    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Dec 16 15:06:25 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBGK6Ou29350;
	Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:06:25 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:06:25 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412162006.iBGK6Ou29350@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 #601

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:06:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 601

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Wrong 911 Address Delays Firemen (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Identify Theft Victim Falsely Charged (Lisa Hancock)
    News Services via Internet (Fred Atkinson)
    FCC Approves Wireless Internet Access on Airplanes (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Seniors Confront Foul Cellphone (Eric Friedebach)
    Some Down Time for Digest Over Weekend (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Re: Software Should Not Be Copyrighted -- Lawsuit (Mark Crispin)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (C.W.)
    Re: AT&T CallVantage Service -- Your Thoughts (LB@notmine.com)
    Re: AT&T CallVantage Service -- Your Thoughts (Rick Merrill)
    Re: Cross Battery and Verizon (LB@notmine.com)
    Re: Kevin Mitnick Recalled (Michael D. Sullivan)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 18:46:54 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Wrong 911 Address Delays Firemen


NEW YORK - AP via Independence Reporter, Wednesday, December 15 - 

A fire in a six-story apartment building early Wednesday, killed one
person and injured 31 others, and Mayor Bloomberg said firefighters
were delayed because the caller reporting the fire gave the wrong
address.

Six civilians were in critical condition fllowing their rescue, three
of them children. In addition, six firefighers, and five police
officers were injured. A candle in a second floor apartment appeared
to be the cause of the fire, and the fire quickly spread through the
entire second and third floor of the building, in Jackson Heights,
Queens.

Mayor Bloomberg said someone called 911 and gave the wrong address of
building. Firefighters went to the wrong address, discovered the
error, then immediatly went to the correct address, causing in total
a two or three minute delay in reaching the place they should have
been. By then, the fire was spreading quickly, and police officers
were called to assist in evacuating the building. The temperature was
in the upper teens or low twenties.

         ===================================

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As sad as this event is, *nothing*
was said about the call to 911 going over VOIP, rather than the
more usual transport for calls to 911, nor was it explained who the
'someone' was that gave an incorrect address to the dispatcher. Maybe
one of our NYC readers can provide more background on this.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Identify Theft Victim Falsely Charged
Date: 15 Dec 2004 14:08:32 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


There are more and more reports of devastating losses to identity
theft victims.

One troubling newspaper columnist report stated that authorities only
pursue criminals when the monetary loss is extremely large, otherwise
it's not worth their effort.  This was very frustrating to one victim.

Another report (referenced below) described how another victim was
falsely charged with a serious crime and suffered as a result.

Apparently the victim's credit card was stolen, and the thief used it
to set up an illegal porn site.  The victim was raided by the Feds and
his business computer (and livlihood) was confiscated.  He was
eventually cleared of any crime, but that took months.  He claims his
computers were seriously damaged in the process.

With today's heightened sensitivity toward illegal porn, one can't
help but worry about the risk of some sort of identity theft, either
to steal money or as a malicious way to attack someone.

See:

http://1010wins.com/topstories/local_story_349120748.html

If anyone knows additional details about this story, would you post
them?

[public comments only, please]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: He should have gotten out of the matter
by *immediatly reporting* -- as soon as he knew of it -- of his loss
to his local police, *then* always referred to that report whenever
there were further consequences.  But I do hope he sued FBI and other
government officials for the hassles he suffered as a result. PAT]

------------------------------

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: News Services via Internet
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:29:45 -0500


    Does anyone know of news services devices provided via Internet
connection?  To give an example of what I mean:

    A news scroller that runs ball scores over as they are updated by
the news service provider.  This could be mounted in a bar or
restaurant and connected to a high speed Internet connection.

    If you could reply via email about this, I'd like to know who
offers such services.

    Regards,

    Fred

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Search on the net for the phrase
'RSS' (Really Simple Syndication) for services like you want.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:10:23 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: USATODAY.com - FCC Approves Wireless Internet Access on Airplanes


Press reports say that the FAA is in no hurry to allow this, so it may
be=20 several years before it's implemented. This article says that
they won't complete their technical study for 2 years.

Another scenario, however, would be to nibble away at the rules: use
is now allowed at the ramp with the doors open. It might be allowed on
some airlines while taxiing based on this experience. Then later it
could be allowed at altitude based on that experience. But that would
take a couple of years anyhow.

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2004-12-15-wifi-in-flight_x.htm

http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=3Dcpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+FCC+approves+wireless+Internet+access+on+commercial+jets&expire=&urlID=3D12603942&fb=3DY&url=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Ftravel%2Fnews%2F2004-12-15-wifi-in-flight_x.htm&partnerID=1664

FCC approves wireless Internet access on commercial jets
By Genaro C. Armas, Associated Press

WASHINGTON Airlines can provide their passengers access to high-speed
wireless Internet while they fly, under a vote by federal regulators
Wednesday.

"If there is a theme for this meeting, it is that we want (new
technologies) on the land, in the air, and on the sea" Federal
Communications Commission chairman Michael Powell said Wednesday as
the commission considered new rules for airlines.

"We are pushing the frontiers in order to bring the information age to
all corners of the world," he said.

The FCC also talked about whether to end the ban on using cell phones
on planes, but did not vote.

David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association, a
passenger group, said the changes under consideration would "make
business travelers more efficient and while away the time for a lot of
other passengers. This is all the wave of the future here."

Currently, the only way passengers on domestic flights can communicate
with the ground is through phones usually built into the seat
backs. That service isn't very popular: It costs far more than
conventional or cell phones about $3.99 a minute and the reception
often is poor.

Of the three companies that initially offered that service on commercial
jets, only Verizon Airfone remains. It has phones on about 1,500 jets.

The FCC approved a measure to restructure how frequencies for such
"air-to-ground" services are used and allow the airlines to offer
wireless high-speed Internet connections.

Left undecided was the issue of how many companies the FCC would
allow, through an auction, to offer such services. Verizon Airfone
maintains that letting one company handle the service would ensure the
best quality, and existing technology can't support two competitors.

Others, including Boeing and AirCell, argue for two competitors to
prevent one company from having a monopoly. FCC officials said the
auction would take place within a year.

Once plans are completed and planes outfitted with the equipment,
wireless high-speed Internet access might be found on commercial
domestic flights by 2006, said Jack Blumenstein, chairman and CEO of
Louisville, Colo.-based AirCell.

The timeline on when air travelers would be able to start using cell
phones in flight is murkier, in part because both the FCC and the
Federal Aviation Administration ban the practice.

The FCC took up the issue Wednesday in an effort to start public
discussion, and commissioners might eventually relax the rules or lift
the ban entirely. Of most concern to FCC officials is how using a cell
phone in an airplane would interfere with cell phone use on the
ground.

The FAA is worried mainly about how airborne cell phone use would
interfere with a plane's navigation and electrical systems, agency
spokeswoman Laura Brown said. The technology used on seat-back phones
and being considered for use for wireless Internet hookups causes no
interference.

The FAA has commissioned a private, independent firm to study the
issue, and results aren't due until 2006. The FAA will not make its
decision on cell phone use until after the study is completed, Brown
said.

Allowing high-speed Internet access and cell phone use on planes could
offer cash-strapped airline companies a new source for revenues, said
Doug Wills, spokesman for the Air Transport Association, the major
airlines' trade group.

Still, airlines must weigh the demand for such service against the
desire of other passengers for a quiet cabin, Wills said. "Some people
see a cell-free environment as a good thing," he said.

Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. 

Find this article at:
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2004-12-15-wifi-in-flight_x.htm

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance Associated Press and USA Today.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Eric Friedebach <friedebach@yahoo.com>
Subject: Seniors Confront Foul Cellphone
Date: 16 Dec 2004 00:46:13 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


[Note from Eric: The headline in my post is not the one from the AP
feed. I changed it to make some sense in the archive. The actual
headline is below.]

Senior citizen, sentenced to probation, gets a thumbs-up in court
Associated Press, 12-15-04

ST. PAUL - A retiree who tussled with a man half his age who was using
foul language in a restaurant was sentenced to probation, but he got a
thumbs-up from attorneys and others who sympathized with his motives.

Bill Stevenson, 79, of Lake Elmo, pleaded guilty to one count of
disorderly conduct Tuesday in Ramsey County District Court, and judge
Paulette Flynn placed him on three months of probation.

"I think I could've won my case by going to trial, with a sympathetic
jury," said Stevenson. "I've had over 30 calls and letters and e-mails,
and I've not had one negative call. They're all on my side."

Stevenson and another retired 3M engineer, Sten Gerfast, 74,
confronted the man July 15 at Bruegger's Bagels in the Sun Ray
Shopping Center.  The two retirees were going over a design Gerfast
had invented when Jesse Tabor, of Minneapolis, entered the bakery with
his 13-year-old daughter.

In an interview after the incident, Tabor, 40, said he was talking on
his cell phone with a man whose home he was remodeling and said he
didn't recall cursing. But Stevenson and Gerfast remember it
differently.

"He was using the F-word against this guy he was talking to,"
Stevenson said. "There was an argument on the phone. The third time he
walked by our booth where Mr. Gerfast and I were trying to design
something, Mr. Gerfast said to me, 'Should I do something about it?'
I thought a moment and thought, 'What can you do in a case like this?'
I didn't know what you could do."

So Gerfast, of Mendota Heights, decided to confront Tabor. He tapped
him on the shoulder and asked him to take his call outside, Stevenson
said, but Tabor said something like, "This is none of your business."

"It was only when he used the words, 'you f-ing bastard' -- it was
yelled across the bagel shop so everybody heard it -- that I started
walking up to him," Stevenson said. "Then he said 'you f-ing a-hole"
and that really bothered me. I've been in lots of different places,
but when I heard that kind of stuff coming in my hometown, I thought,
'Somebody's got to do something.' "

Stevenson grabbed the phone from Tabor and the two men played
tug-of-war for a few seconds. Stevenson realized it was a dumb thing
to do, let go of the phone and Tabor "went sailing across the floor,"
Stevenson said.

The three men with charged with disorderly conduct. Gerfast was
acquitted in a court trial last month. Tabor, who has previous
convictions for criminal sexual conduct and drug possession, failed to
appear at a September hearing and a bench warrant was issued for him.
Attempts to reach him Tuesday were unsuccessful.

http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/news/politics/10420049.htm

[Note from Eric: This item came up on a local (Minneapolis) talk radio
station today. The talk show host was able to get Sten Gerfast on the
phone. It turns out Gerfast was the mechanical engineer on 3M's tape
drive backup system some years back, among over two dozen other
patents to his name under 3M.]

Eric Friedebach

/KMPX Rocks!/

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 18:03:12 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Some Down Time for Digest Over Weekend


John Levine, who helps the Digest by providing the alias
'telecom-digest.org' address to me, via his computer in Trumansburg,
NY said to me that this weekend coming up, he will be doing some
maintainence on one of his computers (rearranging files, etc) and so
will be off line part of the time. In the event, when you ask for the
URL http://telecom-digest.org this weekend, the computer tells you the
page cannot be reached, then use one of the other addresses to reach
our site.  In addition to our direct address
http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives you can also use
http://telecom-digest.n3.net if you wish. The preferred URL is the
first one (with '.org') but massis and .n3.net also work fine and
bypass John Levine's computer to get here.

Patrick Townson

------------------------------

From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Subject: Re: Software Should Not Be Copyrighted -- Lawsuit
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:40:37 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Steve Sobol wrote:

>> Intellectual-property consultant Greg Aharonian hopes to convince the
>> court that software makers can protect their products adequately
>> through patents

> No. Patents are absolutely NOT the proper way to go. Copyrights are.

I agree.  This is one issue that the Gnu radicals got right.

Now, we may all feel that copyright should not last as long as it
does, especially in the field of software where the value of
intellectual property becomes moot long before its creator dies.  All
too often, the preservation of antique software has been hampered by
the difficulty in identifying who owns the IP and securing permission.

Even worse, once the owner is identified, it turns out to be an
extraordinarily complex and expensive process to get the permission
executed even when the owner is otherwise pleased to grant it.  What's
needed is an inexpensive process by which an owner can abandon IP
without undesirable side-effects.

But that's something that should be fixed in copyright law.

Patents, on the other hand, lock up techniques; and the history of
software patents is a sad litany of numerous obvious and commonly-used
techniques being claimed under patent.  The necessary litigation to
overturn such patents is ridiculously expensive.

Something tells me that Aharonian is a lawyer who's looking to drum up
even more business.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:17:32 CST
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?
From: C.W. <temp18@thewolfden.org>


John Bartley <johnbartley@email.com> wrote on Wed, 15 Dec 2004 
12:25:44 -0500 about Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?

> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <spamtrap100@comcast.net>
wrote:
 ...
> Topic drift alert.

Not that that ever happens here in the -> TELECOM <- digest.

Or is it now the
Telecom-Computer-Hacker-Legal-WiFi-Television-Automobile-Etc News Feed
Digest?

------------------------------

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: AT&T CallVantage Service -- Your Thoughts
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:10:07 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


Lanceman wrote:

> Hi -

> I am considering switching my local landline to the AT&T CallVantage
> service.  I have also looked at Vonage, but am unable to move my local
> number with them.  Anyone out there have good or bad experiences with
> the CallVantage service?

> Thanks in advance for your replies.

> Lance

I believe Consumer Reports thought poorly of ATT stuff.

LB

------------------------------

From: Rick Merrill <RickMerrill@comTHROWcast.net>
Subject: Re: AT&T CallVantage Service -- Your Thoughts
Organization: Comcast Online
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:53:54 GMT


Lanceman wrote:

> Hi -

> I am considering switching my local landline to the AT&T CallVantage
> service.  I have also looked at Vonage, but am unable to move my local
> number with them.  Anyone out there have good or bad experiences with
> the CallVantage service?

Excellent experiences. When the previous company continued to bill me,
a rep. from CallVantage stayed with me on the phone until the other
company agreed to give me full credit from the date that CallVantage
switched on.

It was a snap to disconnect the house phones from the old system and
connect the Telephone Adapter (TA) to my house phone. One caution: it
may not power more than three REN (Ringer Equivalency Number) worth of
phones. Their official policy is to support a wireless phone with
multiple handsets.

One feature I use a lot is the phone messages my callers leave are
sent to me as attachments to email!

Another feature I like is the on-line list of callers: one click and the 
call is returned!

Rick Merrill

------------------------------

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: Cross Battery and Verizon
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:13:45 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


Joe Perkowski wrote:

> Hey ppl,

> Does anyone know what is "cross battery"?  We put in a NBX 2 months
> ago running fine.  Now, we are getting static and crosstalk on some of
> our incoming lines.

> We have had a great deal of rain these past 2 weeks, and have had
> previously problems with Verizon due to old copper in our area.

> The Verizon guy is telling us "cross battery" is causing this?

> What is "cross battery" if anyone knows...?

> Thanks.

> Joe

He may be blowing smoke.  The rain points to your problem -- poor
cable.  The wires in the cable actually are rotated over distance.  As
you can see all cable have a sag.  If a poorly insulated wire inside
the cable is at the bottom of the bunch where the sag is low then
water can get in there.  Unfortunately the fix is new cable or new way
of routing.

LB

------------------------------

From: Michael D. Sullivan <nospam@camsul.com>
Subject: Re: Kevin Mitnick Recalled
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 02:29:45 GMT


In article <telecom23.593.6@telecom-digest.org>, lisa_minter2001
@yahoo.com says:

> Rummaging around through the Telecom Archives, I found two interesting
> items on Kevin Mitnick. I wonder if anyone knows what he has been
> doing since 1997 or whenever he got out of prison.

He's become a computer security consultant, appearing on 60 Minutes, 
writing in Newsweek, running his consulting website 
<http://www.defensivethinking.com/main/index.php>, writing books, etc.  
The usual stuff for a convicted notorious hacker. 


Michael D. Sullivan
Bethesda, MD, USA
Delete nospam from my address and it won't work.

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #601
******************************
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Dec 16 16:30:12 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBGLUCO01002;
	Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:30:12 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:30:12 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412162130.iBGLUCO01002@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 #602

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:30:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 602

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Yahoo Maps Offer Live U.S. Traffic Conditions (Lisa Minter)
    Latest Zafi Worm Wreaking Holiday E-Mail Havoc (Lisa Minter)
    Cell Phone Motorists are Dangerous (Lisa Hancock)
    FCC Announces New Competition Rules (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: (Celling Your Soul) (Tony P.)
    Re: AT&T CallVantage Service -- Your Thoughts (Rick Merrill)
    Re: AT&T CallVantage Service -- Your Thoughts (gb)
    Re: Cingular Migration (jrefactors@hotmail.com)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Software Should Not Be Copyrighted -- Lawsuit (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Dialogic JCT Series (Maverick)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave of The Future? (Patrick Townson)
    Re: Wrong 911 Address Delays Firemen (John Levine)
    Re: Software Should Not Be Copyrighted (Scott Dorsey)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Yahoo Maps Offer Live U.S. Traffic Conditions
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:55:36 EST


SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Yahoo Inc. is set to offer an online service
that lets users view live U.S. local traffic conditions on
custom-created maps, the first site to do so nationally, the company
said late on Wednesday.

In a milestone for Internet-based traffic services, Yahoo has beefed
up its existing mapping services to allow customers to plot a route
from one local destination to another, and overlay traffic data such
as road speeds and potential delays.

The new service can be found at http://maps.yahoo.com/.

While local radio, television and weather sites have offered traffic
tracking for years, many of the maps and features are primitive. No
national site exists that offers dynamically generated traffic maps,
Yahoo executives said.

"Certainly the distribution of this content on the Yahoo site is just
a starting point," Paul Levine, general manager of Yahoo's local
services unit, said in an interview. Eventually, users away from
computers may be able to receive traffic alerts via e-mail or on
phones with links to live maps, he said.

He declined to say whether or when a version of the service might be
offered on mobile devices such as phones, wireless handheld computers
or car location systems. The service is currently only available for
viewing U.S. road conditions.

The traffic mapping feature, which will be available across Yahoo's
search, local content and map sections of the site, is the latest move
to enhance Yahoo's local information push and follows rival Google's
own recent push into online mapping.

Google recently acquired Keyhole Corp., a supplier of online satellite
maps that allow users to zoom to street level and view locations such
as buildings or even cars. A big limitation is that Keyhole maps rely
on previously collected photos and as such give no snapshot of current
conditions.

By contrast, Yahoo's dynamic maps draw on real-time traffic
information from metropolitan transportation departments and private
providers, including embedded road sensors, traffic cameras, police
scanners, and traffic helicopters. Yahoo declined to identify the
exact sources of its traffic data.

The site boasts traffic accident reports and road construction
information in more than 70 metropolitan areas, in effect covering
regions where three-quarters of the U.S.  population lives. Real-time
driving speed data will be available in the more than 20 top
metropolitan markets.

The new service generates regional maps that include the user's
starting point and destination. Roadways are colored green, yellow and
red, to highlight the normal movement of traffic, minor delays or
severe road congestion. A user can hover over a stretch of road to
view details of impediments.  They can drill down at hazards to see
further details.

Yahoo's existing map service allows users to type in only single
addresses, then zoom in or out on the resulting local map. Icons
displaying convenient entertainment, shopping and services can be
served up at the user's request.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Latest Zafi Worm Wreaking Holiday E-Mail Havoc
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:59:26 EST


NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Zafi.D worm, which disguises itself as an
e-mail holiday greeting, is currently the most frequently detected
worldwide virus, software security company Panda Software said this
week.

The worm is most commonly found in South America, Italy, Spain,
Bulgaria and Hungary and spreads itself in an e-mail attachment that
says "Happy holidays!"

Glendale, California-based Panda also noted in a statement on
Wednesday that the virus has the ability to adapt to the language of
the user, matching the message's language to the domain of a user's
e-mail address.

In addition, Zafi.D -- which appeared for the first time on Tuesday --
enables attackers to gain remote control of an affected computer,
Panda said.

The worm is not expected to have much effect on the United States
because the time difference with Europe gave advance warning to
U.S. anti-virus companies, broadcaster CNN said on its Web site on
Wednesday.

This is the fourth incarnation of Zafi, with the first one detected
last April, CNN said.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.^^

*** 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, Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Cell Phone Motorists Are Dangerous
Date: 16 Dec 2004 09:43:45 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I just had two close calls, nearly getting hit by two separate
motorists distracted by their cell phone conversation.

The first motorist was driving in the middle of the road, right on the
center line, oblivious to oncoming traffic.  The second motorist was
driving too slowly yet igonored pedestrians in the designated
crosswalk.

Quite often drivers on their phones find themselves in the wrong toll
gate line, and disrupt traffic when they have to shift over.

BTW, in this state it is illegal drive and talk on the cell phone, not
that these motorists care.

Why is it so critical that people must stay connected 24/7?  Can't
they stay off the phone during their drive?  More importantly, don't
people _want_ to have a break from constant phone calls?  (I know if
I'm on the phone too much I'm grateful for a break).

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:14:53 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: FCC Announces New Competition Rules


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
December 16, 2004
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18162&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* FCC announces new competition rules
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Breaking down the Sprint-Nextel merger
* Time Warner in $510 million settlement with federal regulators
* Verizon in deal to carry Discovery channels over FiOS
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* USTA Says FCC Order Leaves Economy, Businesses and Consumers on Hold
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* FCC approves wireless broadband use during flights
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Emergency GPS shutdown plans reviewed
* U.K. lowers broadband access costs for BT competitors
* Maryland judge rules state's anti-spam law unconstitutional

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18162&l=2017006

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: Politics (Celling Your Soul)
Organization: ATCC
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:21:32 -0500


In article <telecom23.597.9@telecom-digest.org>, mark@atwood.name 
says:

> Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> writes:

>> Tony P. wrote:

>>> In article <telecom23.594.8@telecom-digest.org>, dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org
>>> says:

>>>> One thing I've noticed lately, is a lot of telemarketing calls from
>>>> Quebec.  Note that Canadian telemarketers are not bound by US law.

>>> I've noted the same thing. Is there some particular reason this occurs?

>> Because they aren't bound by US law ...

> But the people they are marketing on behalf of *are*, and they are
> responsable for assuring the legality of all marketing efforts they
> have subcontracted for.

That is precisely why I say that to stop spam in its tracks you have
to follow the money.

Financial auditing is a tool that most law enforcement agencies don't
understand. If they did we'd see a whole lot less corruption in
government and business.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But they *will soon* be bound by
Canadian law. Canada right now is in the process of discussing and
legislating some very tough telemarketing -- or actually, anti-
telemarketing -- laws.  See http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra .  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Rick Merrill <RickMerrill@comTHROWcast.net>
Subject: Re: AT&T CallVantage Service -- Your Thoughts
Organization: Comcast Online
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:18:23 GMT


Lanceman wrote:

> Hi -

> I am considering switching my local landline to the AT&T CallVantage
> service.  I have also looked at Vonage, but am unable to move my local
> number with them.  Anyone out there have good or bad experiences with
> the CallVantage service?

> Thanks in advance for your replies.

> Lance

 see:

https://www.callvantage.att.com/help/featurefaqs/

It was a snap to disconnect the house phones from the old system and
connect the Telephone Adapter (TA) to my house phone. One caution: it
may not power more than three REN (Ringer Equivalency Number) worth of
phones. Their official policy is to support a wireless phone with
multiple handsets.

One feature I use a lot is the phone messages my callers leave are
sent to me as attachments to email!

Another feature I like is the on-line list of callers: one click and
the call is returned!

Rick Merrill

------------------------------

From: gb <georgeb@944ecology.com>
Subject: Re: AT&T CallVantage Service -- Your Thoughts
Date: 16 Dec 2004 03:45:11 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Excellent service, wonderful terms and conditions, flawless connection.
Canada included, Europe calls cheap. No weird federal taxes, so, a
twenty dollar service costs twenty dollars, not forty dollars.

------------------------------

From: jrefactors@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Cingular Migration
Date: 16 Dec 2004 09:21:40 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Then how about SBC? I always heard SBC advertisments mentioning about
Cingular Wireless. Please advise more ...

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?
Date: 16 Dec 2004 10:10:14 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


As others mentioned, it will get to the point that no one will watch
their stuff because the imposed restrictions are too onerous.

There's a lot of stuff on now I will only watch as a VCR tape because
it is just too loaded with commercials and irritating ones at that.
It used to be about 45 minutes of content vs. 15 minutes of
commercials.

In an hour show; my guess now they added another 5 minutes so it's 40
show 20 commercials.  Some late night or cable fare is 30/30 -- you get
five minutes of content then five minutes of commercials -- utterly
unbearable to watch live.  (And very annoying if on cable which
you're paying separately for anyway).

I don't watch much of network news anymore because they made that 18
minutes instead of 22.5 and the commercials are all disturbing health
care products.

Yes, the VCR does allow me to skip commercials but on the other hand I
can watch simultaneous shows now (watch one live, tape the other),
which means I see more TV, benefiting them.  Time shifting of course
allows me to see stuff I'd never see, again, a benefit for them.

I'd hate to see increased govt regulation of Hollywood and
the TV networks, but these people have become incredibly greedy
and need to be reined in.  Of course, we must remember that some
controls may be _worse_ than what we have now*.  But I would:

1) Separate ownership of the cable TV industry from the production
industry.  In other words, Time Warner would be allowed to make
movies/TV, but not own cable delivery systems.

2) Separate network owners.  I don't mind cable networks from having
multiple similar channels (ie NICK and TVLAND or A&E and HIST), but I
don't like ABC owning Disney and the Family Channel, and I understand
CBS/Viacom own a lot as well.

*In some cases, it might be better if networks owned more of their
affiliates.  During some controversial broadcasts the affiliates
refused to show them while the network did (ie Murrow vs. McCarthy,
southern civil rights issues).  That's a tricky double-edged sword.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you remember *many, many* years ago
when cable television was first getting underway how 'they' said cable
would be a better deal 'since there would not be any commercials; it
is all paid for by your cable fees'.  What a joke that was. Of course
that was long before they started showing commercials in the movie
theatres (where you had bought a five or six dollar ticket to watch
a movie also.)  PAT]

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Software Should Not Be Copyrighted -- Lawsuit
Date: 16 Dec 2004 10:22:16 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Lisa Minter wrote:

> Aharonian argues in his complaint that software copyright laws
> violate the right to due process enshrined in the U.S.  Constitution
> because they do not provide clear boundaries for appropriate
> use. That means industry players and courts do not have a clear idea
> of the rules.

>> "Until you're sued and a judge makes up his mind about what is the
>> idea and expression (at stake), no one knows," Aharonian said in an
>> interview.

In the history of technology, there have been a great many court
battles over patents.  For example, I think the fellow who invented FM
had a long running battle with RCA over it.

Having patent is no guarantee at all of no litigation.  There are
plenty of arguments over exactly what a patent does and not does not
cover, and whether a subsequent invention is actually something new
and different or just a copy of an existing patent.

A patent and copyright each have their advantages and disadvantages.

I understand copyright law was recently changed to allow holders to
keep their rights much longer.  Some people object to that because it
supposedly enriches "big [evil] corporations".  It just might (like
Disney and Warner continuing to get royalties over Mickey Mouse and
Bugs Bunny).  On the other hand, it also just as much protects small
guys who create something and can continue to get royalties.  Further,
it protects certain popular images from being abused by becoming
public domain and I think that's a good thing.

There is always the conflict between our desire to protect creators
and our dislike of anti trust.  One solution in the past has been to
mandate monopolists (whether intentional or not) to license their
patents at reasonable cost to competitors.  I think, for example,
classic cartoon images should be protected, but also available for
license at a reasonable fee.

(I wanted to buy a video tape of an old newsreel.  The company quoted
me $3,000, which I thought was a bit much for something 75 years old.)

------------------------------

From: Maverick <rashid.anwer@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Dialogic JCT Series
Date: 16 Dec 2004 08:30:55 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Hi,

Thanks for the help David.

I am not sure if we are purchasing from some stockist or directly or
 from some some reseller but I will to get some help from there as
well.  Thanks anyways.

------------------------------

From: Patrick Townson <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' the Wave of the Future?  
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:18:02 -0600


C.W. (temp18@thewolfden.org) responded in this thread on Wed, 15 
Dec 2004 14:17:32 CST:

> <spamtrap100@comcast.net> wrote:

>> Topic drift alert.

>> Not that that ever happens here in the -> TELECOM <- digest.

> Or is it now the Telecom-Computer-Hacker-Legal-WiFi-Television-
> Automobile-Etc News Feed Digest?

Right on, C.W.!  I am glad you understand what is going on here. 
It is *all those things* (except for the automobile part), but the
hassle is, the Digest software I use is so old it would require
a lot of work to get all that in the title; my software is so 
obsolete that all my scripts would have to be changed to use the
*entire title* before the word 'Digest', so to avoid having to 
rebuild all my scripts I just stick with the seven letter word
'TELECOM' which makes it all hold together just right. As a courtesy
to the people who wish to read telecom news, I do run a liberal
amount of it in each issue, and even more of it in the TD-Extra
pages daily on our web site. Trouble is, C.W., I fell asleep at
the switch when the issue before this came out, and I could not
think of a witty, snotty Editor's Note to answer you back with at
the time, but I hope this delayed response is good enough.  

PAT

------------------------------

Date: 16 Dec 2004 20:36:40 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Wrong 911 Address Delays Firemen
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As sad as this event is, *nothing*
> was said about the call to 911 going over VOIP, ...

Nobody said it had anything to do with VoIP.  A few moments in Google
news found this explanation in the NY Post:

 Officials said a neighbor a block away from the blaze mistakenly gave
 the 911 operator his own address -- sending the first wave of
 firefighters to the wrong apartment house. Twenty-five units
 altogether responded to a flood of calls but only one went to the
 wrong address -- a not uncommon situation, officials said.

------------------------------

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Software Should Not Be Copyrighted -- Lawsuit
Date: 16 Dec 2004 15:42:15 -0500
Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)


Mark Crispin  <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:

> Patents, on the other hand, lock up techniques; and the history of
> software patents is a sad litany of numerous obvious and commonly-used
> techniques being claimed under patent.  The necessary litigation to
> overturn such patents is ridiculously expensive.

This is not necessarily something wrong with patents.  This is
something wrong with patents that are issued by a patent bureau with
no proper examination of the patents.

A quick look at recent software patents shows that the vast majority
of them are not new designs but entirely dependant on prior art, and
that anyone with any software experience should never have allowed
them to be issued.

The fact that the patent bureau does not have anybody skilled enough
to realize that the ring buffer is a forty-year-old idea and therefore
not patentable to Microsoft means that they should not be in the
business of issuing software patents.  But that does not mean that
somebody out there should not be doing it.

I should add that software patents should also not last anywhere near
as long as they do.

> Something tells me that Aharonian is a lawyer who's looking to drum up
> even more business.

There is a need to protect innovative technology.  In the best of all
possible worlds, patents will do that.  In fact, issuing patents on
technology that is not innovative causes the system to collapse
completely.  But that does not mean that there is not a kernel of
goodness in the idea.

--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.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #602
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Dec 16 23:46:18 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBH4kHZ05765;
	Thu, 16 Dec 2004 23:46:18 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 23:46:18 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412170446.iBH4kHZ05765@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 #603

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Dec 2004 23:42:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 603

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    No Safer and Less Free (Lisa Minter)
    Gays Own More Tech Innovations (Lisa Minter)
    Record Industry Sues 754 for Internet Song Swaps (Lisa Minter)
    AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phones (Marcus Falco)
    Re: FCC Approves Wireless Internet Access on Airplanes (Joseph)
    Re: Wrong 911 Address Delays Firemen (Mark Atwood)
    Re: Wrong 911 Address Delays Firemen (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Re: Cingular Migration (John Levine)
    Re: Cell Phone Users/Motorists Are Dangerous (Dave VanHorn)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Cross Battery and Verizon (Gary Novosielski)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: No Safer and Less Free
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:07:55 EST
Organization: http://lisaminter.us.tf


Editorial on National ID Cards

By Laura W. Murphy

"Show me your papers" is a phrase most Americans would never expect to
hear in their everyday lives, but with the intelligence bill passed by
Congress last week, that's the type of Big-Brother society we're
becoming. The de facto national ID that lawmakers approved won't make
us any safer, but it will make us much less free.
 
Most people already use a driver's license -- to cash checks, vote and
travel -- so what's wrong with standardizing and consolidating data?

A national ID is an identity thief's dream come true. Under new
federal guidelines, state IDs must include personal information, plus
a digital photograph, and they must be "machine readable." Businesses
might soon be able to swipe your ID to track what you bought, and when
and where you bought it. They could be able to use that information
themselves or sell it to others.

Since 9/11, Americans have had to weigh tradeoffs between privacy and
security. A national ID, though, protects neither. Of the 25 countries
most affected by terrorist attacks -- including Israel -- 80% already
have national IDs. A national ID hasn't made these nations any
safer.

A convincing case has not been made that this system would have
stopped 9/11 or the Oklahoma City bombing, because a national ID
cannot reveal malicious intentions. For example, some of the 9/11
hijackers obtained identification documents legally, and were in the
country legally. 

It takes good, old-fashioned police work to follow up on leads and
separate the Mohamed Attas and Timothy McVeighs from law-abiding
people.

A national ID wouldn't have stopped those with fake IDs, either. An ID
is only as secure as the "source documents" it requires. Someone who
used a fake birth certificate and fake Social Security card to get an
ID will still be able to do so under the new law; the same people who
manufacture fake driver's licenses today will be manufacturing fake
national IDs tomorrow.

Our privacy isn't the only price we'll pay for this system. Enacting
this legislation will cost billions of dollars -- money better spent on
real security measures that will keep us both safe and free.</p>

Laura W. Murphy is director of the American Civil Liberties Union's
Washington Legislative Office.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, the Associated Press, and Yahoo News..

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Gays Own More Tech Innovations
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:17:51 EST
Organization: http://lisaminter.us.tf


Trendsetters once more, gay people are slightly ahead of the curve
when it comes to using technology, particularly when it comes to
communication, a new online survey reveals.

Harris Interactive, in conjunction with Witeck-Combs Communications, a
strategic public relations and marketing firm that focuses on the gay
market, conducted an online survey of technology usage and found some
real differences between how gay and straight people use or acquire
new technology.

If you wanted to watch cable, for instance, you'd have more luck
finding a cable box at a gay person's home. More than two-thirds of
gay households, or 69 percent, have cable as compared with less than
two-thirds, or 61 percent, of straight homes.

At a gay household you would also double your chances of being able to
watch "Queer as Folk" in HDTV: 16 percent of gay households have HDTV;
only 8 percent of straight households have it so far.

Gay people may also stay slightly better connected than their straight
counterparts -- at least when it comes to cell phones. Eight in 10 gay
people, or 79 percent, have cellular service as compared with 72
percent of straight people. The survey also showed slightly more gay
people pick their cell phones and cell phone plans according to their
friends' and family's advice.

While showing the difference between the two communities, the survey
also suggests that such market information is important for companies
to know if they want to attract more gay customers.

"It's no secret that the cellular market is becoming increasingly
saturated, and these data can help marketers distinguish between GLB
and heterosexual consumers' use and purchase considerations," Jake
Stafford, senior marketing strategist at Witeck-Combs, said in the
firm's press release. "The research also suggests that as gays
continue to embrace emerging technologies such as HDTV, there is room
for innovations that would continue to spur the buying preferences of
trend-setting gay customers."

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 Planet Out News and AP News Service..

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Record Industry Sues 754 for Internet Song Swaps
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:11:36 EST


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A recording industry trade group said Thursday
that it has filed another wave of lawsuits against 754 people it
suspects of distributing songs over the Internet without permission.

The Recording Industry Association of America has now sued more than
7,000 people for distributing its songs over "peer to peer" networks
like eDonkey and Kazaa, in an effort to discourage the online song
copying that it believes has cut into CD sales.

The RIAA typically settles copyright infringement suits for around
$5,000 each.

Despite more than a year of headline-grabbing lawsuits, peer-to-peer
use has not declined. An average of 7.5 million users were logged on
to peer-to-peer networks in November 2004, up from 4.4 million in
November 2003, according to the research firm BigChampagne.

The four major labels -- Vivendi Universal, Sony BMG Music
Entertainment, EMI Group Plc and privately held Warner Music -- have
recently begun to license their songs to a new generation of online
services as a way to slash distribution costs and reach out to fans.

But recording-industry officials remain at loggerheads with software
makers like Grokster and Morpheus that allow users to freely copy
their songs.

"With legal online retailers still forced to compete against illegal
free networks, the playing field remains decidedly unbalanced," said
RIAA president Cary Sherman in a statement.

Courts so far have declined to declare peer-to-peer software makers
like Grokster and Morpheus illegal because, like a photocopier, they
do not permit copyright infringement but merely make it possible.

The Supreme Court will hear the entertainment's case against Grokster
and Morpheus in March.

The latest round of lawsuits included students at Columbia University,
the University of Pennsylvania, Old Dominion University and Virginia
Commonwealth University.

Under pressure form the RIAA, many schools have taken steps to limit
file sharing and at least 20 schools give students free access to
industry-sanctioned download services like Roxio Inc.'s Napster .

The RIAA does not yet know the names of those it has sued, only the
numerical addresses used by their computers. The trade group typically
finds out suspects' identities from their Internet service providers
during the legal proceedings.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 Reuter News.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:42:50 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use


There are a lot more interests than the FCC and FAA in this story, and
a lot of players who can delay or derail the change. In this case
its the flight attendants. They may be claiming a safety issue,
but it may be they don't want to deal with passengers yelling
into the phones, or it may be they're hoping to use it as a
bargaining chip in negotiations.

http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=3Dst/sn/12150000aaa06203.u
pi&Sys=3Dsiteia&Fid=3DAVIATION&Type=3DNews&Filter=3DAviation
http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=3Dst/sn/12150000aaa06203.u
pi&Sys=3Dprint&Fid=3DAVIATION&Type=3DNews&Filter=3DAviation&S=3Dsiteia=20
<http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=3Dst/sn/12150000aaa06203.
upi&Sys=3Dprint&Fid=3DAVIATION&Type=3DNews&Filter=3DAviation&S=3Dsiteia>

AFA opposes in-flight cell phone use

WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 (UPI) -- A union representing U.S. flight attendants is=
calling on the Federal Communications Commission to maintain its ban on
in-flight use of cellular telephones.

The Association of Flight Attendants warns widespread use of wireless
devices in the confined space of an aircraft cabin potentially could
interfere with an aircraft's communications and navigation systems,
compromise safety and increase conflicts between passengers and crew
member.

An AFA representative called for more research on the use of portable
electronic devices on board aircraft during a Washington meeting on
proposed changes in prohibitions on cellular use.

"While this process is unfolding, attempts to weaken the long-standing
FCC prohibition will only confuse the public, and any widespread
misperception by travelers that cell phone use in flight is now
intrinsically safe might well prove catastrophic," said Chris
Witkowski, director of the AFA Air Safety, Health and Security
Department in a statement.

The AFA represents more than 46,000 flight attendants.

Copyright 2004 by United Press International.
All rights reserved.

Copyright 2004 UPI

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 United Press International.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: FCC Approves Wireless Internet Access on Airplanes
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:03:22 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:10:23 -0500, Marcus Didius Falco
<falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Press reports say that the FAA is in no hurry to allow this, so it may
> be several years before it's implemented. This article says that
> they won't complete their technical study for 2 years.

> Another scenario, however, would be to nibble away at the rules: use
> is now allowed at the ramp with the doors open. It might be allowed on
> some airlines while taxiing based on this experience. Then later it
> could be allowed at altitude based on that experience. But that would
> take a couple of years anyhow.

All this talk of the FAA is nice, but isn't the present prohibition
for cell phones in flight because of a FCC edict and it has nothing to
do with how it affects avionics and the FAA isn't even involved
officially, but rather the way that someone in a plane at 35,000 feet
would affect multiple cells on the ground and thus mess things up on
the ground is the main concern of the FCC?

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Wrong 911 Address Delays Firemen
From: Mark Atwood <mark@atwood.name>
Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy!
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:35:35 GMT


TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org> writes:

> A fire in a six-story apartment building early Wednesday, killed one
> person and injured 31 others, and Mayor Bloomberg said firefighters
> were delayed because the caller reporting the fire gave the wrong
> address.

Which is why, when one moves to a new address and has POTS service
installed, on a weekday day, when not lots of emergencies are
happening, it is wise to dial 911, immediately tell the operator that
this is not an emergency, and ask them to verify your address.


Mark Atwood       |  When you do things right, people won't be sure
mark@atwood.name  |  you've done anything at all.
http://mark.atwood.name/  http://www.livejournal.com/users/fallenpegasus

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When I first printed the original
item a couple days ago, my original intention was to *refute* the
oft-given argument about how 'VOIP fails to provide good identifica-
tion to public safety units.' That is one reason telcos and their
supporters give against VOIP service. My intention was to show it
can go both ways.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Wrong 911 Address Delays Firemen
Date: 16 Dec 2004 23:20:36 -0500
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.


In article <telecom23.601.1@telecom-digest.org>,
TELECOM Digest Editor  <ptownson@telecom-digest.org> wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As sad as this event is, *nothing*
> was said about the call to 911 going over VOIP, rather than the
> more usual transport for calls to 911, nor was it explained who the
> 'someone' was that gave an incorrect address to the dispatcher. Maybe
> one of our NYC readers can provide more background on this.   PAT]

The story didn't say anything about VOIP because VOIP was either not
involved or entirely irrelevant.  According to this morning's New York
Times, the caller who reported the fire was so flustered that he gave
the dispatcher *his* address as the building on fire instead of the
correct one (which was about a block away).

The real problem here is idiots (often building superintendents, or
tenants intimidated by complaints from their neighbors about door
slamming noise) who remove or defeat the extremely strong spring that
New York City requires as a self-closer on all apartment-door hinges.
With the required spring in place, the door basically _cannot_ stay
open when someone rushes out of an apartment after discovering a fire.
In this case, according to the Times, the tenant rushed out of the
apartment after discovering the fire and did not close the door; what
the Times failed to mention was that if the door had been in
compliance with the fire code, it would have closed itself.


Thor Lancelot Simon	                          tls@rek.tjls.com

"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is
 to be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem."  - Noam Chomsky

------------------------------

Date: 17 Dec 2004 03:35:59 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Cingular Migration
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Then how about SBC? I always heard SBC advertisments mentioning about
> Cingular Wireless. Please advise more ...

That story did a rather poor job of explaining what the problem is.

Cingular bought AT&T Wireless.  Since it takes a while to merge the
operations of two big companies, for the moment AT&T Wireless is still
operating as AT&T Wireless even though it's part of Cingular.

That's so EXCEPT in a few places, like the part of Oklahoma where the
article was written.  For anti-trust reasons, they sold some parts of
AT&T Wireless to Alltel.  So in those few places, AT&T Wireless is
really Alltel.  AT&T Wireless did a lousy job of telling the customers
in those areas to ignore all the ads, you're really Alltel customers
now.

If you were a Cingular customer before, you're still a Cingular
customer.  If you were an AT&T Wireless customer before, you're
probably a Cingular customer, except in a few areas where you're an
Alltel customer instead.  If you're an AT&T Wireless customer and
you're not sure, I'd suggest calling 611 from your cell phone and when
you get a human ask "is this Cinglar or Alltel"?


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711
johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

Reply-To: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org>
From: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Motorists Are Dangerous
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:45:53 -0500


I've been watching this, conducting my own unscientific poll if you
will ... My results suggest that everyone should be forced to use cell
phones while driving, as I've seen far more "stupid maneuvers" by
drivers without cell phones, than with them.

Seriously, I think it's wrong to judge one driver's abilities by
another driver's abilities.  If that were the case, we'd all be
walking because some people can't concentrate enough to drive, at all.

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?
Date: 16 Dec 2004 13:45:55 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you remember *many, many* years
> ago when cable television was first getting underway how 'they' said
> cable would be a better deal 'since there would not be any
> commercials; it is all paid for by your cable fees'.  What a joke
> that was. Of course that was long before they started showing
> commercials in the movie theatres (where you had bought a five or
> six dollar ticket to watch a movie also.)  PAT]

Yes, I do.  Indeed, I remember a lot of promises about cable
television that never came to be, and I've read a lot of the hopes for
broadcast TV that either never came out or only did in a trickle.

All these broken promises from new technology is a motivator for many
of my postings here.  I've seen enough "oh this is a wonderful
technology!" promises when in reality it actually made things _worse_
for us consumers.  Sometimes the technology itself was just plain bad,
sometimes it was the way it was promoted and marketed.

Everyone is deep in love with "digital" over analog, but the rush to
implementation had a lot of bugs with disasterous consquences as
firemen radios went dead.  A major police system used in several
cities tends to fail; the mfr is working on it.

The old Bell System used to test, test, and retest its new
technologies before rolling them out nationwide.  After in-house
extensive lab testing, they did carefully controlled beta tests in one
real exchange.  Their famous initial ESS tests taught them a heck of a
lot about reliability, the switchgear, and station sets.

The original point of CATV was better reception.  I'm still waiting
for that to happen.  For some reason the lowest channels on my system
come in very poorly, and I've called them out many times.  As it
happens I don't watch those channels too much so I live with it, but
it's interesting how this supposedly high-tech medium (with fiber
optic now) still can't get the basics right.

The second point of CATV was better program selection.  In some ways
that has come true, but in many ways that's lacking.  When Nick@Nite
and TV Land first came out they offered some neat stuff from the
1950s, but now it's just more reruns of recent junk.  Nick daytime had
some creative original shows, but I don't think they bother anymore.

I don't think much of cable news networks because they spew out raw
facts that are _out of context_ and thus not newsworthy.  Good news
reporting is more than just reporting isolated facts -- it is putting
them together in a logical fashion, eliminating contradictions, and
putting in a wider context.  Despite all the time they have they still
put everything in brief sound bites.

------------------------------

From: Gary Novosielski <gpn@suespammers.org>
Subject: Re: Cross Battery and Verizon
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:22:51 GMT


Joe Perkowski wrote:

> The Verizon guy is telling us "cross battery" is causing this?

Tell him you don't care if Green Men from Mars are causing it; when is
he going to fix it?

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #603
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Dec 17 14:23:23 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBHJNM814288;
	Fri, 17 Dec 2004 14:23:23 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 14:23:23 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412171923.iBHJNM814288@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 #604

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 17 Dec 2004 14:23:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 604

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Time Warner to Pay $510 Million to Resolve U.S. Probes (Lisa Minter)
    AOL Settlement Includes Tight Controls (Lisa Minter)
    Former Charter CEO Pleads Guilty to Fraud (Monty Solomon)
    Geico Claims Google Advertising Policy Violates Trademark Law (ptownson)
    VOIP, Bluetooth Vulnerable to Hacks (Telecom DailyLead)
    Re: Dialogic JCT Series (David)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Andrew Bell)
    Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use (Joseph)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Time Warner to Pay $510 Million to Resolve U.S. Probes
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 11:15:39 EST


WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - Time Warner Inc. said on Wednesday it
agreed to pay the U.S. government $510 million to resolve criminal
and civil charges that its America Online unit fraudulently inflated
its revenue figures.

