www.netcentrex.net ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 11:09:24 -0500 Subject: Jackson Becomes First Tennessee City to Get VoIP over FTTP Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20040330005041&newsLang=en Jackson Becomes First Tennessee City to Get VoIP over FTTP; Aeneas to Deploy MetaSwitch VP3500 Next Generation Class 5 Switch for Voice Services over Jackson Energy Authority's Fiber Network Spring VON 2004 JACKSON, Tenn.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 30, 2004--Building on its success deploying the nation's largest fully-funded Fiber to the Premise (FTTP) network, the Jackson Energy Authority is partnering with Aeneas Internet & Telephone, the largest ISP in western Tennessee, to offer voice services to 31,000 homes and businesses. Aeneas has selected MetaSwitch as its VoIP technology partner for the venture based on the company's proven ability working with the JEA's chosen FTTP network vendor, Wave7 Optics (www.wave7optics.com). Using MetaSwitch's flagship VP3500 Next Generation Class 5 Switch, Aeneas will offer Jackson residents a broad range of advanced calling features, along with the ability to manage and configure those services via the Web. Full press release at: http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20040330005041&newsLang=en ------------------------------ From: VOIP News Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 12:42:44 -0500 Subject: Voxilla To Issue Encrypted Calling Certificates Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.voxilla.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=63&mode=nested&order=0&thold=0 VOXILLA.COM News Report Beginning March 30th, Voxilla will offer owners of the Sipura Technology line of analog telephone adaptors the ability to make point-to-point encrypted telephone calls, a first in the VoIP world. Utilizing the built-in encryption capabilities of version 2.0 of the Sipura firmware for its SPA-2000 and SPA-1000 telephone adaptors, callers using Sipura units will be able to talk to one another and their voice will travel across the internet in digitally encrypted packets. Voxilla will issue secure randomly generated private and public keys to users who visit a specially designed series of pages on Voxilla.com. Any two users with a verifiable key from Voxilla will be able to have an encrypted conversation. Encryption is something early adopters, particularly business users of VoIP, have publicly called for. The encrypted service will work with peer-to-peer IP telephony service, such as Free World Dialup or IPTel. Calls to commercial VoIP services and to the PSTN system will not be encrypted. However, New Jersey-based VoIP service provider VoicePulse plans on offering encrypted calls to consumers in the 2nd quarter of 2004. Full story at: http://www.voxilla.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=63&mode=nested&order=0&thold=0 ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech Support Subject: Re: A Better Way To Squelch Spam? Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 05:07:12 GMT Just hold the ISP who is enabling the foreign website being spamvertised access to the USA responsible just as if they were knowingly enabling a US spam website. Then watch how fast the spam slows down. 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, Beamer, Watchguard! Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. Mini-Splitter log splitter! If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: A Better Way To Squelch Spam? Organization: Comcast Online Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 16:03:04 GMT Fred Goldstein wrote in message news:telecom23.149.8@telecom-digest.org: > On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Tom Betz didst uttereth, >>> http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/wo_johansson032604.asp >> The same old 'hashcash' proposal, which penalizes everyone to try to >> stop spammers; and of course, when the spammer is abusing a hijacked >> Windows PC to send spam, which is the typical case these days, it >> doesn't penalize the spammer at all. > Indeed. The article says, >> Money stamps raise other significant issues: Who redeems the stamp? >> Who has taxing authority on the income? Who bears legal liability >> for erroneous or absent stamp validation? Who controls access to >> your mailbox and for how big a stamp? These questions make it clear >> why we and many others distrust money stamps as a solution to spam. > Well, there are obvious solutions to that problem. "Work stamps", > like hashcash, just lead spammers to steal cycles, which, Moore's Law > noted, keep getting cheaper. Money, though, is money. > Here's a way to do it. Let anybody issue money stamps. Let the > issuer keep the money. Let them use the money to build the necessary > server infrastructure, and if it's profitable, fine. A "stampette" > is, in effect, a one-time certificate, and the issuer is a certificate > authority whose certificates can't be cached. I'm estimating a price > of few thousand stampettes per dollar. > The stamps would only be needed for mail from strangers. A user could > create a whitelist of users whose mail would not require a stampette. > Mailing lists would require their subscribers to whitelist them. Or > maybe a permanent certificate (vs. a one-time stampette) would be used > for mailing lists, to prevent spoofing. You wouldn't want a spammer > to get around it by claiming to be telecom-digest, would you? > Now the reason this works is that the recipient does not automatically > accept anything passing itself off as a stampette. The recipient only > accepts stampettes that are validated by an issuer that it knows and > trusts (whitelists). If an issuer charges