The agreements close a two-year investigation by the U.S. Justice
Department and Securities and Exchange Commission and gives the
world's largest media company financial flexibility to pursue a range
of deals, including the acquisition of cable operator Adelphia
Communications Corp.

"For them to be an effective and fully competitive suitor, they will
be pressed to clear their reputation from any type of censure," said
Thomas Russo, a portfolio manager at asset manager Gardner, Russo,
Gardner, which owns shares in the company.

Time Warner Chief Executive Dick Parsons told employees in an internal
company memorandum, "While there are still challenges ahead, the steps
we announced today will help to remove a cloud that has been hanging
over the company for some time now,"

The company, which is home to such assets as Bugs Bunny, CNN and
People magazine, has already set up a $500 million reserve to
cover anticipated costs of the agreements.

DEFERRED PROSECUTION

Time Warner said it will pay $210 million as part of a deferred
prosecution agreement with the U.S. Justice Department to resolve
criminal charges of aiding and abetting securities fraud.

Under the agreement filed in federal court in Virginia, Time Warner
accepted responsibility for criminal violations made by AOL employees
and pledged to cooperate fully with the Justice Department in its
investigation into individuals involved in the fraud, among other
conditions.

In exchange, the government agreed to defer prosecution of the company
for two years, after which it will dismiss charges if Time Warner
complies with the deal.

"The agreements we've reached today with America Online and Time
Warner give the company a chance to turn itself around and avoid the
consequences of a criminal conviction," said Deputy Attorney General
James Comey.

U.S. Attorney Paul McNulty said the investigation was continuing and
he expected additional criminal charges.

The company has offered to pay about &#36;300 million to settle fraud
charges with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission related to
its buyout of a stake held by Germany's Bertelsmann AG AOL Europe.

While a final resolution with the SEC has not been reached, the staff
of the SEC has agreed to recommend the proposal to the commissioners,
who must sign off on any settlement, Time Warner said in a statement.

Time Warner will also agree to an independent examiner who will review
the company's accounting on online advertising revenue from 1999 to
2002, which may result in further restatements.

Time Warner said it admits no guilt or denies any
wrongdoing as part of the SEC proposal.

DEALINGS WITH PURCHASEPRO

The Justice Department's charges stemmed from AOL's dealings with the
once-thriving now defunct software company PurchasePro.com. Court
documents said "six or more" AOL officers or employees aided
PurchasePro.com's officers to falsely inflate the company's revenue.

No AOL officials have yet been charged in the case and Justice
Department officials declined to identify any of the AOL officials who
may be charged.

As part of the deal with the Justice Department, four former
PurchasePro executives agreed to plead guilty and cooperate with the
government's investigation. They also settled civil charges with the
SEC.

Time Warner stock closed the day flat at $19.38 on the New York Stock
Exchange.

For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: AOL Settlement Includes Tight Controls
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:59:04 EST


By David A. Vise, Washington Post Staff Writer

America Online Inc.'s settlement with the Justice Department imposes a
strict new set of controls on the company, including requirements that
the Internet giant hire a corporate monitor and disclose serious
wrongdoing discovered internally to the government.

The deal -- announced Wednesday and signed by federal prosecutors and
America Online chief executive Jonathan F. Miller -- comes as
authorities seek to strengthen corporate checks and balances following
scandals at Enron Corp., WorldCom Inc. and other firms.

The AOL settlement requires the Dulles-based company to give the
Justice Department every letter it receives threatening private
litigation against AOL. The agreement also makes the Justice
Department a party to normally private communications between AOL and
its parent company, media giant Time Warner Inc.
  
"AOL will adopt a new internal standard of conduct under which it will
inform the Department of Justice of any new matter reported to Time
Warner's Audit and Finance Committee that involves substantial and
credible evidence of any Federal Crimes," the cooperation agreement
states.

AOL also agreed to hire and pay for an independent monitor for at
least two years. The selection must be approved by Justice, and the
monitor will report to prosecutors regularly on the firm's business
conduct. The monitor has the power to hire accounting firms to assist
in the work and must be given access to all details of AOL's online
advertising deals.

The company could be subject to criminal prosecution if it fails to
live up to the terms of the agreement. Justice officials filed a
criminal complaint against America Online but agreed to defer
prosecution for two years and to dismiss the complaint at the end of
that period if the company cooperates fully with authorities.

However, AOL could be prosecuted as a corporate entity if it commits
various crimes in the future. As part of the settlement, the firm
waived its right to assert that the statute of limitations had
expired.

On Wednesday, Time Warner and AOL agreed to pay the federal government
$510 million to settle criminal and civil charges following a
long-running probe of questionable accounting and dealmaking that
inflated AOL's revenue and profit before and after the company merged
with Time Warner. The agreements have been approved by Justice and the
enforcement division of the Securities and Exchange Commission , but
the proposed SEC agreement still must be reviewed by the commissioners
of the agency, who have the right to alter, amend or reject the
proposed settlement.

AOL also agreed to assist Justice fully in the criminal prosecution of
"six or more" current and former AOL employees involved in alleged
accounting fraud committed between AOL and PurchasePro.com Inc., a
defunct Las Vegas software firm. The agreement states that AOL and
PurchasePro engaged in a multiyear scheme of accounting fraud and
deceptive dealmaking that enabled both companies to exaggerate the
real revenue they were taking in by millions of dollars.

The agreement does not list the names of the six individuals at AOL
but states that they worked in AOL's business affairs unit, which took
the lead on advertising deals; in the interactive marketing unit; and
elsewhere. Former AOL employees David M. Colburn and Eric Keller, who
worked in business affairs, are among the former AOL employees under
scrutiny, said people familiar with the probe who spoke on condition
of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation. Attorneys for both
men have said they engaged in no wrongdoing.

Four former PurchasePro executives agreed on Wednesday to plead guilty
to criminal charges in the probe and to cooperate in the government's
investigation. They are Robert Geoffrey Layne, former executive vice
president and a co-founder; Shawn P. McGhee, the company's former
chief operating officer; Dale L. Boeth, a former senior vice
president; and James S. Sholeff, a former vice president.

Under the cooperation agreement signed by Miller, AOL agreed not to
challenge Justice's conclusions about the alleged criminal nature of
the scheme between the companies or the criminal culpability of some
AOL officials. Miller also agreed that AOL will actively assist
Justice in the prosecution.

Among other things, Miller agreed that AOL officials with knowledge of
the wrongdoing will testify before a federal grand jury about current
and former America Online officials who participated in the fraudulent
deals and, if necessary, testify at trial.

The Department of Justice's "decision to defer and ultimately not seek
criminal sanctions against AOL is contingent on AOL's adherence to a
number of conditions," Miller wrote in an e-mail to employees. "We
take this matter very seriously and expect you to do the same. As a
company, living up to the conditions imposed by the DOJ must and will
be a clear priority."

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 Washington Post Company.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:55:22 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Former Charter CEO Pleads Guilty to Fraud


By JIM SALTER AP Business Writer

ST. LOUIS (AP) -- The former chief operating officer of cable
television company Charter Communications Inc. pleaded guilty Thursday
to a federal charge that he conspired to defraud investors by
inflating subscriber numbers, U.S. Attorney James Martin said.

David Barford, 46, of Chesterfield, faces sentencing March 11 for
conspiracy to commit wire fraud. He could face up to five years in
prison and a fine of $250,000, but has agreed to testify in the trial
of two other former executives, Martin said.

As part of the plea agreement, 13 other counts were dismissed, Martin
said.

      - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=45695431

------------------------------

Subject: Geico Claims Google Advertising Policy Violates Trademark Law
From: ptownson <ptownson@massis.csail.mit.edu>
Organization: SFGate, San Francisco, CA
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:21 -0800


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=3D/news/archive/2004/12/13/n=
ational1739EST0713.DTL

Monday, December 13, 2004 (AP)
SAM HANANEL, Associated Press Writer

(12-13) 14:39 PST ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) -- federal judge heard
arguments Monday in a trademark dispute that could threaten millions
in advertising revenue for search engine Google Inc.

Attorneys for auto insurance giant Geico told U.S. District Judge
Leonie Brinkema that Google should not be allowed to sell ads to rival
insurance companies that are triggered whenever Geico's name is typed
into the Google search box.

Geico claims that Google's AdWords program, which displays the rival
ads under a "Sponsored Links" heading next to a user's search results,
causes confusion for consumers and illegally exploits Geico's
investment of hundreds of millions of dollars in its brand.

"When a consumers enters 'Geico' ... and goes to the sponsored link
believing there's a connection, that is where the confusion arises,"
said Geico attorney Charles Ossola.

But Google attorney Michael Page said the ad policy is no different
than a supermarket giving out coupons for one product in the checkout
line when a customer buys the same product from a different company.

"There is nothing wrong with that under the trademark laws," Page
said.

Geico filed the lawsuit against Google in May, seeking $8.65 million
in lost profits and a court order preventing Google from using its
name in the advertising program.

Under the program, for example, a competing insurance company could
bid to have its ad appear every time Google users search for the
word "Geico."  When a user clicks on an ad, the advertiser pays Google
a predetermined fee.

Google is facing similar lawsuits from other companies, including
American Blind and Wallpaper Factory Inc. and AXA, the world's No. 3
insurer. Last year, Google asked a court to rule on whether its
pay-for-placement ad policy is legal.

John McCutcheon, Geico's assistant vice president of marketing,
testified Monday that most consumers visit just one Web site when
shopping for auto insurance. If a consumer trying to find Geico is
unknowingly steered to a competitor's site, "We've lost one
opportunity."

The Geico lawsuit, filed in May, came just weeks after Google said it
hoped to raise $2.7 billion with an initial public stock offering. The
vast majority of Google's ad revenue comes from search-related
advertising. In federal filings, the company said it would face
financial risks if it was forced to limit sales of keyword ads to
generic words.

Geico's lawsuit had also named Web site company Overture Services, a
Yahoo! subsidiary, but the two companies reached an undisclosed
settlement in November, after Brinkema denied a motion to dismiss the
trademark claims.

The bench trial is expected to last three days, after which Brinkema
could issue a decision or take the matter under advisement.

Copyright 2004 AP

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 SF-Gate and Associated Press.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As this issue of the Digest was being
prepared for distribution, word reached us that Google had won the
case.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 13:33:00 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: VoIP, Bluetooth Vulnerable to Hacks


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
December 17, 2004
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18191&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* VoIP, Bluetooth vulnerable to hacks
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Sprint-Nextel merger won't result in immediate changes
* Opinion: Debt holds Qwest back
* Former Charter exec pleads guilty in subscriber-number case
* Covad, Verizon revise DSL deal
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Announcing Phone Facts Plus 2005
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Cable companies drive boom in fiber-optic cable business
* NTT DoCoMo takes wraps off new handset
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* DOJ to keep a close watch on AOL's books
* Court allows fiber rights-of-way lawsuits to proceed

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18191&l=2017006

------------------------------

From: David <FlyLikeAnEagle@United.Com>
Reply-To: FlyLikeAnEagle@United.Com
Subject: Re: Dialogic JCT Series
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:24:07 GMT


On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:30:55 UTC, Maverick <rashid.anwer@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,

> Thanks for the help David.

> I am not sure if we are purchasing from some stockist or directly or
>  from some some reseller but I will to get some help from there as
> well.  Thanks anyways.

The groups we initially contacted once we had identified that the
D/42JCT-U was useful for a new product were a great help.  The cards
ranged in price nearly two to one.  Some dealers had support charges
and others an up front service fee.

We chose a supplier near the low end per card and a somewhat
reasonable hourly support rate.  During the initial contacts we were
directed deep into the Intel web sites with addresses for their
support groups.  These are still free to sign up for.

If you are technically savy, this may help you get certain questions
answered.  The support group we pay for as well as many other
developers hang out there.  The D/42 and D/82 aren't used by most
developers but it has been worthwhile.  It is good to pick the brains
of other developers who may have fought some of the battles you may
face when starting out on a new system.  It all depends on what help
you need.


David

------------------------------

From: Andrew Bell <andrew.bell@adress withheld at request>
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 09:06:35 -0500


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote about Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' 
The Wave Of The Future? on 16 Dec 2004 10:10:14 -0800:

> As others mentioned, it will get to the point that no one will watch
> their stuff because the imposed restrictions are too onerous.

GOOD!  Hoist by their own petard, I say.
 
> Yes, the VCR does allow me to skip commercials but on the other hand I
> can watch simultaneous shows now (watch one live, tape the other),
> which means I see more TV, benefiting them.  Time shifting of course
> allows me to see stuff I'd never see, again, a benefit for them.

Not so.  You only benefit "them" if you watch the commercials.

Leaving aside things like per {cable|satellite} subscriber payments,
an OTA TV station sells a product (the viewers) to their customer (the
advertisers.)  Yes, YOU are the product.  If you don't co-operate and
watch the commercials like a good sheep, then you are of absolutely no
commercial (pun intended) value, and "they" couldn't care less what
you watch or when.

The more people skip commercials, the less advertisers will pay.  For
TV to survive as an advertiser supported medium, they MUST find a way
to make their product attractive to their customers.  They can do this
in two ways -- embed the advertising directly in the programming, or
use technology to attempt to force viewers to watch commercials.

Or, the radical approach would be to abandon the advertiser supported
model and turn the whole thing on its head.  If you turn the
programming into the product, and turn the viewers into the customer,
just imagine the increase in quality programming!  Of course, a
$300/month cable bill will probably come with it, but everything has
its price.

Andrew

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:09:35 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:42:50 -0500, Marcus Didius Falco
<falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> The Association of Flight Attendants warns widespread use of wireless
> devices in the confined space of an aircraft cabin potentially could
> interfere with an aircraft's communications and navigation systems,
> compromise safety and increase conflicts between passengers and crew
> member.

Well, as has been written many times before it's unlikely that use of
cell phones will interfere with avionics.

It's more likely the second part "increase conflicts between
passengers and crew member."

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #604
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Dec 18 02:51:14 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBI7pCk20964;
	Sat, 18 Dec 2004 02:51:14 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 02:51:14 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412180751.iBI7pCk20964@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 #605

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 18 Dec 2004 02:51:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 605

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Apple Sues Over Web Leak of Advance Products (Lisa Minter)
    Wireless in Cherryvale (Wesrock@aol.com)
    Mass Call in or Choke Lines in Chicago Area (kevin906)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Wesrock@aol.com)
    Re: Cingular Migration (jrefactors@hotmail.com)
    Re: Cross Battery and Verizon (William Warren)
    Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? (Rick Merrill)
    Re: Geico Claims Google Ad Policy Violates Trademark Law (Clarence Dold)
    Re: Cell Phone Motorists Are Dangerous (Phil McKerracher)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Tony P.)
    CTI Consultant (Peter Deveaux)
    Copy Protection Easily Defeated With Shift Key (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Cable TV Advertising (was 'Transitional Fair Use'...) (Neal McLain)
    VOIP (jim@giganews.com)
    Lots of Free Domains Without ICANN Tyranny (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Ten Ducks (joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Apple Sues Over Web Leak of Advance Products
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 19:48:36 EST


SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Apple Computer Inc.  is suing anonymous
people who leaked details about new products by posting information on
the Internet, court documents showed on Friday.

Apple's complaint, filed with the Santa Clara County California
Superior Court, comes only weeks ahead of the Macworld conference in
San Francisco, the annual show where CEO Steve Jobs unveils the latest
Apple products.

Apple is notoriously secretive about its product plans, while many fan
sites routinely discuss what may be in store, including posting
pictures of real products and hoaxes.

The complaint alleges that "an unidentified individual, acting alone
or in concert with others, has recently misappropriated and
disseminated through Web sites confidential information about an
unreleased Apple product."

Apple said in the seven-page civil complaint, filed on Dec.  13, that
it did not know the "true names or capacities, whether individual,
associate, corporate or otherwise," of the defendants. Once they have
been discovered, the Cupertino, California-based company said it would
amend the complaint.

It was not the first time Apple has gone after fanatics who have
posted information about upcoming products on the Internet.

In December 2002, Apple sued a former contractor who allegedly posted
drawings, images and engineering details of the company's PowerMac G4
computer in July of that year, several weeks before the product was
officially unveiled.

"Apple has filed a civil complaint against unnamed individuals who we
believe stole our trade secrets and posted detailed information about
an unannounced Apple product on the Internet," the company said in a
statement provided to Reuters.  "Apple's DNA is innovation and the
protection of our trade secrets is crucial to our success."

Mac rumor Web sites are at their busiest ahead of the annual Macworld
conventions, which are highly anticipated by the Mac faithful for
product introductions and Jobs' keynote.

In recent weeks, the Web sites have been buzzing with speculation that
Apple will introduce a smaller, cheaper version of its market-leading
iPod digital music player that uses flash memory, rather than the hard
disk drives of the standard iPods.

Flash memory chips retain data stored on them even when electrical
current is shut off.

Financial analysts Andy Neff of Bear Stearns and Charlie Wolf of
Needham & Co. have also published notes in recent weeks mentioning
flash iPods.

"To succeed, Apple must develop innovative products and bring those
products to market in advance of its competitors," the company said in
its complaint. "If Apple competitors were aware of Apple's future
production information, those competitors could benefit economically
from that knowledge by directing their product development or
marketing to frustrate Apple's plans."

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Reuters News Service..

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:15:24 EST
Subject: Wireless in Cherryvale


What kind of wireless service do they have in Cherryvale?  I was
there a week or two ago and tried three times to make a call.

My phone is a Nokia 5165, which has both digital and analog
capabilities.  It displayed simply "Roam" (not "Cingular Roam") so I
must have been in an area (never encountered one before on my
"regional plan"), and then my attempts had these results:

1. Assorted noises, perhaps switching noises, no connection.

2. Very noisy connection, cut off several seconds into the recorded 
   message at the number (in Cherryvale) I was calling.

3. Clean connection, and proceeded through the called number's
   announcement message all the way to the beep to record, and I did
   leave a message, apparently successfully.

My service is registered in Oklahoma City, area code 405, and Kansas is 
in the "region."

You're probably familiar with the situation in Cherryvale and
would know what kind of service I got, what carrier, and why it was so
erratic.

Just wondering, no big deal.  It was a day with bright sunshine and
the calls were made from different locations in Cherryvale.
     

Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Cherryvale, with around 2000 residents,
has the same carriers we have here in Independence, namely Cingular
Wireless, Alltel, and Sprint. But the towers are few and far apart. 
Now that I think about it, I don't beleive any carrier has an office
there in town, however, in all fairness, I am a few blocks down the
street from a Cingular Wireless tower here in Independence, but yet
now and then my phone says 'roam' also (Nokia 6100 series, an older
type phone). If I 'cycle the power' it comes back up in Cingular,
but when I tested it (by dialing 611 when 'roaming') I found I was
on Alltel.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: kevin906 <kfitzgerald@tribune.com>
Subject: Mass Callin or Choke Lines in Chicago Area
Date: 17 Dec 2004 11:20:54 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Anyone have any clues about how these lines are engineered these days?
Or has everyone that knew anything about them retired to sunny climes?
I would think that in the era of modern ISDN SS7 networks that these
chokes would no longer be needed to manage traffic loads between
Central offices.  If they can be provisioned as something besides
analog lines without caller id?  I am just throwing this out there.
Wondering if this technology can be updated into the 21st century.

Thanks for any input.

------------------------------

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 19:24:49 EST
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?


>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you remember *many, many* years
>> ago when cable television was first getting underway how 'they' said
>> cable would be a better deal 'since there would not be any
>> commercials; it is all paid for by your cable fees'.  What a joke
>> that was. Of course that was long before they started showing
>> commercials in the movie theatres (where you had bought a five or
>> six dollar ticket to watch a movie also.)  PAT]

This seems a strange memory, since I remember commercials in movie
theaters in Perry, Oklahoma, in the 1930s, when I was not yet even a
teenager.  A few years later I was working as a projectionist in those
same theaters, and running the commercials along with the rest of the
show.  This would have been in the 1940s, perhaps into the 1950s.

Most of the commercials for movie theaters were produced by the
Alexander Film Company of Colorado Springs, Colo.  One which probably
had a lasting effect on commerce, and which most people from that time
will still remember is the one where the audio was the song "Twice as
much and for a nickel, too ... Pepsi-Cola is the drink for you."

Surely they ran them in Independence, too, and pretty much everywhere
in the country, including theaters in cities.

Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe, but I do not remember, sorry.
PAT]

------------------------------

From: jrefactors@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Cingular Migration
Date: 17 Dec 2004 11:51:15 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I am AT&T customer. AT&T customers have the option to unchange the
plan or migrate to Cingular.  But if Cingular already bought AT&T
Wireless, even AT&T customers unchange the plan, eventually the
wireless network will be Cingular's network. And the AT&T wireless
bill will become Cingular bill.

Then what's the point to migrate? There are so many advertisments
encourage AT&T Wireless customers to migrate to Cingular, that's my
confusion.

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Cross Battery and Verizon
From: William Warren <william_warren_nonoise@comcast.net>
Organization: Church of the Infinite Possibility
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:11:10 GMT


On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:01:52 GMT, Joe Perkowski  
<nospamperkowski1@optonline.net> wrote:

> Hey ppl,

> Does anyone know what is "cross battery"?  We put in a NBX 2 months
> ago running fine.  Now, we are getting static and crosstalk on some of
> our incoming lines.

> We have had a great deal of rain these past 2 weeks, and have had
> previously problems with Verizon due to old copper in our area.

> The Verizon guy is telling us "cross battery" is causing this?

> What is "cross battery" if anyone knows...?

Joe,

He means "Crossed _WITH_ Battery", i.e., he sees a "foreign" voltage on  
your pair when he puts a voltmeter on your line at the CO.

There are three possible causes:

1. The pair is defective, and is shorted to another pair in the
cable. The tester is seeing the voltage on the _other_ pair (-48v from
the CO), looped back to him through the short circuit in the cable.

2. There is a short circuit in your company's internal cable.

3. Your PBX places a "Ground detect" voltage on the pair in order to
sense the tip ground which signals dial tone on a ground-start line.

In all these cases, you'll need to open the lines at the demarcation
point and make a binary decision about which side (your or theirs) the
problem is coming from.

In case (3), if your test at the demarc shows voltage coming from your
PBX, the problem could be that your PBX is optioned for ground-start,
but the CO is configured for loop-start. You'll need to change the
options on the line(s) involved.

HTH.

William

(Filter noise from my address for direct replies)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:28:35 -0500
From: Rick Merrill <RickMerrill@comTHROW.net>
Subject: Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse?


A number of people 'think' they have a problem with their VoIP
provider, BUT the problems only occur when talking to someone on a
CELL phone. The reason may be that the compression algorithms used in
the cell phone do not "fit well" with the compression algotithms used
for VoIP. - RM

------------------------------

From: dold@XReXXGeico.usenet.us.com
Subject: Re: Geico Claims Google Advertising Policy Violates Trademark Law
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:30:45 UTC
Organization: a2i network


ptownson <ptownson@massis.csail.mit.edu> wrote:

> <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=3D/news/archive/2004/12/13/national1739EST0713.DTL>

> Monday, December 13, 2004 (AP)
> SAM HANANEL, Associated Press Writer

> (12-13) 14:39 PST ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) -- federal judge heard
> arguments Monday in a trademark dispute that could threaten millions
> in advertising revenue for search engine Google Inc.

Let's try to stay current.  The judge issued a summary dismissal of
the case moments after Geico finished their presentation and Google
asked for a dismissal.

<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/12/15/national1351EST0573.DTL>


Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA  38.8-122.5

------------------------------

From: Phil McKerracher <phil@mckerracher.org>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Motorists Are Dangerous
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 00:00:43 GMT


<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote in message
news:telecom23.602.3@telecom-digest.org:

> I just had two close calls, nearly getting hit by two separate
> motorists distracted by their cell phone conversation...

> Why is it so critical that people must stay connected 24/7?

I can think of lots of possible reasons, some of which make me wonder
how we ever managed without cell phones. Two obvious examples are
medical emergencies (pregnant wife etc) and arranging a rendezvous
somewhere (e.g airport). Things that are hard to predict but sometimes
very important.

But I completely agree that people should pull over or at least use a
hands-free kit.


Phil McKerracher
www.mckerracher.org

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?
Organization: ATCC
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:26:07 -0500


In article <telecom23.603.10@telecom-digest.org>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com 
says:

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you remember *many, many* years
>> ago when cable television was first getting underway how 'they' said
>> cable would be a better deal 'since there would not be any
>> commercials; it is all paid for by your cable fees'.  What a joke
>> that was. Of course that was long before they started showing
>> commercials in the movie theatres (where you had bought a five or
>> six dollar ticket to watch a movie also.)  PAT]

> Yes, I do.  Indeed, I remember a lot of promises about cable
> television that never came to be, and I've read a lot of the hopes for
> broadcast TV that either never came out or only did in a trickle.

> All these broken promises from new technology is a motivator for many
> of my postings here.  I've seen enough "oh this is a wonderful
> technology!" promises when in reality it actually made things _worse_
> for us consumers.  Sometimes the technology itself was just plain bad,
> sometimes it was the way it was promoted and marketed.

> Everyone is deep in love with "digital" over analog, but the rush to
> implementation had a lot of bugs with disasterous consquences as
> firemen radios went dead.  A major police system used in several
> cities tends to fail; the mfr is working on it.

Working on it until the first wrongful death suit that is. 

> The old Bell System used to test, test, and retest its new
> technologies before rolling them out nationwide.  After in-house
> extensive lab testing, they did carefully controlled beta tests in one
> real exchange.  Their famous initial ESS tests taught them a heck of a
> lot about reliability, the switchgear, and station sets.

The first ESS couldn't even handle ring current so there were special
phone sets with electronic ringers. Now here we are forty or so years
later and most new phones have electronic ringers yet the
infrastructure still supports the 90VAC 20Hz signalling.

> The original point of CATV was better reception.  I'm still waiting
> for that to happen.  For some reason the lowest channels on my system
> come in very poorly, and I've called them out many times.  As it
> happens I don't watch those channels too much so I live with it, but
> it's interesting how this supposedly high-tech medium (with fiber
> optic now) still can't get the basics right.

I love how the cable companies harp on the fact that satellite
transmission can be interrupted by rain, and then one of their own
carried stations goes off the air because you guessed it, weather
interfered with the cable companies OWN satellite reception.

> The second point of CATV was better program selection.  In some ways
> that has come true, but in many ways that's lacking.  When Nick@Nite
> and TV Land first came out they offered some neat stuff from the
> 1950s, but now it's just more reruns of recent junk.  Nick daytime had
> some creative original shows, but I don't think they bother anymore.

What kills me is all the commercials. I've got expanded basic service
and I can flip through all 80 channels in a given time and see nothing
but commercials.

> I don't think much of cable news networks because they spew out raw
> facts that are _out of context_ and thus not newsworthy.  Good news
> reporting is more than just reporting isolated facts -- it is putting
> them together in a logical fashion, eliminating contradictions, and
> putting in a wider context.  Despite all the time they have they still
> put everything in brief sound bites.

But that costs money. It's the same thing that ruined prime time
television. Reality television is so much cheaper to produce but you
get absolute lowest common denominator television. The only reason I
watch the local evening news is to if anyone I know has gotten
ambushed which has happened a couple of times. :)

Tony

------------------------------

From: pdeveaux@primas.net (Peter Deveaux)
Subject: CTI Consultant
Date: 17 Dec 2004 18:08:59 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


CTI Systems Applications Consultant design computer telephony
integrated solutions

Description:
 
We are a developer of custom computer telephony (CT) software
solutions. We seek the services of a skilled CTI consultant.

CTI Systems Applications Consultant
 
Primary responsibility is to design and develop custom Computer
Telephony Integrated solutions. Candidate will be responsible for
design, development, testing and support for Intel NetMerge Dialogic
CT-Connect consulting projects.

Secondarily, this engineer will also be responsible to provide site
implementation and installation services for CT Connect related
products at customer sites.  This includes installing CT Connect
Software on CTI server platforms, testing and troubleshooting the
telephone switch to CTI server link, providing consulting services for
CT Connect management and maintenance procedures, and verifying the
customer's acceptance of the installation services.  A working
knowledge of data networking is required for the site implementation
and installation services aspects of this position.
 
Other responsibilities include assisting sales professionals with
customer requirements gathering.
 
Approximate travel time 20%. 

Minimum Qualifications:
 
3+ years experience in developing software solutions on a Windows /
Windows NT environment
 
Person must be able to program in one or more of the following
languages, C, C++, VB or Java, and have the necessary skills to test
and troubleshoot complex systems.
 
Proven track record in delivering consulting and application
integration projects.
 
Experience with object-oriented programming and 1+ years of Computer
Telephony Integration development is a minimum requirement.

Desired Qualifications:  
 
Excellent communications skills
Intel NetMerge experience
Dialogic CT-Connect experience
Aspect Contact Server

Company-Paid Benefits: 
                Medical Coverage  
                Vision Coverage  
                Paid Prescription Program  
                Dental Coverage  

Additional Benefits:
                Paid Time Off  
                Holidays  
 
Optional Benefits:  
                Tuition Reimbursement Plan

Apply to: tech-hr@primas.net
          www.primas.net

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:28:42 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: [IP] Copy Protection Easily Defeated With Shift Key


If I recall correctly there was a similar scheme several years ago that 
could be defeated in a similar way:

 From: "David Farber" < >

_______________ Forward Header _______________
Subject:        Copy Protection Easily Defeated With Shift Key
Author: EEkid
Date:           17th December 2004 2:50:43 pm

SonyBMG plans to begin the new year with a batch of freshly pressed
music cds that will feature copy protection technology from First 4
Internet.  First 4 Internet's technology encodes the music files with
a heavy encryption that allows standard cd players to playback the
music. There are also additional data files on the CD that further
enhance encryption. All of which is easily bypassed by simply holding
down the shift button when you load the CD into a PC.

http://www.anandtech.com/news/shownews.aspx?i=23525

_______________ Forward Header _______________
Subject:        Re: [IP] Copy Protection Easily Defeated With Shift Ke y
Author: Brett Glass < g>
Date:           17th December 2004 5:40:38 pm

Dave:

One doesn't even need to hold down the shift key to disable this nasty
DRM if one configures one's Windows system not to "autoplay" CDs when
they are inserted. This is a good idea, since leaving this "feature"
enabled can also cause awkward problems if a CD is left in a drive
when the machine is rebooted.

Instructions on how to disable "autoplay" (They'll vary for different
versions of Windows) are available on hundreds of Web sites; consult
your favorite search engine.

--Brett Glassi

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:32:09 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Subject: Cable TV Advertising (was 'Transitional Fair Use'...)


PAT wrote [TD 23:602]:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you remember *many, many*
> years ago when cable television was first getting underway how
> 'they' said cable would be a better deal 'since there would not
> be any commercials; it is all paid for by your cable fees'.

Huh?  That's not the way I remember it.  Who's the 'they' that told
you that?

 From 1948 to 1975 (before communications satellites existed) cable TV
systems carried programming from two sources: "local origination" and
television broadcast stations.  Local-origination programming was
non-broadcast programming produced either by the cable operator or by
local "access" organizations.  Broadcast stations fell into two
loosely-defined categories: "local" stations, which potential
subscribers could receive off-the-air, and "distant" stations which
the average viewer couldn't receive without an elaborate antenna.

Distant broadcast stations which didn't duplicate local stations were
the cable operator's bread and butter.  Cable operators usually
carried local stations in an effort to offer a complete lineup (and
because FCC rules made such carriage mandatory for most cable
systems).  But local stations didn't help sell cable subscriptions:
only distant broadcast stations which subscribers couldn't receive
off-the-air -- particularly commercial independents like WOR-TV and
WGN-TV -- would induce potential subscribers to sign up for cable.

Cable operators went to great lengths to "import" distant stations.
Tall towers, some exceeding 1000 feet, were erected just to support
receiving antennas.  Many cable operators constructed microwave links
to import distant stations.  Some cable operators even constructed
antenna sites on mountaintops so remote that they couldn't be reached
except by helicopter.

The FCC's "manner of carriage" rules governed how cable systems could
carry television stations.  One fundamental rule that was established
in those days (and that remains in place to this day) stated that,
unless specifically permitted by some other FCC rule, the cable TV
system must carry each broadcast signal in its entirely, without any
interruption or substitution.

In other words, the cable system **shall carry** all commercial and
political messages transmitted by the originating station, and shall
not delete or alter any such message.

This rule applied even to non-commercial educational (NCE) stations.
Although these stations didn't carry commercials, they did carry
program promos and solicitations for contributions.

Local programming was governed under FCC different rules.

   - Any sort of paid commercial or political advertising was
     prohibited on any channel designated by franchise as a
     public, educational, or government access channel.

   - Advertising was permitted on channels controlled by cable
     operators, and many cable operators accepted commercial
     and political messages.  Even character-generated "message
     board" channels carried advertising.

Given this history, I don't see how it's possible that anyone familiar
with the industry could have claimed that "there would not be any
commercials; it is all paid for by your cable fees."  Without distant
independent commercial stations like WGN-TV and WOR-TV, the cable
industry wouldn't have had a salable product.


Neal McLain

------------------------------

From: jim@giganews.com
Subject: VOIP
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 00:22:11 -0600


I'm considering VOIP for my home but realistically, how many phones
can it support?  I've read from 2 sites, 3 and 5 phones so I was
hoping what your experience has been?  Does it matter who the provider
is to answer this question?  I presume the phones are the same used as
before voip.  Just in case, can you buy one base unit with multiple
hand sets ?

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 02:02:03 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Lots of Free Domains Without ICANN Tyranny


I notice that in addition to .tf domains, one can also now get free
domains in the .tc and .ms domains under the same terms as the
original .tf domains. That is, auto, unvalidated registration, free
forever, using redirection to any other site you want it to go to.

For 'ms' domain names, go to http://www.cydots.com to sign up.
For 'tc' domain names, go to http://www.smartdots.com to sign up.
For 'tf' domain names, go to http://unonic.com to sign up.

For wox.org and dhs.org, n3.net and home.dhs.org you do have to pay
$5.00 for a two year registration, but it is a totally automated
process as well, and these also redirect to wherever you wish. Yoy pay
the $5.00 fee (one charge gets you up to four domain names)and these
turn on immediatly upon set up); these are also redirectors to
wherever you wish, and can be passworded or not as you wish. You pay
the five dollar registration fee for wox.org and dhs.org and n3.net
using a PayPal account. These three are all based out of Australia,
but like all 'org' and 'net' domains, they *are* subject (I suppose)
to ICANN tyranny.  So you may wish to go with ms, tc, and tf which are
not only free, and easy to use instant signup/registration, but no
ICANN supervision.  Other than 'tf' which was explained to me as the
Antarctic area of the Indian Ocean, I have no idea where 'tc' and 'ms'
are located, but they are free, with remote registration, and
redirection as well as incoming email, etc.

Just a reminder, I was notified by John Levine that he will be doing
some work on his machine xuxa.com this weekend and as a result,
telecom-digest.org may be unreachable some of the weekend. If you try
to reach us, and cannot get through, then try either of these which
bypass John: massis.lcs.mit.edu or www.telecom-digest.n3.net .

PAT

------------------------------

Reply-To: <joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com>
From: <joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com>
Subject: Ten Ducks
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 18:10:40 -0500
Organization: ICB Inc./WhoSells800.com


Today ICB made a small holiday donation -- half a dairy cow, some
rabbits, fruit trees, clothes for homeless children, blankets, ducks,
a gift to the "Girls in Crisis Fund."

It's not much, we thought at first, just a token, a drop in the
bucket.

But we realized that a lot of drops in a lot of buckets, helps a lot
of people.  And we did touch a few lives today, each one important.

So as you do your last minute shopping, you might consider farm
animals, or a foot-powered water pump.  It's most rewarding.  (See
http://worldvision.org.)

Best wishes to you and your family for a happy holiday and a healthy
new year.

Warmest Regards,

Judith Oppenheimer
http://JudithOppenheimer.com 
http://ICBTollFreeNews.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And the same to you, Judith! I can
also recommend http://worldvision.org as a good site for readers. 
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.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #605
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Dec 18 19:03:51 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBJ03pI00543;
	Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:03:51 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:03:51 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412190003.iBJ03pI00543@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 #606

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:04:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 606

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    ISP "Wins" Billion Dollar Anti-Spam Lawsuit (Danny Burstein)
    Re: VOIP (Rick Merrill)
    Re: VOIP (Dave VanHorn)
    Re: VOIP (Clark W. Griswold, Jr.)
    Re: VOIP (Tony P.)
    Re: VOIP (John Levine)
    Re: Cingular Migration (Klay Anderson)
    Re: Cingular Migration (John Levine)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Cable TV Advertising (was 'Transitional Fair Use') (Barry Margolin)
    Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Oppose In-Flight Cell Phone (John D. Galt)
    Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? (John Levine)
    Re: Wireless in Cherryvale (John Levine)
    Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (AES/newspost)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: ISP "Wins" Billion Dollar Anti-Spam Lawsuit
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 16:24:21 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


("wins" in quotes because getting the money is unlikely, and the
initial judgment is based on defaults/no shows.)

"Spam suit nets $1 billion"   By Todd Ruger and Kay Luna

"CLINTON, Iowa A federal judge awarded a Clinton Internet service
provider more than $1 billion in judgments Friday in a lawsuit against
companies who used his equipment to send so-called spam e-mails.

"It is believed to be by far the largest judgment ever against
companies accused of sending unsolicited commercial e-mail via the
Internet, said those who track such practices.

" 'It's definitely a victory for all of us that open up our e-mail and
find lewd and malicious and fraudulent e-mail in our boxes every day,'
said Robert Kramer, the owner of CIS Internet Services in Clinton.

[ snippety snip, rest of very comprehensive article at:

http://www.qctimes.com/internal.php?story_id1041776

------------------------------

From: Rick Merrill <RickMerrill@comTHROWcast.net>
Subject: Re: VOIP
Organization: Comcast Online
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:30:32 GMT


jim@giganews.com wrote:

> I'm considering VOIP for my home but realistically, how many phones
> can it support?  I've read from 2 sites, 3 and 5 phones so I was
> hoping what your experience has been?  Does it matter who the provider
> is to answer this question?  I presume the phones are the same used as
> before voip.  Just in case, can you buy one base unit with multiple
> hand sets ?

It matters what TA (telephone adapter) you use: some only support 1
REN and some support 3 REN (ringer equivalency number).  Remember that
these are the base sets only, so if you have a cordless baseset it can
support multiple handsets.  The providers will tell you (most likely)
"one phone". - RM

------------------------------

Reply-To: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org>
From: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org>
Subject: Re: VOIP
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:40:47 -0500


How do they handle 911 calls when the power is out? 

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Either they do not handle them at
all (the usual, default situation) or, if they planned ahead of
time for such contingencies they have a backup battery they use. 
You can buy a backup battery (such as used for an orderly shut
down on computers) but use it to power the VOIP TA, the modem 
and nothing else. Then the VOIP phone will continue to work.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <spamtrap100@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: VOIP
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:05:25 -0700
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


jim@giganews.com wrote:

> I'm considering VOIP for my home but realistically, how many phones
> can it support?  I've read from 2 sites, 3 and 5 phones so I was
> hoping what your experience has been?  Does it matter who the provider
> is to answer this question?  I presume the phones are the same used as
> before voip.  

Most VOIP Terminal Adapters (TAs) that I have seen will support
between 3-5 REN.

REN stands for ringer equivilence number. A REN of 1.0 is roughly
equal to the current needed to drive 1 mechanical bell ringer in an
old 500 style telephone.  Modern electronic "chirp" ringers are in the
neighborhood of 0.3 REN, so driving multiple phones is usually not a
problem.

That said, I think someone here recently reported that their VOIP
service had lowered the max REN of their TA through a config
option. It apparently took a phone call to get it raised.

> Just in case, can you buy one base unit with multiple hand sets ?

Yes.

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: VOIP
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 13:51:17 -0500


In article <telecom23.605.14@telecom-digest.org>, jim@giganews.com 
says:

> I'm considering VOIP for my home but realistically, how many phones
> can it support?  I've read from 2 sites, 3 and 5 phones so I was
> hoping what your experience has been?  Does it matter who the provider
> is to answer this question?  I presume the phones are the same used as
> before voip.  Just in case, can you buy one base unit with multiple
> hand sets ?

I have five phones connected to my VoIP router (A Linksys RT31P2). The
phones are:

A Radio Shack 43-3544 900MHz cordless;
Western Electric 2940 Celebrity; 
Western Electric 2226 Trimline; 
Western Electric 2702B Princess; 
Western Electric 302 - Receive Only but will be able to dial once I pick 
up a SMART-1 adapter. 

No problems at all. 

------------------------------

Date: 18 Dec 2004 21:36:05 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: VOIP
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I'm considering VOIP for my home but realistically, how many phones
> can it support?

It depends on the terminal adapter.  I have Vonage with a Cisco
ATA-186 and it supports three phones fine.

> Just in case, can you buy one base unit with multiple hand sets ?

Most VoIP carriers give you a terminal adapter into which you plug a
phone rather than a standalone phone.  You can always throw money at
the problem and plug in a high-end cordless phone that supports
multiple handsets.

You can also buy ring boosters that increase the number of phones you
can plug in.

-- 

John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711
johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

From: Klay Anderson <klay@klay.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:07:24 -0700
Organization: Klay Anderson Audio, Inc.
Subject: Re: Cingular Migration


In article <telecom23.605.5@telecom-digest.org>,
jrefactors@hotmail.com wrote:

> Then what's the point to migrate? There are so many advertisments
> encourage AT&T Wireless customers to migrate to Cingular, that's my
> confusion.

In my case, I had to in order to change my phone to a RAZR.  No
problems though, other than long on-hold times to get the deal
straight and BS promises about shipping times.  A few newbies in the
cubicles were not too sure how to do it, but all were cheerful and
eventually I got it done.  For the same AT&T business plan on my
particualar phone, Cingular was US$20 per month cheaper, so I am not
complaining.

Regards,

Klay Anderson
http://www.klay.com
+801-942-8346

------------------------------

Date: 18 Dec 2004 20:38:39 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Cingular Migration
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I am AT&T customer. AT&T customers have the option to unchange the
> plan or migrate to Cingular. Then what's the point to migrate?

Cingular's point is that they would like all of their customers to
have profitable new plans and use GSM phones.  If you like your plan,
there's no reason to change it.

If you have a TDMA phone, at some point you'll probably have better
service if you switch to a GSM phone, since Cingular is rapidly moving
their network to GSM.  But it's been my experience with Cingular that
I can walk in and say that I want a new phone but I don't want to
change my plan, and they'll say OK.

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <devilspgd@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 02:35:32 -0700
Organization: Octanews


In message <telecom23.605.10@telecom-digest.org> Tony P.
<kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net> wrote:

> I love how the cable companies harp on the fact that satellite
> transmission can be interrupted by rain, and then one of their own
> carried stations goes off the air because you guessed it, weather
> interfered with the cable companies OWN satellite reception.

While true, it takes a lot more weather to take out a 6' dish then a
20" dish.

------------------------------

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Cable TV Advertising (was 'Transitional Fair Use'...)
Organization: Symantec
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:15:30 -0500


In article <telecom23.605.13@telecom-digest.org>,
Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com> wrote:

> Given this history, I don't see how it's possible that anyone familiar
> with the industry could have claimed that "there would not be any
> commercials; it is all paid for by your cable fees."  Without distant
> independent commercial stations like WGN-TV and WOR-TV, the cable
> industry wouldn't have had a salable product.

Of course they weren't talking about broadcast channels that were
piped in by the cable system -- those would obviously have the same
content as over-the-air.  The no-commercials expectation was for all
the premium channels that were created just for pay cable
distribution.  Since we have to pay extra to get those, there was an
expectation that these fees would obviate commercials.  But the only
channels that have stayed true to this vision are some of the movie
channels, like HBO and Showtime.


Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

------------------------------

From: John David Galt <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us>
Subject: Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 09:14:10 -0800
Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society


Joseph wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:42:50 -0500, Marcus Didius Falco
> <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>> The Association of Flight Attendants warns widespread use of wireless
>> devices in the confined space of an aircraft cabin potentially could
>> interfere with an aircraft's communications and navigation systems,
>> compromise safety and increase conflicts between passengers and crew
>> member.

> Well, as has been written many times before it's unlikely that use of
> cell phones will interfere with avionics.

> It's more likely the second part "increase conflicts between
> passengers and crew member."

Why would they expect conflicts?  Do they intend to try to enforce rules
against cell phone use after those rules are repealed, or what?

If they're talking about complaints from other passengers, perhaps
they should divide the plane into "phoning" and "non-phoning"
sections, now that the smokers are gone.  At least phoning won't
pollute the breathing air of the people in the non-phoning section.

------------------------------

Date: 18 Dec 2004 20:42:53 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> A number of people 'think' they have a problem with their VoIP
> provider, BUT the problems only occur when talking to someone on a
> CELL phone.

In my case, I have observed lousy voice quality when picking up my
Vonage voice mail on the voice prompts which are, I presume, coming
directly from Vonage's servers.  I haven't noticed cell phone voice
quality being much worse than it is elsewhere.

I do have one more clue: people tell me that even when I can barely
understand them, they can understand me fine, so the problem is on the
inbound side.  I don't understand that at all, since my net connection
is equally fast in both directions (it's a T1) and I usually have more
outbound traffic from web servers than inbound.

------------------------------

Date: 18 Dec 2004 21:02:18 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Wireless in Cherryvale
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> What kind of wireless service do they have in Cherryvale?  I was
> there a week or two ago and tried three times to make a call.

The Wireless Travel Guide gives this info for Montgomery county.

The A-side AMPS carrier is Alltel with CDMA and analog, and the B side
is US Cellular with TDMA and analog.  There's also some 1900 MHz
carriers, but your 5165 is 800 MHz only.

Your phone should roam OK on US Cellular since it's a TDMA phone,
but Cingular programs in a list of preferred carriers, and if Alltel
is preferred more than US Cellular, it could be trying to do analog
on Alltel rather than TDMA on US Cellular.

You can try dialing 611 to see who you get.  If it's Alltel, that
explains the crummy service.  If it's US Cellular, who knows, might be
a distant tower, might be a problem between Cingular and US Cellular
authorizing your phone.

------------------------------

From: AES/newspost <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:11:24 -0800


In article <telecom23.599.5@telecom-digest.org>, Clark W. Griswold,
Jr. <spamtrap100@comcast.net> wrote:

> AES/newspost <siegman@stanford.edu> wrote:

>> I've read news stories in the past about cellphone jammers or blockers
>> for use in restaurants, theaters, library reading rooms, etc.

>> Anyone have any leads on portable, battery-powered versions?

> I share your implied problem with inconsiderate cell users. However,
> based on your address, you should know that these devices are illegal
> in the US. While the odds of getting caught using them are quite
> small, especially if used in a mobile situation (ie, in your pocket),
> people have been prosecuted in other countries (a dealer in Scotland &
> a church in Mexico).

You correctly sensed the implied (and in fact primary) message behind
my post: I have very little interest in sitting through a five-hour
transcontinental flight, trying to read, sleep, or just relax, while
multiple cellphone users all around me do deals in penetrating voices
all through the flight.  I suspect others will feel similarly, and
wonder how the airlines will deal with the issue.

Assuming that the airlines probably won't deal straightforwardly with
the problem, or will be unwilling to forgo the add'l revenue in flight
cellphone service can offer, I've tried to think of realistic
solutions and/or counter-measures, but haven't come up with much that
seems promising in the list:

*   Earplugs or noise-cancelling headphones for all the other passengers 
[uncomfortable, and more seriously don't really work all that well]

* Airlines set up a couple of enclosed "phone booths" somewhere on the
plane, for those who have to play this game [unlikely, because of
revenue seating lost, but maybe.]

* Cellphoners required to use some kind of silent throat mikes and
whisper [technically feasible?]

* Limiting cell phoning to first class? [Maybe some would pay extra
for the opportunity, driving up FC sales -- but other FC opponents
might squawk equally loudly.]

*   Jammers, as per initial query [which I suspect will happen, if the 
problem gets bad enough.]

*   And of course finally the "Charles Bronson response":  Bring a large 
battery-powered "boombox" tape deck with a really annoying musical 
selection as your carryon, and if the cellphone noise pollution around 
you gets too annoying just turn it on LOUD and decline to turn it off, 
pointing out politely to neighbors and cabin crew that if the cellphone 
guys can noise pollute, so can you.  [Unfortunately I have more in 
common with Walter Mitty than Charles Bronson, so it's not likely to 
happen].

Inflight cellphone use does seem to me one of those problems where some 
number of passengers will certainly be rude and inconsiderate enough to 
make it a problem; the airlines will be craven and greedy enough not to 
deal with it; and air travel will deteriorate even more than it already 
has [Dulles main terminal at 4:30 pm yesterday afternoon was a sight not 
to be believed].

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #606
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Dec 19 01:25:51 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBJ6Pp204439;
	Sun, 19 Dec 2004 01:25:51 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 01:25:51 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412190625.iBJ6Pp204439@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 #607

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 19 Dec 2004 01:26:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 607

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    VoicePoint - VoIP (Lou Jahn)
    A.C.L.U.'s Search for Data on Donors Stirs Privacy Fears (Monty Solomon)
    Re: VOIP (Tony P.)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Dave Close)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Tony P.)
    Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? (DevilsPGD)
    Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use (DevilsPGD)
    Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Call Phone Use (Joseph)
    Re: Wireless in Cherryvale (Joseph)
    Re: Cell Phone Motorists Are Dangerous (Dave Close)
    Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (Mark Crispin)
    Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (Gene S. Berkowitz)
    Re: Access of Calling Card Dial in Number From Prepaid Cell (E. Parrish)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lou Jahn <LouJahn@comcast.net>
Subject: VoicePoint - VoIP
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:42:30 -0500
Organization: Info Partners Corp.


I am using VoicePoint and have several questions:

1) How do I get my number listed within Verizon's Directory Assistance,
I think there was a prior post, but could not find it.

2) Every once and awhile - the incoming voice discussions become
garbled -- or fade off (like early Cell phones) - anyone know why this
occurs? I have not noticed any thing around that might cause it.

3) Recently (within the past 10 days) callers tell me that at times my
speech on my VoIP line sometime sounds as though I have been given a
shot of Novocain. Could this be a reverse version of item 2?

Also -- I have tried a second VoIP line to forward my Faxes, but it
does not work in a consistent fashion. People sending might get 2-3 of
a 5 page fax through and have to resubmit 2-3 times before I receive a
full 5 page Fax. So if there any tricks to make Fax operate "okay",
I'd love to hear them.

Overall ... my judgment of VoicePoint is it has promise, but still
needs loads of improvement before any LEC selling true landline
service needs to worry if buyers need an equal level of quality. The
best part is their clever extra features where I can control them via
Internet and also getting email notice on calls and
Voicemail. However, if I call into voicemail for messages, it does not
let me know when the message arrived.

If it matters my ISP is Comcast using a Toshiba cable modem and
Syslink Router/Hub. If I had to grade the service, I guess it would be
a C+.

Lou Jahn
Info Partners Corp.

[TELCOM Digest Editor's Note: The answer to your first question
(regards listing in Directory Assistance) is you speak to *your
carrier*, they are the ones who handle it. They are the 'agents'
(both for placement and monthly collection of fees) with the
national DA database which Verizon and the others use.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 14:29:07 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: A.C.L.U.'s Search for Data on Donors Stirs Privacy Fears


By STEPHANIE STROM 

The American Civil Liberties Union is using sophisticated technology
to collect a wide variety of information about its members and donors
in a fund-raising effort that has ignited a bitter debate over its
leaders' commitment to privacy rights.

Some board members say the extensive data collection makes a mockery
of the organization's frequent criticism of banks, corporations and
government agencies for their practice of accumulating data on people
for marketing and other purposes.

Daniel S. Lowman, vice president for analytical services at Grenzebach
Glier & Associates, the data firm hired by the A.C.L.U., said the
software the organization is using, Prospect Explorer, combs a broad
range of publicly available data to compile a file with information
like an individual's wealth, holdings in public corporations, other
assets and philanthropic interests.

The issue has attracted the attention of the New York attorney
general, who is looking into whether the group violated its promises
to protect the privacy of its donors and members.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/18/national/18aclu.html

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: VOIP
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:06:03 -0500


In article <telecom23.606.2@telecom-digest.org>,
RickMerrill@comTHROWcast.net says:

> jim@giganews.com wrote:

>> I'm considering VOIP for my home but realistically, how many phones
>> can it support?  I've read from 2 sites, 3 and 5 phones so I was
>> hoping what your experience has been?  Does it matter who the provider
>> is to answer this question?  I presume the phones are the same used as
>> before voip.  Just in case, can you buy one base unit with multiple
>> hand sets ?

> It matters what TA (telephone adapter) you use: some only support 1
> REN and some support 3 REN (ringer equivalency number).  Remember that
> these are the base sets only, so if you have a cordless baseset it can
> support multiple handsets.  The providers will tell you (most likely)
> "one phone". - RM

The Linksys RT31P2 supports 5 REN.

In article <telecom23.606.4@telecom-digest.org>,
spamtrap100@comcast.net says:

> jim@giganews.com wrote:

>> I'm considering VOIP for my home but realistically, how many phones
>> can it support?  I've read from 2 sites, 3 and 5 phones so I was
>> hoping what your experience has been?  Does it matter who the provider
>> is to answer this question?  I presume the phones are the same used as
>> before voip.  

> Most VOIP Terminal Adapters (TAs) that I have seen will support
> between 3-5 REN.

> REN stands for ringer equivilence number. A REN of 1.0 is roughly
> equal to the current needed to drive 1 mechanical bell ringer in an
> old 500 style telephone.  Modern electronic "chirp" ringers are in the
> neighborhood of 0.3 REN, so driving multiple phones is usually not a
> problem.

> That said, I think someone here recently reported that their VOIP
> service had lowered the max REN of their TA through a config
> option. It apparently took a phone call to get it raised.

That would have been me. But in my case the ring voltage was set to 
60VAC instead of 90VAC. 

90VAC hasn't stressed the unit any but I do note it gets a little
warm.

------------------------------

From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close)
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?
Date: 18 Dec 2004 16:29:34 -0800
Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California


Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net> writes:

>> I don't think much of cable news networks because they spew out raw
>> facts that are _out of context_ and thus not newsworthy.  Good news
>> reporting is more than just reporting isolated facts -- it is putting
>> them together in a logical fashion, eliminating contradictions, and
>> putting in a wider context.  Despite all the time they have they still
>> put everything in brief sound bites.

> But that costs money. It's the same thing that ruined prime time
> television. Reality television is so much cheaper to produce but you
> get absolute lowest common denominator television. The only reason I
> watch the local evening news is to if anyone I know has gotten
> ambushed which has happened a couple of times. :)

When CNN first started Headline News, back before Gulf War One, they
were still a bootstrap operation and very short of money. HLN used a
single anchor and no remote correspondents. Video was bought from
local stations and presented with the anchor's voice-over. That was
much less expensive than the present programming.

And not only was it less costly to produce, it was a better product as
well. The original HLN presented two or three times as many stories in
a half-hour as they do today, and didn't use "human interest" filler.
They truly presented just the headlines. As their cost has gone up,
their quality has gone down. HLN today is a local newscast in a small
market, without the local coverage.

The best network news today is Univision, though it is necessary to
tolerate Spanish. They actually cover international stories (with a
heavy concentration on Latin America, of course), and squeeze in many
more stories than any of the English language networks. The best part
is that, while understanding Spanish helps, if you have a good idea
what's going on in the world, you can get a lot from their broadcast
without that. And what you don't understand, you can follow-up on
through the Web since, like everyone else, a banner gives you the
location of the story.

       Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA       +1 714 434 7359
       dave@compata.com              dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu
       "Political campaigns are the graveyard of real ideas and
       the birthplace of empty promises." -- Teresa Heinz Kerry

Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA  "Politics is the business of getting
dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359    power and privilege without
dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu           possessing merit." - P. J. O'Rourke

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:05:42 -0500


In article <telecom23.606.9@telecom-digest.org>, devilspgd@crazyhat.net 
says:

> In message <telecom23.605.10@telecom-digest.org> Tony P.
> <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net> wrote:

>> I love how the cable companies harp on the fact that satellite
>> transmission can be interrupted by rain, and then one of their own
>> carried stations goes off the air because you guessed it, weather
>> interfered with the cable companies OWN satellite reception.

> While true, it takes a lot more weather to take out a 6' dish then a
> 20" dish.

It can be misting here and we lose channels. Anytime water is involved
you can kiss centimeter or lower bands goodbye.

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <devilspgd@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse?
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:32:24 -0700
Organization: Octanews


In message <telecom23.606.12@telecom-digest.org> John Levine
<johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

>> A number of people 'think' they have a problem with their VoIP
>> provider, BUT the problems only occur when talking to someone on a
>> CELL phone.

> In my case, I have observed lousy voice quality when picking up my
> Vonage voice mail on the voice prompts which are, I presume, coming
> directly from Vonage's servers.  I haven't noticed cell phone voice
> quality being much worse than it is elsewhere.

> I do have one more clue: people tell me that even when I can barely
> understand them, they can understand me fine, so the problem is on the
> inbound side.  I don't understand that at all, since my net connection
> is equally fast in both directions (it's a T1) and I usually have more
> outbound traffic from web servers than inbound.

It could be that Vonage is having issues on their side, or that some
router/link on the path Vonage's traffic takes to get to you is having
problems but the reverse is stable.

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <devilspgd@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:32:25 -0700
Organization: Octanews


In message <telecom23.606.11@telecom-digest.org> John David Galt
<jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote:

>>> The Association of Flight Attendants warns widespread use of wireless
>>> devices in the confined space of an aircraft cabin potentially could
>>> interfere with an aircraft's communications and navigation systems,
>>> compromise safety and increase conflicts between passengers and crew
>>> member.

>> Well, as has been written many times before it's unlikely that use of
>> cell phones will interfere with avionics.

>> It's more likely the second part "increase conflicts between
>> passengers and crew member."

> Why would they expect conflicts?  Do they intend to try to enforce rules
> against cell phone use after those rules are repealed, or what?

1) Just because the FCC doesn't have rules against it doesn't mean
that the airline's rules and/or FAA rules have changed.

2) IIRC, CRTC rules don't allow cell calls from airlines -- Imagine
trying to explain that distinction to your typical obnoxious idiot as
the plane flies from US soil to Canada.

3) Flight attendants will have to deal with drunk confined retards
yelling into their cellphone and complaints from nearby passengers.

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 21:40:23 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 09:14:10 -0800, John David Galt
<jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote:

> If they're talking about complaints from other passengers, perhaps
> they should divide the plane into "phoning" and "non-phoning"
> sections, now that the smokers are gone.  At least phoning won't
> pollute the breathing air of the people in the non-phoning section.

More than likely that's just what they're afraid of.  Considering that
some people haven't got the good sense their Lord gave them to be
considerate of others I'd be worried too.

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Wireless in Cherryvale
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 21:45:10 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 18 Dec 2004 21:02:18 -0000, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

> The A-side AMPS carrier is Alltel with CDMA and analog, and the B side
> is US Cellular with TDMA and analog.  There's also some 1900 MHz
> carriers, but your 5165 is 800 MHz only.

Sorry you have incorrect information.  The Nokia 5165 is 800/1900 TDMA
and 800 AMPS.

The Nokia 5120 is 800 TDMA only.

http://www.nokiausa.com/phones/5165/0,2803,feat:1,00.html
           
------------------------------

From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Motorists Are Dangerous
Date: 18 Dec 2004 16:48:56 -0800
Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California


Phil McKerracher <phil@mckerracher.org> writes:

> But I completely agree that people should pull over or at least use a
> hands-free kit.

There are far too many roads on which it is impossible to "pull over".
Consider most central business districts: the only potential pull-over
spots are turn lanes or bus stops. Even if an empty parking space were
nearby, you couldn't get into it while answering a call.

When people talk about pulling over, they seem to think that all calls
happen while driving on highways. It may be more likely to find a good
spot along a highway or freeway, but many of those don't have an extra
lane, either. That fact is that, many times it is less distracting to
answer an incoming call, speak for a minute or two, and continue on.
Extended conversations are a different matter, I'd agree.

A hands-free kit is nice, but again not always practical. One is not
likely installed in your rental car, for example. And putting on a
headset for every short drive, most of which will not involve a phone
call, seems overkill.

But blaming the phone is all the rage, as is blaming blood alcohol
levels. (I've seen studies showing that people with /one/ drink are
safer drivers than those with no drinks.) It seems we just can't bring
ourselves, as a society, to put the blame where it really belongs: on
the person misbehaving.  

-- Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA +1 714
434 7359 dave@compata.com dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu 

"Political campaigns are the graveyard of real ideas and the
birthplace of empty promises." -- Teresa Heinz Kerry

------------------------------

From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:07:08 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, AES/newspost wrote:

> *   And of course finally the "Charles Bronson response":  Bring a large
> battery-powered "boombox" tape deck with a really annoying musical
> selection as your carryon, and if the cellphone noise pollution around
> you gets too annoying just turn it on LOUD and decline to turn it off,
> pointing out politely to neighbors and cabin crew that if the cellphone
> guys can noise pollute, so can you.

There's a better way.  It's what I do with excessively long/personal
cell phone conversations on the ferries.

I start mocking their conversation, in a loud enough tone of voice
that they can hear me.  Be it lawyers plotting or trophy wives
babbling, I have the appropriate offensive comments at hand to offend
them enough to tone down their conversation, terminate it, or move
away from my vicinity.

A short and/or obviously necessary phone conversation does not elicit
this response.  After all, I use a cell phone myself.  I would not
think of harassing someone arranging to be picked up, or learning
errands to do on the way home, etc.

It's only when they drag it out long beyond what is necessary (and
worse, use the walkie-talkie mode), to the point that it disturbs
others; and especially when the topic is inappropriate for a public
setting.

It's quite effective.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

------------------------------

From: Gene S. Berkowitz <first.last@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:12:12 -0500


In article <telecom23.606.14@telecom-digest.org>, siegman@stanford.edu 
says:

> In article <telecom23.599.5@telecom-digest.org>, Clark W. Griswold,
> Jr. <spamtrap100@comcast.net> wrote:

>> AES/newspost <siegman@stanford.edu> wrote:

>>> I've read news stories in the past about cellphone jammers or blockers
>>> for use in restaurants, theaters, library reading rooms, etc.

>>> Anyone have any leads on portable, battery-powered versions?

>> I share your implied problem with inconsiderate cell users. However,
>> based on your address, you should know that these devices are illegal
>> in the US. While the odds of getting caught using them are quite
>> small, especially if used in a mobile situation (ie, in your pocket),
>> people have been prosecuted in other countries (a dealer in Scotland &
>> a church in Mexico).

> You correctly sensed the implied (and in fact primary) message behind
> my post: I have very little interest in sitting through a five-hour
> transcontinental flight, trying to read, sleep, or just relax, while
> multiple cellphone users all around me do deals in penetrating voices
> all through the flight.  I suspect others will feel similarly, and
> wonder how the airlines will deal with the issue.

> Assuming that the airlines probably won't deal straightforwardly with
> the problem, or will be unwilling to forgo the add'l revenue in flight
> cellphone service can offer, I've tried to think of realistic
> solutions and/or counter-measures, but haven't come up with much that
> seems promising in the list:

> *   Earplugs or noise-cancelling headphones for all the other passengers 
> [uncomfortable, and more seriously don't really work all that well]

> * Airlines set up a couple of enclosed "phone booths" somewhere on the
> plane, for those who have to play this game [unlikely, because of
> revenue seating lost, but maybe.]

> * Cellphoners required to use some kind of silent throat mikes and
> whisper [technically feasible?]

> * Limiting cell phoning to first class? [Maybe some would pay extra
> for the opportunity, driving up FC sales -- but other FC opponents
> might squawk equally loudly.]

> *   Jammers, as per initial query [which I suspect will happen, if the 
> problem gets bad enough.]

> *   And of course finally the "Charles Bronson response":  Bring a large 
> battery-powered "boombox" tape deck with a really annoying musical 
> selection as your carryon, and if the cellphone noise pollution around 
> you gets too annoying just turn it on LOUD and decline to turn it off, 
> pointing out politely to neighbors and cabin crew that if the cellphone 
> guys can noise pollute, so can you.  [Unfortunately I have more in 
> common with Walter Mitty than Charles Bronson, so it's not likely to 
> happen].

> Inflight cellphone use does seem to me one of those problems where some 
> number of passengers will certainly be rude and inconsiderate enough to 
> make it a problem; the airlines will be craven and greedy enough not to 
> deal with it; and air travel will deteriorate even more than it already 
> has [Dulles main terminal at 4:30 pm yesterday afternoon was a sight not 
> to be believed].

Wait until the first corporate weenie causes a stock stampede by
incidently sharing confidential corporate information with the 10-15
people within earshot.  The opportunities for easy airborne corporate
espionage are great too, especially when laptops get plugged into the
network.

This would all be moot if seatback calls were even remotely reasonable 
in price.

--Gene

------------------------------

From: Earl F. Parrish <efparri@nowhere.world>
Subject: Re: Access of Calling Card Dial in Number From Prepaid Cellular
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 03:38:26 GMT


Marek Tomczyk <Marek.Tomczyk@stud.uni-karlsruhe.de> wrote in 
message news:telecom23.544.4@telecom-digest.org:

> Hi,

> I'm posting this for a friend (Juergen). Find his contact address at
> the bottom of this post. Thanks.

> Marek

> ===========

> Hi Telecom Digest,

> This October I stayed three weeks in the bay area. I like it a lot,
> and this time I even had a GSM1900 (Nokia 6100) phone from my German
> provider T-Mobile with me.

> The phone worked fine, but I never ever used it to place phone
> calls home to Germany and I never ever answered any incoming call.

> Why? Quite simple, the charges for outgoing and esspecially inbound
> calls are outrageous. Just imagine to pay $1.70 for incoming calls
> per minute!!!

> So I have decided now to get an American mobile phone on my next
> trip to the USA.

> I like the offer of AT&T Wireless very much as it provides a long
> validity of one year for balances starting at $100. Domestic calling
> with the Free2Go service is very reasonable priced, but calling
> foreign countries is still expensive.

> So the idea is to use a calling card service for this matter. The
> AT&T documents say that prepaid calling card service is not possible
> with Free2Go. Besides this AT&T says in its terms that certain
> numbers can be blocked if "abuse" to the network happens.

> Is calling a local dial in number from a mobile phone in America, in
> particular from a free2Go phone, abusive usage of the network?

> Do you know if calling of local (regular) dial in number from
> American, in particular prepaid aka "pay as you go" services is
> possible?

> Can such providers block access to those numbers?

> Unfortunately I could not find definitive information about this
> issue on the web.

> Thanks,

> Juergen-Usenet@web.de

Click on this link for information about one of the Locus Mobile 
affiliates which piggybacks on the TDMA network of the former AT&T 
Wireless network:

http://www.ecallplus.com/

Pay special attention to the link for International Calls on the 
page you reach.

Earl F. Parrish 

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #607
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Dec 19 22:14:23 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBK3ENQ15409;
	Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:14:23 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:14:23 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412200314.iBK3ENQ15409@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 #608

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:14:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 608

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Vodafone Rim Blackberry 7100v (DFleming Ireland)
    Speaking of Giving Up Landline For Cellphone (Thomas A. Horsley)
    Foreign Residential Listings (Fred Atkinson)
    VoIP - Zyxel Prestige 2002 Analog Adaptor (lauricat)
    QCTimes.com --  Spam Suit Nets $1 Billion (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (Joseph)
    Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (AES/newspost)
    Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use (DevilsPGD)
    Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use (n28110)
    Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? (Tony P.)
    Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? (Rob Levandowski)
    Re: Wireless in Cherryvale (John Levine)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Cable TV Advertising (was 'Transitional Fair Use'...) (Neal McLain)
    Re: Cell Phone Motorists Are Dangerous (Thomas A. Horsley)
    Re: Access of Calling Card Dial in Number Prepaid Cellular (M Crispin)
    Re: VOIP (Rick Merrill)
    Re: VoicePoint - VoIP (Rick Merrill)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: davidfleming01@eircom.net (DFleming Ireland)
Subject: Vodafone Rim Blackberry 7100v
Date: 19 Dec 2004 12:27:25 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I am thinking of buying this phone for use in Ireland.  Can someone
tell me what is the real position re: Internet access?

i.e. am I wasting my money and should I get separate phone & PDA?

The price would put this item far ahead of the O2 XDA2 and it's much
prettier than O2's Blackberry, but I still have doubts.

Can anyone help?

DF

------------------------------

Subject: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone
From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley)
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:41:50 GMT


Is there any kind of gadget available to interface with a cellphone
(perhaps via the headset connection) that would allow you to plug your
cellphone into it when you are at home, and have it provide your own
little local phone system over your old phone wires so that you could
use any phone in the house to make a call on the cellphone and have
all the phones in the house ring when the cellphone rings?

Or lacking that level of sophistication, is there anything that could
at least amplify the ring so you could hear it if you left your phone
on the other side of the house?

>>==>> The *Best* political site <URL:http://www.vote-smart.org/> >>==+
      email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL      |
<URL:http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley> Free Software and Politics <<==+

------------------------------

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Foreign Residential Listings
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 12:20:41 -0500


> Can anyone suggest an *easy* way for people to get foreign residential
> or business telephone numbers listed with directory assistance?

Most people who attempt to do this (for example, to get their Vonage
residential number listed with directory assistance) encounter a
bottomless pit of CSRs that don't want to find out how to do it and
just tell them it can't be done rather than deal with it.  It most
certainly can.  I've gotten my Vonage number listed with directory
assistance.  If you don't believe it, call 803 directory assistance
(or Easy 411 or whichever one you use) and ask for Fred W. Atkinson,
III in Columbia, SC.  They'll give you my Vonage (803) 233 number.  If
you are trying to get Bellsouth to do it, get my number from directory
assistance and refer to it when you call them.  Tell them you want the
same kind of account that I have.

I posted my story on the Vonage forum (http://www.vonage-forum.com).
Someone else is going through the same bottomless pit of CSRs.  With
all the telephone company people on here, I'm sure a solution can be
found.  Or perhaps there are or is a representative(s) of a company
that can get these listings made.  Certainly one of you can help with
this.  Then I can post it on the Vonage forum and we can make it
easier for the other folks.  As VOIP service continues to grow, this
will become a bigger issue.  We can solve it now if someone here will
be a Good Samaritan and help.

When I finally got it done, I had to have created what is called a
'miscellaneous account' and make a 'foreign listing'.  The cost is a
little over twenty-four dollars per year with Bellsouth for a
residential listing.  The account number consisted of my area code,
the letter 'M' followed by a series of digits that did not correspond
to my telephone number.  They bill annually for the service.  If you
do it in the middle of the calendar year, they prorate it for the
remaining months.

But to get it done (because those CSRs did not want to be bothered
with it), I had to call the South Carolina Public Service Commission
and register a complaint.  They called some vice-presiden's office at
Bellsouth on my behalf.  I was then promptly contacted by a Bellsouth
representative who got it done immediately for me and without any
further hassle.

When the bill came, they billed me for access charges.  I called them
back and pointed out that this wasn't telelphone service, but only a
listing.  They promptly removed that charge from my bill, as they
should have.  But, it was less than a dollar overcharge.  It wouldn't
have killed me if I had gone ahead and paid it.

Everyone should have the right to have their telephone number listed
regardless of who is providing the service.  That shouldn't be an
issue.

Feedback?

Regards,

Fred Atkinson

------------------------------

From: lauricat@gmail.com (lauricat)
Subject: VoIP - Zyxel Prestige 2002 Analog Adaptor
Date: 18 Dec 2004 23:35:44 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Hi all,

I have recently bought a Zyxel Prestige 2002 Analog Telephone Adaptor.
I am having all sorts of problems getting it to work.

I am trying to hook up to a local (Australian) provider,
www.faktortel.com.au and use the service. It does not matter what
settings I use I can't make a call. I recently upgraded my firmware,
so now I don't get a constantly engaged tone - also the new flash has
changes to a "common" phone area that allows me to select my country,
I assume to tailor the box to it's local connection.

My VoIP provider supports SIP and G529, so does Prestige. I am running
Win XP Pro (SP1), a 512/128 DSL connection and a Billion 711CE
Modem/Router, through a 8 port hub.

If any one has some experience with these adaptors I would be glad to
get some info. (I have printed out the manual and gone right through
it..) I am also working on this with my provider, to try and resolve
the issue. There really does not *seem* to be much out there on this
brand of adaptor.

Thanks,

Laurie.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 19:01:32 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: QCTimes.com --  Spam Suit Nets $1 Billion


Trying yet another way of stripping the HTML. Hope this works better

http://www.qctimes.com/internal.php?story_id=3D1041776
http://www.qctimes.com/print.php?story_id=3D1041776&doc=3D


Copyright 2004 The Quad-City Times | www.QCTimes.com

By Todd Ruger
and Kay Luna

CLINTON, Iowa A federal judge awarded a Clinton Internet service=
provider more than $1 billion in judgments Friday in a lawsuit
against companies who used his equipment to send so-called spam
e-mails.

It is believed to be by far the largest judgment ever against
companies accused of sending unsolicited commercial e-mail via the
Internet, said those who track such practices.

It's definitely a victory for all of us that open up our e-mail and
find lewd and malicious and fraudulent e-mail in our boxes every day,
said Robert Kramer, the owner of CIS Internet Services in Clinton.

Kramer is unlikely to ever collect the large judgment, which was made
possible through an Iowa law that allows plaintiffs to claim damages
of $10 per spam message, said his attorney, Kelly O. Wallace of
Atlanta.

"We hope to recover at least his costs," Wallace said of the lawsuit,
originally filed in October 2003 against 300 defendants then known only as
John Does. "He decided it was worthwhile to take some of these guys down."

Kramer;s relatively small service provided e-mail for about 5,000
subscribers in the Clinton vicinity when, at one point, his Internet
server received 10 million or more spam e-mails per day, according to
Kramer and the judgment documents.

He was called away almost daily to repair downed e-mail servers that
should run months without interruption, Kramer added.

U.S. District Judge Charles R. Wolle of the Southern District of Iowa
filed the default judgments Friday against three companies under the
Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and the
Iowa Ongoing Criminal Conduct Act:

n $360 million against Cash Link Systems Inc., a Florida corporation
shut down by the Securities and Exchange Commission in July for a
fraudulent investment scheme involving automatic teller machines.

n $720 million against AMP Dollar Savings Inc., an Arizona corporation
that Wallace said is mainly a organization designed for spammers to
hide their identities.

n $140,000 against TEI Marketing Group Inc., a Florida
corporation. Wallace described TEI as one guy selling spy software.

Wallace said he has only heard of judgments up to $25 million in
spam-related cases.

The president of the SpamCon Foundation, an organization based in Palo
Alto, Calif., said it was the biggest judgment in a spam lawsuit she
has ever heard about.

"This is just incredible," Laura Atkins said. "I'm not aware of
anything that's been over $100 million.

Steve Linford, the chief executive officer of a London-based spam
tracker called The Spamhaus Project, also said he had not heard of a
judgment reaching $1 billion, adding that such lawsuits and criminal
investigations into spamming are starting to have an effect.

"But the effect is still rather small," he said. "What we are seeing
is slightly more spammers from overseas."

While it used to be that 100 percent of spammers operated in the
United States, about 10 percent of them now operate in other
countries, including Russia and some Asian nations, with 70 percent of
spam messages directing users to Web sites hosted in China, he said.

Kramer said the lawsuit made a difference for his business almost
immediately after it was filed, but not before 4 years of taking a
toll on him at both the business and personal levels.

"I was forced to set up an infrastructure that would support e-mail
for millions of users," he said. "It has consumed me."

Friday's judgment covers only three companies who did not respond to
court papers and were found in default. The lawsuit continues against
other named defendants.

"It's a slow process and it's not cheap," Wallace said. "Our goal is
the economic death penalty."

He and Kramer said they began identifying the companies by doing what
the spammers wanted purchasing spy software and other products
typically hawked via the e-mails, including penis enlargement pills.

"I've got a bottle of them sitting here," Kramer said. "I never opened
them."

Wallace said he presented about 1,400 pieces of evidence at a hearing
to determine the amount of damages, including selections from
thousands of CD-ROMs full of computer usage log files showing that
large numbers of spam e-mail were not atypical.

Kramer's problems are linked to a CD-ROM sold to spammers that is
called 'Bulk Mailing 4 Dummies,' which includes a guide for sending
spam and a large number of mainly fictitious e-mail addresses for some
of the largest Internet providers in the nation, the judgment states.

While most of the addresses were for large providers such as America
Online, Microsoft Network, Hotmail and Earthlink, CIS somehow had 2.8
million addresses entered on the CD-ROM, Wallace said.

Receiving e-mail at those bogus addresses uses as much computer
resources as legitimate e-mail, the judgment states.

"My dad put it well when he said I was being terrorized, and I was,
Kramer said. "It's been a hassle to catch these people because of the
method they use.

Nothing will stop spam altogether, he said.

"I think all of us as Internet service providers are always going to
face spam problems," he said. "We are still pursuing others. We're
going to catch more."

The company, operating since 1996, has four full-time employees. Two
are network administrators.

In response to the spam congestion, CIS beefed up its core
infrastructure, spending thousands of dollars to upgrade the system so
it could handle the traffic flow.

Kramer now calls himself a 'spam professional.'

"We know how to handle this better than any other ISP (Internet service
provider) in Clinton," he said. "We can virtually eliminate spam coming
to your mailbox."

Todd Ruger can be contacted at (563) 383-2493 or
<mailto:truger@qctimes.com>truger@qctimes.<mailto:truger@qctimes.com>com.

BY THE NUMBERS

For the two larger parts of the anti-spam judgment he entered Friday,
U.S. District Judge Charles R.  Wolle used a formula based on trial
testimony and Iowa and federal laws.  This is how the judgment was
calculated for Clinton Internet Services against AMP Dollar Services
Inc.:

AMP Dollar messages,
per server per day 40,000
CIS mail servers X 3
Messages per day 120,000
Number of days X 150
Total e-mails sent 18 million

Statutory damages
per message X $10

Total statutory
damages $180 million
Federal, state laws
triple statutory damages X 3
New damage total $540 million
Punitive damages + $180 million

Total liability

of AMP Dollar $720 million

Copyright 2002 The Quad-City Times

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 Quad City Times.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 08:16:08 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:07:08 -0800, Mark Crispin
<mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:

> I start mocking their conversation, in a loud enough tone of voice
> that they can hear me.  Be it lawyers plotting or trophy wives
> babbling, I have the appropriate offensive comments at hand to offend
> them enough to tone down their conversation, terminate it, or move
> away from my vicinity.

You're really lucky that someone hasn't slugged you yet for your
obnoxious behavior.  You seem to think that their being obnoxious is
license for you to be as well, eh?

> A short and/or obviously necessary phone conversation does not elicit
> this response.  After all, I use a cell phone myself.  I would not
> think of harassing someone arranging to be picked up, or learning
> errands to do on the way home, etc.

Ah, I see you are the arbeiter of what is a "long" or short
conversation and what is necessary and what is not.  How fortunate
that you are around to judge for us what is the "right" length and
subject for conversations.

> It's only when they drag it out long beyond what is necessary (and
> worse, use the walkie-talkie mode), to the point that it disturbs
> others; and especially when the topic is inappropriate for a public
> setting.

And we should suppose that you are the judge of what is necessary and
what is fluff, eh?

> It's quite effective.

Until some guy socks you in the mouth for commenting on his private
conversation.

------------------------------

From: AES/newspost <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:38:50 -0800


In article <telecom23.607.11@telecom-digest.org>, Mark Crispin
<mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, AES/newspost wrote (re in-flight cellphone call
annoyance):

>> *   And of course finally the "Charles Bronson response":  Bring a large
>> battery-powered "boombox" tape deck with a really annoying musical
>> selection as your carryon, and if the cellphone noise pollution around
>> you gets too annoying just turn it on LOUD 

> There's a better way.  It's what I do with excessively long/personal
> cell phone conversations on the ferries.

> I start mocking their conversation, in a loud enough tone of voice
> that they can hear me.  

Marc,

I think I knew you or knew of you, in long-ago Stanford computer
center days (?); and it looks like you've inherited more Charles
Bronson genes, and I've inherited more Walter Mitty genes.

--AES

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <devilspgd@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:33:17 -0700
Organization: Octanews


In message <telecom23.607.8@telecom-digest.org> Joseph
<JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> If they're talking about complaints from other passengers, perhaps
>> they should divide the plane into "phoning" and "non-phoning"
>> sections, now that the smokers are gone.  At least phoning won't
>> pollute the breathing air of the people in the non-phoning section.

> More than likely that's just what they're afraid of.  Considering that
> some people haven't got the good sense their Lord gave them to be
> considerate of others I'd be worried too.

I happen to believe many folks weren't given any good sense to begin
with.  It explains a lot.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:20:11 +0000 (GMT)
From: n28110 <n28110@hotmail.nospammoporfavor.com>
Subject: Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use
Organization: Shaw Residential Internet


Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:telecom23.607.8@telecom-digest.org:

> More than likely that's just what they're afraid of.  Considering that
> some people haven't got the good sense their Lord gave them to be
> considerate of others I'd be worried too.

I'm not convinced that sense is a god-given gift ...

As a wearer of a cellular phone for work reasons, I'm absolutely
amazed at the numer of people who power up the phone the instant the
plane leaves the active runway onto the taxiway, only to call their
(I'm assuming) loved ones to let them know that the plane has
successfully smacked onto the ground.

Of course I was amazed that a young lady would have a conversation
that would drive her to tears on the MARTA in Atlanta ...

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse?
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:03:20 -0500


In article <telecom23.607.6@telecom-digest.org>, devilspgd@crazyhat.net 
says:

> In message <telecom23.606.12@telecom-digest.org> John Levine
> <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

>>> A number of people 'think' they have a problem with their VoIP
>>> provider, BUT the problems only occur when talking to someone on a
>>> CELL phone.

>> In my case, I have observed lousy voice quality when picking up my
>> Vonage voice mail on the voice prompts which are, I presume, coming
>> directly from Vonage's servers.  I haven't noticed cell phone voice
>> quality being much worse than it is elsewhere.

>> I do have one more clue: people tell me that even when I can barely
>> understand them, they can understand me fine, so the problem is on the
>> inbound side.  I don't understand that at all, since my net connection
>> is equally fast in both directions (it's a T1) and I usually have more
>> outbound traffic from web servers than inbound.

> It could be that Vonage is having issues on their side, or that some
> router/link on the path Vonage's traffic takes to get to you is having
> problems but the reverse is stable.

Vonage is pretty much ISP dependent. They haul from your local ISP to 
either a Paetec or Focal switch and put it out on the PSTN from there. 

------------------------------

From: Rob Levandowski <robl@macwhiz.com>
Subject: Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse?
Organization: MacWhiz Technologies
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 23:15:29 GMT


In article <telecom23.605.7@telecom-digest.org>, Rick Merrill
<RickMerrill@comTHROW.net> wrote:

> A number of people 'think' they have a problem with their VoIP
> provider, BUT the problems only occur when talking to someone on a
> CELL phone. The reason may be that the compression algorithms used in
> the cell phone do not "fit well" with the compression algotithms used
> for VoIP. - RM

I've noticed that the voice quality of my Vonage line has *improved*
lately.  The line seems far more resistant to echo in the past few
months.

When I first got my Vonage line, I had many dropouts.  I have a Cisco
ATA, and I use a UNIX system as my home firewall/router.  I was able
to improve the reliability and call quality quite a nbit by configuring
my firewall to give priority to the Vonage packets and to TCP ACK
packets in general.  Less geeky users with consumer-grade home routers
may not have the ability to do this.


Rob Levandowski                    robl@macwhiz.com

------------------------------

Date: 19 Dec 2004 06:56:35 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Wireless in Cherryvale
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


>> The A-side AMPS carrier is Alltel with CDMA and analog, and the B side
>> is US Cellular with TDMA and analog.  There's also some 1900 MHz
>> carriers, but your 5165 is 800 MHz only.

> Sorry you have incorrect information.  The Nokia 5165 is 800/1900 TDMA
> and 800 AMPS.

Gee, look at that.  All the time I had a 5165 it never picked up a 1900
signal, but I suppose that has more to do with where I live.

Anyway, the guide says that Cingular does TDMA and GSM 1900 but not in
Cherryvale.  The guide says there is TDMA 1900 in Cherryvale from
Dobson, but Dobson's web site says not.  So I'd guess the lousy
connections are from falling back to AMPS.


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711
johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <devilspgd@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:33:12 -0700
Organization: Octanews


In message <telecom23.607.5@telecom-digest.org> Tony P.
<kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net> wrote:

>>> I love how the cable companies harp on the fact that satellite
>>> transmission can be interrupted by rain, and then one of their own
>>> carried stations goes off the air because you guessed it, weather
>>> interfered with the cable companies OWN satellite reception.

>> While true, it takes a lot more weather to take out a 6' dish then a
>> 20" dish.

> It can be misting here and we lose channels. Anytime water is involved
> you can kiss centimeter or lower bands goodbye.

To tie it in to the cable-vs-satellite argument, does it take out any of
the cable company's channels?

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 04:55:47 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Subject: Re: Cable TV Advertising (was 'Transitional Fair Use'...)


PAT wrote [TD 23:602]:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you remember *many, many*
> years ago when cable television was first getting underway how
> 'they' said cable would be a better deal 'since there would not
> be any commercials; it is all paid for by your cable fees'.

To which I wrote [TD 23:605]:

> Given this history, I don't see how it's possible that anyone
> familiar with the industry could have claimed that "there would
> not be any commercials; it is all paid for by your cable fees."
> Without distant independent commercial stations like WGN-TV and
> WOR-TV, the cable industry wouldn't have had a salable product.

Whereupon Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote [TD 23:606]:

> Of course they weren't talking about broadcast channels that
> were piped in by the cable system -- those would obviously have
> the same content as over-the-air.  The no-commercials
> expectation was for all the premium channels that were created
> just for pay cable distribution.  Since we have to pay extra to
> get those, there was an expectation that these fees would
> obviate commercials.  But the only channels that have stayed
> true to this vision are some of the movie channels, like HBO
> and Showtime.

So you're telling me that back in the late 40s and early 50s
("... when cable television was first getting underway"), "they"
expected that the cable industry would create commercial-free "premium
channels ... just for pay cable distribution"?  And, by implication,
that a technology would exist for distributing these channels
nationwide at reasonable cost?

Gee, I'd sure like to know who "they" are.

Neal McLain

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I do not know who 'they' were
either, but I distinctly remember sometime the late 1950's hearing
about how 'cable television stations will not have commercials since
the fee you pay for service takes care of all that ..."   PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Cell Phone Motorists Are Dangerous
From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley)
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:34:38 GMT


Actually, I think the point is moot now. From my own unscientific
survey, I am the only person in the world driving without a cellphone
stuck to my head. It has been years since I have seen anyone on my
daily commute along I-95 in South Florida who wasn't on a cellphone
(maybe the non-cell users all have that heavy window tinting or
something :-).

Oblivious behavior is not confined to drivers either. There is this
one student waiting for a bus every day along the route from my house
and not only is she always on a phone, but 90% of the time she has
managed to wander out right into the middle of the road to stand and
talk.

I've been thinking of starting a comic book "Cellphone Girl" where the
hero foils crime without realizing it by blundering into things while
on her cellphone :-).

-- >>==>> The *Best* political site <URL:http://www.vote-smart.org/> 
   >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL |
<URL:http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley> Free Software and Politics <<==+

------------------------------

From: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Subject: Re: Access of Calling Card Dial in Number From Prepaid Cellular
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:28:13 -0800
Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing


On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Marek Tomczyk wrote:

> I like the offer of AT&T Wireless very much as it provides a long
> validity of one year for balances starting at $100.

That's news to me.  I used to have AT&T Wireless Free2Go on my Alaska
phone (now Dobson Cellular One).  The expiration period was 45 days,
although it would rollover if you recharge in time.

AT&T Wireless was recently bought by Cingular, so this may have
changed.  In any case, Free2Go uses TDMA digital, which is on its way
towards extinction.  Most TDMA phones are also SOC locked, so you
can't use them with another carrier.

I suggest that you consider either a prepay GSM SIM card for your home
country phone (assuming you have an unlocked tri-band or quad-band
phone), or one of the CDMA prepaid services.

Under CDMA prepay, Verizon's is on their network, the phones are
unlocked, and can be used with monthly service.  Virgin has ultra
cheap prepay using Sprint's network (which almost certainly means that
the phones are locked but there are ways of getting Sprint unlock
codes).

Another advantage of Verizon is that, overall, it probably has the
best coverage in the continental US (48 states), especially if you
pick a phone with analog capability.  If you go to Alaska, you'll need
a TDMA/analog phone, although GSM has finally appeared in Alaska.
There is very little CDMA in Alaska.

> So the idea is to use a calling card service for this matter. The AT&T
> documents say that prepaid calling card service is not possible with
> Free2Go. Besides this AT&T says in its terms that certain numbers can
> be blocked if "abuse" to the network happens.

Don't worry about it; your plan is fine.

When you call one of the cheap international calling card companies,
the cellular company still gets to charge you for the airtime, so they
are happy.

What they are concerned about are calls to numbers with delayed
surcharges and fraud issues.  Calls to the premium 900 area code, and
to the local 976 premium exchange, are almost always blocked to cell
phones.

Most cell phones have international calls blocked unless you ask
customer service to unblock it.  Most people consider that to be a
good thing, and also do that on their wired phones (although the
default for wired phones is to allow international calls unless the
customer asks for it to be disabled).

However, "international calls" really means "calls outside of country
code 1"; that is, the 011 North American international dialing prefix
is disabled.  That doesn't always help.

Remember that country code 1 is quite a few countries.  You get a
message "urgent, please call me at (555) 555-5555" which looks like an
ordinary US or Canada number, but is really an expensive pornography
service in the Caribbean that charges $10/minute.  The customer
complains about the bill and refuses to pay.  Usually, the phone
company refunds the charge and takes the loss itself, but it then
blocks future calls to that number.

 From the prepaid cell phone company's point of view, they are
probably happy if you use a calling card for international calls,
because then the problem (of how much to charge you for the
international call) is some other company's problem.  The cell phone
company just charges you for the airtime, which they know how to do
quite well.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:12:18 -0500
From: Rick Merrill <RickMerrill@comTHROW.net>
Subject: Re: VOIP


Dave VanHorn wrote:

> How do they handle 911 calls when the power is out? 

No.

If your cable is up AND you have your modem and TA and phone on a UPS,
then probably ok.

Furthermore, the VoIP 911 is not the same as E911. Check with town
and supplier.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Either they do not handle them at
> all (the usual, default situation) or, if they planned ahead of
> time for such contingencies they have a backup battery they use. 
> You can buy a backup battery (such as used for an orderly shut
> down on computers) but use it to power the VOIP TA, the modem 
> and nothing else. Then the VOIP phone will continue to work.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 15:35:57 -0500
From: Rick Merrill <RickMerrill@comTHROW.net>
Subject: Re: VoicePoint - VoIP


Lou Jahn wrote:

> I am using VoicePoint and have several questions:

> 1) How do I get my number listed within Verizon's Directory Assistance,
> I think there was a prior post, but could not find it.

Ask your provider: VoIP may not be under any obligation to "list" the
number if it is a new one.

> 2) Every once and awhile - the incoming voice discussions become
> garbled -- or fade off (like early Cell phones) - anyone know why this
> occurs? I have not noticed any thing around that might cause it.

This is still in transition with some VoIP. For example, Call Vantage
(ATT) says it is a problem when certain cell phones call their VoIP
users because of compression algorithms!

> 3) Recently (within the past 10 days) callers tell me that at times my
> speech on my VoIP line sometime sounds as though I have been given a
> shot of Novocain. Could this be a reverse version of item 2?

> Also -- I have tried a second VoIP line to forward my Faxes, but it
> does not work in a consistent fashion. People sending might get 2-3 of
> a 5 page fax through and have to resubmit 2-3 times before I receive a
> full 5 page Fax. So if there any tricks to make Fax operate "okay",
> I'd love to hear them.

Here too, you must talk with your specific VoIP provider.

> Overall ... my judgment of VoicePoint is it has promise, but still
> needs loads of improvement before any LEC selling true landline
> service needs to worry if buyers need an equal level of quality. The
> best part is their clever extra features where I can control them via
> Internet and also getting email notice on calls and
> Voicemail. However, if I call into voicemail for messages, it does not
> let me know when the message arrived.

> If it matters my ISP is Comcast using a Toshiba cable modem and
> Syslink Router/Hub. If I had to grade the service, I guess it would be
> a C+.

> Lou Jahn
> Info Partners Corp.