too little, its stamps may > become attractive to spammers, but that will lead recipients to remove > them from their whitelists, putting the issuer out of business. (An > end user might have the ability to control their own whitelist, but > more typically an ISP would pay attention.) If an issuer charges too > much, nobody will buy its stamps. Very self-correcting. Very "Adam > Smith", free market, decentralized, scalable, end to end, yadda yadda. > Naturally, a lot of "mail must be FREE as in BEER" purists oppose > this, and it has some potential issues, but I don't see how any > cashless system can ever stay ahead of the spammers. More at > http://www.ionary.com/ion-spam.html . Pat, Although I don't often agree with Mr. Goldstein, in this case I concur. The cost of paying for email will be dwarfed by the savings that result from it: not just the lowered cost of an (already overtaxed) infrastructure, but the much higher human cost in wages, agravation, and time. Although privacy advocates might be concerned with a certificate process that exposes its users identities to the world, I'm sure that we could design a system that allows for pseudonymous email at the same cost as attributed material. In any case, few believe that governments can't get access to the identity of email senders when they really want to. The only area left open to debate is how we can, of if we should, keep the system voluntary: I've never met a bureaucrat who didn't want a bigger budget, and governments are very adept at collecting, and raising, taxes. However, there's a large advantage if Uncle Sam gets involved: "money, though, is money", and governments by and large are eager to help each other collect it. That will be a big lever to use on spammers who move offshore: IANAL, but I suspect there are tariff or other treaties that would make it very difficult for the sender to avoid paying for spam sent from foreign countries if it were taxed here. It is, of course, inevitable that foreign governments would offer discounts to spammers willing to contribute to their coffers, but the infrastructure and attitudes are already in place for that sort of thing, so it would (IMNSHO) reach equilibrium fairly quickly. The issue of what to do with hijacked PC's being used as zombie senders is also solved: not only are billing systems very well prepared to cut off debtors, but they're also coded to restrict sudden surges beyond a cusomary average, and that means that the issuing authority would be able to cut off any zombie computer that starting spewing without reason. Even if a spammer had access to a large coral of hijacked machines, the legal effect of causing someone else to spend money without permission is predictable and quick: everybody understands money, and everybody hollers just as loudly at a pickpocket as at a bank robber. FWIW. YMMV. Bill Warren (Filter noise from my email address for direct replies) ------------------------------ From: Joe Wineburgh Subject: Making One Spammer Pay Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 11:10:38 -0500 AOL to Give Away $47,000 Porsche Seized in Settlement By Anick Jesdanun Associated Press NEW YORK -- Finally, some payback for all that spam. It's a 2002 Porsche Boxster S that will be the grand prize in an America Online sweepstakes starting Tuesday. AOL obtained the car in settling a lawsuit against "a guy who by our estimates made more than a million dollars from spamming," said Randall Boe, AOL's executive vice president and general counsel. Although the company has previously won cash judgments and destroyed computers used in spamming, Boe said the latest case "represents us moving beyond that to the toys, the fruits of spam. We'll take cars, houses, boats, whatever we can find and get a hold of." The sweepstakes is open until April 8. Adult AOL members living in the continental United States are eligible, and they can enter only online. The two-door, metallic silver gray Porsche with a leather interior has 18,000 miles on it and retails for $47,000, according to AOL. Boe said the spammer was sued last April and the car had California plates. He gave no other details, citing confidentiality terms of the settlement. In that round of five federal lawsuits, AOL targeted individuals and companies accused of sending a combined 1 billion junk messages to AOL members, pitching pornography, college degrees, cable TV descramblers and other products. Boe said seized assets are usually cash and are used to pay lawyers, develop anti-spam technology and expand the anti-spam team. He said spammers are often forced to sell houses or other tangible assets. AOL made an exception in this case and took the car because of its "symbolic value," Boe said. "Here was a spammer who made some money fast. He bought himself a Porsche." Boe said he hoped the publicity would deter spammers, though he acknowledged it wouldn't end spam. ------------------------------ From: _William_ Subject: "Virtual" Call Forwarding Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 08:43:16 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Question: ================= Does anyone know of a company that allows me to "port" (using the new number portability capabilities) my existing landline phone number to them and then allows me to forward that to a different number without having to maintain an actual phoneline. Background: ================= I have a business cellphone and a personal landline. I no longer need a home landline but I want to keep the number that is assigned to it. I want to get rid of dialtone since I'm moving. I want people to call that number and have it "bounce" or forward to my cellphone. Options Considered: ================= Get another cellphone and port the