> [TELCOM Digest Editor's Note: The answer to your first question
> (regards listing in Directory Assistance) is you speak to *your
> carrier*, they are the ones who handle it. They are the 'agents'
> (both for placement and monthly collection of fees) with the
> national DA database which Verizon and the others use.   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.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #608
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Dec 20 14:25:12 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBKJPCE23928;
	Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:25:12 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:25:12 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412201925.iBKJPCE23928@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 #609

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:25:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 609

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Update (Canada) #462, December 20, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement)
    Jeff Pulver Offers IP Communications Predictions for 2005 (Lisa Minter)
    Sprint's Merger With Nextel (Marcus Didius Falco)
    P2P Battle Shifts to High Court (Lisa Minter)
    Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (Mark Crispin)
    Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (jmeissen@aracnet)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Tony P.)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Bob Goudreau)
    Re: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone (John Levine)
    Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Cable TV Advertising (was 'Transitional Fair Use'...) (Neal McLain)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:48:56 -0500
From: Angus TeleManagement <jriddell@angustel.ca>
Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #462, December 20, 2004


************************************************************
TELECOM UPDATE
************************************************************
published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group
http://www.angustel.ca

Number 462: December 20, 2004

Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous
financial support from:
** ALLSTREAM: www.allstream.com
** AVAYA: www.avaya.ca/en/
** BELL CANADA: www.bell.ca
** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: www.cisco.com/ca/
** ERICSSON: www.ericsson.ca
** MITEL NETWORKS: www.mitel.com/
** SPRINT CANADA: www.sprint.ca
** UTC CANADA: www.canada.utc.org/

************************************************************

IN THIS ISSUE:

** We're Taking a Break
** Ottawa Tables Do-Not-Call Bill
** Bell Predicts Big Shift to New Services
** Telus Sees Wireless-Driven Growth
** Nortel Reports Slip in Sales
** SuperPages Retreats
** AOL Enters VoIP Market
** Winnipeg Firm Offers $14.95 VoIP
** Bell Plans 3G Wireless Service
** RIM Loses Another Round
** Ted Rogers Gets Contract Extension
** Canadian Firm Takes Over NANPA Fund
** Unbundled Access to Bell ADSL Approved
** MTS-Allstream Slams Bell CSAs
** Telus Takes Stake in IP Unity
** Telehop Enters Atlantic Provinces
** Telus to Buy Back Shares
** TeraGo Buys Regional Carrier
** Onlinetel Moves to Cuts Costs
** Telecom Executive Roundtable

============================================================

WE'RE TAKING A BREAK: Telecom Update is taking a winter break. The
next regular issue will be published on Monday, January 10.

OTTAWA TABLES DO-NOT-CALL BILL: Bill C-37, tabled December 13 by
Industry Minister David Emerson, will empower the CRTC to establish a
national do-not-call list, and to impose fines of $1,500 per call on
individuals, and $15,000 on corporations, for violating telemarketing
rules. The cost of operating the list is to be recovered from
telemarketers.

** After the bill passes, the CRTC will hold public
    consultations on how the list will operate, how much
    it will cost, and whether any types of calls should be
    exempt. The list is unlikely to be operational until
    late 2005 or 2006.

www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/government/C-37/C-37_1/C-37-3E.html

BELL PREDICTS BIG SHIFT TO NEW SERVICES: At a conference for
investment analysts last week, BCE CEO Michael Sabia said that the
percentage of Bell Canada revenues coming from new services such as
wireless, video, high-speed Internet, and IP networking would rise
from 40% today to 55% in 2006.

** Bell and Microsoft have announced a "strategic initiative"
    which will integrate telecom services and Microsoft
    software for small and mid-size businesses. The two
    companies plan a joint incubation lab to develop
    additional integrated services, and to operate customer
    education programs.

** BCE Inc. has raised its annual common share dividend by
    10%, to $1.32 per share. This is the company's first
    dividend increase in over a decade.

TELUS SEES WIRELESS-DRIVEN GROWTH: Telus Corp. last week forecast that
its 2005 earnings per share will be 8% to 21% higher than in 2004. A
wireline EBITDA decline of 2% to 5% will be offset by wireless EBITDA
growth in the 19% to 23% range, said CFO Robert McFarlane.

NORTEL REPORTS SLIP IN SALES: According to its "limited estimated
unaudited" results, Nortel had sales of US$2.27 billion in the third
quarter, down 10% from the average of the first two quarters. Nortel
expects fourth quarter revenues of $2.9 billion and a third quarter
loss of $0.06 per share.

SUPERPAGES RETREATS: SuperPages Canada, publisher of telephone
directories bearing the Telus brand, has decided to stop publishing
directories in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, the Maritimes, and
some areas of Quebec. The decision means that SuperPages books will
once again be published only in areas where Telus is the incumbent
telephone company. Five hundred employees will lose their jobs.

** SuperPages was formed in 2001 when Dallas-based Verizon
    Information Services bought Telus's directory publishing
    business for $810 million.

AOL ENTERS VoIP MARKET: AOL Canada plans to offer a residential VoIP
service across Canada in 2005, beginning in Greater Toronto next
month. Basic service including voicemail and other features will be
$34.95/month.

WINNIPEG FIRM OFFERS $14.95 VoIP: Ravon, a VoIP service from
Winnipeg-based Modern Digital Communications, provides basic local
calling to users across Canada for $14.95/month.

BELL PLANS 3G WIRELESS SERVICE: Bell Canada has begun a trial in
Toronto of EVDO (Evolution, Data Optimized) technology that will
support wireless data speeds up to 2.4 Mbps. The company says it will
roll out commercial service in major cities in 2005 and 2006.

RIM LOSES ANOTHER ROUND: A U.S. appeals court has upheld a lower court
ruling that Research In Motion infringed on patents of NTP Inc., but
has sent the case back to the district court for further
argument. (See Telecom Update #437)

TED ROGERS GETS CONTRACT EXTENSION: The Board of Directors of Rogers
Communications has extended the employment contract of President and
CEO Ted Rogers from December 31, 2006, to June 30, 2008.

CANADIAN FIRM TAKES OVER NANPA FUND: Welch & Company, an Ottawa-based
accounting firm, is now the Billing and Collection Agent for the North
American Numbering Plan Administration (NANPA) Fund, which collects
money from telecom carriers to finance administration of the telephone
numbering system.

UNBUNDLED ACCESS TO BELL ADSL APPROVED: The CRTC has given interim
approval to Bell tariffs for Gateway Access Service and High Speed
Access Service, which will allow competitors to provide high-speed
access using Bell's ADSL facilities.

www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2004/o2004-418.htm

MTS-ALLSTREAM SLAMS BELL CSAs: In September, the Federal Court
dismissed Bell Canada's appeal of the CRTC's order to disclose details
of its Customer Specific Arrangements (see Telecom Update #401,
414). Bell has since refiled these CSAs, in Tariff Notices 817 to
843. Allstream has now submitted a detailed critique, charging that
many of the tariffs are still incomplete or non-compliant and should
be turned down.

http://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/caf/2004/2004caf295.shtml
www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2004/b20_818.htm

TELUS TAKES STAKE IN IP UNITY: Telus Ventures has made a "strategic
investment" in IP Unity, the California-based company that provides
voicemail and e-mail technology for Telus's IP-One hosted IP-PBX
service. The amount of the investment was not revealed.

TELEHOP ENTERS ATLANTIC PROVINCES: Telehop Communications, operator of
the 10-10-620 dial-around long distance service, has signed a Billing
and Collection Agreement with Aliant, allowing it to offer service in
the four Atlantic provinces.

TELUS TO BUY BACK SHARES: Telus Corporation has received TSX approval
to purchase up to 14 million of its common shares and up to 11.5
million of its non-voting shares, about 7% of the outstanding shares
in each category.

TERAGO BUYS REGIONAL CARRIER: TeraGo Networks has added seven cities
in southwest Ontario to its fixed wireless broadband network through
the purchase of WorldWithoutWire, a regional carrier based in
Waterloo, Ontario.

ONLINETEL MOVES TO CUTS COSTS: Eiger Technology, parent of Newlook
Industries, which offers LD services under the name Onlinetel, reports
several measures to cut costs, including selling a facility in
Stratford and bringing its outsourced call centre back in
house. Newlook President Neil Romanchych, hired last spring, will
leave the company on December 31.

** Eiger CEO Gerry Racicot says Newlook will return to
    positive cash flow in 2006.

TELECOM EXECUTIVE ROUNDTABLE: Coming soon -- a special issue of
Telemanagement, featuring exclusive articles by 13 industry leaders,
and comments from dozens of enterprise managers, on the most important
issues in enterprise telecom and networking in 2005.

** Contributors include top executives from: Allstream,
    Avaya, Bell Canada, Cisco, Delphi Solutions, IBM, Intel,
    Mitel, Nortel, OneConnect, Primus, Sprint Canada, and
    Telus.

** This special issue, for subscribers only,
    will be published on January 3. To start your
    subscription with this special issue, go to
    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.
============================================================


JOHN RIDDELL                    jriddell@angustel.ca
Angus TeleManagement Group              http://www.angustel.ca
8 Old Kingston Road                     Tel: 905-686-5050 x226
Ajax Ontario L1T 2Z7  Canada            Fax: 905-686-2655  

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:39:15 -0500
Subject: Jeff Pulver Offers IP Communications Predictions for 2005


http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/12-20-2004/0002669321&EDATE

World Renowned VoIP Thought Leader Jeff Pulver Offers IP
Communications Predictions for 2005 http://www.pulver.com
http://pulverblog.pulver.com

      Pulver Predicts Burnout of Some VoIP Start-Ups, Major Carrier
    VoIP Announcements, FCC and Regulatory Actions, the Growth of
    Wireless Vs.  Wireline, and More

    MELVILLE, N.Y., Dec. 20 /PRNewswire/ -- VoIP pioneer Jeff Pulver,
who is responsible for creating the industry standard Voice on the Net
(VON) events and is known as the "voice" of IP Communications, has
announced a number of predictions for what will happen to the VoIP
industry in the year ahead.  His predictions for 2005 are:

     1)  VoIP in the USA will cross the "early-adopter chasm."

     2)  Broadband penetration will begin to snowball in the US, but
         not at a pace fast enough to raise America's mediocre 
         global standing in broadband penetration.

     3)  We will see the restart of VoIP IPOs, and we will also see
         some VoIP startups burning-out due to lack of marketing funds
         and customer base ... and vision.

     4)  Still more major carrier VoIP announcements, as well as
         significant product announcements from major non-carriers
         (including software and Internet giants).

     5)  New battle lines and tangling alliances will form between and
         among carriers, vendors, and application providers and debate
         will grow over the continuing role for unaffiliated,
         non-carrier VoIP providers.

     6)  (a) The FCC will not establish an IP-Communications Bureau.
         (b) The FCC will release an Order in the IP-Enabled Services
         Proceeding, setting forth a broad, hands-off approach for VoIP.

     7)  Governments around the world will look harder at VoIP 
         regulation, and service providers will respond by stepping 
         up their efforts to deploy industry-based solutions for many
         of the social issues confronting the industry (e.g.,
         emergency response, lawful intercept).

     8)  The pace of Wireless replacement of Wireline will increase.

     9)  ENUM (Electronic Numbering) will continue to happen around 
         the world ... and the US will continue to lag.

     10) Open Source communications will continue to gain momentum, the
         effects of which will be felt in the next 12-18 months.

     11) IM and incidental communications and applications (such as
         "presence") will continue to grow unregulated.

     12) Universal Service will move to a connections-based system.

     13) Access rates and inter-carrier compensation will trend down 
         (although the long-anticipated unified intercarrier comp 
         reform will not be seen in '05.)

     14) Sides will be drawn further as Congressional debate grows
         over the likely rewrite of the Communications Act.  We will
         find out who our friends are and who has just been paying us
         lip-service.

     15) 2005 might be the year of Bluetooth.  2005 will see the
         emergence of the first dual, or multi-mode, phones capable of
         switching from WiFi to mobile wireless (and perhaps to
         landline).

    "We are in the midst of a VoIP communications revolution," said
Jeff Pulver, chairman of Pulver.com Enterprises.  "The buzz
surrounding the international VoIP industry continues to grow, and
it's important for everyone to understand and take advantage of the
changes taking place.  IP Communications is 'disruptive'
communications in the most positive sense, and it will dramatically
enhance the ways in which we communicate."

    Pulver publishes a blog that offers unique insight into the state
of the IP Communications industry.  This blog, which is updated daily
(and sometimes more often than that) addresses all-things-VoIP, from
the technical (i.e., service and product innovations, extensions of
concept) to the political (Governmental concerns, hearings and
rulings, any and all issues-based subject matter).  The Jeff Pulver
Blog can be easily accessed at http://pulverblog.pulver.com/ , and
reader comments are welcome (and typically result in a speedy reply!).

    About Jeff Pulver

Jeff Pulver is one of the true pioneers of the Internet
telephony/VoIP industry with more than a decade of hands-on experience
in IP Communications and innovation.  He is the publisher of The
Pulver Report and VON magazine, and creator of the industry standard
Voice on the Net (VON) conferences, where all sectors of the IP
Communications industry come together to discuss, debate, and advance
the industry.  Additionally, Mr. Pulver is the founder of a number of
IP Communications companies.  Mr. Pulver has testified before the FCC,
the United States Congress, and numerous agencies that have a growing
interest in IP Communications.  Named by BusinessWeek as one of their
2003 "Gurus of Technology," Mr. Pulver is committed to the future of
IP Communications and is featured often in the media as a true expert
in his field.

    About Pulver.com Enterprises

The Pulver.com group of companies strives to promote the IP industry
and change the way people communicate through new, enabling,
innovative IP Communications technologies.  The group focuses on IP
hardware, software, and communications services, demonstrating that IP
Communications makes it possible to do new things with
telecommunications that can't be done with the traditional PSTN
network.  Pulver.com Enterprises owns a number of companies including
Free World Dialup, LibreTel, pulverInnovations, and Blue Lava
Software, and is headed by IP Communications entrepreneur and globally
renowned thought leader, Jeff Pulver.

     Reader Contact Information
Pulver.com Enterprises, 115 Broadhollow Road, Suite 225; Melville, NY
11747; Tel: 631-961-8950, Fax: 631-293-3996, http://www.pulver.com .

     Company Contact:                 Press Contact:
     Diana Caporale                   Alan Weinkrantz
     631-961-8986                     210-820-3070 ext. 103
     dcaporale@pulver.com             alan@weinkrantz.com

SOURCE Pulver.com Enterprises
Web Site: http://www.pulver.com http://pulverblog.pulver.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 02:49:47 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Sprint's Merger With Nextel


http://economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3D3499537

And then there were four
  From The Economist print edition

Why America's latest wireless merger makes sense and its implications

FROM six to five, and now four: the oft-repeated prediction that America s
fragmented wireless telecoms industry would consolidate finally came true
in 2004. In October, Cingular completed its $41 billion purchase of AT&T
Wireless, leapfrogging Verizon Wireless to become the nation s largest
wireless operator (see chart). And on Wednesday December 15th, Sprint and
Nextel, the third- and fifth-largest operators, announced a merger of
equals in reality, the acquisition by Sprint of Nextel for around $36
billion. The combined firm will be called Sprint Nextel.

Both deals were driven in large part by technology, which placed
constraints on who could merge with whom. Unlike Europe, where
wireless operators all use a system called GSM, America s operators
use several different and incompatible standards. Verizon and Sprint
use a technology called CDMA, while Cingular, AT&T Wireless and
T-Mobile have GSM networks (which explains why Cingular and AT&T
Wireless made a logical partnership).  Nextel, however, uses a
proprietary system called iDEN, made by Motorola, which has both
strengths and weaknesses.  Mobile telecommunications

Its main strength is its acclaimed push to talk feature, which allows
Nextel handsets to be used like walkie-talkies, though the calls are in
fact routed over the cellular network. As a result, Nextel has long been
the choice of construction workers and maintenance technicians; other
consumers love the walkie-talkie feature too. It explains Nextel s
unrivalled customer loyalty and average revenue per user, both key industry
metrics. But as the industry upgrades to high-speed third generation (3G)
networks, which offer both extra voice capacity and fast internet access,
there is no upgrade path for iDEN so Nextel must switch to another=
 technology.

It has been evaluating two options. The first is another proprietary
technology, called Flash-OFDM, made by a firm called Flarion. This is
sometimes referred to as a 4G technology, but is already available:
Nextel has a small Flarion network running in North Carolina. While it
works well as a wireless-broadband technology for PCs and laptops,
however, the technology is not yet supported in mobile phones. So
Nextel was also evaluating the high-speed version of CDMA, called
EV-DO. Verizon Wireless is already deploying it, and Sprint, after
much dithering, recently announced that it would do so too. For
Nextel, the benefit of EV-DO is that handsets already exist, and it is
possible to implement push-to-talk functionality, on a par with Nextel
s existing service, on an EV-DO network. Customers can therefore be
moved from iDEN to EV-DO without having to give up the feature they
value most. Hence the logic of merging with Sprint, which is also
committed to EV-DO.

The deal makes sense for other reasons too. Nextel has lots of
business customers, an area where Sprint is weak. The combined firm
will have greater economies of scale and more bargaining power with
handset and equipment suppliers. And the decision to spin off Sprint s
regional fixed-line division paves the way for Sprint Nextel to strike
deals with America s cable operators. They want to add wireless
telephony to their service bundles, better to compete with America s
regional fixed-line incumbents, the Baby Bells. Sprint and Nextel
already rent network capacity to smaller operators such as Virgin
Mobile and Boost, so they know how to support such virtual operators .

The merger requires regulatory approval, but that is likely to be
forthcoming, since the deal is smaller than the Cingular/AT&T Wireless
transaction and will clearly enhance competition. Shareholders are
also likely to approve. A rumoured counter-bid for Sprint from Verizon
Wireless, which could derail the deal, seems unlikely not least
because regulators would probably object. But many hurdles
remain. Integrating the two firms various networks will be tricky;
another worry is that the corporate cultures will clash. Nextel has an
entrepreneurial, innovative culture, while Sprint is formal and
conservative, says Raul Katz of Adventis, a consultancy.

Yet perhaps the most significant aspect of the deal concerns not 3G,
but 4G. Between them, Sprint and Nextel own nearly all the spectrum
licences for the unused 2.5GHz frequency band. The combined firm will
be able to use this prime wireless real estate to build a 4G network,
perhaps using Flarion s technology or WiMax, an emerging
wireless-broadband standard. In the short term, the merger helps
Sprint Nextel catch up with Verizon and Cingular in the 3G stakes. But
beyond that, it also gives the new firm a head start in 4G.


Copyright The Economist Newspaper Limited 2004.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Economist Newspapers.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: P2P Battle Shifts to High Court
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:33:07 EST



NEW YORK (Billboard) - The U.S. Supreme Court is about to play a vital
role in determining the fortunes of the music industry.

Its decision in the so-called Grokster case will finally clarify the
industry's ability to control peer-to-peer technology through existing
law.

In so doing, the court will influence the industry at every level,
including its ability to invest in artists and songwriters,
entertainment industry lawyers say.

The High Court on Dec. 10 gave the nod to record labels, music
publishers, songwriters and major motion picture studios, agreeing to
review the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that ruled that P2P
operators Grokster and StreamCast were not liable for copyright
infringements by users of their file-sharing technology.

Gregory Garre, a partner with Hogan & Hartson in Washington, D.C.,
highlights the significance of the court's decision to hear the
case. Only about 100 cases out of roughly 8,000 petitions filed each
year are granted review by the court, he says.

Garre, formerly with the Solicitor General's office within the
Department of Justice now heads the firms Supreme Court practice. He
believes the justices will have two concerns as they review this case.

First, they will focus on whether the P2P services facilitate a
blatant way for users to defeat copyright laws, threatening this
important form of intellectual property.

BETAMAX PRECEDENT

While the Supreme Court in 1984 held that Sony Corp of America was not
liable for any copyright infringement by users of its Betamax video
recorder, Garre notes, the evidence in the Grokster case is
different. Most people used the Betamax for lawful reasons -- to watch
recorded TV programs at a later time. In the Grokster case, the record
shows that the substantial majority of P2P users infringe copyrights,
he says.  

The court also will be sensitive to the fact that its ruling may have
dramatic effects in the marketplace for technology and entertainment,
Garre says. Its ruling will reflect careful consideration of these
concerns, he predicts.

None of the lawyers Billboard contacted believe the court's decision
will change the 1984 Sony Betamax decision. "It has served the law
well for the last 20 years," Garre says. The justices will most likely
interpret that decision and apply it to current technology.

As the nine justices consider the issues and listen to oral arguments,
expected to be scheduled for March, they will take a common-sense
approach, Garre says. While appellate courts focus on applying legal
precedent, he explains, the Supreme Court tends to be concerned with
the practical dimensions of their decisions.

The justices could explore alternative ways to restrict copyright
infringement on the P2P networks, says Marc Jacobson, of Greenberg
Traurig in New York. The court could send the case back to the
District Court in Los Angeles -- where it is still pending on other
issues -- for that court to explore the alternatives and then apply
rules provided by the Supreme Court.

FRIENDS OR FOES?

The parties to this case won't be the only ones raising issues with
the court, Garre notes. "This is the kind of case that is going to
attract an enormous amount of amicus briefs."  Anyone with an interest
in the case may file a "friend of the court" brief with consent of the
parties, which is rarely denied.

This could prove troublesome to the parties, however. While some
organizations may coordinate their efforts with one side, they are not
required to do so, Garre says. Their interests could undermine a
strategy developed by the parties they support.

Amicus briefs will be especially important in educating the court in
how the technology works and why these issues are so important, Garre
adds. The decision is expected before the court adjourns for the
summer. A wild card in the process is whether Chief Justice William 
Rehnquist who is ailing, will take part in the decision. Rehnquist
was a dissenter in the Sony Betamax case. In the meantime, the
industry continues to face an uncertain future. 

"We're going to have to get a handle on digital piracy in order to get
investors comfortable and to restore stability in the recording and
publishing industry," says Michael Elkin, with Thelen Reid & Priest.
Pending copyright-related legislation is likely to stay on hold
until the court rules.  Reuters/Billboard

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 Reuters/Billboard News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:03:54 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


On Sun, 19 Dec 2004, Joseph wrote:

> You're really lucky that someone hasn't slugged you yet for your
> obnoxious behavior.

In case you weren't aware, assault is a felony, punishable with fines
and jail time.  I am also quite capable of self-defense from criminal
attack.

You need to learn to restrain your violent impulses.  When you grow
up, you will learn that you can not solve your problems with violence.

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004, AES/newspost wrote:

> I think I knew you or knew of you, in long-ago Stanford computer
> center days (?); and it looks like you've inherited more Charles
> Bronson genes, and I've inherited more Walter Mitty genes.

Tony, it has nothing to do with Charles Bronson.  It has everything to
do with shaming those who impose their loud cell phone conversations
on an unwilling and captive audience.

Increasingly, there are laws and/or regulations banning use of cell
phones in public places.  Cell phone jammers are illegal in the US,
but they are being deployed increasingly.  This not a good thing;
someone will die some day because of a jammer.  Nevertheless, this is
the natural result of abusive cell phone use; and will get worse
unless people pay more attention to mobile phone manners.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

------------------------------

From: jmeissen@aracnet.com
Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now
Date: 20 Dec 2004 15:59:35 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


In article <telecom23.608.6@telecom-digest.org>, Joseph
<JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:07:08 -0800, Mark Crispin
> <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:

>> I start mocking their conversation, in a loud enough tone of voice
>> that they can hear me.  

> You're really lucky that someone hasn't slugged you yet for your
> obnoxious behavior.  You seem to think that their being obnoxious is
> license for you to be as well, eh?

Sounds good to me. :-) Teaching by example can be very effective.

>> It's quite effective.

> Until some guy socks you in the mouth for commenting on his private
> conversation.

If it's held in a public place, and broadcast for all to hear, then
it's no longer private.

John Meissen                                     jmeissen@aracnet.com

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 23:07:25 -0500


In article <telecom23.608.13@telecom-digest.org>, devilspgd@crazyhat.net 
says:

> In message <telecom23.607.5@telecom-digest.org> Tony P.
> <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net> wrote:

>>>> I love how the cable companies harp on the fact that satellite
>>>> transmission can be interrupted by rain, and then one of their own
>>>> carried stations goes off the air because you guessed it, weather
>>>> interfered with the cable companies OWN satellite reception.

>>> While true, it takes a lot more weather to take out a 6' dish then a
>>> 20" dish.

>> It can be misting here and we lose channels. Anytime water is involved
>> you can kiss centimeter or lower bands goodbye.

> To tie it in to the cable-vs-satellite argument, does it take out any of
> the cable company's channels?

It takes out things like Discovery, TNT, AMC, etc. all of which are 
delivered via satellite. 

------------------------------

From: BobGoudreau@withheld on request
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:58:26 -0500


[Please make sure my email address is removed from both this message
and from the issue's table of contents. Thanks]

Dave Close wrote:

> When CNN first started Headline News, back before Gulf War One, they
> were still a bootstrap operation and very short of money HLN used a
> single anchor and no remote correspondents. Video was bought from
> local stations and presented with the anchor's voice-over. That was
> much less expensive than the present programming.

I think this overstates the situation slightly.

When my family first got cable TV in the summer of 1982 (almost 9
years before the Kuwait war), I remember that it included two separate
24-hour news stations. One was CNN, which was already starting to make
its mark, though not yet as famous as the aforementioned war would
eventually make it. The other was its new sister station called
"CNN2", which had been launched at the beginning of that same year,
and wouldn't be renamed to "CNN Headline News" until the following
year. It was clear from the start that CNN2's role in life was to be a
summary-serving companion for its big brother.  It's true that there
was a single anchor at a time, but its content came (as it still does)
from CNN.  Of course, some of that content was (and is) purchased from
other news sources, including local news teams, but even back then,
CNN did have correspondents of its own.

Bob Goudreau
Cary, NC

------------------------------

Date: 20 Dec 2004 03:35:51 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


In article <telecom23.608.2@telecom-digest.org> you write: 

> Is there any kind of gadget available to interface with a cellphone
> (perhaps via the headset connection) that would allow you to plug your
> cellphone into it when you are at home, and have it provide your own
> little local phone system over your old phone wires so that you could
> use any phone in the house to make a call on the cellphone and have
> all the phones in the house ring when the cellphone rings?

Mike Sandman sells devices that do just that, at
http://www.sandman.com/pouches.html (It's on the same page as cell
phone belt pouches.)

Regards,

John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711
johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have one of those devices from Mike.
Mine is called 'cell socket' and my cellular phone sits right inside
the device. It charges the phone battery, and allows the phone to be
used from any regular phone which plugs in with a modular connector. 
I can use it with a 'total com' PBXtra box by plugging the Cell Socket
into one of the 'dial 9' level ports on the PBXtra (which Mike also 
offers in his catalog). From any phone, dial 9 and get dialtone from
the cell phone (via cell socket). Or when cell phone (via cell socket)
rings, the phone attached to PBXtra as the default for incoming calls
will ring as well, or a common audible will ring and dialing *7 from
any phone allows it to be answered. I put my Vonage phone in another
port on the PBXtra as well to do the same thing with it, then the
remaining five ports (of the eight ports on PBXtra) allow me to answer
any phone (landline, Vonage or cell phone) from any phone in my
house, or transfer any call to any other extension. 

These devices (PBXtra units) are great for people who have a large 
house (but a small amount of phone traffic) but want the flexibilty 
of all phones at all locations, and they are fully programmable by
the user. For example, I have my one landline phone as dial 9 for
outgoing calls, my Vonage line as dial 8 for outgoing calls, and
my cell phone on the cell socket as dial 7 for outgoing calls. The
common audible tells me when any of them have an incoming call, and
*7 allows me to answer whatever line is ringing. You definitly need
to check Mike Sandman's catalog if you have not recently. Look at
http://www.sandman.com . One disadvantage is no caller ID available
on it.  PAT] 

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <devilspgd@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: AFA (Flight Attendants) Opposes In-Flight Cell Phone Use
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:56:35 -0700
Organization: Octanews


In message <telecom23.608.9@telecom-digest.org> n28110
<n28110@hotmail.nospammoporfavor.com> wrote:

> As a wearer of a cellular phone for work reasons, I'm absolutely
> amazed at the numer of people who power up the phone the instant the
> plane leaves the active runway onto the taxiway, only to call their
> (I'm assuming) loved ones to let them know that the plane has
> successfully smacked onto the ground.

I did exactly that on my last two flights -- Well, I wasn't calling
"loved ones", I was calling the people I was meeting to let them know
they should get off their asses and drive to the airport.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 00:37:04 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Subject: Re: Cable TV Advertising (was 'Transitional Fair Use'...)


I wrote:

> Gee, I'd sure like to know who "they" are.

PAT wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I do not know who 'they'
> were either, but I distinctly remember sometime the late 1950's
> hearing about how 'cable television stations will not have
> commercials since the fee you pay for service takes care of all
> that ..."   PAT]

I think whoever told you that was either misinformed or pulling your
leg.

In the late 1950's, very few cable TV systems carried anything other
than broadcast stations (which, of course, included advertising).
Although a few cable systems originated some programming, it was
pretty primitive stuff.

As it happens, the "Weather Scan" was introduced in 1958 -- the
industry's first attempt at automated programming.  The Cable Center's
history-of-cable page describes this device as follows:

    1958-59
    Systems begin carrying FM radio stations and
    "weather scans" (a stationery camera pans between
    gauges showing local temperature, barometric
    pressure, wind, etc.). Weather scans provide an
    additional opportunity to sell local advertising
    with the advertiser's message printed on a fixed
    placard beside the gauges. Customers can also
    listen to background music while they watch the
    weather information.

Source: "Cable History: 1950."  Denver: The Cable Center, 2004.
http://www.cablecenter.org/history/timeline/decade.cfm?start=1950
This link includes a photograph of the device.

The Weather Scan should sound familiar to PAT: it's the same "weather 
dials" device that Coffeyville Community College used on their Channel 4 
station back in the 60s.  See: 
http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/archives/back.issues/recent.single.issues/V23_%23529

Note that the Weather Scan, primitive though it was, established a 
precedent for advertising support of local-origination programming:

     "Weather scans provide an additional opportunity
     to sell local advertising with the advertiser's
     message printed on a fixed placard beside the
     gauges."

Neal McLain

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #609
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 21 01:11:00 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBL6Ax429280;
	Tue, 21 Dec 2004 01:11:00 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 01:11:00 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412210611.iBL6Ax429280@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 #610

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 21 Dec 2004 01:11:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 610

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call (phoner@company.com)
    TV Over Phones Attracts Billions in Investment (Telecom dailyLead)
    DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo lifetime Service (googlenospam@netcrafting)
    Motorola MD481 Cordless (Weston Fire 22)
    PSAPs Sound E911 Call For Help (Lisa Minter)
    Vonage(R) Canada and Galaxy Broadband Bring VoIP Phone Service (Minter)
    System Would Allow 911 Checks (Jack Decker)
    Re: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone (Neal McLain)
    Re: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone (LB@notmine.com)
    Re: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone (John Stahl)
    Re: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone (Joseph)
    Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (Joseph)
    Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Wesrock@aol.com)
    Re: Cable TV Advertising (was 'Transitional Fair Use') (Barry Margolin)
    Re: New Treo 650 Is Better Than Ever; Rivals Offer Alternatives (Drew)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call
From: phoner@company.com
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:06:01 GMT


Cell phone companies record the tower that handles each call, and then
keep that info for at least a short time.

That came out in the recent arson case in Maryland.  The suspect
claimed that he was at home.  However, he had a cellphone call during
his alibi time.  His provider's records showed that the cell tower
handling his call wasn't near his house.

This had to have been a routine log since the suspect wasn't yet a
suspect at the time of the call.

(Putting my tinfoil hat on:) I have a theory that the location of
every cellphone that is turned on is being routinely recorded, say
every minute, and saved for later data mining.  I have no direct
evidence.  However, this is technically feasible, and is a logical (to
me) extension of what we know was done decades ago.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 14:27:08 -0500 (EST)
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: TV Over Phones Attracts Billions in Investment


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
December 20, 2004
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18221&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* TV over phones attracts billions in investment
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Analysis: Wireless consolidation may have its benefits
* Analysis: Investors cheer telecom rebound
* CNET Special Report: The year in broadband
* Comcast upgrade leads to new services in Colorado
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Telecom Crash Course -- The must-have book for telecom professionals
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Sprint offers streaming music via mobile phones
* Yahoo! expands mobile offering
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Opinion: FCC took wrong approach in last week's competition ruling
* Iowa ISP wins $1B in spam damages

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18221&l=2017006

------------------------------

From: googlenospam@netcrafting.com
Subject: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service
Date: 20 Dec 2004 11:58:39 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I thought Google readers would like to know this.

When I bought my Sony Directv w/Tivo satellite receiver three years
ago, I also bought the Tivo lifetime subscription for $249.00. It is
still in use and is my only Tivo unit. From 11/2001 to 10/2004, my
monthly satellite service was provided by Pegasus. This happened
because we were in an area that Directv chose to have them service.

Directv took over Pegasus this fall. My most recent billing from
Directv is showing a new monthly fee of $4.99 for Tivo service. When I
called Directv, they said, "Sorry, but we're not honoring the lifetime
Tivo subscriptions purchased when the customer was serviced by
Pegasus.". This is a really bad deal. I called Tivo and they were of
no help. Directv billed me for the lifetime subscription on 12/6/2001
and I paid THEM for it.

I'm on hold waiting to talk to a Directv customer service supervisor
right now. I'll continue this paragraph after I speak with them ...

Just hung up with Kathy at Directv and they said, "Sorry, but that's
the way it is."

I cannot believe this is happening. I thought a lifetime subscription
lasted the lifetime of the Tivo unit? This is not the case for folks
who were serviced by Pegasus. Beware if you buy a lifetime Tivo on
Ebay that was owned by a customer who got their satellite service from
Pegasus.

Signed,

Angry customer in Northern MN.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone committed fraud on you. When
you purchase (or otherwise take over) an existing business, then 
you take over not only the assets of the existing business, but the
*liabilities* as well, unless the people going *out* of business
specifically publish a notice to the effect otherwise, which is to
afford *you* - the holder of that asset (by virtue of your lifetime
subscription in this case) -- the opportunity to collect on it from
the original owner of the business. Did DirectTV publish a notice
saying 'not responsible for debts of Pegasus' or did Peegasus publish
a notice saying 'going out of business, etc'. Did Pegasus file a
petition in bankruptcy?  If so, did they list *all* of their
liabilities, including 'lifetime' (prepaid) subscriptions?  You
definitly were defrauded, but collecting on it may be a challenge and
cost more than it is worth. Your legal complaint is with Pegasus,
assuming that DirectTV had no knowledge of any such 'lifetime
subscritions' outstanding through Pegasus.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Weston Fire 22 <WestonFire22@gmail.com>
Subject: Motorola MD481 Cordless
Date: 20 Dec 2004 17:06:42 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I got a MD481 cordless phone the other day, after charging overnight,
yada, yada, I went to use the phone today.  Any number I call, local
or long distance, I get a message from the telco saying the call
couldn't be completed, etc.

Just to check things out, I switched to pulse dialing and it works
fine.  So, tone dialing doesn't work, pulse dialing does.  I proceeded
to call Motorola support (and waited 30 minutes on hold) and was
promptly told,"Sir, this is a digital phone and you need to call your
phone comapny and make sure you have a digital phone line and not an
analog phone line. If the phone company says you have a digital line,
then call us back."  Huh??  Never before have I heard such a thing.
Sure the phone says digital on it, but so do my other two cordless
phones (though not Motorola's).

So did the support guy just not know what was wrong and decided to
send me on a chase and hope he didn't get me when I called back?  Any
insight would be appreciated.

Bruce

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 12:15:47 -0500
Subject: PSAPs Sound E911 Call For Help


http://www.americasnetwork.com/americasnetwork/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=140090

PSAPs Sound E911 Call For Help 

Emergency responders in rural areas still are struggling for more
money to handle advancing VoIP-based communications as they continue
to work through lingering wireless E911 Phase II location-based
services issues.

For the time being, public safety answering points (PSAPs) will get
some relief. After it looked as though PSAPs would get left out in the
cold this year, senators stepped up to the plate at the last minute
and approved a bill to create a centralized national E911 coordinating
office run jointly by the U.S. Commerce Department and the Department
of Transportation. It also will authorize $250 million in matching
grants for states, local governments and tribal organizations to
improve their 911 communications systems, hire and train more
personnel, as well as purchase equipment.

And for those states that divert E911 surcharge fees, the initiative
makes them ineligible for the matching grants; a bi-annual report to
Congress on E911 progress will identify those states.

Full story at:
http://www.americasnetwork.com/americasnetwork/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=140090

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:55:00 -0500
Subject: Vonage(R) Canada and Galaxy Broadband bring VoIP phone service


Jack Decker note: News from our neighbors to the north, east, and (if
you are in Downtown Detroit) south.  Maybe something like this could
be used to provide phone service to the East Lake area, and other
parts of northern Michigan that are presently unserved!  Of course if
Vonage will work over satellite broadband (albeit with noticeable
latency - you can't repeal the laws of physics nor exceed the speed of
light) then it's probable that other VoIP companys' service would
also, and I am hopeful that at least one of the commercial VoIP
providers will be able to offer numbers in the Upper Peninsula real
soon now (and it's not Vonage).

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/December2004/20/c7153.html

Vonage(R) Canada and Galaxy Broadband bring VoIP phone service to
isolated Canadians

 Remote oil drilling rigs, lighthouses, and fishing lodges connect to the
 outside world with innovative satellite broadband and Internet telephone
 service

    MISSISSAUGA, ON, Dec. 20 /CNW/ - Vonage Canada, the country's
leading provider of broadband phone service, today announced a
partnership with Galaxy Broadband Communications, a leading provider
of two-way high-speed Internet access via satellite, to offer
Canadians in remote locations a more affordable, reliable and
potentially life-saving link to the world.

    Galaxy Broadband provides broadband Internet access through its
network of satellites to remote logging camps, oil drilling rigs,
fly-in fishing and hunting lodges and any Canadian who is otherwise
disconnected because of location. The agreement with Vonage Canada
will allow those isolated work locations or homes to connect Vonage's
broadband phone service to the high-speed network, ensuring reliable
communications to company headquarters, family and friends.

    "Our customers are traditionally beyond the reach of land-based,
high-speed Internet access," said Rick Hodgkinson, president and CEO
of Galaxy Broadband. "Communications is often very spotty with our
remote customers, with little or no cellular phone coverage, where
people literally have to climb the nearest hilltops to try and get a
signal. Reliable connections are critical to many remote operations
like drilling rigs in the middle of nowhere, in case of emergency or
other safety considerations. Vonage's service piggybacks on Galaxy's
high-speed connection so remote workers and homeowners have an
instant, reliable link to the outside world, and at a significantly
less cost than cellular or satellite telephone service."

    Galaxy Broadband tested nearly 10 VoIP services in 2004, selecting
Vonage because of its reliability and call quality. Galaxy will make
the Vonage service available to its 400 certified reseller partners
across Canada.

    Remote Canadian homeowners, branch operations and small business
owners can choose an area code from 14 major centres in six provinces,
including Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa, Toronto, Montreal and
Halifax. Customers can also obtain a secondary "virtual" number from
any available area code in Canada and the U.S. served by Vonage. 
International virtual numbers are also available from Mexico and U.K.

    Broadband phone service, or VoIP, works by turning voice calls
into data packets and sending them over the Internet. When the data
packs approach their destination, they are reassembled, and delivered
in the form of a traditional call.

    "Voice over IP brings communications to people who would otherwise
be disconnected from the world," said Bill Rainey, president, Vonage
Canada. "The simplicity of Vonage's service allows any remote
homeowner or business with high-speed access to bridge the distance
gap and take advantage of this breakthrough technology that is
changing the way Canadians make and receive phone calls."

    Vonage Canada's partnership with Galaxy is another step in its
strategy of widening its distribution channel with Canadian resellers
whose customers are looking for an affordable, full-featured phone
service that leverages the power and ubiquity of the Internet.

    About Vonage(R) Canada

    Vonage Canada is redefining communications by offering consumers
and small businesses an affordable alternative to traditional
telephone service.  The fastest growing telephony company in North
America, Vonage's service area encompasses more than 2000 active rate
centers in over 125 North American markets, including six Canadian
provinces. 

Vonage is sold directly through http://www.vonage.ca and retail
partners such as STAPLES Business Depot and RadioShack Canada. With
more than 350,000 lines in service within North America, Vonage
continues to add more than 30,000 lines per month to its network. More
than 10 million calls per week are made using Vonage, the easy-to-use,
feature-rich, flat-rate phone service. Vonage Canada is headquartered
in Mississauga, ON. For more information about Vonage's products and
services, please visit http://www.vonage.ca or call
1-877-272-0528. Vonage Canada is a trademark of Vonage Holdings Corp.

    About Galaxy Broadband

    With more than 25 years experience, Galaxy Broadband
Communications Inc.  specializes in providing satellite-based Internet
solutions for consumers and businesses throughout Canada. For more
information about high-speed Internet virtually anywhere in Canada,
visit http://www.galaxybroadband.ca or call 1-877-463-9728.

For further information: Duane MacDonald for Vonage Canada, 
(416) 924-5700 x4043; Patti Jordan, Vonage Canada, (416) 907-6157, 
patti.jordan@vonage.com

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 12:49:18 -0500
Subject: System Would Allow 911 Checks


http://www.wisinfo.com/postcrescent/news/archive/local_18928007.shtml

Verification service not yet available in Wisconsin 

By Duke Behnke 
Post-Crescent staff writer 

A national company with expertise in emergency communications has
developed an automated system that would enable telephone customers to
verify the accuracy of their 911 information.

The system, however, is not available through SBC Wisconsin, the
telephone company that manages 911 databases in Outagamie, Waupaca and
Winnebago counties.

"We have not tested this technology, and it currently is not available
in any Wisconsin community," SBC spokesman Howard Riefs said this past
week. "Its very much in its infancy."

Intrado Inc. of Longmont, Colo., unveiled 911Plus Info Check in
November as a means for telephone customers to self-validate their 911
information, which public service agencies use to dispatch emergency
personnel.

Earlier this year, The Post-Crescent found that telecommunicators in
the four counties around Appleton uncover an average of 200 data
errors each year, ranging from a wrong digit in a house number to
missing information and wrong communities. Some result in emergency
crews being dispatched to the wrong address.

The newspaper began investigating the issue in January after
paramedics mistakenly were sent to a Menasha address while a Neenah
man died of a heart attack at his home.

With the new system, telephone customers call a special number and
follow a few steps for security and privacy protection to hear the 911
address on record for their phone number.

If the information is wrong, callers can report the inaccuracy through
the system.

Full story at:
http://www.wisinfo.com/postcrescent/news/archive/local_18928007.shtml 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:18:16 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Subject: Re: Giving up Landline For Cellphone


Thomas A. Horsley <tom.horsley@att.net> wrote:

> Is there any kind of gadget available to interface with a
> cellphone (perhaps via the headset connection) that would allow
> you to plug your cellphone into it when you are at home, and
> have it provide your own little local phone system over your
> old phone wires so that you could use any phone in the house to
> make a call on the cellphone and have all the phones in the
> house ring when the cellphone rings?

Try "cellsocket" < http://www.cellsocket.com/ >.

For the past few weeks, I've been trying, without much success, to get
one of these things to work in rural Brazoria County, Texas.  I've
encountered two problems: low signal from AT&T Wireless and the
cellsocket's inability to complete some calls.

In an attempt to overcome the low-signal problem, I installed an
outdoor omnidirectional antenna (Mike Sandman's "indoor cellular
antenna" < http://www.sandman.com/pouches.html > mounted on the roof
of a single-story building surrounded by lots of trees).  The antenna
is connected to the cellsocket by about 16 feet of cable.  According
to Sandman, this antenna is supposed to provide 3 dB. gain, but it
hasn't helped in my situation.  Maybe the cable loss negates the
antenna's gain.

For test purposes, I connected a standard 2500-type touch-tone desk
phone to the cellsocket's RJ-11 jack.  When I make a call from this
phone, I'm supposed to be able to dial 1-NXX-NXX-XXXX-#, where the "#"
serves as "SEND."  Most of the time, this seems to work, but sometimes
the call doesn't go through: immediately after I press "#", it dumps
the call I get dialtone again.

I haven't been able to figure out why this happens.  Perhaps the
low-signal problem is causing (or contributing to) it, so I don't
blame the cellsocket.  I discussed this problem with cellsocket's
technician (a marginally-helpful guy named Roosevelt), who suggested
that I contact the cellsocket manufacturer, WHP Wireless, Inc.

At that point, I gave up on the whole idea, and signed up with Vonage.
The antenna is still on the roof, but I'll haul it down one of these
days.

Further lessons I learned from all this effort:

  - Tellular makes a "cellular fixed wireless" device
    < http://www.telular.com/products/index.asp >.  But
    apparently, it doesn't just interface with a cellphone;
    it *replaces* the cellphone.  Which, I assume, means
    you'd need a separate cell access line just for it.

  - Mike Sandman's website describes a "Cellular POTS adapter"
    < http://www.sandman.com/pouches.html >.  It doesn't exist:
    Sandman's website is WAY out of date.  I originally planned
    to use one of these adapters in conjunction with the rooftop
    antenna; unfortunately, I had already installed the antenna
    on the roof when I found out that the adapter isn't available.
    Which is why I ended up using a cellsocket instead.  (And yes,
    I did grump at Mike Sandman about his obsolete website, but
    he still hasn't fixed it.)

  - Sandman's antenna doesn't mate directly with the cellsocket's
    input connector (of course), so I had to buy an adapter
    cable (SMA-male-to-FME-male).  Fortunately, HamStop.com
    < http://www.hamstop.com/ > had one for 5.95, including
    shipping.

  - The cellsocket only fits certain kinds of cellphones, so
    I had to buy a new one.  I bought a used Motorola 120T on
    eBay, only to discover that AT&T wouldn't authorize it
    because it was on their "lost or stolen" list.  So then
    I managed to return that phone to the seller, and bought
    another one.  Then I spent a half-hour on the phone with
    AT&T getting my cellphone number moved from my old old
    phone to my new old phone.  AT&T's CSR was a bit
    perplexed that anybody would actually buy an old 120T,
    but she proceeded cheerfully anyway.

As things stand now, I have a Motorola 120T cellphone, Sandman's
antenna, a cellsocket, an SMA-FME adapter, a big hole in the hall
wall, two holes in the roof, and a pending order with Vonage.  And
nothing to show for it.

Maybe the cellsocket would work if AT&T's signal were stronger ...

Neal McLain

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T's signal strength is a serious
problem in many rural areas. They seem to have a bad habit of *not*
releasing your phone from one of their towers until the signal
strength gets to be so awful they have no choice but to let you go,
then they have cut some deal with (some one or another) of the Cell
One carriers to take you. I originally got an AT&T Wireless phone
(the old Nokia 5165, still my phone of choice) when I was staying
in the Chicago area, on the '630' area code. I brought that phone all
the way to Kansas with me, and only rarely did it ever switch to
'roam' as the bus I was riding on came down I-55 and then US Highway
54 through Missouri. But the screen display would often times change
 from 'AT&T' to 'AT&T Extended Area'. Once the bus got into Tulsa
the signal perked up again; then coming north out of Tulsa on the
Jefferson Lines bus it gradually pooped out again, and eventually
the screen display changed to 'extended area'. Here in Independence,
the phone always says 'extended area', and I am told it gets its
signal through Dobson's operation, an antenna farm over in Liberty,
Kansas, which is west and south of town a little. Dobson has the
Cellular One franchise here, but his 'antenna farm' in Liberty, KS
has not only Cell One, but also Cingular and other tenants renting
space through him. 