landline. Problem: Cost and hassle. I don't want a second cellphone. Or a dual-nam cellphone where I have switch between lines. I'd like one cellphone for all my numbers. Plus, I'd have to pay for the second line of service. Have the telephone company do something: I called Qwest (my local provider) twice and spoke to two different people (sometimes, one won't know what's available). They said they don't have any options for this and something they call "Vacation Suspend" whatever that it, might have been an option but is not available in my state. Forget keeping the landline and tell everyone that I have a new phone number. Problem: I have one of the best numbers in the city and I'm a bit attached to it. Without revealing the true number, it's my areacode and all one digit except for the last similar to (xxx) 888-8889. How can I give that up? Also -- I still want a different number for personal and business in case I have to separate them again. Thanks for any ideas. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ask your local telco for 'remote call forwarding' if it is available. Using RFC, you have no actual phone instrument; your 'preferred number' is simply terminated in the central office and permanently forwarded to whatever number you request, in this case your cell number. You have no control over changing the forwarding of the number; all that is done by telco in the central office. Telco usually charges some flat rate for remote call forwarding plus the charge for each call forwarded at the rate in effect for same. Whenever you want it turned off permanently just tell telco. PAT] ------------------------------ From: sbrickclick@hotmail.com (Steven) Subject: Avaya Question Date: 30 Mar 2004 09:59:00 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Does someone on the Internet can explain to me about an Avaya (prev. Lucent)'s small business phone system the Partner. Well, one of the Partner systems is called Endeavor. I don't know the diffrence between the ACS and that and all I know is one of the Endeavor has only one line display. Could someone explain me what the dif and what is it exactly. Thanks ~steven - the avaya freak~ ------------------------------ From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry) Subject: Re: Customer Disservice Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 08:05:42 +0300 Organization: Elisa Internet customer Monty Solomon wrote: > These Days, Consumers May as Well Keep Their Complaint To Themselves > By Caroline E. Mayer > Washington Post Staff Writer Talk about synchronicity -- this is really resonating with me right now. Last fall, I got very bad service on an expensive purchase -- essentially, they didn't provide what I bought. I got a refund within a reasonable time from the independent local agent, but I wanted the Head Office to know exactly why I was dissatisfied so I wrote them a detailed letter explaining point by point where I thought they had failed me. I had my refund and, really, the matter was closed; I just wrote to them because (a) I wanted to get my unhappiness off my chest and (b) I was curious to see what they would say. That was in November. As the months went by, it became apparent that my letter had simply gone into the circular file. But then, yesterday -- after four months -- I got an answer. It was a very-slightly-modified form letter, about 80% of which had absolutely nothing to do with anything. But in the few lines that were 'personalised' for me, they basically said 'we believe that we are excellent and therefore you have no complaint'. Arrogant bastards. Needless to say, I won't be buying any of their stuff ever again. Cheers, Henry Larsen [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This reminds me very much of Southwestern Bell (SBC). You get *no* written responses from them *ever* which actually address your complaints, just more promotional letters. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Correcting 411/555-1212 Info; Unlisted Service Date: 30 Mar 2004 10:26:08 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) William Robison wrote: > As stations are added and removed from the loop, everything needs > to be readjusted, and testing of voice loops occurs on a daily/weekly > basis. > "ACE, station xxx, how do you read?" > "station xxx, ACE,we read you 5 by, and me?" > "ACE, station xxx, I read you 5 by 5, good day" I have, on HF radio, heard conversations like: "You are five and nine, old man" "I do not copy." "Repeat, you are five and nine" "Please repeat that." "You are coming in five and nine here." "I copy. You are five and nine also but I can hardly hear you." --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Western Union Clocks Date: 30 Mar 2004 10:27:16 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , J Kelly wrote: > On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 19:59:41 -0800, Al Gillis wrote: >> So who can explain this about time: Most modern DVD/VCR machines can >> set the time based on signals from a TV station, most frequently a >> public broadcasting stations (CPB?) So how does that work? And why >> does it take so long to set the time? I'd guess there is some sort of >> signal during the vertical retrace interval or something like that but >> I've not been able to find any authorative referances to this feature. >> Explain it, please!! > Participating PBS stations transmit the time signal on Line 21 of the > Vertical Blanking Interval. Many stations transmit time on line 21. Unfortunately, SOME stations don't bother setting things so that they transmit correct time. In the DC area, some stations are as much as two minutes off. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #150 ******************************