AT&T closed their dealership here in Independence and sold their
local customer base to Cingular a few years ago. I still have a
Nokia 5165 but on Cingular now. (I rarely bother to use the AT&T
Wireless phone, which I have on prepaid service. I take the two
phones, hold them side by side, the Cingular phone **always** gets
better reception; I think because AT&T insists on 'serving me' from
Dobson's place in Liberty; while Cingular *used to* use Dobson as
well, but now have their own towers around town. PAT]

------------------------------

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:00:22 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


John Levine wrote:

> In article <telecom23.608.2@telecom-digest.org> you write:

>> Is there any kind of gadget available to interface with a cellphone
>> (perhaps via the headset connection) that would allow you to plug your
>> cellphone into it when you are at home, and have it provide your own
>> little local phone system over your old phone wires so that you could
>> use any phone in the house to make a call on the cellphone and have
>> all the phones in the house ring when the cellphone rings?

> Mike Sandman sells devices that do just that, at
> http://www.sandman.com/pouches.html (It's on the same page as cell
> phone belt pouches.)

> Regards,

> John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711
> johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com,
> Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have one of those devices from Mike.
> Mine is called 'cell socket' and my cellular phone sits right inside
> the device. It charges the phone battery, and allows the phone to be
> used from any regular phone which plugs in with a modular connector.
> I can use it with a 'total com' PBXtra box by plugging the Cell Socket
> into one of the 'dial 9' level ports on the PBXtra (which Mike also
> offers in his catalog). From any phone, dial 9 and get dialtone from
> the cell phone (via cell socket). Or when cell phone (via cell socket)
> rings, the phone attached to PBXtra as the default for incoming calls
> will ring as well, or a common audible will ring and dialing *7 from
> any phone allows it to be answered. I put my Vonage phone in another
> port on the PBXtra as well to do the same thing with it, then the
> remaining five ports (of the eight ports on PBXtra) allow me to answer
> any phone (landline, Vonage or cell phone) from any phone in my
> house, or transfer any call to any other extension.

> These devices (PBXtra units) are great for people who have a large
> house (but a small amount of phone traffic) but want the flexibilty
> of all phones at all locations, and they are fully programmable by
> the user. For example, I have my one landline phone as dial 9 for
> outgoing calls, my Vonage line as dial 8 for outgoing calls, and
> my cell phone on the cell socket as dial 7 for outgoing calls. The
> common audible tells me when any of them have an incoming call, and
> *7 allows me to answer whatever line is ringing. You definitly need
> to check Mike Sandman's catalog if you have not recently. Look at
> http://www.sandman.com . One disadvantage is no caller ID available
> on it.  PAT]

Very Interesting.

Does it matter where one places the adapter?  My cell phone only get
decent reception while at one end of the house.

LB

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have one of Mike's external 3-db gain
antennas also, and it sits by a window in my bedroom, feeding the cell
socket device. The PBXtra unit on the other hand is in my computer
area at the other end of my house. What I would suggest you do is put
the cellsocket adapter at whatever place in your house you get the
best cellular reception, then run a pair to wherever the PBXtra is
located. In other words, cell socket output *not* to a phone, but to
the *input* of the PBXtra, then run the pairs used by the PBXtra to
wherever. PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:56:04 -0500
From: John Stahl <aljon@stny.rr.com>
Subject: Re.: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cell phone


Try this location (URL) for a review of several 
cell-phone-to-landline-phone-adapters: http://www.phonelabs.com/news_08.asp

The author indicates that there are several manufacturers of these
gadgets which you can connect through a non-active landline
installation (i.e., a home or business line telephone system which you
have disconnected from the incoming line at the NID but is still wired
to RJ-11 type outlets to which you can attach standard landline type
phones) and drop your cell phone into (these gadgets vary by the make
of cell phone) when you come home. These gadgets then allow you to
receive/make telephone calls by using your attached landline phones
all through the (inserted) cell phone. Most I've heard not only allow
make/receive calls but charge the cell phone battery.

These type of gadgets would seem to be most popular with senior
citizens as they are more used to using "standard" type phone sets
rather than the smaller cell phones (obviously only usable when the
cell is dropped into them when you are home.)

Hope this info helps you.


John Stahl
Aljon Enterprises
Telecom/Data Consultant 

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh yeah ... keep the cell socket (or
other cell phone adapter) just like the Vonage (or other VOIP
adapter) **away** -- totally separate -- from the landline phone
central office incoming pairs. Just like VOIP adapters, cell phone
adapters get easily offended and tend to fry when telco voltage
gets on the line.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:15:02 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:41:50 GMT, tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A.
Horsley) wrote:

> Is there any kind of gadget available to interface with a cellphone
> (perhaps via the headset connection) that would allow you to plug your
> cellphone into it when you are at home, and have it provide your own
> little local phone system over your old phone wires so that you could
> use any phone in the house to make a call on the cellphone and have
> all the phones in the house ring when the cellphone rings?

I don't know if this is what you're talking about but there are at
least two "docking" solutions.  CellSocket has a unit where you put
your phone into a docking station and you can then use regular
wireline phones in your house to make and receive calls.  There's also
another called "Dock-N-Talk" which works similarly and also has
Bluetooth connectivity so more phones are compatible.

------------------------------

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 13:16:09 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Mark Crispin wrote:

>> You're really lucky that someone hasn't slugged you yet for your
>> obnoxious behavior.

> In case you weren't aware, assault is a felony, punishable with fines
> and jail time.  I am also quite capable of self-defense from criminal
> attack.

> You need to learn to restrain your violent impulses.  When you grow
> up, you will learn that you can not solve your problems with violence.

Wow. I'm impressed. I've never seen someone take a post as far out of
context as you somehow managed to.

I guess the second paragraph of your response would have been
appropriate if Joseph was actually threatening to hurt you. Of course,
he wasn't. He was just commenting that you're lucky that your
obnoxious behavior hasn't caused a fight yet, and I agree. (Yes,
abusive cell users are also obnoxious.)

JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California     Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:32:01 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:03:54 -0800, Mark Crispin
<mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:

> In case you weren't aware, assault is a felony, punishable with fines
> and jail time.  I am also quite capable of self-defense from criminal
> attack.

Well, if you are obnoxious enough they may not care and decide they
don't want you messing with their personal conversations.

------------------------------

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:04:20 EST
Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future?


In a message dated Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:58:26 -0500,
BobGoudreau@withheld on request writes:

> When my family first got cable TV in the summer of 1982 (almost 9
> years before the Kuwait war), I remember that it included two separate
> 24-hour news stations. One was CNN, which was already starting to make
> its mark, though not yet as famous as the aforementioned war would
> eventually make it. The other was its new sister station called
> "CNN2", which had been launched at the beginning of that same year,
> and wouldn't be renamed to "CNN Headline News" until the following
> year. It was clear from the start that CNN2's role in life was to be a
> summary-serving companion for its big brother.  It's true that there
> was a single anchor at a time, but its content came (as it still does)
> from CNN.  Of course, some of that content was (and is) purchased from
> other news sources, including local news teams, but even back then,
> CNN did have correspondents of its own.

Two personal experiences come to mind:

A Continental Airlines flight skidded off the runway leaving the
airport in Denver.  My sister had been on the flight of that number on
her way back from Oklahoma City to Denver.  She called me to tell me
(a) it skidded off on departure (for Billings, I believe), and not on
arrival, and so she was safe (b) the actual aircraft had been changed
in Denver so even though it was the same flight number it was not the
aircraft she was on.

As soon as she told me about the crash, I reached over to the TV
and turned it on CNN.  It had a live feed of the crash scene from some
local station in Denver, just as I expected it would (news events of
that sort are where CNN shines; CNN Headline News rarely runs such
live feeds but included the story in its regular report).

At the time of the Oklahoma City bombing (when I was sitting at the
same computer in the same place as I am writing this) there was
confusion for some time as to what had happened.  Within a few minutes
CNN was picking up from all three network affiliates in Oklahoma City
and were switching among them to present as coherent report as could
be provided at those earlier minutes as hours.  I finally just watched
CNN where I could see all the local reports with some continuity
rather than trying to switch between local stations.


Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com

------------------------------

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Cable TV Advertising (was 'Transitional Fair Use'...)
Organization: Symantec
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:40:48 -0500


In article <telecom23.608.14@telecom-digest.org>, Neal McLain
<nmclain@annsgarden.com> wrote:

> So you're telling me that back in the late 40s and early 50s
> ("... when cable television was first getting underway"), "they"
> expected that the cable industry would create commercial-free "premium
> channels ... just for pay cable distribution"?  And, by implication,
> that a technology would exist for distributing these channels
> nationwide at reasonable cost?

I don't know what people were saying about cable TV in the 40's and
50's.  I'm talking about what happened in the 70's when cable-only
channels like HBO first started to appear.  I believe that prior to
that, cable TV was just a way of providing TV service to communities
that had environmental difficulties receiving broadcast TV (e.g.
mountainous terrain blocking the signals).

Since you had to pay extra for these "premium" channels, there was an 
expectation that this would obviate the need for commercials.


Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

------------------------------

From: dixie_drew@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: New Treo 650 Is Better Than Ever, But Rivals Offer Alternatives
Date: 20 Dec 2004 14:32:08 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I just got a Treo 650 for $40!  I'm so excited that I signed up for two
more.  Check it out:

http://www.power2source.com/index.php?ref_id=642

Owen P. Epstein wrote:

> Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote in message
> news:<telecom23.520.2@telecom-digest.org>:

>> New Treo 650 Is Better Than Ever, But Rivals Offer Some Alternatives

>> By WALTER S. MOSSBERG

>> PalmOne's Treo smart phone has been the best combination of phone, PDA
>> and e-mail device on the market. It had a few key flaws, though, so
>> the company has now released a new, improved model, the Treo 650, to
>> be sold by Sprint starting next month.

>> But the rest of the industry is catching on to the idea of making a
>> phone that, like the Treo, actually has a full keyboard for banging
>> out e-mails. So the competition will be tougher for the new Treo than
>> it was for its predecessor.

>> Over the last week, I've been testing the new Treo 650, and comparing
>> it with two other PDA phones that have now morphed into models with
>> keyboards. One is the Microsoft-based Pocket PC phone. The other is
>> the Sony Ericsson P910 smart phone, based on the Symbian operating
>> system. I concentrated on the new keyboards in these two competitors
>> because that's their main new feature. I have already reviewed another
>> major Treo competitor, the new BlackBerry 7100t, sold by T-Mobile.

>> My verdict: The Treo is better than ever, but the two newest keyboard
>> phones, like the new BlackBerry, will give some new options to mobile
>> e-mail users who prefer different designs and different software.

>> http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20041028.html

> Well you just may be on to something but the market for Palm Treo is
> really hopping.  What other PDA gives the same brilliance as the Treo?

> Thx,

> Owen Epstein

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #610
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 21 16:04:47 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBLL4lr09564;
	Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:04:47 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:04:47 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412212104.iBLL4lr09564@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 #611

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:05:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 611

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Which is the Best Cellphone You Ever Used? (pfschoeng@yahoo.com)
    Re: Motorola MD481 Cordless (jmeissen@aracnet.com)
    Re: Motorola MD481 Cordless (DevilsPGD)
    Global Crossing Secures Much Needed Financing (Telecom DailyLead)    
    Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call (A Burkitt-Gray)
    Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call (Dave VanHorn)
    Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call (Isaiah Beard)
    Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call (Daniel Johnson)
    Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service (Tim@Backhome.org)
    Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service (jmeissen@aracnet.com)
    Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service (DevilsPGD)
    Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo lifetime Service  (Michael Muderick)
    Re: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone (LB@notmine.com)
    Re: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone (Thomas A. Horsley)
    Re: Hanging Up on Wireless Spam (Sparky)
    Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now (Mark Crispin)
    Re: System Would Allow 911 Checks (Mark Atwood)
    Re: Sprint's Merger With Nextel (Isaiah Beard)
    A Christmas Carol: 'Lost Boy' Clings to Hope He'll See Mom (Lisa Minter)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: pfschoeng@yahoo.com
Subject: Which is the Best Cellphone You Ever Used?
Date: 21 Dec 2004 08:53:38 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


This discussion must begin with safety isues. The radiation level is
usually given a SAR value and must be less than 1.6. Other safety
issues should also be discussed.

Reliability and durability are the next things to consider. Nokia,
Motorola and Samsung seem to do well, although this is only my
preliminary impression. The specific model numbers by the manufacturer
is necessary. For example, the Nokia 3200 is considered by many to be
a good phone but other Nokias fare less well.

Performance is next, the main points being reception and battery life.
Many cellphones seem to have a problem with low audio volume for some
reason.  Features are probably the main thing most people mistakenly
consider when buying a cellphone. It should be considered last in most
cases.

------------------------------

From: jmeissen@aracnet.com
Subject: Re: Motorola MD481 Cordless
Date: 21 Dec 2004 16:54:53 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


In article <telecom23.610.4@telecom-digest.org>, Weston Fire 22
<WestonFire22@gmail.com> wrote:

> I got a MD481 cordless phone the other day, after charging overnight,
> yada, yada, I went to use the phone today.  Any number I call, local
> or long distance, I get a message from the telco saying the call
> couldn't be completed, etc.

> Just to check things out, I switched to pulse dialing and it works
> fine.  So, tone dialing doesn't work, pulse dialing does.  I proceeded
> to call Motorola support (and waited 30 minutes on hold) and was
> promptly told,"Sir, this is a digital phone and you need to call your
> phone comapny and make sure you have a digital phone line and not an
> analog phone line. If the phone company says you have a digital line,
> then call us back."  Huh??  Never before have I heard such a thing.
> Sure the phone says digital on it, but so do my other two cordless
> phones (though not Motorola's).

> So did the support guy just not know what was wrong and decided to
> send me on a chase and hope he didn't get me when I called back?  Any
> insight would be appreciated.

Wow. That is so "Dilbert"-ish I had to laugh, in spite of your obviously
not funny predicament.

You were fed a line a mile long.


John Meissen            jmeissen@aracnet.com

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <devilspgd@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Motorola MD481 Cordless
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 23:57:27 -0700
Organization: Octanews


In message <telecom23.610.4@telecom-digest.org> Weston Fire 22
<WestonFire22@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just to check things out, I switched to pulse dialing and it works
> fine.  So, tone dialing doesn't work, pulse dialing does.  I proceeded
> to call Motorola support (and waited 30 minutes on hold) and was
> promptly told,"Sir, this is a digital phone and you need to call your
> phone comapny and make sure you have a digital phone line and not an
> analog phone line. If the phone company says you have a digital line,
> then call us back."  Huh??  Never before have I heard such a thing.
> Sure the phone says digital on it, but so do my other two cordless
> phones (though not Motorola's).

> So did the support guy just not know what was wrong and decided to
> send me on a chase and hope he didn't get me when I called back?  Any
> insight would be appreciated.

Any phone with a TONE/PULSE switch is analog by definition, no digital
service would use analog tones (or would repeatedly short the circuit,
for that matter) to communicate data, the very concept is absurd.

In other words, he was probably not happy in his job :)

------------------------------

From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Global Crossing Secures Much-Needed Financing
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:00:00 EST


As we end this year, the dailyLead team wishes you the best during the
holiday season. Thanks to our partners, our advertisers and -- most
significantly -- you and the thousands of your colleagues who read the
Telecom dailyLead, this has been a very good year, indeed. Your comments
and suggestions help to improve our service, and we look forward to
helping you stay smart and save even more time in 2005!

Telecom dailyLead from USTA
December 21, 2004
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18262&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Global Crossing secures much-needed financing
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Sprint projects sales and profit to grow in 2005
* Report surveys the outlook for Wi-Fi
* Qwest sells services through nonprofits
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Order USTA's Best-Selling VoIP Implementation and Planning Guide Today
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Musiwave offers music via mobile phones
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Nextel to sit out spectrum auction

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18262&l=2017006

------------------------------

Reply-To: <alan@burkitt-gray.com>
From: Burkitt-Gray <alan@burkitt-gray.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 19:58:31 -0000
Organization: Alan Burkitt-Gray


In  volume 23 : Issue 610 phoner@company.com wrote: 

> Cell phone companies record the tower that handles each call, and
> then keep that info for at least a short time."

Well, of course. Where's the surprise? Operators not only have to
provide E-911 location information to emergency services, but are also
investigating opportunities for location-based services, which would
at the very least use cellsite information.

Here in the UK there have been two prominent murder cases where
routine location-based information from cellsites was key. In November
2003 in the trial of Ian Huntley for the murder of two teenagers,
Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman, the prosecution used detailed
evidence of his movements during and after the murder, based on his
location when he turned his phone on, made calls, and turned it off,
and when it went out of range. He was found guilty and is now doing
life.

And when a prominent television presenter, Jill Dando, was stabbed to
death at the door of her home in broad daylight in London in 1999, the
phone companies supplied data to the police about phones in use in the
area at the relevant time. The person eventually arrested and
convicted of the murder didn't have a phone, but at the time of the
investigation much was made -- particularly in the ukcrypto email list
 -- about the use of the phone data.

Alan B-G
Alan Burkitt-Gray, London, UK
alan@burkitt-gray.com

------------------------------

Reply-To: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org>
From: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:49:02 -0500


I have seen my cellphone do some bizarre things at times.

Once, I was standing in Auburn Ca, and my phone switched to "roam". I was 
well within my home area, so I called 611 to see what was up.. They said I 
was in Chico.  Look at a map.

------------------------------

From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:44:21 -0500


phoner@company.com wrote:

> Cell phone companies record the tower that handles each call, and then
> keep that info for at least a short time.

This has been S.O.P. for a long time, and that information is
generally kept for as long as your carrier keeps copies of your past
bills (in my case, at least 2 years, in the case of other carriers,
who knows ... perhaps forever?).  The original purpose was for
maintenance reasons (logging cells that frequently drop calls, for
example) as well as fraud tracking (If your phone makes a call from a
cell in New York City, and then five minutes later, a phone claiming
to be yours makes a call in Montana somewhere, then fraud is
suspected).

Of course, in our current era, these same logs are convenient for 
investigators in they can potentially bolster a claim that you were 
elsewhere than your purported alibi.

> That came out in the recent arson case in Maryland.  The suspect
> claimed that he was at home.  However, he had a cellphone call during
> his alibi time.  His provider's records showed that the cell tower
> handling his call wasn't near his house.

Refuting the validity of this evidence to bolster the prosecution's
case depends on how far away that cell tower was.  There are plenty of
reasons for a non-adjacent cell to take your call.  Perhaps the
nearest cell was at capacity and could not handle your call, but your
phone happened to be able to pick up a not-so-nearby cell that had
slots free.

Or, perhaps there was an odd atmospheric disturbance that permitted an
unusual propagation of radio waves to distant cell sites (similar to
listening to a distant radio station "on a skip").  Such an argument
tends to be less plausible the generally low-power nature of cell
phone transceivers, but such things could still happen under very rare
conditions.

In any case, cell site records aren't a smoking gun.  Even if you
happen to be making a call at a cell that covers the scene of a crime,
there can still be a rather wide area that the cell covers, anywhere
from a radius of a quarter of a mile (for microcells in dense metro
areas) to several miles (in rural areas).  Such records may suggest
that your phone was in the area, but it won't always pinpoint you to
the exact spot.  If you have a plausible alibi that puts you in the
vicinity of the crime but not connected to it, then the cell site
evidence could be moot.

Further, unless the phone has been tapped or a witness sees/hears you
using it, they still can't definitively prove it was YOU using the
phone.

> (Putting my tinfoil hat on:) I have a theory that the location of
> every cellphone that is turned on is being routinely recorded, say
> every minute, and saved for later data mining.

No, not every minute.  For one thing, your phone when "idle" is not
constantly transmitting.  To have everyone's phone constantly transmit
would really degrade battery life, and also severely cripple the cell
network as it is overwhelmed with broadcasting cell phones and not
enough channels to handle them all.

Cell phones do, however, register with the network from time to time 
using a brief burst of data.  They generally do this when a phone moves 
out of a specific "zone" or cluster of cells into a new area, 
broadcasting a "here I am!" message so that in case a call comes in, the 
network knows in which cell group it will find your phone and cause it 
to ring.  And if a phone is sitting still, it might send out a 
registration every 5-15 minutes or so to remind the network that it's 
still there.

> I have no direct evidence.  However, this is technically feasible,
> and is a logical (to me) extension of what we know was done decades
> ago.

There is one last thing to note.  All cell phones being sold in the US
are now FCC mandated to have a location-tracking capability built-in.
Most cell phones have a GPS-assisted device inside them now that
permits this capability, and with it you can theoretically be
pinpointed to within a couple hundred feet.  However, this is
generally activated only when someone dials 911 and is connected to a
dispatch center that can retrieve that location data.  The intent here
is to allow cell users to enjoy the same benefits as most landline
users when they dial 911 (emergency personnel can find you even if you
don't know where you are or otherwise cannot relay that information).

However, even now, not many 911 call centers can retrieve this info,
because the capability requires expensive upgrades that many local
governments haven't bothered to spend money on.

And in any case, both the traditional cell-tracking data and the more
precise GPS data can be easily circumvented: if you don't want to be
located, turn off your cell phone. :)


E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

------------------------------

From: Daniel W. Johnson <panoptes@iquest.net>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call
Date: 21 Dec 2004 10:58:34 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


They probably do that logging for quality of service purposes.  For
example, if a particular tower has an average call length of 10
seconds, it's likely that people are hanging up due to unusable
connections.  Or if handoffs are going from the 3rd-and-Main tower
directly to the 5th-and-Main tower, skipping the one at 4th-and-Main,
there is probably something wrong with the middle tower.  Correlating
the tower logs with call logs would help with handling trouble
tickets; if someone complains that their last call had a lot of noise
for the middle third, it helps to know that the middle third of the
call was handled by the 4th-and-Main tower.

General location data on all phones that are on would be volumnious.
But I suspect that some cell companies note quantities for each tower,
for help when selecting new tower locations.

------------------------------

From: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 04:07:00 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone committed fraud on you. When
> you purchase (or otherwise take over) an existing business, then
> you take over not only the assets of the existing business, but the
> *liabilities* as well, unless the people going *out* of business
> specifically publish a notice to the effect otherwise, which is to
> afford *you* - the holder of that asset (by virtue of your lifetime
> subscription in this case) -- the opportunity to collect on it from
> the original owner of the business. Did DirectTV publish a notice
> saying 'not responsible for debts of Pegasus' or did Peegasus publish
> a notice saying 'going out of business, etc'. Did Pegasus file a
> petition in bankruptcy?  If so, did they list *all* of their
> liabilities, including 'lifetime' (prepaid) subscriptions?  You
> definitly were defrauded, but collecting on it may be a challenge and
> cost more than it is worth. Your legal complaint is with Pegasus,
> assuming that DirectTV had no knowledge of any such 'lifetime
> subscritions' outstanding through Pegasus.   PAT]

As a matter of business ethics, and perhaps law, TIVO is liable and
being quite ugly in the process, if the facts are stated correctly.
It's TIVO who made the claim in the first instance of the life-time
service option.  It's TIVO who complies and distributes the
programming and software updates.

Sounds  like a couple of scam artists at work here.

------------------------------

From: jmeissen@aracnet.com
Subject: Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service
Date: 21 Dec 2004 16:43:48 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


In article <telecom23.610.3@telecom-digest.org>,
<googlenospam@netcrafting.com> wrote:

> When I bought my Sony Directv w/Tivo satellite receiver three years
> ago, I also bought the Tivo lifetime subscription for $249.00. It is
> still in use and is my only Tivo unit. From 11/2001 to 10/2004, my
> monthly satellite service was provided by Pegasus. This happened
> because we were in an area that Directv chose to have them service.

> Directv took over Pegasus this fall. My most recent billing from
> Directv is showing a new monthly fee of $4.99 for Tivo service. When I
> called Directv, they said, "Sorry, but we're not honoring the lifetime
> Tivo subscriptions purchased when the customer was serviced by
> Pegasus.". This is a really bad deal. I called Tivo and they were of
> no help. Directv billed me for the lifetime subscription on 12/6/2001
> and I paid THEM for it.

> I'm on hold waiting to talk to a Directv customer service supervisor
> right now. I'll continue this paragraph after I speak with them ...

> Just hung up with Kathy at Directv and they said, "Sorry, but that's
> the way it is."

Something doesn't add up. The monthly Tivo charges aren't a revenue for
DirecTV but a pass-through charge from Tivo, and comprise the income
Tivo derives from the DirecTV subscribers. When you paid the lifetime
subscription charge you were paying that to Tivo. DirecTV just plays the
part of middleman.

Sounds to me like you haven't gone high enough up the food chain
yet. I would try to contact Tivo for resolution.


John Meissen                                 jmeissen@aracnet.com

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <devilspgd@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 23:57:28 -0700
Organization: Octanews


In message <telecom23.610.3@telecom-digest.org>
googlenospam@netcrafting.com wrote:

> I cannot believe this is happening. I thought a lifetime subscription
> lasted the lifetime of the Tivo unit? This is not the case for folks
> who were serviced by Pegasus. Beware if you buy a lifetime Tivo on
> Ebay that was owned by a customer who got their satellite service from
> Pegasus.

I'd suggest a quick trip to file papers in small claims court would
probably get either your subscription fee refunded, your lifetime
service restored, or possibly both.

If it's not worth the hassle, at a minimum write letters to Pegasus,
DirecTV (even though they're the same companies the letters will
probably end up in different places), the BBB, the FCC (Who won't
help, but will likely forward the letter higher up the DirecTV chain
then your letter will go), and to your local attorney general (who
won't act either, but it looks good on the "CC" line and it *is*
fraud)

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone committed fraud on you. When
> you purchase (or otherwise take over) an existing business, then 
> you take over not only the assets of the existing business, but the
> *liabilities* as well, unless the people going *out* of business
> specifically publish a notice to the effect otherwise, which is to
> afford *you* - the holder of that asset (by virtue of your lifetime
> subscription in this case) -- the opportunity to collect on it from
> the original owner of the business. Did DirectTV publish a notice
> saying 'not responsible for debts of Pegasus' or did Peegasus publish
> a notice saying 'going out of business, etc'. Did Pegasus file a
> petition in bankruptcy?  If so, did they list *all* of their
> liabilities, including 'lifetime' (prepaid) subscriptions?  You
> definitly were defrauded, but collecting on it may be a challenge and
> cost more than it is worth. Your legal complaint is with Pegasus,
> assuming that DirectTV had no knowledge of any such 'lifetime
> subscritions' outstanding through Pegasus.   PAT]

If Pegasus was purchased by DirecTV, then the legal complaint is with
DirecTV -- If DirecTV purchased Pegasus without being aware of Pegasus'
liabilities, that's their fault, and maybe next time they'll perform due
diligence before making a corporate acquisition.

------------------------------

From: Michael Muderick <michael.muderick@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: DirecTV Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service 
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 06:01:51 -0500


Pat is correct in his answer.  The lifetime guarantee should be
honored. I know of a bank in the '70's that offered (then) guaranteed
free for life checking.  There has since been takeover after takeover.
Those that took out that account, are still taking advantage of it.
At one point they were notified that, to keep it, they had to maintain
a $100 minimum in the account - not part of the original deal, but they
were notified - and it was honored.  Good luck.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We also need to define the term
'lifetime'. *Whose* lifetime? *Which* lifetime? Yours? The equipment?
The corporate entity (Pegasus)?  PAT]

------------------------------

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 05:37:22 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


Joseph wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:41:50 GMT, tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A.
> Horsley) wrote:

>> Is there any kind of gadget available to interface with a cellphone
>> (perhaps via the headset connection) that would allow you to plug your
>> cellphone into it when you are at home, and have it provide your own
>> little local phone system over your old phone wires so that you could
>> use any phone in the house to make a call on the cellphone and have
>> all the phones in the house ring when the cellphone rings?

> I don't know if this is what you're talking about but there are at
> least two "docking" solutions.  CellSocket has a unit where you put
> your phone into a docking station and you can then use regular
> wireline phones in your house to make and receive calls.  There's also
> another called "Dock-N-Talk" which works similarly and also has
> Bluetooth connectivity so more phones are compatible.

Thank You.

LB

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Speaking of Giving up Landline For Cellphone
From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley)
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 13:11:30 GMT


 From what I can tell, none of these gadgets will work with my audiovox
phone, and it seems kind of like overkill anyway.

What about the 2nd half of my question -- anyone ever hear of a ring
amplifier for cellphones? The closest thing I've found is this:

http://www.techlib.com/electronics/cellhelp.htm

It is hard to believe such a useful gadget isn't available in an
already built form :-).

>>==>> The *Best* political site <URL:http://www.vote-smart.org/> >>==+
      email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL      |
<URL:http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley> Free Software and Politics <<==+

------------------------------

From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:19:56 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


On Mon, 20 Dec 2004, Joseph wrote:

>> In case you weren't aware, assault is a felony, punishable with fines
>> and jail time.  I am also quite capable of self-defense from criminal
>> attack.

> Well, if you are obnoxious enough they may not care and decide they
> don't want you messing with their personal conversations.

If they do and decide to resort to criminal attack, then I will press
charges (and, if necessary, physically defend myself).  They will then
end up in a place where they won't be allowed to use a cell phone,
which will solve the problem of their obnoxious use of a cell phone on
public transportation.

Most people are intelligent enough to understand this progression.

-- 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: Most people are also smart enough to
understand that, depending on the police officers who arrive to deal
with the situation, *they* may decide to take you in as well, and
lock you up. Often times, when there is a street brawl, the cops just
say 'let the judge work it out when they get to court' and lock you
both up in the meantime. What makes you think the cop will *necessarily*c
consider you to be the good guy and the other fellow the bad guy?
PAT]

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain For Now
Date: 21 Dec 2004 12:21:09 -0800


Mark Crispin wrote:

>> You're really lucky that someone hasn't slugged you yet for your
>> obnoxious behavior.

> In case you weren't aware, assault is a felony, punishable with fines
> and jail time.  I am also quite capable of self-defense from criminal
> attack.

Unfortunately, the reality of today's world is such that:

1) You might not be as capable as you think to defend yourself from an
assault.  People have gotten shot over stuff like this.

2) In attempting to defend yourself, _you_ may be the one charged with
assault, not the other person.  Not fair, but the way it is.

3) You could be charged with disorderly conduct.  Again, not fair, but
the way it is.

4) You could get sued.

------------------------------

From: SPARKY <spunk0210@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Hanging Up On Wireless Spam
Date: 21 Dec 2004 12:16:08 -0800


I got a text message spam, I have TMobile, they charged me 5 cents,
but after demanding the charge be taken off they did.  They said they
have no way of blocking text messaging, I can only do it as a filter,
this would be after the fact usually. Told them I would drop my cell
phone before I'll start paying for SPAM, what's next SPAM deliveried
to your TV via your cable box?  and you get to pay for it?

Nathan Tenny wrote:

>> Why's that? I'm not a network-side guy, but it seems to me that the
>> local system just needs to talk to its own VLR to find out what it
>> needs to know about you. All the phone is doing is sending up a data
>> burst (encapsulated in one of several ways, depending on the system
>> and the length of the message and the phase of the moon), which
>> wouldn't seem to be a process requiring any special contact with the
>> home network.

> In article <telecom22.537.12@telecom-digest.org>,
> Spyros Bartsocas  <spyros@telecom-digest.zzn.com> wrote:

>> I am not a very technical person, but you program a Service Center to
>> the phone.

> That must be the equivalent of a Message Center (MC henceforth) in
> the IS-41 world (I assume you're talking about GSM, where I *really*
> know nothing about the network side).  It makes sense that the SMS >
> transaction would need to go through whatever SMS entity "owns" the >
> target phone, I guess.

>> The service center phone number includes the country code
>> in order to be reachable from other networks. So, I believe what
>> happens is that you are actually calling this number (at least it
>> appears this way last time I roamed in Switzerland).

> That's *really* interesting, and doesn't seem to be the case in IS-41,
> where the various MSCs just talk to each other.  I'm looking at IS-41
> as I write this, trying to figure out how the process works; every
> time I think I've understood it, I start to write a summary and then
> discover that I'm wrong.  My current thinking -- which I'm going to
> write down and send in a hurry before I have a chance to change my
> mind -- is that the sender's MC always has to contact the recipient's
> MC, but policy for which network the MCs are located on is left up to
> the carriers.

> In principle, if I'm right, a roamer *could* be associated with an MC
> on the local network, and then delivery of SMS would be routed just
> like a call -- caller's MSC checks with recipient's HLR which directs
> it to the appropriate VLR, which indicates how to deliver the
> notification.  But the roamer could also be "owned" by his home MC, in
> which case the sender has to talk to HLR, then VLR, then back to the
> "home" MC, which gives back a routing address (by consulting the HLR),
> and *then* the message gets routed accordingly (presumably not
> involving the roamer's home network any more).

> There isn't an actual *call* involved, in the sense of a process
> that involves assigning a mobile onto a traffic channel and sending
> traffic around, but maybe the MC generates its own CDRs, which then
> show up as calls on your bill.

> Can anyone give a definitive, succinct explanation?  This is well
> outside my field, but it's got me curious, particularly about the
> differences between GSM and IS-41.

> Nathan Tenny                   | When the world ends, there'll be no more
> Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA  | air. That's why it's important to pollute
> <ntenny+s@qualcomm.com>        | the air now.  Before it's too late.
>                                |       -- Kathy Acker

------------------------------

Subject: Re: System Would Allow 911 Checks
From: Mark Atwood <mark@atwood.name>
Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy!
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:08:57 GMT


Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com> writes:

> With the new system, telephone customers call a special number and
> follow a few steps for security and privacy protection to hear the 911
> address on record for their phone number.

You can do the same thing by just calling 911 during non-peak times
and asking them to verify your information.


Mark Atwood       |  When you do things right, people won't be sure
mark@atwood.name  |  you've done anything at all.
http://mark.atwood.name/  http://www.livejournal.com/users/fallenpegasus

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But it is better to call the non-
emergency administrative number *first* and get their okay before doing
that.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Sprint's Merger With Nextel
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:07:10 -0500


Unfortunately, analysts still fail to grasp something that most people
who have a knowledge of wireless have known for years:

Marcus Didius Falco wrote:

> Its main strength is its acclaimed push to talk feature, which allows
> Nextel handsets to be used like walkie-talkies, though the calls are in
> fact routed over the cellular network. 
       ^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^

Even if you use the term loosely, there is no real "cellular network"
in iDEN, at least not in the same sense as other cellular carriers.
Nextel's network is really just a glorified SMR network, originally
intended by Motorola for use as a digital walkie-talkie network that
just *happens* to have a very good phone patch built in.  Nextel was
originally known as Fleet Call, and was originally an analog two-way
radio operator until they converted their systems to digital, and then
bought up their competitors and converted theirs too... annoying quite
a few business customers in the process, too and raising antitrust
concerns as they began to monopolize the SMR industry (see
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/indx117.htm for an example).

However, Nextel discovered that people didn't want a two-way radio
that happened to have cell phone capability for the occasional phone
call ...  they instead wanted a cell phone that happened to have a
built in two-way radio for the occasional dispatch call.  And this is
where the "Dead end" lies.  More than twice the bandwidth was needed
to handle a duplex phone call than a dispatch call, and as a result,
iDEN's capacity was taxed from the beginning.

If you look back at old iDEN handsets, you can see the obvious
distinctions (i.e. http://tinyurl.com/568yd ).  They were designed
more as walkie-talkies with phone keypads attached.  Since the big
paradigm shift, the handsets have gotten much sleeker.


E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: A Christmas Carol - 'Lost Boy' Clings to Hope He'll See Mother
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:54:17 EST


By Dahleen Glanton Tribune national correspondent

Gabriel Boul was 7 when he last saw his mother. She was on the floor
of their home in Sudan, bound and gagged. Nearby, Boul's father, an
older sister and a brother lay in a puddle of blood, slain by
militiamen who had raided their peaceful village.

Four years ago he landed in America, one of the "Lost Boys of Sudan,"
more than 3,500 young refugees who have made it out of the civil
war-torn country and resettled in cities such as Atlanta, Chicago and
Salt Lake City since 2000.

It was to be the start of a new life. But for Boul, 24, stories rarely
have a happy ending. He has liver cancer. Last week, he moved into a
hospice.

Boul always wondered what happened to his mother. Surely, he thought,
she could not have survived the violence that left millions dead or
displaced in Sudan during the last two decades. But in September he
got an unexpected phone call, and the voice on the other end was his
mother, Atong Abor, whom he had not seen in 17 years.

"Neither one of us believed it was true," said Boul, a lanky young man
whose boyish face looks much younger than the age that refugee camp
workers put on his birth certificate. "I just held the phone while she
cried for 10 minutes."

The call, arranged by a friend who had tracked Boul's mother down in a
village in Sudan, was a remarkable gift for Boul, whose life has been
a series of hardships and triumphs. The only thing he wishes for now
is to see her face to face.

With war raging in Sudan, a country with limited diplomatic relations
with the U.S., getting his mother to this country is a challenge. But
that hasn't stopped his friends in Atlanta from trying.

They set up a fund at the Bank of America to accept donations for her
travel. They asked Sen. Saxby Chambliss R-Ga.) and former UN
Ambassador Andrew Young to help expedite a temporary visa. Chambliss'
office confirmed it is working on it.

"He is such a good, bright kid, and he deserves this wish," said Janis
Sundquist, an Atlanta volunteer, who developed a motherly bond with
Boul three years ago while helping him get settled. "Nothing is being
done to help the situation in Sudan, and these boys feel
forgotten. They feel like God has left them for some reason."

Doctors said Boul has only a few months to live. But for a man who has
spent his life overcoming odds, this is not news he is willing to
accept. There are too many other things to think about, he said, like
getting some warm clothes for the winter.

His graduation from Open Campus High School, an alternative public
school, is coming up in June. He has a job making salads at a
restaurant at the airport, and other young refugees in Africa are
waiting for the check he sends each month. And there's his dream to
return to Sudan and help the sick--as his father, a tribal doctor,
did.

"He is very motivated and very ambitious," said Dr. Val Akopov, a
physician at Emory Crawford Long Hospital. "He was very curious about
all the things he was seeing in America, and it is no doubt that he
would have been successful here. He has overcome so much, and
embracing his mom would complete that circle."

Lying in his hospice bed, his frail body often curled up in pain, Boul
struggled to talk about the day his family was attacked. He and his
12-year-old brother had been tending cattle when he heard the
gunshots. When they got to the house, the militiamen were there.

They tied the boys up. They shot his brother as Boul watched. They
later left Boul in the house alone, deciding there was no need to kill
him because he was too young to survive without food or water. After
they left, a neighbor came and took him away.

Boul is one of some 26,000 Sudanese boys who fled the violence that
destroyed their villages in the late 1980s. He spent four years at a
refugee camp in Ethiopia before the boys were forced to return to
Sudan.

He was 11 when he and others walked more than 1,000 miles through the
desert, eating leaves, drinking dirty water and struggling to stay
alive for four months, as they made their way to a refugee camp in
Kenya. Their name, the "Lost Boys of Sudan," comes from the orphans
who followed Peter Pan.

Many of the refugees died along the way or after they arrived in
Kenya, where disease ravaged the camp.

The rescue program initiated by the United Nations and the State
Department began bringing the boys to the U.S. in 2000. The
resettlement program continues today.

Boul can't describe how it would feel to see his mother but said, "It
would be a great present for me."

In the meantime, morphine will ease the pain from the cancer. And Boul
will sleep and wait as long as he can. Even if she does not arrive in
time, she will be with him in his dreams, he said, just as she always
has.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.^^

*** 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, Chicago Tribune Company.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #611
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 21 20:20:55 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBM1KsZ12089;
	Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:20:55 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:20:55 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412220120.iBM1KsZ12089@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 #612

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:21:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 612

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Cromwell vrs. Sprint Settlement (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    What Tandem in Telcom Means? (Jack)
    Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service (Joseph)
    Re: DirecTV Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service (jmeissen@aracnet.com)
    More on TiVo and Lifetime Subscriptions (Lee Sweet)
    Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call (A. Burkitt-Gray)
    Re: Hanging Up On Wireless Spam (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: Motorola MD481 Cordless (Weston Fire 22)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 19:41:41 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Cromwell vrs. Sprint Settlement


Some time ago, I mentioned here that Sprint had decided it was in
their best interest, legally, to settle with customers in the class
action suit "Cromwell vrs. Sprint Communications Company, LP", 
Docket number 99-2125-GTV in the United States District Court for
the District of Kansas.  I told you how to apply for relief, as a
member of the Class (anyone who used Sprint service during the 
1998-1999 time period, but I forgot exactly what the complaint was
about; I suspect it was something to do with their slovenly customer
service). I used their local service (the old United Telephone) during 
much of 1999 when living in Junction City, KS). 

Well, my 'relief' arrived today in snailmail: a Fifty Dollar prepaid
Sprint phone card. Its like a plastic phone card; the one side of 
the card has a large $50 printed on it, the Sprint corporate logo;
and the phrase 'Domestic Long Distance'. The reverse side of the
card had the interesting stuff on it: An 800 number to use to place
calls (800-858-1799); my ten digit card number which begins with
'687' and seven more digits, and the instructions to use it.

"For customer service, call 1-800-981-7012. To place another call,
do not hang up. Press # for 2 seconds. The maximum rate per domestic
minute is 19 cents, **assuming the call is not made from a U.S.
payphone.** An additional charge of $2.85 *per call* applies if
calling from a U.S. phone or the minute rate equivilent, All rates
are subject to change. "

     19 cents per minute ???  

     $2.85 payphone surcharge ???

I dunno, somewhere I read that Sprint was supposed to be so much 
cheaper than AT&T ...  of course I know this card was *free*, but
still, is the above their 'typical' rates?  

"This prepaid card given 'in full settlement' (as of the first time I
use it) expires in thirteen months, on January 31, 2006. "

Patrick Townson

------------------------------

From: Jack <jack@invalid.inv>
Subject: What Tandem in Telcom Means?
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:31:01 -0500
Organization: NTT/VERIO


I am new to telcom. I came across the term Tandem many times (eg. LEC
Access Tandem).

What exactly does Tandem mean?

Is there any good book or website that would help me understand basic 
concepts?

TIA!

Jack

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You might try checking on the net for 
a group of books called "Lee's ABC of Telephones". That's a good 
start.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 12:46:59 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 20 Dec 2004 11:58:39 -0800, googlenospam@netcrafting.com wrote:

> I cannot believe this is happening. I thought a lifetime
> subscription lasted the lifetime of the Tivo unit? This is not the
> case for folks who were serviced by Pegasus. Beware if you buy a
> lifetime Tivo on Ebay that was owned by a customer who got their
> satellite service from Pegasus.

Well, buying anything "lifetime" should always be considered a risk.
What lifetime are they referring to?  Yours, the satellite receiver,
the company?  What applies to gym memberships probably applies to all
things that you buy.  Buying a "lifetime" anything is always a gamble.
Unless in the original agreement they vowed to continue your service
on the "lifetime" basis no matter who the company became I'm afraid
you're probably sunk.

------------------------------

From: jmeissen@aracnet.com
Subject: Re: DirecTV Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service
Date: 21 Dec 2004 22:16:26 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


In article <telecom23.611.12@telecom-digest.org>, Michael Muderick
<michael.muderick@verizon.net> wrote:

> Pat is correct in his answer.  The lifetime guarantee should be
> honored. 

It seems that these days the decision to honor commitments is at the
whim of whoever is in charge. I have stopped doing business with
McAfee (Network Associates now?) because if a similar incident. A
friend had paid a premium for an anti-virus product with "Free
Lifetime Upgrades".  We had to rebuild his system because of a
hard-drive failure, and after re-installing the software it failed to
update. Several layers of "customer support" would only tell us "You
have to buy the latest version". We threw it in the trash and
installed the free version of Avast! (http://www.avast.com/).


John Meissen                           jmeissen@aracnet.com


------------------------------

From: Lee Sweet <lee@datatel.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:38:24 -0500
Subject: More on TiVo and Lifetime Subscriptions


I thought someone would post this by now, but since they haven't,
here's the answer: This issue appears to have been corrected.  Just
get to the TiVo Specialty Group at DirecTV and they know what to do.
The details are in this thread at tivocommunity.com, the number one
place for TiVo info on the 'net.

Some CSRs were saying that they can't do anything about the transfer
of lifetime, but DirecTV (with whom your contract is, not anyone at
TiVo) does know the right answer if you get to the right group.
Frontline CSRs are often known for the quickie answer (as we all know
from other industries that we hear about :-) ).

Here's the thread: 

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=207060

[And, hello to PAT, who I worked with many years back on getting my
company's vanity tollfree number!]

__ Lee Sweet Datatel, Inc.
Manager of Telephony Services and Information Security How higher
education does business Voice: 703.968.4661 Fax: 703.968.4625 Cell:
703.932.9425 lee@datatel.com www.datatel.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Hello back to you, Lee. Don't be such
a stranger around here!  PAT]

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call
Date: 21 Dec 2004 13:36:28 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Isaiah Beard wrote:

> Of course, in our current era, these same logs are convenient for
> investigators in they can potentially bolster a claim that you were
> elsewhere than your purported alibi.

Nowadays we are tracked through many ways, some known, some unknown.
Some of us have highway toll transponders on our cars.  Many of us
carry ID badges with sensors.  Many of us use mag cards for transit
fares.

A great many retail transaction points, from convenience stores to
tollgates, have recording TV cameras.

This information is often used by prosecutors.  But I wonder how often
defense attorneys can access this information and at what cost to the
defendant.

> Refuting the validity of this evidence to bolster the prosecution's
> case depends on how far away that cell tower was. There are plenty of
> reasons for a non-adjacent cell to take your call.  Perhaps the
> nearest cell was at capacity and could not handle your call, but your
> phone happened to be able to pick up a not-so-nearby cell that had
> slots free.

> In any case, cell site records aren't a smoking gun.  Even if you
> happen to be making a call at a cell that covers the scene of a crime,
> there can still be a rather wide area that the cell covers, anywhere
> from a radius of a quarter of a mile (for microcells in dense metro
> areas) to several miles (in rural areas).

I initiate a number of cell phone calls from the same spot but at
least four separate locations show up on my bill.  Sometimes the
location name isn't close to the physical location -- I was once a
good 20 miles away from the location named on one call.

> However, even now, not many 911 call centers can retrieve this info,
> because the capability requires expensive upgrades that many local
> governments haven't bothered to spend money on.

My state charges a $1 extra per month per line (land and cell) for 911
upgrades.

------------------------------

Reply-To: <alan@burkitt-gray.com>
From: Burkitt-Gray <alan@burkitt-gray.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:01:21 -0000
Organization: Alan Burkitt-Gray


Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote: 

"Refuting the validity of this evidence to bolster the prosecution's
case depends on how far away that cell tower was.  There are plenty of
reasons for a non-adjacent cell to take your call.  Perhaps the
nearest cell was at capacity and could not handle your call, but your
phone happened to be able to pick up a not-so-nearby cell that had
slots free."

In the Huntley case I mentioned earlier there was just such an
example.  Huntley's phone was picked up by a base station some way
off, but the prosecution brought in someone from the phone company --
Vodafone I think but I can't remember -- to show that because the
terrain (Soham, near Cambridge, in eastern England) is very flat there
was a good signal from the distant base station at his home, where he
did the murders. Someone from the phone company tried it out and
demonstrated it to the jury with complex maps showing the field
strength around the area. Google "Soham murder" and you should find
reports of the case if you're interested.

Meanwhile have a look at this article from The Guardian's Online
section in 2001
http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,,608434,00.html. Under UK
data protection law (which is matched in other European Union
countries) citizens have a right to see personal data held about them
by private companies on payment of a small fee.

In that article a journalist, S A Mathieson, showed how he tested the
law with the mobile phone company Orange and demanded to see the data
it kept on his locations when he made calls. Orange had to comply with
the Data Protection Act.

Mathieson wrote: "[Guardian] Online can now reveal that the base
station used by an Orange subscriber is retained at the beginning and
end of every call, whether outbound or inbound, including calls to
retrieve voicemail," and wrote later in the same article: "Orange
 ... currently retains location data for six months. Vodafone already
keeps it for a year, BT Cellnet [since separated from BT and renamed
O2] for "at least a year", and Virgin Mobile has retained it since its
foundation in November 1999.

It plans to hold such data for six years, citing financial
regulations. One2One [now T-Mobile] refused to disclose its retention
period. Other than this information, none of the networks would
discuss location data further than to say they complied with the law."


Alan Burkitt-Gray
alan@burkitt-gray.com

------------------------------

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Hanging Up On Wireless Spam
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:15:40 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


SPARKY wrote:

> what's next; SPAM deliveried to your TV via your cable box?

Um, isn't that what commercials are?

------------------------------

From: Weston Fire 22 <WestonFire22@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Motorola MD481 Cordless
Date: 21 Dec 2004 16:41:28 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Well, I was suspecting as much, so I decided I would email their
support and see what they gave me, well, here is their response.  It
must be the company line:

Dear Bruce,

Thank you for choosing Motorola! If your phone is dialing on pulse
dialing and not tone dialing, you will need to check with your phone
service provider to see if the line is digital or analog b/c if it is
not a digital line then the phone is not going to dial on tone
dialing.

Please let us know if we can further assist you.

Thanks,

Freda Allman
Motorola Cordless Support

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #612
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Dec 22 02:15:34 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBM7FW915105;
	Wed, 22 Dec 2004 02:15:34 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 02:15:34 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412220715.iBM7FW915105@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 #613

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 22 Dec 2004 02:16:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 613

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Cable TV Advertising (Neal McLain)
    U.S. Judge Refuses to Accept Guilty Plea on Spam (Lisa Minter)
    Download Site SuprNova Closes Amid Hollywood Crackdown (Lisa Minter)
    Sex Tape on Internet Roils Indian Public (Lisa Minter)
    Washington Post Buys Microsoft's Webzine (Lisa Minter)
    Apple Sues Three for Posting Mac OS X on Net (Lisa Minter)
    Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service (DevilsPGD)
    Re: DirecTV Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service (William Van Hefner)
    Re: DirecTV Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service (Barry Margolin)
    Re: Cromwell vrs. Sprint Settlement (Steven Sobol)
    Re: Hanging Up on Wireless Spam (Steven Sobol)
    Re: What Tandem in Telcom Means? (John McHarry)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 00:48:15 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Subject: Cable TV Advertising (was 'Transitional Fair Use')


Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> I don't know what people were saying about cable TV in
> the 40's and 50's.  I'm talking about what happened in
> the 70's when cable-only channels like HBO first started
> to appear.  I believe that prior to that, cable TV was
> just a way of providing TV service to communities
> that had environmental difficulties receiving broadcast
> TV (e.g. mountainous terrain blocking the signals).

CATV systems were operating in small-market cities well before 1970,
including communities that already supported local broadcast stations.
Many of these CATV systems produced extensive schedules of local
non-broadcast programming ("origination cablecasting" in FCC-speak),
and much of it included commercial advertising.

As an example, my former employer, Complete Channel TV in Madison
Wisconsin, co-existed in a market with four broadcast stations (ABC,
CBS, NBC, PBS).  We operated a full-color studio for several years
before the first satellite-delivered non-broadcast programming
appeared.  We used this studio for three types of programming:
commercially-sponsored; non-commercial public affairs; and public
access.

> Since you had to pay extra for these "premium" channels,
> there was an expectation that this would obviate the need
> for commercials.

The CATV industry uses the term "premium" to refer to programming
channels funded by subscriber fees *over and above* the charge for
basic (or extended basic) service.  By this definition, premium
channels are, and always have been, commercial free: HBO, Showtime,
The Movie Channel, and Cinemax.

The CATV industry (and the FCC) use the term "cable programming service" 
(CPS) to identify channels that:

   - Are usually carried on the basic or extended basic tier
     (e.g. CNN, ESPN, Discovery, Family Channel), and

   - Are not broadcast stations, premium channels, or
     access channels.

The entrepreneurs who funded CPS channels certainly didn't expect that
these channels would be commercial-free.  With a few exceptions, every
CPS channel carried by satellite after 1975 was launched as a
commercial venture and carried advertising from day one.

There are, of course, exceptions.  In a previous post on this subject,
I included a list of non-commercial CPS channels:

http://tinyurl.com/4kfxq

These exceptions aside, CPS channels are, and always have been,
commercial ventures.  I don't see how anyone who was familiar with the
CATV industry could have expected that the basic service charge "would
obviate the need for commercials."

References:

The FCC definitions of "basic service" and "CPS" are at 47 CFR 76.901: 

http://tinyurl.com/45sj9

An extensive history of the CATV industry, including information about
programming, is at The Cable Center's "Cable History" page:

http://tinyurl.com/5nukj

Neal McLain

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: U.S. Judge Refuses to Accept Guilty Plea on Spam
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:26:04 EST


NEW YORK (Reuters) - A federal judge on Tuesday refused to accept a
guilty plea from a former America Online employee accused of selling
the Internet provider's customer list to a "spammer," saying he was
unsure a crime had been committed.

U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein stopped a hearing at which Jason
Smathers was to plead guilty to conspiracy and interstate trafficking
of stolen property, saying he had a "technical question" about the
alleged crime.

At issue, the judge said, is whether the actions rose to the level
required by a new antispam law, which states that spam must be not
only annoying but deceptive. Spam is the term widely used for
unsolicited commercial e-mails, often hawking products to combat
sexual dysfunction or promote weight loss.

"Everybody has spamsters, but mine is a technical question," the judge
said. "I don't think it's deceptive or misleading to the recipient."

The judge, who said he once used AOL but quit the provider because of
the amount of spam he received, asked prosecutors to submit a legal
brief by Jan. 12 with more information.

The judge also set a hearing for Jan. 28 at which time he could decide
to accept the plea.

"I need to be independently satisfied that a crime has been
committed," he said.

The case by federal prosecutors charges that Smathers, of Harpers
Ferry, West Virginia, stole a list of 92 million customer screen names
from AOL, a Time Warner Inc. unit, and sold it to an Internet
marketer.

The marketer then allegedly used the list to promote his online
gambling operation and sold the names to other spammers, according to
prosecutors.

Smathers, 24, faces up to 15 years in prison on charges of conspiracy
and interstate trafficking of stolen property, but was expected to
receive a sentence closer to 18 to 24 months.

After the hearing was unexpectedly cut short, an attorney for Smathers
said "everything has been thrown open now" by the judge's refusal to
accept his client's plea.

"This is a new statute," the attorney, Jay Goldberg, said.  "He is
questioning whether the conduct here met the standard of deception."

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Download Site SuprNova Closes Amid Hollywood Crackdown
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:33:14 EST



By Adam Pasick

LONDON (Reuters) - SuprNova.org, one of the Internet's most popular
sites for finding links to download pirated movies, has been taken
offline by its creator amid a legal crackdown by Hollywood's copyright
cops.

Slovenia-based SuprNova offered thousands of special files that
enabled users to download movies, TV shows, music and other content
using the BitTorrent file-transfer network.

Earlier this month, the Motion Picture Association of America launched
a barrage of lawsuits against people that operate the so-called
"torrent" files, as well as servers on the eDonkey and Direct Connect
networks.

SuprNova's creator, who goes by the name Sloncek, took the site down
over the weekend, citing the increased legal pressure on those hosting
torrent files. In addition to MPAA's civil lawsuits in the United
States and Britain, criminal charges were filed in France, the
Netherlands and Finland.

"SuprNova.org was more like a hobby that took most of my free time
away. And now with current situation, there's too much pressure and I
don't have the time for it," Sloncek told the file-sharing Web site
Slyck (http://www.slyck.com). He did not respond to an emailed
interview request from Reuters.

In a message on SuprNova, Sloncek said: "We are sorry to inform you
all, that SuprNova is closing down for good in the way that we all
know it. We do not know if SuprNova is going to return, but it is
certainly not going to be hosting any more torrent links."

BitTorrent has quietly grown into a file-sharing behemoth, devouring
up to one-third of the Internet's bandwidth by one research firm's
account. Bram Cohen, the programer that created BitTorrent, has warned
against using the software for illicit purposes.

BitTorrent's "file-swarming" software breaks a digital file into many
pieces, shares the pieces among all users who have downloaded the
torrent file, then stitches them back together.  It is also used for
many non-illicit purposes, such as sharing non-copyrighted music and
distributing video game demos.

The shutdown of the premier source for movies and TV downloads through
BitTorrent was welcomed by MPAA anti-piracy chief John Malcolm, who
has railed against "parasites leeching off the creative activity of
others."

"I'm pleased. It was the most popular torrent site," he said. "They
took that action voluntarily, so obviously they were concerned about
their conduct. It was something we were studying, so I can understand
why they were concerned."

Hollywood is desperate to avoid the fate of its corporate cousins in
the music industry, who have yet to recover from the illicit MP3
downloading boom that began with Napster.  The large size of video
content has prevented movie and TV downloads from catching on as
quickly, but higher bandwidth and improving compression technology
means that it may not be safe for long.

"We are a little bit ahead of the curve in the sense that the movie
industry is still making money. Downloading and uploading video has
not become, thankfully, mainstream activity the way that downloading
and uploading music became," Malcolm said. "We've also gotten out
ahead because our industry has not been decimated -- yet."

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
 
------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Sex Tape on Internet Roils Indian Public
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:39:14 EST


By VIJAY JOSHI, Associated Press Writer</i></font>

NEW DELHI - It was a private act of two hormone-charged teenagers that
lasted 2 minutes and 37 seconds on digital video.

But offered for sale on the Internet, the fuzzy images of the
17-year-old girl having oral sex with her high school sweetheart has
sent shock waves through urban India, exposing the growing friction
between the conservative middle class, its increasingly Westernized
progeny and modern technology.

"It came to me as a surprise that kids are having sex so soon," Barkha
Dutt, who hosts the country's most popular television talk show on
social issues, said in an interview. "Even we are not aware of how
much things have changed."

India may be the birthplace of Kama Sutra, the 6th century sex manual,
but sex today is a generally taboo subject. Premarital sex is not
widely condoned, and public displays of affection draw frowns.

Caught in the scandal's stinging sweep is Avnish Bajaj, the
Indian-born American who heads eBay's Indian subsidiary Baazee.com,
where the video clip shot by the schoolboy himself using his cell
phone camera was put up for sale.

Arrested last week under an ambiguous Indian law on cyber porn, Bajaj
was freed after posting bail Tuesday, but his U.S. passport remained
confiscated.

Bajaj's arrest triggered a diplomatic spat between the United States
and India and a threat by eBay executives to reconsider doing business
in a country that would toss one of their top managers in jail as a
scapegoat.

"This incident has certainly given us pause and raises concerns about
the safeguards that are in place for businesses operating in India,"
said Henry Gomez, an eBay vice president in the United States.

"This situation is one of concern at highest levels of the
U.S. government," State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said in
Washington.

Bajaj set up Baazee.com in 2000 and sold it to San Jose, Calif.-based
eBay, the Internet's leading auction company, for about &#36;50
million in June. The Harvard-educated executive has since headed the
Bombay-based subsidiary.

The sex clip was recorded weeks ago and passed on by the bragging
schoolboy to three of his friends and eventually made its way to video
disc sellers in New Delhi. It did not draw much attention until an
engineering student at a prestigious Indian college listed it for sale
on Baazee.com.

Now the girl's parents have sent her off to Canada. The 17-year-old
boy, the son of an affluent businessman, is now in a juvenile
detention center. He went to Nepal to escape the media glare and was
arrested at the airport when he returned to the capital on Sunday. A
judge on Tuesday ordered him held until Jan. 4 for questioning to try
to determine how the video clip reached the man who tried to sell it.

The controversy over the clip; it's the talk of urban India, an
obsession of newspapers and talk shows; is typical of a society
in transition, said Dr. Ranjana Kumari, the director of the think tank
Center for Social Research.

India's recent economic boom has created unimaginable wealth among the
tech-savvy urban population, who live in a globalized world dominated
by the Internet, international brands and Western lifestyle with its
relatively liberal sexual values.

Kumari says urban India is being pulled apart by these new values and
its own centuries-old social conservatism.

"It is this transition which is resulting in a lot of confusion,"
Kumari said.

Observers like Kumari think a variety of people share the blame for
grossly amplifying this sex scandal including the authorities
who arrested Bajaj and the boy, who remains unidentified because of
his age; the teenagers' parents, who weren't aware of their children's
activities; and teachers, for sidestepping sex education in schools.

Many are outraged by the arrest of the schoolboy, who along with the
girl attended one of the capital's best known private schools, The
Delhi Public School.

"What are we trying to say here?" asked Dutt. "What do we believe is
wrong? Was it that he had sex? Was it that he sent out the clip? Which
part is the disturbing part?"

Of greater concern to many in the business community is Bajaj's arrest
under the Information Technology Act of 2000. The law makes a criminal
offense of "publishing, transmitting, or causing to publish any
information in electronic form, which is obscene." But it also says an
Internet provider or Web site manager can't be held responsible if he
acted diligently to remedy an electronic offense after learning of it.

Baazee.com maintains it yanked the sex video listing as soon as
customer service managers noticed it, and Bajaj had traveled to New
Delhi to cooperate with authorities.

Pawan Duggal, a cyberlaw expert, said Bajaj's arrest has serious
implications, especially when Internet usage in the country is rapidly
growing and foreign investors are increasingly looking to India for
e-commerce opportunities.

"Ultimately we have to see bigger picture. We want to increase
Internet penetration. All this will only happen if you allow service
providers the freedom," he said. "The law needs to be more industry
friendly and more pragmatic."

AP Technology Writer Rachel Konrad contributed to this report from San
Jose, Calif.

For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, Associated Press.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Vijay Joshi, the writer of this article
for the Associated Press noted that this incident caused a diplomatic
squabble between India and the USA. I am reminded of the similarity 
between this incident (minors and consensual sex) and an incident on
September 25 in Iraq: one of Bush's Onward Christian Soldiers raped a
seventeen year old boy, an Iraqi soldier. It is discussed in detail in
Yahoo News Tuesday evening (let's see if I can get this URL correct):
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=101&e=4&u=/po/20041222/co_po/americansoldiershootsiraqiaftersex

You may need to use a Yahoo login to deep link into that page, and if
the link does not work for some reason, go to Yahoo News (my.news.yahoo.com)
and read the 'Planet Out' news section, for the story 'American Soldier 
Shoots Iraqi After Sex'. It seems that National Guardsman Private
Federico Merida, age 21 shot and killed a 17-year old Iraqi boy
following a sex act between them. At his court martial, held in Iraq
about a month ago, Merida shot the boy eleven times with his carbine
following the sex act. At first, he tried to blame it on the boy,
saying the boy had demanded money following sex. Then he changed his
story and said the boy had *forced him* to do the sex act. Later he
admitted to 'getting agressive with the boy' and when the kid
threatened to tattle on him, he decided to shoot the kid. Merida was
found guilty in the court martial, sentenced to 25 years in prison in
Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, in what the Army euphemistically refers to
as the Fort Leavenworth Disciplinary Barracks. The parents of the
Iraqi boy are understandably livid about it; and according to Yahoo,
the Army has been covering up the court martial records. Tsk, tsk.  
Like the two children in India and the E-Bay video, we may hear more
about this problem in Iraq.    PAT] 

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Washington Post Buys Microsoft's Webzine
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:42:14 EST


By Howard Kurtz, Washington Post Staff Writer

The Washington Post Co. said yesterday it is buying Slate in an effort
to boost the media company's online traffic but does not plan any
editorial changes at the eight-year-old Web magazine.

In announcing a deal to acquire Slate from Microsoft Corp. for an
undisclosed sum, said to be in the millions of dollars, Post
executives said they would keep Jacob Weisberg as editor and most of
the 30-person staff.

Asked for reaction, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates said by e-mail:
"Mostly I'm really proud of Slate's pioneering role in online
journalism, and confident it will continue to lead the way. As one of
the early -- albeit minor -- participants in Slate's diary section,
I'll always feel incredibly close to it -- and will definitely remain
an avid fan and reader." He added: "Graduating to media ownership
seemed the obvious next step for Slate, and I'm confident it will
thrive wonderfully under The Post."

Weisberg pronounced himself "delighted" with the move. "Microsoft has
been a great place for us for the last 8 1/2 years," he said, but "it
was a tough place to develop our business because it wasn't a media
company and doesn't want to be a media company. They're really big and
we're really small. The joke was always that we're almost a rounding
error, but a rounding error probably exaggerated our status."

Ann McDaniel, a Post Co. vice president, said: "Our goal is not to in
any way change Slate. We think it's important that it keep its
personality. Over time, we hope to find a business model that will
make money. You're not suddenly going to see a different kind of
Slate."

Jeff Jarvis, who writes a blog called BuzzMachine.com and is president
of Advance Publications' Internet arm, called the sale "a smart move"
because "The Washington Post has been in many ways clever and smart
about online. It will support Slate in a good environment that
understands media in a way that Microsoft, God bless them, which tried
many times, didn't." Had the sale fallen through, Jarvis said,
Microsoft "wouldn't necessarily have been a happy home" for Slate once
"they already tried to give you up for adoption and failed.

As if to underscore Slate's independence, the magazine ran a piece
yesterday by media columnist Jack Shafer that criticized a front-page
Washington Post series on the murders of new and expectant mothers. "I
was glad to whack the new master one more time," Shafer said
yesterday, adding that he plans to continue doing so and has found
that the newspaper "has a remarkably thick skin" about criticism.

The Post reported in July that Microsoft was looking for a buyer and
that the leading contenders were The Post Co. and the New York Times
Co. The Times did pursue a possible deal, according to people familiar
with the matter. The Post's Web site already has an alliance with
MSNBC.com, which is partly owned by Microsoft, and former Microsoft
executive Melinda Gates, the wife of the company's founder, was named
to the Post Co. board in September.</p>

Cliff Sloan, general counsel of Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive,
will become publisher of the money-losing magazine when the deal takes
effect next month.

Scott Moore, general manager of MSN Network Experience, called the
sale "bittersweet," saying: "It's a little like seeing your kid go off
to college." But Microsoft now has "a mass-market publishing
strategy," he said, and "Slate is more of a niche publication. Slate
wasn't going to get as much attention as it really deserved." 

According to Nielsen Net Ratings, washingtonpost.com drew 7 million
unique visitors last month, compared with 6 million for Slate. Another
service, ComScore Media Metrix, says washingtonpost.com drew 4.5
million unique visitors last month and Slate 4.8 million, but that
people spend more time on the Post site: 120 million page views,
compared with 25 million for Slate. Much of Slate's traffic is driven
by being part of the Microsoft Network, whose home page will continue
to feature Slate headlines. Post executives say that Slate's home page
will include some reference to the newspaper's Web site and that
washingtonpost.com will also promote certain Slate stories. 

Sloan called the acquisition, which will become part of
Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, "a great fit" in part because
advertisers could be offered a package that would include The Post and
Newsweek sites as well as Slate. Post stock closed up $26.95
yesterday to finish at $60.01.

Slate was founded in suburban Seattle, where Microsoft is based, in
1996 when former New Republic editor and CNN commentator Michael
Kinsley launched what was then an unusual experiment in online daily
journalism. But the software giant and the liberal magazine proved to
be an odd combination. Weisberg said it was difficult, for example, to
pay freelance writers on a timely basis because "a company like
Microsoft isn't geared to write a check for $400."

In editorial terms, Slate will be losing its Seattle flavor while
keeping its offices in New York, where Weisberg works, and on
Washington's M Street. While a few copy editors now based in Redmond,
Wash., will work from home, several other Slate staffers, including
publisher Cyrus Krohn, have decided not to move east.

Slate, which has competed with another liberal online journal, San
Francisco-based Salon, has made a mark not just with feature articles
but also with columns and digests such as "Pressbox," "Chatterbox,"
"Moneybox," "Kausfiles," and the "Dear Prudence" advice column. Slate
also co-produces the National Public Radio show "Day to Day."

Given its Web-based DNA, Slate does some things differently than The
Post. A week before the election, nearly all its editorial staffers,
including Weisberg, disclosed that they were voting for John Kerry
over President Bush.  On Election Day, Slate posted leaked numbers
from the early wave of exit polls made available to the networks, the
Associated Press and such clients as The Post, something the newspaper
would never do.

Asked if he was worried about editorial interference from the new
owner, Weisberg invoked the name of The Post Co.'s chief
executive. "Don Graham and everyone else we've dealt with at The Post
Co. made very clear they wanted to buy Slate because they like the
magazine the way it is," he said. "I don't think readers are going to
notice much difference."

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 Washington Post..

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Apple Sues Three for Posting Mac OS X on Net
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:44:41 EST


By Duncan Martell

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Apple Computer Inc. has sued three men for
illegally distributing test copies of the next version of its Mac OS X
operating system on a file-sharing Web site, court records showed on
Tuesday.

The lawsuit is the second in as many weeks by the maker of the popular
iPod digital music players and iconic Macintosh personal computers to
thwart the release of its software and details of its unannounced
products.

Apple claims in its suit that two different versions of Mac OS X,
code-named Tiger, were made available on the Web on or about Oct. 30
and Dec. 8 of this year.

The company has said it will ship Mac OS X "Tiger" in the first half
of 2005, after previewing it to the Mac community at a trade show last
June.

Apple makes test versions available to certain software developers
under strict confidentiality conditions and lets them test the
prerelease software and develop or change their own programs to work
with the software.

The company said in its lawsuit that the two different versions were
made publicly available by the men, who were members of the Apple
Developer Connection.

"Members of Apple Developer Connection receive advance copies of Apple
software under strict confidentiality agreements, which we take very
seriously to protect our intellectual property," the company said in a
statement.

According to the suit, the men released the software on a Web site
that employs BitTorrent file-sharing technology, which is used to
rapidly distribute large files of electronic data, and is also widely
used to distribute pirated copies of motion pictures via the Internet.

"Apple's future operating results and financial condition are
substantially dependent on its ability to continue to develop
improvements to the Mac OS and related software applications in order
to maintain perceived design and functional advantages over competing
platforms," the company said in its civil complaint, filed on Monday
in the U.S.  District Court, Northern District of California, San
Jose.

Apple's Macintosh computers and Mac operating system compete
principally with personal computers using Microsoft Corp.'s dominant
Windows operating system. Apple currently has a less than 5 percent
share of the overall PC market.

On Dec. 13 Apple, based in Cupertino, California, filed a lawsuit
against unnamed individuals who leaked details about new products by
posting information on the Internet.

The lawsuits come weeks ahead of the Macworld conference in San
Francisco, the annual show where Chief Executive Steve Jobs typically
unveils the latest Apple products in front of thousands of the Mac
faithful.


NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <devilspgd@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 21:56:17 -0700
Organization: Octanews


In message <telecom23.612.3@telecom-digest.org> Joseph
<JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Well, buying anything "lifetime" should always be considered a risk.
> What lifetime are they referring to?  Yours, the satellite receiver,
> the company?  What applies to gym memberships probably applies to all
> things that you buy.  Buying a "lifetime" anything is always a gamble.
> Unless in the original agreement they vowed to continue your service
> on the "lifetime" basis no matter who the company became I'm afraid
> you're probably sunk.

Lifetime typically means "lifetime" of the hardware, but obviously if
the company goes under there is nobody to sue anyway.

However, it really depends on the contract -- As with all things in
life, read the contract for the answers.

------------------------------

Reply-To: <postmaster@thedigest.com>
From: William Van Hefner <postmaster@thedigest.com>
Subject: Re: DirecTV Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:34:15 -0800
Organization: Vantek Communications, Inc.


> If Pegasus was purchased by DirecTV, then the legal complaint
> is with DirecTV -- If DirecTV purchased Pegasus without being
> aware of Pegasus' liabilities, that's their fault, and maybe
> next time they'll perform due diligence before making a
> corporate acquisition.

The whole affair between Pegasus, DirecTV and TiVo is actually a quite
messy situation. In a nutshell, Pegasus had a contract at one time to
be a distributor of DirecTV programming. Pegasus signed-up customers
in rural areas and was paid a regular commission each month by DirecTV
for doing so.

At some point, DirecTV decided that it wanted to terminate the Pegasus
contract. Since these commissions constituted Pegasus' chief form of
income, they fought the issue in court. The decision was a complicated
one, but what DirecTV ended up doing was basically taking over
Pegasus' entire customer base and keep the monthly commissions for
themselves. Pegasus is now in deep doo-doo and I believe that they
will now very likely go out of business.

I am not sure whether DirecTV did direct billing of "Pegasus
customers" from the beginning, or whether Pegasus itself acted as a
rebiller, but as DirecTV sees it, these customers paid Pegasus the
lifetime subscription money for the TiVo service, and not
them. Exactly how much of this "lifetime subscription" was passed
through to DirecTV from Pegasus is unknown, but it certainly was not
100%, as DirecTV would have liked it.

DirecTV -USED- to offer TiVo service, which was completely driven by
TiVo's software and proprietary programming. Now when you buy a
DirecTV receiver with DVR capabilities, you get "DirecTV DVR service
powered by TiVo".  This is basically DirecTV's way of severing their
exclusive deal with TiVo, and will allow them in the future to do away
with TiVo as a middleman altogether. Therefore, DirecTV viewers are
not really getting TiVo service directly anymore. They are just
getting a repackaged form of the service, and DirecTV may do-away with
TiVo's service at any time. DVR technology is now so standard that
companies like DirecTV no longer need companies like TiVo. They can do
everything themselves.

This begs the question, exactly how much of this "lifetime"
subscription was passed on from Pegasus to DirecTV, and in turn, how
much of the subscription was passed on from DirecTV to TiVo? Nobody
really knows, as these were all private agreements. For its part,
Pegasus has (VERY unwillingly) been cut out of the loop. It can't do a
thing, even if it actually has the money to give back (it
doesn't). DirecTV will likely claim that it was not the one paid for
the lifetime subscription, and has no obligation to fulfill Pegasus'
promises. It did NOT buy Pegasus. It only cannibalized its customer
base. And TiVo? Well, they would be happy to provide the lifetime
service, I'm sure. Only thing is, the subscription is tied to the
receiver (NOT the owner) and DirecTV no longer offers TiVo service.

This whole fiasco reminds me of the Abbott & Costello "Who's On First"
sketch. Everyone is denying responsibility. IMHO, DirecTV made a
killing from taking over the Pegasus customer base, and should honor
the deal.  Whether or not they are legally obligated to do so though
is another question.


William Van Hefner
Editor - TheDigest.Com

------------------------------

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service
Organization: Symantec
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 01:03:28 -0500


In article <telecom23.610.3@telecom-digest.org>,
googlenospam@netcrafting.com wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone committed fraud on you. When
> you purchase (or otherwise take over) an existing business, then 
> you take over not only the assets of the existing business, but the
> *liabilities* as well, unless the people going *out* of business
> specifically publish a notice to the effect otherwise, which is to
> afford *you* - the holder of that asset (by virtue of your lifetime
> subscription in this case) -- the opportunity to collect on it from
> the original owner of the business.

I think an exception to this is if the company taken over was in 
bankruptcy.  This seems to allow some freedom for the new owner in 
cancelling or renegotiating contracts.  When I was working for Genuity 
and Level(3) acquired us, they started cancelling many of our customers' 
contracts because they weren't profitable (I assume we'd been giving 
lots of discounts in order to build up the business, but Level(3) was 
big enough that they didn't need loss leaders like these).

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

------------------------------

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Cromwell vrs. Sprint Settlement
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:29:28 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


TELECOM Digest Editor wrote:

> I dunno, somewhere I read that Sprint was supposed to be so much 
> cheaper than AT&T ...  of course I know this card was *free*, but
> still, is the above their 'typical' rates?  

MCI is supposed to be cheaper than AT&T too, but their calling card
rates still suck. Around here I can buy Sprint and MCI prepaid cards
at the local grocery store chains, and they're cheap. But so are AT&T
cards from Wal*Mart. Why? The SMALLEST such chain here is
locally-owned Stater Brothers Market, which is headquartered about an
hour from here in Colton, CA. And I'm sure they buy thousands of the
cards at once. The other chains are Von's (Safeway Stores, Inc.),
Ralphs and Food4Less (Kroger Company) and Albertsons (Federated Inc).
Safeway, Kroger and Federated are all huge companies with lots of
buying power -- Kroger, in particular, is by far the largest grocery
company in the country, if not in the world.

And we all know how big Wal*Mart is.

(a) I'd question how many plaintiffs got cards -- I'm sure it's small
compared to the number of cards a typical large retail chain buys in a
year.

(b) I wouldn't expect any special deals on cards given out as a
settlement lawsuit -- I'm sure Sprint wants to minimize its losses
from the suit.


JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California     Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

------------------------------

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Hanging Up On Wireless Spam
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:31:09 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


T. Sean Weintz wrote:

>> what's next; SPAM deliveried to your TV via your cable box?

> Um, isn't that what commercials are?

This comment demonstrates a basic misunderstanding of what spam
is. Spam is not 'advertising I don't like'. The defining
characteristic of spam is that it is an attempt by the advertiser to
shift advertising costs onto the recipient, and when was the last time
you were forced to pay for someone's television or radio ad?

JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California     Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is sort of what happens now on
cable channels. Although the advertiser does not 'force me to pay for
it', they do prevent me from getting a full 24/7 of the shows I might
want to see (if I were a televison watcher.)Presumably, what I pay for
cable is intended to pay the cable operator's costs and make a profit
for him as well. But he wants to double dip by charging the advertiser
to give his messages, and charge *me* for watching them. If that were
not the case, why wouldn't the cable operator program the DVR boxes
they now use to fast-forward past commercials if that is what I wanted
to do?  PAT]

------------------------------

From: John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: What Tandem in Telcom Means?
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 03:49:19 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:31:01 -0500, Jack wrote:

> I am new to telcom. I came across the term Tandem many times (eg. LEC
> Access Tandem).

> What exactly does Tandem mean?

PAT's reference is correct, but, in the meantime, a tandem office is a
telephone switching machine that stands between two end offices, the
latter serving subscriber lines. In the olden days, a couple decades
ago or less, end offices couldn't handle long distance accounting and were
connected with toll tandems that could. In very large cities there were
also, as I recall, some inter local tandems that allowed hub and spoke
arrangements of local switching. 

With computer driven switches (central offices) this has pretty much
gone the way of the horse and buggy. Any office can perform most any
function required, given the appropriate software. One switch can
serve several NXX exchanges and also interface to toll carriers, or
act as part of one itself. This has also allowed routing to become
much more dynamic, adapting to changing traffic patterns.

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #613
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Dec 22 17:29:31 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBMMTVf23425;
	Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:29:31 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:29:31 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412222229.iBMMTVf23425@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 #614

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:28:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 614

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    T-Mobile Cripples the Blackberry (Monty Solomon)
    Broadband Tops Dial-Up Use in Homes, Nielsen Says (Telecom dailyLead)
    Voicemail Recommendations (xasdfg123456@yahoo.com)
    Re: Access of Calling Card Dial in Number From Prepaid Cellular (hbr)
    Re: What Tandem in Telcom Means? (Wesrock@aol.com)
    Re: Cell Phone Company Records Tower Handling Call (Howard Eisenhauer)
    Re: Cell Phone Company Records Tower Handling Call (Fritz Whittington)
    Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement (BobGoudreau)
    Re: VOIP (ukcats4218016@yahoo.com)
    Re: Motorola MD481 Cordless (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Hanging Up On Wireless Spam (Fritz Whittington)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:11:50 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: T-Mobile Cripples the Blackberry


Jason D. O'Grady

Blackberry's Crippled by T-Mobile. In his article "T-Mobile Tells
BlackBerry Users: GetLess!" PowerPage editor Emory Lundberg reports
about how T-Mobile effectively crippled the Blackberry smartphone on
its network by disallowing outbound requests on TCP port 80. A real
sin considering that T-Mo Blackberry users pay US$40 per month for
"BlackBerry Unlimited w/Enterprise E-mail" that includes "Unlimited
Web Browsing."

http://www.powerpage.org/cgi-bin/WebObjects/powerpage.woa/wa/story?newsID=13375

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:43:49 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Broadband Tops Dial-Up Use in Homes, Nielsen/NetRatings Says


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18294&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Broadband tops dial-up use in homes, Nielsen/NetRatings says
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* CompUSA to sell VoIP service from Vonage
* Cablevision halts plan to spin off Rainbow assets
* EMC buys SMARTS for $260 million
* RIM earnings jump, Qualcomm raises fiscal first-quarter forecast
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* SIP Demystified Now Available in the Telecom Bookstore
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Alcatel, Microsoft said to mull IPTV deal
* UWB standard elusive
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Plea deal denied in AOL e-mail address theft case

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18294&l=2017006

------------------------------

From: xasdfg123456@yahoo.com
Subject: Voicemail Recommendations
Date: 22 Dec 2004 12:33:39 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Hi. I am looking to replace my current voicemail system (KeyVoice on
DOS) with something far easier to configure, and am hoping to get some
recommendations from the group. I think KeyVoice is overkill for what
we need, (20-person office, old Panasonic DBS).

I am not a phone tech, but a sys admin, so of course something I could
easily setup myself by reading the manual would be great, too. I know
a little bit about DBS programming so I am looking to do this all
myself.  Thanks a bunch.

Bill

------------------------------

From: hbr <hbrenke@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Access of Calling Card Dial in Number From Prepaid Cellular
Date: 22 Dec 2004 05:21:09 -0800


Maybe this provider could work for you - http://dynasky.com/ (I just
discoverd them and think they are great for many reasons). 

Good luck!

Heidi

Mark Crispin wrote:

> On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Marek Tomczyk wrote:

>> I like the offer of AT&T Wireless very much as it provides a long
>> validity of one year for balances starting at $100.

> That's news to me.  I used to have AT&T Wireless Free2Go on my Alaska
> phone (now Dobson Cellular One).  The expiration period was 45 days,
> although it would rollover if you recharge in time.

> AT&T Wireless was recently bought by Cingular, so this may have
> changed.  In any case, Free2Go uses TDMA digital, which is on its way
> towards extinction.  Most TDMA phones are also SOC locked, so you
> can't use them with another carrier.

> I suggest that you consider either a prepay GSM SIM card for your
> home country phone (assuming you have an unlocked tri-band or
> quad-band phone), or one of the CDMA prepaid services.

> Under CDMA prepay, Verizon's is on their network, the phones are
> unlocked, and can be used with monthly service.  Virgin has ultra
> cheap prepay using Sprint's network (which almost certainly means
> that the phones are locked but there are ways of getting Sprint
> unlock codes).

> Another advantage of Verizon is that, overall, it probably has the
> best coverage in the continental US (48 states), especially if you
> pick a phone with analog capability.  If you go to Alaska, you'll
> need a TDMA/analog phone, although GSM has finally appeared in
> Alaska. There is very little CDMA in Alaska.

>> So the idea is to use a calling card service for this matter. The
>> AT&T documents say that prepaid calling card service is not
>> possible with Free2Go. Besides this AT&T says in its terms that
>> certain numbers can be blocked if "abuse" to the network happens.

> Don't worry about it; your plan is fine.

> When you call one of the cheap international calling card companies,
> the cellular company still gets to charge you for the airtime, so
> they are happy.

> What they are concerned about are calls to numbers with delayed
> surcharges and fraud issues.  Calls to the premium 900 area code, and
> to the local 976 premium exchange, are almost always blocked to cell
> phones.

> Most cell phones have international calls blocked unless you ask
> customer service to unblock it.  Most people consider that to be a
> good thing, and also do that on their wired phones (although the
> default for wired phones is to allow international calls unless the
> customer asks for it to be disabled).

> However, "international calls" really means "calls outside of country
> code 1"; that is, the 011 North American international dialing prefix
> is disabled.  That doesn't always help.

> Remember that country code 1 is quite a few countries.  You get a
> message "urgent, please call me at (555) 555-5555" which looks like
> an ordinary US or Canada number, but is really an expensive
> pornography service in the Caribbean that charges $10/minute.  The
> customer complains about the bill and refuses to pay.  Usually, the
> phone company refunds the charge and takes the loss itself, but it
> then blocks future calls to that number.

> From the prepaid cell phone company's point of view, they are
> probably happy if you use a calling card for international calls,
> because then the problem (of how much to charge you for the
> international call) is some other company's problem.  The cell phone
> company just charges you for the airtime, which they know how to do
> quite well.

> -- Mark --

> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.

------------------------------

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 09:26:26 EST
Subject: Re: What Tandem in Telcom Means?


In a message dated Wed, 22 Dec 2004 03:49:19 GMT, John McHarry
<jmcharry@comcast.net> writes:

> On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:31:01 -0500, Jack wrote:

>> I am new to telcom. I came across the term Tandem many times (eg. LEC
>> Access Tandem).

>> What exactly does Tandem mean?

> PAT's reference is correct, but, in the meantime, a tandem office is a
> telephone switching machine that stands between two end offices, the
> latter serving subscriber lines. In the olden days, a couple decades
> ago or less, end offices couldn't handle long distance accounting and were
> connected with toll tandems that could. In very large cities there were
> also, as I recall, some inter local tandems that allowed hub and spoke
> arrangements of local switching. 

Aw, c'mon folks.  Manual tandems existed before there were dial
offices, and a concern in big cities was the delay as in some cases
phone numbers had to be passed manually from the originating operator
to a tandem operator, then another tandem operator, and finally to the
terminating office.

The first dial offices to get DDD ("long distance accounting") were
end offices, and it was only later that tandems with CAMA
("Centralized Automatic Message Accounting") were used to provide
customer toll dialing to end offices not equipped for any kind of
accounting, such as step-by-step offices.

In the late 1940s I made a call from a coin box in Los Angeles, and
the operator had to go to rate-and-route to learn which (manual) toll
tandem to plug into which had trunks toward the destination.  L.A. had
so many outgoing manual toll trunks that they had to be distributed
among various tandems; as I recall, for my call the operator was
director to (manual) toll tandem No. 4.  which had trunks for the MX
(multi-switch) routing to the destination.


Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com

------------------------------

From: Howard Eisenhauer <howarde@REMOVECAPShfx.eastlink.ca>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 16:45:52 GMT


Indeed they do, it's part of the billing information they use to
compute your bill.  Each billing record for an outgoing call records
the calling number (so they know who to bill- duh), the number called,
the cell the call originated on, start time and duration.  The
originating cell info & the called number are used by the billing
process to determine if the call is billed as local or long distance.

Same thing only different for incoming calls.

Howard.

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:06:01 GMT, phoner@company.com wrote:

> Cell phone companies record the tower that handles each call, and then
> keep that info for at least a short time.

> That came out in the recent arson case in Maryland.  The suspect
> claimed that he was at home.  However, he had a cellphone call during
> his alibi time.  His provider's records showed that the cell tower
> handling his call wasn't near his house.

> This had to have been a routine log since the suspect wasn't yet a
> suspect at the time of the call.

> (Putting my tinfoil hat on:) I have a theory that the location of
> every cellphone that is turned on is being routinely recorded, say
> every minute, and saved for later data mining.  I have no direct
> evidence.  However, this is technically feasible, and is a logical (to
> me) extension of what we know was done decades ago.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:15:03 -0600
From: Fritz Whittington <f.whittington@att.net>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Company Records the Tower Handling Call


On or about 2004-12-21 08:49, Dave VanHorn whipped out a trusty #2 
pencil and scribbled:

> I have seen my cellphone do some bizarre things at times.

> Once, I was standing in Auburn Ca, and my phone switched to
> "roam". I was well within my home area, so I called 611 to see what
> was up ... They said I was in Chico.  Look at a map.

So Chico looks to be about 100 miles away, but you've got some
elevation.  Perhaps the cells along I-80 were saturated with traffic,
and the Chico tower was the closest one with capacity to spare? So
your phone would lock onto it, and then appear to be roaming.

Fritz Whittington

Those who dream by day are cognizant of many things which escape those who dream only by night. (Edgar Allan Poe, "Eleonora")

------------------------------

From: BobGoudreau@withheld on request
Subject: Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:25:08 -0500


[As always, please remove my email address from the message and from
the digest table of contents. Thanks.]

Steve Sobol wrote:

> Safeway, Kroger and Federated are all huge companies with lots of
> buying power -- Kroger, in particular, is by far the largest grocery
> company in the country, if not in the world.

> And we all know how big Wal*Mart is=2E

Apparently not all of us do.  In particular, it has been a few years
since Kroger has been "by far the largest grocery company in the country".

Kroger is now a distant second to Wal-Mart's grocery business.  See
http://www.progressivegrocer.com/progressivegrocer/images/pdf/pg-top-50-2004pdf=

Bob Goudreau
Cary, NC

------------------------------

From: ukcats4218016@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: VOIP
Date: 22 Dec 2004 11:11:43 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I'm not sure how many phones my service (SunRocket) will support, but
they do offer two separate phone numbers for one price.  I only have
one phone hooked up, but with the two numbers, you would automatically
be able to double the quantity.

------------------------------

From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Motorola MD481 Cordless
Date: 22 Dec 2004 14:18:23 -0500
Organization: Organized?  Me?


In article <telecom23.612.9@telecom-digest.org>, Weston Fire 22
<WestonFire22@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, I was suspecting as much, so I decided I would email their
> support and see what they gave me, well, here is their response.  It
> must be the company line:

> Dear Bruce,

> Thank you for choosing Motorola! If your phone is dialing on pulse
> dialing and not tone dialing, you will need to check with your phone
> service provider to see if the line is digital or analog b/c if it is
> not a digital line then the phone is not going to dial on tone
> dialing.

I would hazzard a guess that *IN THIS USAGE*,

   "digital line"  ==  "touchtone capable line"

Try telling them that you have confirmed that the line is "a digital
line".  Have you tried a known good TT phone?

Rich Greenberg N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA richgr atsign panix.com
 + 1 770 321 6507
Eastern time zone. I speak for myself & my dogs only.     VM'er since CP-67
Canines:Val, Red & Shasta (RIP),Red, husky                  Owner:Chinook-L
Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/ Asst Owner:Sibernet-L

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:59:52 -0600
From: Fritz Whittington <f.whittington@att.net>
Subject: Re: Hanging Up On Wireless Spam


On or about 2004-12-22 00:31, Steve Sobol whipped out a trusty #2
pencil and scribbled:

> T. Sean Weintz wrote:

>>> what's next; SPAM deliveried to your TV via your cable box?

>> Um, isn't that what commercials are?

> This comment demonstrates a basic misunderstanding of what spam
> is. Spam is not 'advertising I don't like'. The defining
> characteristic of spam is that it is an attempt by the advertiser to
> shift advertising costs onto the recipient, and when was the last time
> you were forced to pay for someone's television or radio ad?

<snip>

Every time you buy a product that is advertised on TV or radio, some
fraction of the price you pay goes to paying for those ads.  Even if
you buy a bottle of "generic" aspirin at a 7-11, some fraction of the
price you pay goes towards 7-11's ads.  You'd almost have to live on a
desert island and be completely self-sufficient to not ever pay
something for advertising.  (But then, of course, you probably
wouldn't have radio or TV anyway.)


Fritz Whittington

"Build a man a fire and he will be warm for the rest of the night.  Set 
a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life."  -- Unknown

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #614
******************************
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Dec 23 00:42:36 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBN5gaj27015;
	Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:42:36 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:42:36 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412230542.iBN5gaj27015@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 #615

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:40:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 615

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "Network Security Hacks", Andrew Lockart (Rob Slade)
    Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement (Wesrock@aol.com)
    Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Cromwell vrs. Sprint Settlement (Isaiah Beard)
    Re: Motorola MD481 Cordless (Weston Fire 22)
    Re: Hanging Up On Wireless Spam (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Which is the Best Cellphone You Ever Used? (Steven Fleckenstein)
    Telecom Words: Meaning For 'Bearer' (Jack)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User 
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 13:42:37 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "Network Security Hacks", Andrew Lockart
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


BKNTSCHK.RVW   20041106

"Network Security Hacks", Andrew Lockart, 2004, 0-596-00643-8,
U$24.95/C$36.95
%A   Andrew Lockart
%C   103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA   95472
%D   2004
%G   0-596-00643-8
%I   O'Reilly & Associates, Inc.
%O   U$24.95/C$36.95 707-829-0515 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com
%O   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596006438/robsladesinterne
     http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596006438/robsladesinte-21
%O   http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596006438/robsladesin03-20
%P   298 p.
%T   "Network Security Hacks"

Chapter one lists twenty tips for using a number of utilities and
programs to enhance the security of UNIX systems.  The explanations
are clear and specific, although you would probably have to be really
familiar with UNIX administration to get the full benefit of these
suggestions.  Windows gets ten hacks in chapter two.  While useful,
these could have had more explanation in some cases, in regard to the
limitations and pitfalls of the recommendations.  

Almost all of the network security tools discussed in chapter three
are for UNIX, although some do have Windows versions.  The same is
true with the logging tips in chapter four, although there is mention
of arranging to have Windows report to a syslogd.  Network monitoring,
and some analysis thereof, is in chapter five.  Tunnels and VPN
(Virtual Private Network) products are detailed in chapter six.  Most
of the network intrusion detection material in chapter seven concerns
Snort.  (You are not my NIDS, you are a Snort!)  Chapter eight lists a
few recovery and response tools.

If you run a UNIX system and network, this book enumerates many useful
tasks, settings, and tools that will help to make your systems and
network more secure.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 2004   BKNTSCHK.RVW   20041106


======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca      slade@victoria.tc.ca      rslade@sun.soci.niu.edu
When art critics get together, they talk about form, texture,
movement, meaning.  When artists get together, they talk about
where you can get the best turpentine for cheap.           - Picasso
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade

------------------------------

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:06:01 EST
Subject: Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement


In a message datedWed, 22 Dec 2004 12:25:08 -0500,
BobGoudreau@withheld on request writes:

> Steve Sobol wrote:

>> Safeway, Kroger and Federated are all huge companies with lots of
>> buying power -- Kroger, in particular, is by far the largest grocery
>> company in the country, if not in the world.

>> And we all know how big Wal*Mart is=2E

> Apparently not all of us do.  In particular, it has been a few years
> since Kroger has been "by far the largest grocery company in the country".

> Kroger is now a distant second to Wal-Mart's grocery business.  See
> http://www.progressivegrocer.com/progressivegrocer/images/pdf/pg-top-50-2004p

> Bob Goudreau
> Cary, NC

A recent survey of retail grocers in Oklahoma showed Wal-Mart
Supercenters and Wal-Mart Neighborhood Markets were in first and
second place, I forget which was which.

Albertson's was third.  There are no Kroger stores in Oklahoma.

What is the "Federated" some have mentioned in connection with
Albertson's?  The corporate name is Albertson's and they are based in
Boise, Idaho.

Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a chain of stores called
'Federated Department Stores'. I do not recall ever being in one
of them. PAT]

------------------------------

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:55:24 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


BobGoudreau@withheld on request wrote:

> Apparently not all of us do.  In particular, it has been a few years
> since Kroger has been "by far the largest grocery company in the country".

> Kroger is now a distant second to Wal-Mart's grocery business.  See
> http://www.progressivegrocer.com/progressivegrocer/images/pdf/pg-top-50-2004pdf=

Point noted -- would it be more accurate to say "largest grocery
company that doesn't operate huge big-box retail superstores?" As far
as I know, Kroger stores are still grocery stores, not Wal-mart style
stores. Our local Ralphs has some miscellaneous supplies -- pharmacy
items, everyday needs like diapers, etc., but if I want to buy my boy
a new bike, or get a 32" television, or I need a new battery for my
car, I'm not going to Ralphs.

Wal*Mart superstores aren't just groceries.

JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California     Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For groceries, I find that Marvin's
suits me very well, and its right downtown which makes it very conven-
ient to walk to and from. That is, if it was not so cold outside
today. (In the mid-teens all day today and yesterday.)   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Cromwell vrs. Sprint Settlement
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 22:22:53 -0500


TELECOM Digest Editor wrote:

>      19 cents per minute ???  
>      $2.85 payphone surcharge ???

> I dunno, somewhere I read that Sprint was supposed to be so much 
> cheaper than AT&T ... 

They are!  that is, if you're using one of their calling plans other 
then their highest tariffed rates. :)

> of course I know this card was *free*, but
> still, is the above their 'typical' rates?  

No, currently Sprint is very big on bundle or unlimited plans.  Pay a 
set amount per months and get an unlimited number of LD minutes.  The 
actual rate charged would of course vary depending on your usage, since 
you're paying a set amount that covers all of your calls for the month.

For purposes of this settltment, they probably took the highest tariff
they have on file and used that on these cards.  Still as you've said,
it's "free" and you're not paying for it.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, but $2.85 surcharge on a pay
phone call?  That's totally ridiculous. I could see thirty or fifty
cents surcharge, but $2.85?  If you call an 800 number from a Sprint-
controlled payphone -- let's say in northeast Kansas where they took
over United Tel, is that the amount they charge to the owner of the
800 number?  Or are there different surcharge amounts in use,
depending on the tariff?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Weston Fire 22 <WestonFire22@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Motorola MD481 Cordless
Date: 22 Dec 2004 17:45:21 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


When I called the telco today, just as a goof, the lady there was
stumped as well.  She checked our "settings in the switch" and we are
indeed set to tone service.  She had never heard of a phone requiring
a digital line as well.  As soon as I asked, she replied, we have
analog lines.

Yes, we have always used tone phones, never had to use pulse before
this phone.

We will see what mot comes up with, I replied back that yes indeed, we
are setup for tone service.

Bruce

------------------------------

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Hanging Up On Wireless Spam
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:51:41 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Fritz Whittington wrote:

> Every time you buy a product that is advertised on TV or radio, some
> fraction of the price you pay goes to paying for those ads.  

OK, fine.

The advertisers still don't get the ads for free. There is a
significant investment required by the advertisers to create and air
the ads, sometimes running into millions of dollars.


JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California     Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

------------------------------

From: Steven Fleckenstein <zpfleck@zitlink.zet>
Subject: Re: Which is the Best Cellphone You Ever Used?
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:56:36 -0500


In article <telecom23.611.1@telecom-digest.org>, pfschoeng@yahoo.com
says:

I have an old Qualcom QCP-820 on VZW.  It is kind of bulky by todays
standards, doesn;t have any of the frills, but when my wife compares
it to her 4 month old Kyocera or my daughter uses it instead of her
Motorola V60s they can't believe how much better the audio sounds to
them compared to their units. It does the basics well and with a pull
out antenna picks up the signal where others with stubs don't.

 
Steve

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On those cell phones with stubs for
antennas, it is possible at all to loosen the stub and connect a
telescoping antenna there in its place?  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Jack <jack@invalid.inv>
Subject: Telecom Definitions: Meaning For 'Bearer'?
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:14:12 -0500
Organization: NTT/VERIO


What does Bearer mean in telecom?

TIA!

Jack

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #615
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Dec 23 15:51:12 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBNKpCE05689;
	Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:51:12 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:51:12 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412232051.iBNKpCE05689@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 #616

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:49:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 616

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Download Site SuprNova Closes Amid Hollywood Crackdown (Lisa Minter)
    Browser Wars (Lisa Minter)
    Review: E-Mail Program Lacks 'Wow' Factor (Lisa Minter)
    Beware Sprint Phone Rebates (Nate)
    Broadband Connections Rise 38%, According to FCC (Telecom dailyLead)
    T1/ISDN Intergration With VoiP? (Dave)
    Map-Open in Send Routing Info to Hlr (Bernardo)
    Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement (John Levine)
    Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement (Joseph)
    Re: Cromwell vrs. Sprint Settlement (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Which is the Best Cellphone You Ever Used? (John Levine)
    Re: Which is the Best Cellphone You Ever Used? (Joseph)
    Re: Motorola MD481 Cordless (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Telecom Definitions: Meaning For 'Bearer'? (Todd Mueller)
    Re: Telecom Terms (Doug Krause)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Download Site SuprNova Closes Amid Hollywood Crackdown
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:39:57 EST


By Adam Pasick

LONDON (Reuters) - SuprNova.org, one of the Internet's most popular
sites for finding links to download pirated movies, has been taken
offline by its creator amid a legal crackdown by Hollywood's copyright
cops.

Slovenia-based SuprNova offered thousands of special files that
enabled users to download movies, TV shows, music and other content
using the BitTorrent file-transfer network.

Earlier this month, the Motion Picture Association of America launched
a barrage of lawsuits against people that operate the so-called
"torrent" files, as well as servers on the eDonkey and Direct Connect
networks.

SuprNova's creator, who goes by the name Sloncek, took the site down
over the weekend, citing the increased legal pressure on those hosting
torrent files. In addition to MPAA's civil lawsuits in the United
States and Britain, criminal charges were filed in France, the
Netherlands and Finland.

"SuprNova.org was more like a hobby that took most of my free time
away. And now with current situation, there's too much pressure and I
don't have the time for it," Sloncek told the file-sharing Web site
Slyck (http://www.slyck.com). He did not respond to an emailed
interview request from Reuters.

In a message on SuprNova, Sloncek said: "We are sorry to inform you
all, that SuprNova is closing down for good in the way that we all
know it. We do not know if SuprNova is going to return, but it is
certainly not going to be hosting any more torrent links."

BitTorrent has quietly grown into a file-sharing behemoth, devouring
up to one-third of the Internet's bandwidth by one research firm's
account. Bram Cohen, the programer that created BitTorrent, has warned
against using the software for illicit purposes.

BitTorrent's "file-swarming" software breaks a digital file into many
pieces, shares the pieces among all users who have downloaded the
torrent file, then stitches them back together.  It is also used for
many non-illicit purposes, such as sharing non-copyrighted music and
distributing video game demos.

The shutdown of the premier source for movies and TV downloads through
BitTorrent was welcomed by MPAA anti-piracy chief John Malcolm, who
has railed against "parasites leeching off the creative activity of
others."

"I'm pleased. It was the most popular torrent site," he said. "They
took that action voluntarily, so obviously they were concerned about
their conduct. It was something we were studying, so I can understand
why they were concerned."

Hollywood is desperate to avoid the fate of its corporate cousins in
the music industry, who have yet to recover from the illicit MP3
downloading boom that began with Napster. The large size of video
content has prevented movie and TV downloads from catching on as
quickly, but higher bandwidth and improving compression technology
means that it may not be safe for long.

"We are a little bit ahead of the curve in the sense that the movie
industry is still making money. Downloading and uploading video has
not become, thankfully, mainstream activity the way that downloading
and uploading music became," Malcolm said. "We've also gotten out
ahead because our industry has not been decimated -- yet."

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Browser Wars
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:50:58 -0500 (EST)


Michael Desmond

Are you sick and tired of Internet Explorer? Have you grown weary of
the constant vulnerabilities and patches? Do you scratch your head at
sudden program lockups and crashes? Are you dismayed that Microsoft
hasn't lifted a finger to improve or enhance IE since it buried
Netscape's Navigator browser at the dawn of the century?

Yeah, me too.

Welcome to Internet Explorer backlash. For the first time since
Microsoft launched its flagship browser in 1995, Internet Explorer is
actually losing market share. Research firm WebSideStory reported that
the enormous chunk of IE users declined from a high of 95 percent in
June to 92.9 percent in October. That number could drop further, as a
sudden wealth of good browser options attracts users of all
stripes.

A lot of the credit can go to the folks at the Open-Source Foundation,
which was established in 1998 to breathe new life into the
fast-failing Netscape browser platform. It's taken six years and the
utter failure of Netscape the company, but Mozilla is finally
delivering on its promise.

Today, not one, but two significant browser alternatives are powered
by Mozilla's Gecko software code base -- America Online's Netscape 7.2
and the wildly popular new Firefox 1.0 browser. Of course, even those
two aren't the only IE challengers: A third major alternative, the
Opera browser from Opera Software, has been serving disaffected IE
users for years.

With so many choices just a software download away, questions
swirl. Why should you care? Which browser is best? And after all is
said and done, should you really switch? Software junkies may tell you
the answers are obvious and conclusions foregone, but wait; read
on. *It's the Tabs, Stupid*.

There are a lot of reasons why users are fleeing Microsoft Internet
Explorer, but a lot of it boils down to security. Microsoft has chosen
to run IE like a highly automated factory. ActiveX controls, dynamic
HTML, and other technologies deliver lots of automation and
programmatic control over IE. That's great if you want to integrate,
say, a billing system with your browser, or have Web sites offer
dynamic interfaces. But those same controls can be misused or
targeted, amplifying the threat from malicious code.</p>

Microsoft's response has been a grim parade of patches, fixes, and
advisories. In some instances, Microsoft has suggested turning off
features or setting security levels so high that they disable the very
capabilities that make IE attractive in the first place. Finally in
October, Microsoft released Windows XP Service Pack 2, a wholesale
update that helped close many of the vulnerabilities in Internet
Explorer.

But understand this: No browser is without flaws. Mozilla patched some
holes of its own prior to the Firefox 1.0 release, and Opera has
issued a few security-centric updates in the past year. The problem
for Microsoft is the overwhelming popularity of its browser. Virus
writers and hackers target IE because there are so many systems
running it.

Perhaps more frustrating than security leaks is the fact that
Microsoft quit adding new features to its browser. The last major
feature refresh for IE dates back to August 2001 -- and it
shows. Firefox, Netscape, and Opera all offer significant feature
improvements over IE, including tabbed browsing for juggling multiple
Web pages, and built-in pop-up blocking to prevent ads from opening
new browser windows. Other refinements include helpful managers for
file downloads, integrated search bars, and more accessible controls
for managing histories, cookie files, and the browser cache.

In fact, the future of Web browsing comes down to one word: tabs. I
realized it the instant I fired up multiple pages in a single Opera
program window. Just like that, I could browse a half-dozen Web pages
with ease, jumping from one to the next simply by clicking on the
little tabs at the top of the window. What's more, I could open
multiple tabbed pages in the background, so they could load while I
looked at the page in the foreground.

Not all tabbing systems are created equal, and no one has done it
perfectly yet. Opera gets the nod for best keyboard shortcuts. For
example, I can close a tabbed page by holding Shift and clicking on
the page tab; clicking the tab for the foreground page bounces me to
the last page I viewed. I can even drag tabs around to keep pages in
neat order. Both Firefox and Netscape offer tabbing that is a bit more
rigid.

Time to Switch?

Of the four browsers I've worked with --IE, Firefox, Netscape, and
Opera -- Firefox 1.0 stood out as the best overall choice. The browser
does an excellent job of faithfully displaying Web pages, offers a
superior user interface, and suffers fewer crashes than my previous
favorite, Opera. It's also highly customizable through something
called Firefox Extensions. I installed one module that lets me
navigate pages using mouse gestures, a feature I became addicted to
during my Opera years.</p>

One area where you'll hear browser makers tout an advantage is
performance, or how quickly a browser can show you Web sites. I'd urge
you to take any such claims with a grain of salt. In my testing, I
found that performance was usually determined by the speed of my
Internet connection (not surprisingly) rather than one browser or
another. Although Firefox tended to outperform all the others in
loading complex pages, we're talking about a difference of one to two
seconds.

When the dust settles, the different browsers offer their own unique
benefits and drawbacks. Here's a quick take on which browser might be
best for you, depending on how you work.

Firefox: The best all-around alternative to IE. Great for power users
who want to add functionality to the browser, and appropriate for
newbies just getting started.

Internet Explorer: Best for corporate users in controlled environments
and those who spend most of their time on Microsoft-branded or
IE-specific Web sites.

Netscape: Best for AOL subscribers (with AOL Instant Messenger
integration) and those who are willing to put up with some rough edges
to use other goodies, including an HTML editor and e-mail program.

Opera: Best for power users who keep many pages open at once and
perform frequent downloads. There's an e-mail program included, but
banner ads on the free version of the browser are annoying.

So is it time to ditch Internet Explorer once and for all? In a word,
no. Microsoft requires its browser to access its Windows Update and
Office Update services, and it's not uncommon to find Web sites that
are designed specifically for IE. Pages such as MSNBC.com can
challenge non-Microsoft browsers. Firefox renders MSNBC pretty well,
while Opera fails to render the fly-out menus on the navigation
bar.

For the time being, most users will need to keep IE handy, just in
case. Keep in mind that you can have more than one browser on your
computer. If one acts up, close it and launch the other.

But for general-purpose Web browsing, there is no reason to put off
the switch a minute longer. Firefox, Netscape, and Opera are an
impressive trio of IE alternatives that could help shelter you from
the daily blizzard of Internet exploits.

Michael Desmond is a freelance writer living in Burlington,
Vermont. His wife doesn't understand how anyone can get so excited
about tabs.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Micheal Desmond, and Yahoo News.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Review: E-Mail Program Lacks 'Wow' Factor
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:51:53 EST


By ANICK JESDANUN, AP Internet Writer

NEW YORK - The Firefox browser has become an instant sensation, in
just a few weeks gaining impressively against Microsoft Corp.'s
market-leading but malware-beleaguered Internet Explorer.

Security experts worried about IE's flaws and vulnerabilities have
recommended Firefox. Others, myself included, were impressed by its
innovative features.

The team that put Firefox together, Mozilla Foundation, now offers a
free standalone e-mail application, called Thunderbird. But this time,
the case for switching from Microsoft products is less compelling.

I just can't see too many people abandoning Microsoft's Outlook, if
they use it. Outlook is the gold standard in e-mail programs, despite
its $109 list price. Among other things, Thunderbird lacks a
calendar application, and its tools for sorting your incoming messages
are rather rudimentary.

If you're happy to sacrifice features for something free, anyone
running a Windows operating system already has Outlook Express.

So why bother with Thunderbird?

In some ways, Thunderbird is more powerful than Outlook Express.

But its built-in junk mail filter is based solely on what you, the
user, consider spam and legitimate mail. Unlike many other anti-spam
programs, Thunderbird will do nothing until you "train" the software
by marking a few spam messages as "junk" and a few good messages as
"not junk."

This approach does reduce the chances of good mail ending up wrongly
blocked; a peril these days with many spam-filtering programs
for users who aren't careful.

Thunderbird also offers Really Simple Syndication, or RSS, a
technology for pulling headlines from news sites and Web
journals. Headlines and articles from RSS feeds appear as normal
e-mail messages so you can file them away, forward them to a friend or
do whatever else you might do to e-mail.

If you have multiple e-mail accounts, you can choose to view them all
in one bucket with Thunderbird, or in separate folders sorted by
account or type of account, say personal or work. Outlook Express lets
you keep accounts separate, but only by creating separate
"identities," meaning you can only view one account at a time.

Another plus of Thunderbird is that it automatically enters addresses
into your address book as you send out e-mail, making it easier to
identify replies as legitimate and to avoid retyping the same
addresses over and over. Outlook Express does that only for messages
to which you've replied.

Other than that, Thunderbird looks and works like any other e-mail program.

Available for Windows, Mac and Linux computers, the program lets you
do standard things like change fonts and sizes, specify whether to
include original message in replies and check for new messages after a
given number of minutes, which you specify.

It supports the two most popular e-mail protocols, POP3 and IMAP. It
will bring in Web-based e-mail from Google, Yahoo and America Online
using those protocols (Yahoo is available as part of a $19.99-a-year
premium offering). Thunderbird does not, however, support Microsoft's
Hotmail or MSN services.

Thunderbird does promise to let you import existing mail, address
books and account settings from Outlook, Outlook Express, Eudora,
Netscape 4, Netscape 7 and Mozilla (a combo mail-browser suite from
Thunderbird's developers).

In practice, though, not everything worked. I couldn't import an
address book from Netscape 4, and my distribution lists on Outlook
Express disappeared in the conversion.

And some of the features that trump Outlook Express need work.

To activate RSS feeds, you must manually type in long addresses. Make
a typo, and you must start over; the software doesn't let you simply
change the one wrong character. Many good RSS programs these days can
automatically detect feeds.

And while Thunderbird lets you separate multiple e-mail accounts,
there's no easy way to sort them. Rather, they are listed in the order
added, not alphabetically or in some other meaningful order.

Perhaps the biggest argument for switching is that Thunderbird is
open-source. Two paid developers and hundreds of volunteers jointly
created it, releasing the underlying software blueprints for anyone to
inspect and improve upon.

That, they argue, produces a better and safer product than proprietary
systems like Microsoft's.

For some people, that's reason enough to switch to Thunderbird. For
others, I can't find a compelling reason unless you're dissatisfied

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, Associated Press.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Nate <nnord@maxitd.com>
Subject: Beware Sprint Phone Rebates
Date: 23 Dec 2004 09:20:02 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


After my previous Sprint contract was up, I called to see about a
phone/plan upgrade.  The salesman sold me a new plan and a new phone
with a big rebate.  Well, the rebate was turned down because the
"saleperson" never changed my original plan.  Called Sprint and after
talking to two people (including a supervisor), they wouldn't do
anything except say "talk to the rebate people".  I explained that the
"rebate people" aren't the ones who screwed up.  They didn't seem to
grasp this concept.  It looks like Sprint may have sold me a very,
very overpriced phone.  Can you say lifelong loss of a Sprint
customer?

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is a typical tactic by Sprint.
We have had other messages in the Digest from people who said Sprint
was not honoring their rebates very well.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:35:04 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Broadband Connections Rise 38%, According to FCC


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
December 23, 2004
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18325&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Broadband connections rise 38%, according to FCC
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Sprint-Nextel deal could boost Motorola
* Mobile marketing for offline products
* Acterna thrives after difficult spell
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* USTA urges Wal-Mart and SAM'S CLUB to Disassociate from AT&T phone card scheme
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Germany takes Wi-Fi on the road
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* FCC order raises value of Nextel spectrum
EDITOR'S NOTE
* The dailyLead will not publish Friday

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18325&l=2017006

------------------------------

From: Dave <feywrayspamno@hotmail.com>
Subject: T1/ISDN Intergration With VoiP?
Reply-To: feywrayspamno@hotmail.com
Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:05:11 GMT


If I have VoiP and use a converter to what normally would be a POTS
line, what if, instead, the converter went to a T1 or ISDN set up?
Could I have 23 or 24 incoming VoiP calls, each going to a different
DID number?  Could I have an outgoing call center with 23 or 24 agents
each talking over VoiP at the same time to 23 or 24 different people?

------------------------------

From: bparoli@internet.com.uy (Bernardo)
Subject: Map-Open in Send Routing Info to Hlr
Date: 23 Dec 2004 06:43:39 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


When I send the sendRoutingInfoForSm to the hlr, I need send the User
Information with Map-Open? If I don't send this information, the hlr
return error?

Thanks,
bp

------------------------------

Date: 23 Dec 2004 06:49:45 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a chain of stores called
> 'Federated Department Stores'. I do not recall ever being in one
> of them. PAT]

Sure you have.  They own Bloomindale's, Macy's, and a bunch of
smaller regional chains.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When I used to live in Chicago, I
would frequently fly to New York City for weekend visits with 
friends or to go shopping, and on those trips I would go into 
Macy's occassionally, and Alfred Bloomingdale invited me to come
over to his store also. But that was in the 1960's, and I do not
think either Bloomingdale's or Macy's were part of Federated at
that time.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:41:41 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:06:01 EST, TELECOM Digest editor wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a chain of stores called
> 'Federated Department Stores'. I do not recall ever being in one
> of them. PAT]

Bloomingdale's, Bon March (now Bon-Macy's soon to be just Macy's),
Burdines-Macy's, Goldsmith-Macy's, Lazarus-Macy's, Macy's East/West,
Rich's are some of their stores.  At one time Foley's in Houston was
part of the Federated Department stores.  It's unlikely that they have
any stores in your area of Kansas.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder if they have any stores in
Wichita, Topeka or Tulsa, OK which are the three closest bigger towns
to here.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:15:00 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Wesrock@aol.com wrote:

>>Apparently not all of us do.  In particular, it has been a few years
>>since Kroger has been "by far the largest grocery company in the country".

> A recent survey of retail grocers in Oklahoma showed Wal-Mart
> Supercenters and Wal-Mart Neighborhood Markets were in first and
> second place, I forget which was which.

> Albertson's was third.  There are no Kroger stores in Oklahoma.

Hm. I was informed by someone I consider reliable that Federated
Department Stores owned Albertsons (which I thought was strange), but
I don't see anything on the web, including albertsons.com and
federated-fds.com, that would indicate that.

JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California     Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

------------------------------

Date: 23 Dec 2004 06:52:26 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Which is the Best Cellphone You Ever Used?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On those cell phones with stubs for
> antennas, it is possible at all to loosen the stub and connect a
> telescoping antenna there in its place?  PAT]

As often as not the stub is a fake.

Some phones such as the Nokia 5165 and 6340 have a socket for an
external antenna, usually as part of a car kit.  If you look at the
back of your 5165, there's a little rubber plug over the antenna jack
that you can pry out.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, I know about the little rubber
plug. It has to be removed to use the Cell Socket for those Nokia
models, then you can either use the antenna you screw on to the 
Cell Socket or the stand alone antenna, such as Mike Sandman offers.
PAT]

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Which is the Best Cellphone You Ever Used?
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:44:30 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:56:36 -0500, Steven Fleckenstein
<zpfleck@zitlink.zet> wrote:

> It does the basics well and with a pull
> out antenna picks up the signal where others with stubs don'[t]

Pull out antenna is more of a requirement with CDMA phones rather than
just "preference."

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <devilspgd@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Motorola MD481 Cordless
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:18:47 -0700
Organization: Octanews


In message <telecom23.615.5@telecom-digest.org> Weston Fire 22
<WestonFire22@gmail.com> wrote:

> When I called the telco today, just as a goof, the lady there was
> stumped as well.  She checked our "settings in the switch" and we are
> indeed set to tone service.  She had never heard of a phone requiring
> a digital line as well.  As soon as I asked, she replied, we have
> analog lines.

As far as digital goes, think ISDN.  There are plenty of digital line
options, but they cost a lot more and offer little for your average
home user.

------------------------------

From: toddmueller@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Telecom Definitions: Meaning For 'Bearer'?
Date: 23 Dec 2004 07:11:46 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


'Bearer' channels are payload channels, they 'bear' the load.

------------------------------

From: dkrause@ratcage.com (Doug Krause)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Telecom Terms
Date: 23 Dec 2004 14:23:03 -0600


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For starters, 'tele-phone' is a combin-
> ation of 'phonic' which has to do with hearing, and 'tele' which 
> refers to communication or transfer of information. 'Tele-gram' is
> made up of two parts, one of which comes from 'grap' or visual 
> inspection of 'tele' or the transfer of information. If something
> is 'very graphic' it means it is 'a lot to look at'. So when you use
> a 'telephone' you communicate information by hearing and speaking; when 
> you use a 'telegraph' you communicate information by reading. 

"Tele" means "from a distance".  So telephone is distant hearing,
television is distant seeing, etc.


Doug Krause
dijon@ratcage.com

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #616
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Dec 24 06:29:40 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBOBTdJ13604;
	Fri, 24 Dec 2004 06:29:40 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 06:29:40 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412241129.iBOBTdJ13604@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 #617

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 24 Dec 2004 06:30:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 617

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    NYS AG Spitzer Settles Out More Leases (Danny Burstein)
    Municipal and State Governments to VoIP Industry: Deploy VoIP (Minter)
    T1/ISDN integration with VoiP? (Dave)
    Re: T1/ISDN Intergration With VoiP? (T. Sean Weintz)
    Microsoft Fails to Delay EU Sanctions (Lisa Minter)
    Consumers Union Launches Telecom Advocacy Web Site (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: Review: E-Mail Program Lacks 'Wow' Factor (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: Review: E-Mail Program Lacks 'Wow' Factor (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Telecom Definitions: Meaning For 'Bearer'? (T. Sean Weintz)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: NYS AG Spitzer Settles Out More Leases
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 05:29:00 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


(and this time I've double checked that I'm posting the correct url...)

"Attorney General Eliot Spitzer today announced settlements with five
leading financial institutions in connection with a widespread
telecommunications fraud involving NorVergence, Inc., a bankrupt New
Jersey-based telephone equipment and service company.

"Under the terms of the agreement, the financing companies will
forgive approximately $11 million in payments due from New York
customers who had signed long-term contracts with NorVergence. Earlier
this month, Spitzer announced a $2 million settlement with GE Capital
regarding similar NorVergence contracts. The $13 million forgiven
under all of these settlements provides relief to more than half of
NorVergence customers in ...

( snip, snip. the rest of the press release gives details as to which 
leasing companies have settled, which ones are still reluctant, etc.)

New York. http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2004/dec/dec23b_04.html

_____________________________________________________
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: Danny, to the best of your knowledge
are there *still* any business people paying on their Norvergence
'leases' (to financial institutions who were 'holders in due course',
but of course!) or have they all wised up to this and put a total
freeze on accounts payable as was suggested here many months ago?
PAT]

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:24:41 -0500
Subject: Municipal and State Governments to VoIP Industry: "Deploy VoIP"


http://192.246.69.231/jeff/personal/archives/001467.html

December 23, 2004

Municipal and State Governments to VoIP Industry: "Deploy VoIP ... but
Give Us All your Money" -- Zen Koan or Catch 22?

A Wall Street Journal editorial yesterday (12/22) shined the spotlight
on those politicians and policymakers who have been sending mixed
messages lately to the VoIP industry. These politicians have been
saying on the one hand that consumers should be allowed to avail
themselves of the benefits of IP technology, and, at the same time,
they have been threatening to extract usurious fees from VoIP service
providers. These mixed signals have made it difficult for us would-be
innovators and entrepreneurs to know whether or not to deliver
IP-based technologies and services to American consumers. Every
legislator, governor, and regulator allegedly wants to promote, and
allow its constituents to benefit from, new IP-based technologies and
services. At the same time, many politicians see VoIP as an easy
revenue generator and have blood in their eye for the nascent VoIP
industry.

Recent FCC and Congressional action indicates a general desire to
ensure that the VoIP innovators may continue to bring new technologies
and services to consumers with some assurance that government will not
stifle its growth through unnecessary fees, taxes, or administrative
hassles. Most recently, the FCC indicated that VoIP services must not
be subjected to 50 state and countless local rules that would make it
impossible for any would-be VoIP provider to deploy a national or
global product.

Within the past two weeks, however, we have heard rumblings from both
state and local authorities that they intend to extract as much blood
as possible from the nascent industry. The WSJ properly noted recent
efforts by the National Governors Association and by some in Congress
who would attempt to impose taxes upwards of 20% on VoIP services.

The WSJ editorial did not take note of similar efforts by
municipalities, such as Santa Monica, to impose a utility use tax on
VoIP services. At least the city of Santa Monica had the nerve to
confront the industry directly without having to hide behind a mob of
municipalities.

Unlike Santa Monica, members of the National Governors Association are
attempting to shield themselves within the mob. No individual governor
could be accused of thwarting VoIP if all the other governors endorse
a nationwide effort. I guess no one wants to be the only governor
imposing usurious fees on new IP-based technologies and
services. Instead, the governors have joined forces in the hope that
if everyone imposes similar fees, they do not individually take the
heat for being the only tax-imposing luddite driving away the VoIP
industry.

Full story at:
http://192.246.69.231/jeff/personal/archives/001467.html

------------------------------

From: Dave <feywrayspamno@hotmail.com>
Subject: T1/ISDN Integration With VoiP?
Reply-To: feywrayspamno@hotmail.com
Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:16:25 GMT


If I have VoiP and use a converter to what normally would be a POTS
line, what if, instead, the converter went to a T1 or ISDN set up?
Could I have 23 or 24 incoming VoiP calls, each going to a different
DID number?  Could I have an outgoing call center with 23 or 24 agents
each talking over VoiP at the same time to 23 or 24 different people?

------------------------------

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: T1/ISDN Intergration With VoiP?
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 16:46:58 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Dave wrote:

> If I have VoiP and use a converter to what normally would be a POTS
> line, what if, instead, the converter went to a T1 or ISDN set up?
> Could I have 23 or 24 incoming VoiP calls, each going to a different
> DID number?  Could I have an outgoing call center with 23 or 24 agents
> each talking over VoiP at the same time to 23 or 24 different people?

So far as I know, no one makes a converter like that.

Given that PBX systems are moving towards supporting SIP directly
anyway, one would not really be needed. Simply get 24 sip accounts and
set the PBX up to use them all. They all work over 1 single ethernet
cable -- the sip protocol takes care of telling the PBX what number
was dialed for the incoming calls. I think pretty much all PRI
functionality can be duplicated in SIP natively.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But, given the amount of bandwidth 
required for VOIP, even though that may be theoretically possible,
is it likely? How many 'computers' and how much internet connectivity
would be required to pull that off?  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Microsoft Fails to Delay EU Sanctions
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:22:51 EST


By Douglas Bakshian and David Lawsky

LUXEMBOURG/BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp. was ordered by a 
European Union court to change its business practices and immediately
market a stripped-down version of Windows after it lost an appeal to
delay sanctions imposed earlier this year.

The world's largest software maker said it would comply immediately by
introducing a stripped-down version of its computer operating system
without its Windows Media Player music and video software next month.

Microsoft, which will also share specifications with rival makers of
server software, had tried to delay penalties that were imposed by the
executive European Commission in March.

"Microsoft has not demonstrated specifically that it might suffer
serious and irreparable damage," said Bo Vesterdorf, president of the
Court of First Instance, the EU's second-highest court.

The commission had found the U.S. software giant abused the virtual
monopoly of Windows and also levied a record 497 million euro
($665 million) fine.

Microsoft, which had reached separate settlements worth billions of
dollars with rival companies and organizations supporting the
commission's case, did not seek to avoid the fine.

"We will move forward immediately to comply with today's decision,"
Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith said in a conference call with
reporters.

The company had not decided whether to appeal against Wednesday's
order, Smith added, but indicated in a conference call with reporters
that there was "cause for optimism" for future litigation.

Microsoft had pushed hard for a settlement, which would have required
the EU to rescind a major decision for the first time in its history.

Smith nevertheless urged the commission to consider fresh settlement
talks, arguing the judge had found some merit in Microsoft's arguments
on the substance of the case.

But Jonathan Todd, a commission competition spokesman, said the court
decision upheld the effectiveness of antitrust action and the EU
executive was "not in a process of renegotiation."

Microsoft stock dipped slightly by late Nasdaq trade on Wednesday,
standing at $26.97, down 10 cents, or 0.4 percent.

"While the headline value of the court's ruling may have a slight
negative effect on Microsoft's stock, we believe that the practical
implications of the ruling are minimal," said Charles Di Bona, an
analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co.

CONSUMER VICTORY

"This is a victory for consumers," said Brussels lawyer Thomas Vinje,
who represented an industry group that dropped out of the case after a
$20 million settlement with Microsoft.

Microsoft wanted the penalties, which the commission suspended
temporarily during the appeal, frozen until its court case on the
substance of the EU ruling finishes years from now.

The EU executive argued the market would have moved on and the
sanctions would be obsolete. Todd said there was no longer any reason
to extend the voluntary suspension.

The commission found that Microsoft bundled Media Player to cripple
rivals such as RealNetworks Inc.'s RealPlayer, which it shoved off 
its perch as the dominant player.

Now some versions of Windows will be shipped to computer makers
without audiovisual software, a decision the commission designed to
prompt computer makers to choose from various audiovisual offerings
instead of accepting the Windows bundle.

"Anything that helps create a level playing field, anything that puts
a premium on quality, not on monopoly, is good for RealNetworks," said
Dave Stewart, RealNetworks deputy general counsel.

"We're going to do what we can to take advantage of the opportunity,"
Stewart said.

The commission ordered Microsoft to share data protocols -- software
rules of the road -- with makers of work-group servers that are used
in offices to access files and run printers.

"Microsoft is not required by the remedy ... to disclose source code,
nor does Microsoft dispute that," the judge said.

The ruling was a vindication for former Competition Commissioner Mario
Monti, whose administration was dogged by a string of high-profile
reversals from the court in recent years, and puts his successor,
Neelie Kroes, in a strong position.

The decision on the sanctions can be appealed to the European Court of
Justice, which would take another three to eight months, experts say.

Microsoft's main appeal will be heard by a panel of five judges of the
lower court that will not include Vesterdorf.

To win Wednesday's appeal for so-called interim measures, Microsoft
had to show not only that it had a reasonable case but also that it
urgently needed relief and that the balance of interests between it
and the public weighed in its favor.

(Additional reporting by Quentin Webb in Brussels and Reed
Stevenson in Seattle.)

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 21:50:49 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Consumers Union Launches Telecom Advocacy Web Site  


  From: Declan McCullagh < >
  Date: December 22, 2004 11:50:35 PM EST
  Subject: [Politech] Consumers Union launches telecom advocacy web site

For Politech, please:

Consumers Union has released a new telecommunications and media online
resource: _www.HearUsNow.org_ <http://www.hearusnow.org/>.  I hope
that you will take a moment to check it out.

The site offers in-depth reading on over 60 consumer related telecom
issues. Consumer tips on what to do before you buy, understanding your
bills after and making companies listen when you are unhappy (from
phone services to copyright rules on digital content).  There are also
7 different ways to make a difference in less then 2 minutes (see "Get
Heard" on the left bar and click the red link).  Hearusnow.org gives
consumers the ability to work for change on an individual level and
provides hundreds of resources to join efforts already going on across
the country.

And there is a fun movie to watch, a spoof on a current TV show, but
more importantly puts media consolidation (a somewhat dry topic) in to
a nice, easily digestible, package.

Please help spread the word and tell people to go to _www.HearUsNow.org_
<http://www.hearusnow.org/>.


All the best,
--kdg

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Kenneth DeGraff
Policy Advocate

Consumers Union
Publisher of Consumer Reports
o/ 202.462.6262
f/ 202.265.9548
e/ kdegraff@consumer.org
w/ _http://www.consumersunion.org_
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

------------------------------

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Review: E-Mail Program Lacks 'Wow' Factor
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 16:53:52 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Lisa Minter wrote:

> By ANICK JESDANUN, AP Internet Writer

> NEW YORK - The Firefox browser has become an instant sensation, in
> just a few weeks gaining impressively against Microsoft Corp.'s
> market-leading but malware-beleaguered Internet Explorer.

> Security experts worried about IE's flaws and vulnerabilities have
> recommended Firefox. Others, myself included, were impressed by its
> innovative features.

> The team that put Firefox together, Mozilla Foundation, now offers a
> free standalone e-mail application, called Thunderbird. But this time,
> the case for switching from Microsoft products is less compelling.

> I just can't see too many people abandoning Microsoft's Outlook, if
> they use it. Outlook is the gold standard in e-mail programs, despite
> its $109 list price. Among other things, Thunderbird lacks a
> calendar application, and its tools for sorting your incoming messages
> are rather rudimentary.

> If you're happy to sacrifice features for something free, anyone
> running a Windows operating system already has Outlook Express.

> So why bother with Thunderbird?

> In some ways, Thunderbird is more powerful than Outlook Express.
<snip>

It's also more stable and more secure. It doesn't fall prey to the
exploits that allow viruses to spread so easily from Outlook. Also,
try opening a very large IMAP folder in Outlook or Outlook Express
(one with say 50,000 messages in it) - both apps will completely choke
and freeze up. (as will most email programs -- eudora, "the bat", etc)
Thunderbird handles these with no problem at all.

------------------------------

From: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: Review: E-Mail Program Lacks 'Wow' Factor
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 01:01:31 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science


In article <telecom23.616.3@telecom-digest.org>, Lisa Minter
<lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

> By ANICK JESDANUN, AP Internet Writer

[entire text of wire-service news story deleted]

> I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted
> material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright
> Law.

Having actually read 17 USC 107,[1] I believe quoting an entire
wire-service article verbatim is far from "fair use", in particular:

	(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in
	relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

Copying an entire work verbatim is rarely considered "fair use"
regardless of the purpose; even a university professor who wants to
distribute chapters of an out-of-print source to her class is expected
to get permission from the copyright owner.

	(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or
	value of the copyrighted work

The authors of these wire-service articles frequently work as
independent contractors, paid by the article for stories they write.
News organizations are in turn charged substantial fees to reproduce
the wire service's material.  If every wire-service article that
happens to catch Lisa's eye (apparently without regard to its
relationship to telecommunications) is reposted here, the end result
will be that news organizations will no longer pay to have the stories
written.  That would be a bad result for everyone.

-GAWollman

[1] I had to consider carefully the implications of the copyright law
for my own Web site, which contains many short snippets of broadcast
radio programming.  I came to the conclusion that my use did
constitute "fair use", in part because my snippets are very small
relative to the whole, and because they have no effect on the
commercial value of the works quoted.  Only one station has ever
objected, and (although it was clear to me that they did not
understand the law) I complied with their request immediately.

-- 
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: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement
Date: 23 Dec 2004 16:11:49 -0500
Organization: Organized?  Me?


In article <telecom23.616.9@telecom-digest.org>,
Joseph  <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Bloomingdale's, Bon March (now Bon-Macy's soon to be just Macy's),
> Burdines-Macy's, Goldsmith-Macy's, Lazarus-Macy's, Macy's East/West,
> Rich's are some of their stores.  At one time Foley's in Houston was
> part of the Federated Department stores.  It's unlikely that they have
> any stores in your area of Kansas.

Rich's has been Rich's-Macy's for some time and is about to become
just plain Macy's.


Rich Greenberg N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA richgr atsign panix.com 
+ 1 770 321 6507 
Eastern time zone. I speak for myself & my dogs only.     VM'er since CP-67
Canines:Val, Red & Shasta (RIP),Red, husky                  Owner:Chinook-L
Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/ Asst Owner:Sibernet-L

------------------------------

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Cromwell vrs. [sic] Sprint Settlement
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:12:58 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Joseph wrote:

> Bloomingdale's, Bon March (now Bon-Macy's soon to be just Macy's),
> Burdines-Macy's, Goldsmith-Macy's, Lazarus-Macy's, Macy's East/West,
> Rich's are some of their stores.  At one time Foley's in Houston was
> part of the Federated Department stores.

Foleys, BTW, is now owned by May Department Stores.

-- 
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California     Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

------------------------------

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Telecom Definitions: Meaning For 'Bearer'?
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 16:47:48 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


toddmueller@gmail.com wrote:

> 'Bearer' channels are payload channels, they 'bear' the load.

For instance ISDN "B" Channels?

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #617
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Dec 25 11:49:58 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBPGnw127200;
	Sat, 25 Dec 2004 11:49:58 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 11:49:58 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412251649.iBPGnw127200@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Approved: patsnewlist
Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #618

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 25 Dec 2004 11:50:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 618

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Don't Disconnect VoIP Service Until You Are Ready to Lose Dial (Decker)
    Free Holiday Calling to Canada, Israel and the USA (Lisa Minter)
    USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart (Jack Decker)
    Re: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart (Aswath Rao)
    Verizon Takes Next Big Step Toward VoIP (Lisa Minter)
    Researchers Warn of Multiple Unpatched Windows Holes (Monty Solomon)
    Re: What Tandem in Telcom Means? (Tim@Backhome.org)
    Re: T1/ISDN Integration With VoiP? (Hank Karl)
    Re: Beware Sprint Phone Rebates (stannc@yahoo.com)
    My High Hopes About Google Ads (TELECOM Digest Editor)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 13:18:30 -0500
Subject: Don't Disconnect VoIP Service Until You Are Ready to Lose Dial


A very unsettling thread over on BroadbandReports.com, about how those
who have called to cancel a VoIP service at some future date have
found that it stopped working a few moments later, and could not be
reconnected. If the VoIP companies want to add fuel to the fire of
those clamoring for more regulation, actions like this will surely do
that.  Note that AT&T seems to be the smelliest skunk at this picnic
(but not the only one) ...

http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/remark,12200955~mode=flat

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 19:22:17 -0500
Subject: Free Holiday Calling to Canada, Israel and the USA


http://192.246.69.231/jeff/personal/archives/001471.html

The Jeff Pulver Blog
Notes, comments and observations
December 24, 2004
Free Holiday Calling on the FWD Network: Sponsored by LibreTel

Members of Free World Dialup are now able to place for free, calls
into: Canada, Israel and the USA for the remainder of the holiday
season.

The call requests are being routed from the FWD Network to our peering
partner LibreTel for completion. Members who place a call will hear a
short audio advertisement for LibreTel at the start of each call.

To place a call, dial: * [country code] number on the Free World
Dialup network. Calls can not be place to mobile numbers outside of
the USA and Canada.

My hope is that our promotion will help some families and friends stay
in closer touch during this holiday season.

This promotion will be ending on January 2nd.
Posted by jeff at December 24, 2004 09:15 AM 

[Note: If you don't already have Free World Dialup, one of the easier
ways to get it might be to download the Pulver Communicator
< http://www.pulver.com/communicator/ >, a combination instant messaging
(works with AIM, ICQ, MSN and Yahoo IM's) and VoIP software client.
You do need a headset, or a microphone plus headphones or speakers
connected to your computer to use it, but if you have the right
equipment you can be up and running with Free World Dialup in
minutes.]

------------------------------

From: Jack Decker <Jack Decker@address withheld>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:32:59 -0500
Subject: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart


I don't know what they are putting in the water coolers at the United
States Telecom Association (USTA), but this is just strange.  ANYONE
would half a brain would want to try to avoid the cushy little access
charge scheme that the independent phone companies have set up for
themselves, and I don't think there's a long distance company on the
planet that hasn't tried to reduce the charges they pay to local phone
companies by any legal means possible (and by some methods of
questionable legality, but still, when you have are really, really
idiotic system of compensation you have to expect things like that,
given that the independent phone companies have somehow managed to
manipulate the laws to their own benefit).

What is so, well, just plain strange about this is that the USTA would
make such an appeal to Wal-Mart and try to wrap themselves in the flag
while doing so.  A long time ago, I used to think that the small phone
companies were the good guys (and a very few still are) but when I see
things like this, I am starting to think they are mostly becoming just
as bad as the old Bell System. Here's the press release the USTA
posted on their web site (a further comment follows the release):

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, December 22, 2004

CONTACT: Allison Remsen
202.326.7370

Telecom Association CEO Urges Wal-Mart and SAM'S CLUB To Disassociate
From AT&T's Phone Card Scheme. 

Scheme Pads AT&T's Bottom Line at the Expense of Rural Communities

WASHINGTON, D.C.  Today, the President and CEO of the United States
Telecom Association (USTA) sent a letter to the CEOs of Wal-Mart and
SAMS CLUB urging the two companies to disassociate themselves from
a scheme where AT&T exploits Wal-Mart and SAMS CLUB customers'
goodwill for American troops to pad AT&T's bottom line in a
controversial phone card gimmick that is currently under review by the
Federal Communications Commission.

"Knowing Wal-Mart and SAMS CLUB'S commitment to delivering value and
service in rural America, I am writing to share my concern that your
customers and your brands are being exploited by a company seeking
public relations 'cover' for its scandalous business practices,
which are currently under review by the Federal Communications
Commission," explained Walter B. McCormick, Jr., President and CEO
of USTA. If this activity continues, "the result for rural
telecommunications and for the nation's commitment to affordable,
reliable access to a dial tone is devastating. To date, AT&T has
admitted to avoiding more than $500 million in obligations owed to
help maintain rural telecom networks and universal service.

"In this latest attempt to avoid paying what it owes, AT&T has
employed a two-part scheme. In the first part, AT&T claims that
because it briefly diverts long-distance calls between two towns in
the same state to an out-of-state 800 platform, the company can avail
itself of the lower rates carriers charge for interstate calls rather
than paying the higher rates owed to local telecom providers for
intrastate calls. The second part of the scheme involves playing a
brief audio clip promoting companies like Wal-Mart and SAMS
CLUB. AT&T claims that by including this brief audio clip, calls
placed using these cards are no longer phone calls but are instead
'enhanced' services which have no obligation to support
universal service, the joint industry fund that ensures affordable,
reliable telecommunications services for rural and fixed-income
Americans as well as for connecting schools and libraries to the
Internet."

The letter explains that while hiding behind the flag for its own
financial gain, AT&T has blocked rivals from donating free calls to
military families. Also, this latest scheme raises consumer phone
bills and undermines affordable, reliable telecommunications in rural
communities.

"This is a case of for-profit patriotism, and it stands squarely at
odds with what our member companies understand to be the core values
of Wal-Mart and SAMS CLUB," explained McCormick. "We urge
you to disassociate Wal-Mart and SAMS CLUB from AT&T's
unconscionable refusal to meet its obligations to rural
telecommunications and its cynical exploitation of the goodwill of all
Americans toward our troops and their families."

To view the full text of the letter, go to www.usta.org. [Actually it
is at http://www.usta.org/getFile.php?k=0C948152754A4104BBF64FAA44CB646B ]

###

About USTA

USTA is the premier trade association representing service providers
and suppliers for the telecom industry. USTA's 1,200 member
companies offer a wide range of services, including local exchange,
long distance, wireless, Internet and cable television service.

[The aforementioned further comment:]

So, this is a trade association trying to engage in protectionism for
its members, just the same as when trade associations of plumbers or
electricians or whatever try to get laws passed that would bar
homeowners from doing their own plumbing or wiring.  Of course, many
homeowners just ignore such laws when they do get passed, and it
doesn't surprise me that long distance companies and others would try
to get around usurious and ridiculous access charges that the small
phone companies somehow feel they are entitled to, this often after
collecting ridiculously high monthly rates from their customers.  I'm
certainly not saying that either AT&T or Wal-Mart is on the side of
the angels, so to speak, but to try and make this an issue of
patriotism when it is really an issue of money and greed is reaching
pretty low.

Also, whether the USTA wants to admit it or not, the fact that a call
is routed outside of a state can make it interstate. I recall when
Merit/Michnet (not sure which moniker they were using at the time) set
up their network of dialup access numbers back in the early 90's.
Most of their numbers were in Michigan but they also had an access
point in Washington, D.C. and another in Chicago (if I recall
correctly).  The whole point of having those two access points was
that under the law it made the entire network an interstate network,
thereby reducing their costs.  Maybe a legal loophole, but what
organization or business doesn't take advantage of any legal loophole
they come across that will save them money?

Now, this may be a case of "a pox on both your houses", because the
letter does state this:

"AT&T has used its position as a U.S. military contractor to block
rivals from donating free calls to our military families. As you
likely are aware, AT&T has an exclusive contract with the
U.S. military. In a formal filing with the FCC, Sprint recounted that
AT&T used its role to bar U.S. military personnel from using free
calling cards that Sprint had distributed to troops in Iraq and
elsewhere. While AT&T's 'free' minutes for the troops only
accrue when your customers donate their purchased minutes, the company
actively ensured our troops never received no-strings-attached
donations. The clear message: Good-faith giving should not come at the
expense of AT&T's bottom line."

Now if this is true, it is also reprehensible, and those who have read
this list for a while know that I generally don't have a high opinion
of AT&T anyway (nor of Sprint, for that matter), but note that this is
dragging in an unrelated issue.  But to be fair about it, I would have
to see AT&T's response, because frankly, I don't believe much of what
the USTA is saying in this letter.  Basically what it appears that the
USTA is trying to do is get Wal-Mart to act as an enforcement arm for
the companies they represent -- is it because their appeals to the FCC
and to many state commissions to do their dirty work have fallen on
deaf ears of late?  Why they think Wal-Mart would want to get involved
in this is beyond me; after all, Wal-Mart is a user of telephone
service, and I'm sure that if they give this a moment's consideration
they will realize that high access charges also affect their bottom
line.

Hopefully whoever receives this letter at Wal-Mart will either
promptly file it in the paper shredder, or else send a response
telling the USTA to take a flying leap.  It is not patriotic to gouge
telephone users, and it's certainly not patriotic to tie the issue of
access charges to the issue of free phone cards.  This letter reminds
me of something that a social activist group might write to a company
to try and get them to use paper instead of plastic, or to save the
spotted owls, but the USTA isn't any social action group with high
ideals - it is a trade organization trying to protect and enhance the
bottom line of its members.  So in that context, this letter is just
strange.

All of the above (except for the press release and the excerpt from
the letter) is just my opinion, of course. But we really need access
charge reform and it is organizations like the USTA that are standing
in the way, and I for one would be just as happy to see them get run
over (figuratively speaking) because they represent the old way of
doing things, which basically amounts to gouging telephone users for
every cent they can get (again my opinion).

------------------------------

From: Aswath Rao <aswathr@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 22:43:40 -0500
Subject: Re: USTA sends strange letter to Wal-Mart


I also hope that access charge regime gets fixed soon. At least then
VoIP proponents will develop truly new features rather than just being
an arbitrage player.

Aswath

> All of the above (except for the press release and the excerpt from
> the letter) is just my opinion, of course. But we really need access
> charge reform and it is organizations like the USTA that are
> standing in the way, and I for one would be just as happy to see
> them get run over (figuratively speaking) because they represent the
> old way of doing things, which basically amounts to gouging
> telephone users for every cent they can get (again my opinion).

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 11:28:13 -0500
Subject: Verizon Takes Next Big Step Toward VoIP


http://www.rednova.com/news/display/?id=113914

Posted on: Friday, 24 December 2004, 03:01 CST
Verizon Takes Next Big Step Toward VoIP

Best known locally for its spring tulip festival, the small northwest
Washington city of Mount Vernon now has a new claim to fame: the first
central office in Verizon's network to be converted from old-fashioned
circuit switching to cutting-edge packet telephony

The setup within the Skagit Valley facility doesn't look much
different than it did before the conversion, part of a $1 billion-
plus nationwide project that Verizon estimates will take five or six
years to complete. The central piece of new equipment, a Nortel
softswitch outfitted with add-ons to support legacy TDM
interconnections, takes up about as much space as the 7-foot-high,
19-inch-wide Class 5 circuit switch it replaced. The most visible
change is that the new gear flashes with green lights, whereas the
Class 5 cabinets were"closed up and pretty mundane," says a network
operations supervisor at the facility

But the most significant difference is what you can't see: a platform
that promises to generate increased revenue through support of new
converged services while slashing capital and operational costs by up
to 50%.

Verizon is looking to ditch 2,500 Class 5 switches in about as many
local central offices in favor of IP softswitches, plus line media and
trunking gateways. The carrier is deploying Nortel's Communications
Server 2000 softswitch, Packet Voice Gateway (PVG) and Media Gateway
9000 products.  [.....]

Verizon also has installed many softswitches in five central offices
in California, but has not yet turned up service on them because state
regulators are challenging an FCC rule that does not require
incumbents to unbundle VoIP facilities to provide wholesale access for
competitors.

"Unfortunately we ran into a little bit of a regulatory snafu," Elby
says. "It's one of those classic state vs. federal issues."

Elby says the recent FCC ruling that found Vonage's VoIP service to be
interstate in nature and thus exempt from state regulation has no
bearing on Verizon's softswitch deployment in California. Wholesale
unbundling is a separate issue, and Elby argues that California has
erred in its judgment and questions if this error will be fixed.

Full story at:
http://www.rednova.com/news/display/?id=113914

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 20:51:02 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Researchers Warn of Multiple Unpatched Windows Holes


Researchers warn of multiple unpatched Windows holes
Vulnerabilities could leave systems open to remote attacks

News Story by Paul Roberts

DECEMBER 24, 2004 (IDG NEWS SERVICE) - Antivirus company Symantec
Corp. warned its customers about a number of critical holes in
Microsoft Corp.'s Windows operating system that surfaced late
yesterday and that could make Windows systems vulnerable to compromise
by remote attackers.

Symantec acted after security researchers published the details of the
heap overflow vulnerabilities in messages posted to online security
news groups Thursday, including the Bugtraq mailing list, and on
xfocus.net. The flaws affect most supported versions of Windows, but
Microsoft has not yet issued a patch for the newly disclosed
holes. Windows users are vulnerable to Internet based attacks until
patches are issued, Symantec said.

http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/holes/story/0,10801,98532,00.html

Three Serious Windows Vulnerabilities Surface
By David Morgenstern
December 24, 2004

Symantec Corp.'s Security Response service on Friday confirmed that
unpatched Windows vulnerabilities could pose a serious risk for
exploits via malicious Web pages and e-mail messages.

One of the three security vulnerabilities involves image handling-a
source of recent exploits on Windows and Unix operating systems. The
other two risks are found in the Help system and in Window's ANI
(Automatic Number Identification) authentication.

Symantec said the Microsoft Windows LoadImage API Function Integer
Overflow Vulnerability could be exploited via browsers or e-mail
client software. Users who open an HTML message or Web page bearing
the image could face security risks.


http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1745642,00.asp


Exploits released for new Windows flaws
Published: December 23, 2004, 3:31 PM PST
By Robert Lemos
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

A Chinese security group has released sample code to exploit two new
unpatched flaws in Microsoft Windows.

The advisory comes in the week before Christmas, a time when many
companies and home users are least prepared to deal with the
problems. Security firm Symantec warned its clients of the
vulnerabilities on Thursday, after the Chinese company that found the
flaws published them to the Internet.

One vulnerability, in the operating system's LoadImage function, could
enable an attacker to compromise a victim's PC when the computer
displays a specially crafted image placed on a Web site or in an
e-mail. The other vulnerability, in the Windows Help program, likewise
could affect any program that opens a Help file.

http://news.com.com/2100-1002-5502534.html

------------------------------

From: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: What Tandem in Telcom Means?
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 00:53:57 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


Wesrock@aol.com wrote:

> In the late 1940s I made a call from a coin box in Los Angeles, and
> the operator had to go to rate-and-route to learn which (manual) toll
> tandem to plug into which had trunks toward the destination.  L.A. had
> so many outgoing manual toll trunks that they had to be distributed
> among various tandems; as I recall, for my call the operator was
> director to (manual) toll tandem No. 4.  which had trunks for the MX
> (multi-switch) routing to the destination.

If you were calling out of the area before DDD came in effect in the
late 1950s, there was always rate-and-route for calls out the LA area,
and probably most areas of the country.

------------------------------

From: Hank Karl <notgiven@nothere.com>
Subject: Re: T1/ISDN Intergration With VoiP?
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 11:25:47 -0500
Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/


On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 15:05:11 GMT, Dave <feywrayspamno@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> If I have VoiP and use a converter to what normally would be a POTS
> line, what if, instead, the converter went to a T1 or ISDN set up?
> Could I have 23 or 24 incoming VoiP calls, each going to a different
> DID number?  Could I have an outgoing call center with 23 or 24 agents
> each talking over VoiP at the same time to 23 or 24 different people?

I assume you mean "23 agents each talking to one other person", not
"23 agents each talking to 23 other people".

The answer is yes, assuming you have sufficient bandwidth on the IP
connection.  I have heard that some high compression codecs (like
G.723.1) may cause stress if you're using it all day long, and also
may noticeably degrade the way your voice sounds.

------------------------------

From: <stannc@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Beware Sprint Phone Rebates
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 21:42:27 -0500
Organization: what do you want


Nate <nnord@maxitd.com> wrote about Beware Sprint Phone Rebates
on Date: 23 Dec 2004 09:20:02 -0800:

> After my previous Sprint contract was up, I called to see about a
> phone/plan upgrade.  The salesman sold me a new plan and a new phone
> with a big rebate.  Well, the rebate was turned down because the
> "saleperson" never changed my original plan.  Called Sprint and
> after talking to two people (including a supervisor), they wouldn't
> do anything except say "talk to the rebate people".  I explained
> that the "rebate people" aren't the ones who screwed up.  They
> didn't seem to grasp this concept.  It looks like Sprint may have
> sold me a very, very overpriced phone.  Can you say lifelong loss of
> a Sprint customer?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is a typical tactic by Sprint.
> We have had other messages in the Digest from people who said Sprint
> was not honoring their rebates very well.   PAT]

I was hosed by Sprint's rebate nonsense last year as well.

On the other hand, when I switched that same family member over to
Verizon in November, they received the rebate check from the Verizon
phone in three weeks.

-Stan

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 18:24:57 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: My High Hopes About Google Ads


Some readers may recall that three months ago, I signed up -- at their
encouragement -- with Google Ad Sense, in the hopes I could convert
this Digest into an advertiser supported forum. They had contacted me
and said I was 'pre-approved' for their ad program. I spoke on the
telephone to one of their (frankly, sort of smooth talking) sales reps
in New York City who evaluated this site, and told me I should
'easily' expect to make 'several hundred dollars' per month.  Nothing
could be further from the truth. Thus far, now three months and a
couple weeks later, they have not sent a single check, nor will they
explain *how* they calculate the payouts.

For example, one day there may be 20 click throughs and the Google
scorecard says that is worth 10 dollars. A couple days later there are
20 click throughs and Google says it is only worth 10 cents. I do not
get any answer from them in email about how they calculate these
things.

I run three clusters of ads (one horizonal banner at the top of the
page on latest-issue.html and two 'tower' groups verticaally along the
left side of the page, supposedly with four ads in each tower
cluster). But often times, the two vertical towers are totally blank
and the top horizonal thing is a single public service ad.  They
(Google) say that is because they do not have appropriate ads to give
me. Now and again, they run the same identical ad two or three times
on the latest-issue.html page, and if I read their terms of service
correctly, they claim they will not run the same ad more than once on
a page, but that does not seem to apply to them either.

I have checked my pages both through the direct URL of
'massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives' and also through the more
well-known alias 'telecom-digest.org' but also through the lesser
known aliases of 'telecom-digest.net' and 'telecom-digest.com' and I
also set up an alias to test with of 'telecom-digest.us.tf' and
others, such as 'telecom-digest.n3.net' and sometimes *they* get a
full compliment of ads when the original (via massis) get no ads at
all. When I use another redirection alias, through 'us.tc' or 'net.tc'
still other ads show up in German or French. I just wish they would
explain their rationale for what they do, but they will not!

They claim they will only pay with a written check mailed to your
address (no PayPal payouts which is much more convenient) and that
they will only pay for those months on which you get at least one
hundred dollars in revenue, and that they 'reserve the right' to not
pay that if they choose to charge you for your 'costs' in running
their search engine or if they decided you were cheating on them,
etc. 

And they won't give any real, consistent explanation for how they
come to those conclusions. And guess what! Surprise ...  I have yet to
have a single month on which I 'earned' a hundred dollars. The closest
I have come was last month (November) in which they admitted (by their
calculation which is the only thing they will use) to $98.60. So, of
course no check, since it was not the hundred dollars they insist on,
which their smooth talking sales rep told me should be 'easy
money'. And of course, if you quit their program, then you do not get
anything accrued at all as of that point.

Over all, I do not think Google Ad Sense is a very good program; it
just clutters up a person's web pages with a bunch of ads, (of which I
disapprove anyway), and it would be different if they actually paid on
a timely basis and if they explained how they do it. So far I have
gotten nothing from them except canned answers about their 'policies'.
I cannot recommend it to web page publishers.

Another similar program is called 'Bidvertiser' and I am thinking very
seriously about writing off what I have lost on Google Ad Sense unless
I can find an attorney willing to sue them to try and collect the
approximatly two hundred dollars they always find reasons not to pay
on, and see how the Bidvertiser program works instead.

Bidvertiser says they will pay via PayPal anytime you, as a publisher,
collect at least ten dollars due.  There is also a similar program
through Yahoo, I believe.  I have experimented with Bidvertiser on a
non-telecom web site I also operate, and it seems to be doing okay,
although the payouts are much less, but at least it gives the
appearance of being a more honest operation.

Any thoughts from readers?

Patrick Townson

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #618
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Dec 26 20:17:36 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBR1HaB14461;
	Sun, 26 Dec 2004 20:17:36 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 20:17:36 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412270117.iBR1HaB14461@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 #619

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 26 Dec 2004 20:18:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 619

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    IPTV Pioneer Backspace Inks Deal with IPFlix (torotoro@digitalputty.com)
    Re: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart (John Levine)
    Re: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: The End of TV as We Know It (torotoro@digitalputty.com)
    Re: Beware Sprint Phone Rebates (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Verizon Takes Next Big Step Toward VoIP (Tony P.)
    Re: Don't Disconnect VoIP Service Until You Are Ready to Lose (Tony P.)
    Re: Click Fraud Threatens Web (Consultant)
    Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads (Dave Garland)
    Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads (Jeffrey Mattox)
    Serious Vandalism on the Net Over the Holiday (Patrick Townson)
    Last Laugh! Hospital Bill (Lisa Minter)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: torotoro@digitalputty.com
Subject: IPTV Pioneer Backspace Inks Deal with IPFlix
Date: 25 Dec 2004 16:15:31 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Backspace TV a pioneer in live IPTV broadcast has partnered with
Data-Fortress Groups subsidiary IPFlix to provide all of their content
to their IP Infrastructure.

Founded from the marriage between an ISP and Broadcast Television
Station, Digitalputty and KCCE respectively, Backspace Communications
has been broadcasting live television stations over IP networks for
the past four years.  Backspace has developed their own account
management automation software, authorization and authentications
software, utilization and monitoring software, all proprietary and
database driven.  In addition, they have conceived and constructed a
completely proprietary acquisition, encoding, and broadcasting
infrastructure.  Backspace TV is a true pioneer in the IPTV
Marketplace.

Data-Fortress has been building out their points of presence
throughout Western Canada and United States West Coast for over five
years.  They have a complete fiber loop throughout the Greater
Vancouver Metropolitan area and service a major university campus as
well.

Between the two, with Backspace content and DATA-Fortress networks,
this pair promises to be a strong player in the emerging market of
IPTV.

------------------------------

Date: 25 Dec 2004 18:35:51 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I also hope that access charge regime gets fixed soon. At least then
> VoIP proponents will develop truly new features rather than just
> being an arbitrage player.

Completely agreed.  If VoIP is so great, it should be able to support
the same obligations as real telephony such as 911 and USF.

>> All of the above (except for the press release and the excerpt from
>> the letter) is just my opinion, of course. But we really need
>> access charge reform and it is organizations like the USTA that are
>> standing in the way, ...

The implementation of Universal Service certainly could be improved,
but it still makes it possible for you to call a whole lot of people
who live outside cities and suburbs and couldn't afford a phone if
they had to pay the full incremental cost.  Remember that the whole
point of USF is that the more people who you can call, the more useful
everyone's phones are.

R's of the season.

John

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:46:09 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart 


Jack Decker <Jack Decker@address withheld> on Fri, 24 Dec 2004 
12:32:59 -0500 wrote about USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart


> "In this latest attempt to avoid paying what it owes, AT&T has
> employed a two-part scheme. In the first part, AT&T claims that
> because it briefly diverts long-distance calls between two towns in
> the same state to an out-of-state 800 platform, the company can avail
> itself of the lower rates carriers charge for interstate calls rather
> than paying the higher rates owed to local telecom providers for
> intrastate calls.

Many years ago big companies in California would route their
point-to-point private lines or "tie lines" through a PBX in an office
in Nevada. This was a "rusty switch" in that it didn't actually switch
the traffic. Still, it entitled the companies to pay interstate
rates. The FCC has ALWAYS taken a very strict view on what is
interstate traffic. Since the FCC is also trying to lower per-minute
access charges, AT&T will probably prevail

> The second part of the scheme involves playing a
> brief audio clip promoting companies like Wal-Mart and SAMS
> CLUB. AT&T claims that by including this brief audio clip, calls
> placed using these cards are no longer phone calls but are instead
> 'enhanced' services which have no obligation to support
> universal service, the joint industry fund that ensures affordable,
> reliable telecommunications services for rural and fixed-income
> Americans as well as for connecting schools and libraries to the
> Internet."

The definition of "enhanced services" has been a mess for
years. "Time" and "Weather" services provided by the phone company
came under the definition of "enhanced" and had to be exempted from
the FCC's rules many years ago, even before the divestiture.

------------------------------

From: torotoro@digitalputty.com
Subject: Re: The End of TV as We Know It
Date: 25 Dec 2004 16:08:20 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Very poignant posture, Monty.  We at Backspace.TV have been on just
that since 1999 when we founded our ISP Digitalputty.com and married
it with our TV Station KCCE 50.

Moreover, as an enterprise level corporation with SBC we were heavy
into negotiations for distribution to their 4M Yahoo DSL Subs when
they suddenly went silent last June ( about the same time they inked
Microsoft IPTV ).

We're broadcasting to consumers and partnering with RBOC's for their
subs as well.  Welcome to the future of broadcast.

http://www.backspace.tv

Monty Solomon wrote:

> Sit back on the sofa and get ready for packetized, on-demand, digital
> broadcasts.

> By Frank Rose
> Wired Magazine
> Issue 12.12
> December 2004

> We live in the age of the digital packet. Documents, images, music,
> phone calls -- all get chopped up, propelled through networks, and
> reassembled at the other end according to Internet protocol. So why
> not TV?

> That's the question cable giants like Comcast and Time Warner and Baby
> Bells like SBC and Verizon have been asking. The concept has profound
> implications for television and the Internet. TV over Internet
> protocol -- IPTV -- will transform couch-cruising into an on-demand
> experience. For the Internet, it will mean broadband at speeds 10,
> 100, or even 1,000 times faster than today's DSL or cable.  Online
> games would be startlingly realistic; the idea of channels would seem
> hopelessly archaic. Why not indeed?

> So far, the answer has been inertia. But competition is a powerful
> stimulus. For years, DirecTV and EchoStar have been adding subscribers
> far faster than cable, so cable companies want something satellite
> can't match. At the same time, voice over IP is enabling cable
> operators to poach phone customers from telcos. Combine VoIP, truly
> high-speed broadband, and totally on-demand TV - and you've got such a
> compelling proposition that the Bell companies figure the only way to
> survive is to do likewise.

> IPTV is not to be confused with television over the Internet. On the
> public Net, packets get delayed or lost entirely -- that's why Web
> video is so jerky and lo-res. But private networks like Comcast's are
> engineered, obviously, for reliable video delivery -- which means IPTV
> will look at least as good as TV coming from digital cable or
> satellite.

> It will be accompanied by another, equally critical change. Instead
> of broadcasting every channel continuously, service providers plan to
> transmit them only to subscribers who request them. In effect, every
> channel will be streamed on demand. This will free up huge amounts of
> bandwidth for hi-def TV and high-speed broadband. Add IP and you get
> interactive services like caller ID on your TV. And the system will
> be able to track viewing habits as effectively as Amazon tracks its
> customers, so ads will be targeted with scary precision. Put it all
> together and you've got television that's as intensely personalized
> as 20th-century broadcasting was generic.

> http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.12/start.html?pg=7

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <devilspgd@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Beware Sprint Phone Rebates
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 21:18:00 -0700
Organization: Octanews


In message <telecom23.616.4@telecom-digest.org> Nate <nnord@maxitd.com>
wrote:

> After my previous Sprint contract was up, I called to see about a
> phone/plan upgrade.  The salesman sold me a new plan and a new phone
> with a big rebate.  Well, the rebate was turned down because the
> "saleperson" never changed my original plan.  Called Sprint and after
> talking to two people (including a supervisor), they wouldn't do
> anything except say "talk to the rebate people".  I explained that the
> "rebate people" aren't the ones who screwed up.  They didn't seem to
> grasp this concept.  It looks like Sprint may have sold me a very,
> very overpriced phone.  Can you say lifelong loss of a Sprint
> customer?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is a typical tactic by Sprint.
> We have had other messages in the Digest from people who said Sprint
> was not honoring their rebates very well.   PAT]

I would suggest that if they aren't honouring the contract, you
shouldn't either.  Cease paying the phone bill, for the love of god
cease using the phone, then fight it when/if they come after you.

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Verizon Takes Next Big Step Toward VoIP
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 12:19:17 -0500


In article <telecom23.618.5@telecom-digest.org>, lisa_minter2001@
yahoo.com says:

> http://www.rednova.com/news/display/?id=113914

> Posted on: Friday, 24 December 2004, 03:01 CST
> Verizon Takes Next Big Step Toward VoIP

> Best known locally for its spring tulip festival, the small northwest
> Washington city of Mount Vernon now has a new claim to fame: the first
> central office in Verizon's network to be converted from old-fashioned
> circuit switching to cutting-edge packet telephony

> The setup within the Skagit Valley facility doesn't look much
> different than it did before the conversion, part of a $1 billion-
> plus nationwide project that Verizon estimates will take five or six
> years to complete. The central piece of new equipment, a Nortel
> softswitch outfitted with add-ons to support legacy TDM
> interconnections, takes up about as much space as the 7-foot-high,
> 19-inch-wide Class 5 circuit switch it replaced. The most visible
> change is that the new gear flashes with green lights, whereas the
> Class 5 cabinets were"closed up and pretty mundane," says a network
> operations supervisor at the facility

> But the most significant difference is what you can't see: a platform
> that promises to generate increased revenue through support of new
> converged services while slashing capital and operational costs by up
> to 50%.

> Verizon is looking to ditch 2,500 Class 5 switches in about as many
> local central offices in favor of IP softswitches, plus line media and
> trunking gateways. The carrier is deploying Nortel's Communications
> Server 2000 softswitch, Packet Voice Gateway (PVG) and Media Gateway
> 9000 products.  [.....]

> Verizon also has installed many softswitches in five central offices
> in California, but has not yet turned up service on them because
> state regulators are challenging an FCC rule that does not require
> incumbents to unbundle VoIP facilities to provide wholesale access
> for competitors. ... "It's one of those classic state vs. federal
> issues."  Elby says the recent FCC ruling that found Vonage's VoIP
> service to be interstate in nature and thus exempt from state
> regulation has no bearing on Verizon's softswitch deployment in
> California. Wholesale unbundling is a separate issue, and Elby
> argues that California has erred in its judgment and questions if
> this error will be fixed.  Full story at:
> http://www.rednova.com/news/display/?id=113914

Once again, too much too late for Verizon. You know that most switches 
have been IP aware for at least a decade, if not two. 

I imagine Verizon will still charge exorbitant rates which will mean
that they won't gain much other than not needing the old circuit
switched infrastructure anymore.

So there will be some savings but not for consumers. 

Thanks again Verizon. I'm so glad I ditched you!

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Don't Disconnect VoIP Service Until You Are Ready to Lose Dial
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 12:21:49 -0500


In article <telecom23.618.1@telecom-digest.org>, jack-
yahoogroups@withheld says:

> A very unsettling thread over on BroadbandReports.com, about how those
> who have called to cancel a VoIP service at some future date have
> found that it stopped working a few moments later, and could not be
> reconnected. If the VoIP companies want to add fuel to the fire of
> those clamoring for more regulation, actions like this will surely do
> that.  Note that AT&T seems to be the smelliest skunk at this picnic
> (but not the only one) ...

> http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/remark,12200955~mode=flat

I can't imagine why I'd get rid of my VoIP line. First, one of the
things I look at when moving is if broadband is available or not. If
it isn't then I don't move there.

So all I'd have to do is take my Vonage router with me, disconnect the 
telco side of the NID and plug the Vonage router in there. 

And I've found that the cable companies are more than willing to keep
installation appointments. Not only that, they go the length including
running new cable to a location of your choice, etc.

So in a day or two I can have my net service and phone service up and
running at a new location. RBOC's can't move that fast.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My experience with cable (at least in
rural areas) is that cable is very prompt with their installation and
repairs.   Same day or next day installation/repair is quite common.
And you are correct; the telcos (Bell at least) are rarely that fast.
PAT]

------------------------------

From: Consultant <clickfraud@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Click Fraud Threatens Web
Date: 25 Dec 2004 21:17:05 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


There are tools and consultants that can help you.

And the big issue with click fraud is that it isn't small numbers of
people making small amounts of cash, it is large scale abuse using
trojan type techniques that install rogue dll's on vast numbers of
pc's that is of greater concern.

Overture WILL make refunds, read this blog regarding the case study :

http://www.clickfraud.com/

The refunds can be large and they can be made quickly, just keep in
mind that Overture cannot detect all types of fraud, you have to show
the evidence, that often means recruiting a clickfraud consultant.

C.F. Consultant

Lisa Minter quoted an article in the Digest:

> Someone could make the argument that watchdogs have better things to
> do. But click fraud -- endlessly clicking on ads to generate cash or
> hurt a competitor -- is a serious threat to the web business, and no
> one's doing much about it. Commentary by Adam L. Penenberg.

http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,65324,00.html?tw=wn_story_mailer

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But some companies doing this sort of
work -- Google for instance -- seem almost paranoid about webmasters
and others trying to cheat them. But I have news for Google, some
webmasters are honest people also trying to earn a decent living.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 11:15:36 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when TELECOM Digest Editor
<ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu> wrote:

> When I use another redirection alias, through 'us.tc' or 'net.tc'
> still other ads show up in German or French. 

I don't know the answer to any of your other questions.  But
smartdots.com (the German registrar who is giving away those .tc
subdomains) has a header line in their redirected pages that says the
language is German.  (You'll see it if you view the page source with
your browser.)  Chances are, Google's robot is using that header to
determine the language of the ad.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did not realize '.tc' was assigned
to Germany. For some reason, I thought that '.de' was their country
code. Also, I did not think that Google paid any attention to the
META or HEAD lines on web pages; just the contents of the page.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 16:32:07 -0600
From: Jeffrey Mattox <withheld on request>
Subject: Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads


Pat:

[Please withhold my email address for spam reasons.]

Pat wrote:

> They claim they ... will only pay for those months on which you get 
> at least one hundred dollars in revenue, and that they 'reserve the
> right' to not pay that if they choose to charge you for your 'costs' 
> in running their search engine or if they decided you were cheating 
> on them, etc.

> I have yet to have a single month on which I 'earned' a hundred 
> dollars. The closest I have come was last month (November) in which 
> they admitted (by their calculation which is the only thing they 
> will use) to $98.60. So, of course no check, since it was not the 
> hundred dollars they insist on,...

> ... I am thinking very seriously about writing off what I have lost 
> on Google Ad Sense unless I can find an attorney willing to sue them 
> to try and collect the approximately two hundred dollars they always 
> find reasons not to pay on, ...

Pat!  Calm down!  From the very start, you've expected them to cheat
you, so you assume they are.  Not so.  You have grossly misunderstood
their payment scheme.  For one thing, they WILL pay you what you
earned.  They accumulate your earnings from one month to the next
until you reach $100 or more, then they pay you whatever the balance
is.  It is NOT a minimum $100 per month or you get nothing.  They just
don't want to cut checks for less than $100.

Second, the charge back only applies to Google Search (not the ads)
and only to some very large users of their service.  This will
certainly not apply to you.  Even to those users, they only charge a
small fraction of the earnings.

As to how they calculate the payments, it depends on how much each
advertiser is willing to pay, and that varies widely from one ad to
the next.  They keep less than half, and pay you the rest.  True, they
don't give you the exact ratios, but people have figured it out and
there are web sites devoted to this issue.  I believe it's about 70/30
(70% to you, 30% to Google).  The amount varies depending on the
settings the advertiser has put in, and so it's impossible to compute
in advance what you will earn.

You are seeing duplicate ads (or no ads) because you are expecting
them to serve 12 per page.  That is too many, and Google (and others)
suggests you avoid putting that many ads on a page.  If you only
offered up the banner (4 ads), it would look and feel better.

All this is explained on the Google Adsense site, and I have 
previously suggested you read their FAQ.  But, you have repeatedly 
railed against them, so I assume you were convinced from the start 
that they were out to cheat you.  You don't need lawyers.  You need 
to calm down, wait for your first check, and read their FAQ!

The only real complaint you have is their estimation that you would
earn "several hundreds of dollars per month."  You are earning about
$100 per month.  Is that really so bad?


Jeff

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thus far I have earned **zero dollars
and zero cents** from their ads, over three months since I started
running their ads. And maybe I was convinced early on that they would
cheat me, but if you actually read their lengthy terms of service,
you'll see where they feel the same way about most of the webmasters.
Don't bot-click, don't play games with key-words, we 'reserve the 
right not to pay' etc, as if *they* thought they were in charge of
things around here!  And they are very, very secret about *how much*
they choose to pay. I have had days with a dozen click throughs and
Google said it was worth ten dollars; the next day two or three times
as many hits and click throughs and it was only worth ten cents. And
I have never before seen a company which would not state specifically
what its operation costs were (as with Google searches) and 'reserve
the right' to charge that cost back after-the-fact to the webmasters
who were running their ads for them. Why won't Google give any guidelines
on things like this, other than just generic phrases?  Anyway, they
pay much, much less on clickthroughs after the search engine than
on ads before it. I thought that markdown was to pay for their costs.
I'd rather see them agree to pay some smaller amount of money, but
*actually pay it* and not play games like they do now. I am expected
to wait for several months before getting any money at all, and even
then I don't know for sure how much it will be until it gets here?
'Bidvertiser' tells you exactly how many pennies they are going to pay
for clickthroughs.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Patrick Townson <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Serious Vandalism on the Net Over the Holiday
Date: Sun, 26, Dec 2004 18:00:00 EST


It appears that over the Christmas holiday, some kiddie who got a
new toy computer to play with decided to do a number on many (most?
all?) newsgroups with several thousand trashy, stupid messages,
repeated over and over in various newsgroups.

I received messages from readers of c.d.t. who thought *I* could
possibly do something about it. This newsgroup got hit pretty badly,
but news.admin.net-abuse.email got it worst of all, I understand.  I
had some email this afternoon with John Levine about this mess, and he
responded:

> 	This is quite unusual.  It's been over a year since there's
> 	been a spew like this, and there wouldn't be now except that
> 	there appears to be one well-connected host in Europe whose
> 	management has taken the week off.

Then I asked:

> But even if the managment took the week off, didn't they have any
> bots on duty?

John then replied:

They have a dusty server that is misconfigured and lets anyone post
with fake credentials.  Most likely it has been sitting there for a
couple of years, unused and unnoticed.  The correct thing to do with
it is to pull the plug.

The group that's under attack, news.admin.net-abuse.email is
unmoderated so there's no approved line to handle.

I found a few dozen cross posts to c.d.t and sent out cancels for
them.  As far as I can tell, the flood stopped this morning so
apparently they woke someone up.

Regards,

John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Mayor
"I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And I hope for all of you, the
Christmas holiday was as joyful and pleasant as it has been for me!
PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: Last Laugh! Doctor and Hospital Bills
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 21:07:51 EST


A man suffered a serious heart attack and had open heart bypass
surgery. He awakened from the surgery to find himself in the care of
nuns at a Catholic hospital. As he was recovering, a nun asked him
questions regarding how he was going to pay for services. He was asked
if he had health insurance. He replied in a raspy voice, "No health
insurance." The nun asked if he had money in the bank. He replied, "No
money in the bank." The nun asked, "Do you have a relative who could
help you?" He said, "I only have a spinster sister who is a nun." The
nun got a little perturbed and announced loudly, "Nuns are not
spinsters! Nuns are married to God." The patient replied, "Then send
the bill to my brother-in-law."

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very good! I wish I had thought of that
line when Stormont-Vale Medical Center came to see me to collect on
the *300 thousand* dollars I owed after my brain aneurysm surgery, two 
months in a coma and an additional month in the rehabilitation unit.
Ever see a hospital/doctor bill bottom line of $300,000.00 after three
months more or less in the hospital?  It almost caused me to have yet
another heart attack!  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.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #619
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Dec 27 15:47:46 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBRKlk024269;
	Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:47:46 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:47:46 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412272047.iBRKlk024269@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 #620

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:48:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 620

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Adelphia Reports Billions in Losses Going Back Over Years (dailyLead)
    Drill Bit Size (Fred Atkinson)
    The Secret Life of Phone Numbers (Alan Burkitt-Gray)
    Re: What Tandem in Telcom Means? (Wesrock@aol.com)
    Re: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart (Mark Atwood)
    Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads (Dave Garland)
    Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads (LB@notmine.com)
    Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads (Bob Goudreau)
    Re: Last Laugh! Doctor and Hospital Bills (Dave VanHorn)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 12:45:13 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Adelphia Reports Billions in Losses Dating Back Over Years


http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18342&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Adelphia reports billions in losses dating back over years
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Experts: Mobile phone viruses may pose threat
* Researchers predict Ethernet services boom
* Nextel chief sees big things on the horizon
* Lucent's Russo reaps gains from company's turnaround
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* "3G Wireless with WiMAX and Wi-Fi" -- Now in the Telecom Bookstore
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* As GPS use grows, privacy concerns emerge
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Israel restricts pornographic mobile phone content
* FCC: Local-access lines up 7% in first half of 2004

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18342&l=2017006

Legal and Privacy information at
http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp

SmartBrief, Inc.
1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20005

------------------------------

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Drill Bit Size
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:11:37 -0500


Can anyone on here tell me what the standard bit size that is used by
telephone installers to drill the holes for running standard, four
pair telephone wire through (like drilling a hole through the
baseboard into the floor to pull the wire in to wire a jack mounted on
the baseboard)?


Fred Atkinson

------------------------------

Reply-To: <alan@burkitt-gray.com>
From: Alan Burkitt-Gray <alan@burkitt-gray.com>
Subject: TELECOM Digest: The Secret Life of Phone Numbers
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:27:18 -0000
Organization: Alan Burkitt-Gray


I thought Digest fans would be interested in this programme on BBC Radio 4
tonight (Monday 27) at 20.00 GMT (3pm ET):

It's available when broadcast from the BBC Radio Four website in RealAudio
on http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/radio4.shtml?fm
(you can download a free player if you don't already have it) 


The Secret Life of Phone Numbers

Dialing up stories from the history of telephony, Ian Peacock recalls the
days of two-digit phone numbers and purring dial tones, GPO operators and
mechanical exchanges. He discovers that this era was still with us even as
digital technology and mobile phones entered our lives in the 1990s.
Producer Alan Daulby


The BBC has a listen again facility, also in RealAudio, for up to seven days
after original broadcast:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/progs/listenagain.shtml


Alan Burkitt-Gray
alan@burkitt-gray.com
7 Foxes Dale, London SE3 9BD, UK
tel 020 8463 0365 international +44 20 8463 0365
mobile 079 6202 1330 international +44 79 6202 1330

------------------------------

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:13:24 EST
Subject: Re: What Tandem in Telcom Means?


In a message dated Sat, 25 Dec 2004 00:53:57 -0800, Tim@Backhome.org writes:

> Wesrock@aol.com wrote:

>> In the late 1940s I made a call from a coin box in Los Angeles, and
>> the operator had to go to rate-and-route to learn which (manual) toll
>> tandem to plug into which had trunks toward the destination.  L.A. had
>> so many outgoing manual toll trunks that they had to be distributed
>> among various tandems; as I recall, for my call the operator was
>> director to (manual) toll tandem No. 4.  which had trunks for the MX
>> (multi-switch) routing to the destination.

> If you were calling out of the area before DDD came in effect in the
> late 1950s, there was always rate-and-route for calls out the LA area,
> and probably most areas of the country.

I'm not sure what point you are making.  Toll operators had keyshelf
bulletins giving routes to the commonly called points, and in most
cases direct trunks to a large number of places directly in their
multiples.

Rate-and-route operators existed everywhere, to determine the routing
to places with less traffic, including the smallest places and toll
stations, that were not listed on the keyshelf bulletin.

What I found unusual about Los Angeles was that it had outgoing trunks
to so many places that the toll operator had to know (whether from her
knowledge, the keyshelf bulletin or rate-and-route) not only that she
had to first reach a tandem with trunks to places not in her multiple
but that there were several different tandems because there were so
many different trunk groups they could not all be accomodated either
in the multiple before the operator or in a single toll tandem as was
the case in most places.


Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com

------------------------------

Subject: Re: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart
From: Mark Atwood <mark@atwood.name>
Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy!
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 01:49:21 GMT


John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> writes:

>> I also hope that access charge regime gets fixed soon. At least then
>> VoIP proponents will develop truly new features rather than just
>> being an arbitrage player.

> Completely agreed.  If VoIP is so great, it should be able to support
> the same obligations as real telephony such as 911 and USF.

Should email have similar "obligations"?

So long as I know what I'm getting, I am perfectly happy paying
for my "fake telephony".

And, VoIP or no, the USF should be elimated.  Now.  Immediately.
Yesterday, if possible.

Mark Atwood       |  When you do things right, people won't be sure
mark@atwood.name  |  you've done anything at all.
http://mark.atwood.name/  http://www.livejournal.com/users/fallenpegasus

------------------------------

From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 00:12:00 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when TELECOM Digest Editor
<ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu> wrote:

> I did not realize '.tc' was assigned to Germany. 

It's not.  It's assigned to the Turks and Caicos Islands.  But
apparently the German registrar owns "us.tc", and it's subdomains of
that they're giving away.  (I expect that it's not possible to move to
somebody else's name server, you're not actually getting an IP number
from smartdots but, I think, just some forwarding wizardry.)

> For some reason, I thought that '.de' was their country code.

Quite correct, .de is Germany.  But the registrar has presumably they've
paid the .tc government (or whoever has ultimate authority over that
TLD) to purchase "us.tc", "net.tc", "at.tc", "de.tc", etc.  A lot of
tiny countries seem to be trying to cash in on their namespace this way.

> Also, I did not think that Google paid any attention to the
> META or HEAD lines on web pages; just the contents of the page.

I'm not sure, but what with your page apparently being in a frame, who
knows what Google looks for.  That 'META name="LANGUAGE"
content="DE,german,deutsch"' is an obvious connection to "German", as
the T&C Islands are English-speaking.

------------------------------

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 05:55:56 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


Jeffrey Mattox wrote:

> Pat:

> [Please withhold my email address for spam reasons.]

> Pat wrote:

>> They claim they ... will only pay for those months on which you get
>> at least one hundred dollars in revenue, and that they 'reserve the
>> right' to not pay that if they choose to charge you for your 'costs'
>> in running their search engine or if they decided you were cheating
>> on them, etc.

>> I have yet to have a single month on which I 'earned' a hundred
>> dollars. The closest I have come was last month (November) in which
>> they admitted (by their calculation which is the only thing they
>> will use) to $98.60. So, of course no check, since it was not the
>> hundred dollars they insist on,...

>> ... I am thinking very seriously about writing off what I have lost
>> on Google Ad Sense unless I can find an attorney willing to sue them
>> to try and collect the approximately two hundred dollars they always
>> find reasons not to pay on, ...

> Pat!  Calm down!  From the very start, you've expected them to cheat
> you, so you assume they are.  Not so.  You have grossly misunderstood
> their payment scheme.  For one thing, they WILL pay you what you
> earned.  They accumulate your earnings from one month to the next
> until you reach $100 or more, then they pay you whatever the balance
> is.  It is NOT a minimum $100 per month or you get nothing.  They just
> don't want to cut checks for less than $100.

> Second, the charge back only applies to Google Search (not the ads)
> and only to some very large users of their service.  This will
> certainly not apply to you.  Even to those users, they only charge a
> small fraction of the earnings.

> As to how they calculate the payments, it depends on how much each
> advertiser is willing to pay, and that varies widely from one ad to
> the next.  They keep less than half, and pay you the rest.  True, they
> don't give you the exact ratios, but people have figured it out and
> there are web sites devoted to this issue.  I believe it's about 70/30
> (70% to you, 30% to Google).  The amount varies depending on the
> settings the advertiser has put in, and so it's impossible to compute
> in advance what you will earn.

> You are seeing duplicate ads (or no ads) because you are expecting
> them to serve 12 per page.  That is too many, and Google (and others)
> suggests you avoid putting that many ads on a page.  If you only
> offered up the banner (4 ads), it would look and feel better.

> All this is explained on the Google Adsense site, and I have
> previously suggested you read their FAQ.  But, you have repeatedly
> railed against them, so I assume you were convinced from the start
> that they were out to cheat you.  You don't need lawyers.  You need
> to calm down, wait for your first check, and read their FAQ!

> The only real complaint you have is their estimation that you would
> earn "several hundreds of dollars per month."  You are earning about
> $100 per month.  Is that really so bad?

> Jeff

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thus far I have earned **zero dollars
> and zero cents** from their ads, over three months since I started
> running their ads. And maybe I was convinced early on that they would
> cheat me, but if you actually read their lengthy terms of service,
> you'll see where they feel the same way about most of the webmasters.
> Don't bot-click, don't play games with key-words, we 'reserve the
> right not to pay' etc, as if *they* thought they were in charge of
> things around here!  And they are very, very secret about *how much*
> they choose to pay. I have had days with a dozen click throughs and
> Google said it was worth ten dollars; the next day two or three times
> as many hits and click throughs and it was only worth ten cents. And
> I have never before seen a company which would not state specifically
> what its operation costs were (as with Google searches) and 'reserve
> the right' to charge that cost back after-the-fact to the webmasters
> who were running their ads for them. Why won't Google give any guidelines
> on things like this, other than just generic phrases?  Anyway, they
> pay much, much less on clickthroughs after the search engine than
> on ads before it. I thought that markdown was to pay for their costs.
> I'd rather see them agree to pay some smaller amount of money, but
> *actually pay it* and not play games like they do now. I am expected
> to wait for several months before getting any money at all, and even
> then I don't know for sure how much it will be until it gets here?
> 'Bidvertiser' tells you exactly how many pennies they are going to pay
> for clickthroughs.   PAT]

Pat,

It appears Google is like E-bay.  Both are 800 pound gorillas that you
do not have to dance with, but since so many folks do dance with you
are stuck with their rules.

To answer some of your "why" questions.  Google _does_ have competition
and good business sense says they have every reason to be as quiet as
possible on many things.

It appears you are stuck with the Golden Rule of business:
Those with the Gold make the rules <sigh>

LB

------------------------------

From: BobGoudreau@ withheld on request 
Subject: Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:48:18 -0500


[As always, please delete my email address from the message header and
from the digest ToC=2E  Thanks=2E]

>>> When I use another redirection alias, through 'us.tc' or 'net.tc'
>>> still other ads show up in German or French.

>> I don't know the answer to any of your other questions. But
>> smartdots.com (the German registrar who is giving away those .tc
>> subdomains) has a header line in their redirected pages that says the
>> language is German.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did not realize '.tc' was assigned
> to Germany.

It's not. It's assigned to the Turks and Caicos Islands, which is a
British territory in the Caribbean.

> For some reason, I thought that '.de' was their country code.

True, but irrelevant. Dave didn't claim that the .tc domain was assigned
to Germany.  What he actually said was that the .tc and net.tc
SUBdomains (not the overall .tc domain) were ADMINISTERED by (not assigned
to) a German registrar COMPANY (not the government of the Federal
Republic of Germany). Presumably, SmartDots purchased the rights to
those subdomains through legitimate means from the registrar of the overall
 .tc domain, which is an English company called AdamsNames
Limited.  AdamsNames itself presumably has an arrangement with the T&C
government (or possibly their colonial superiors in London) to administer
the .tc name space.


Bob Goudreau
Cary, NC

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It seems like that Adams Company has
a lot of domains they give away for free, just for asking, and taking.
Both '.tf' and '.tc' are entirely divided up with lots of sub-domains
under them, including all the various two letter country codes and
all the USA domains such as .org, .com, .net, etc ... if you go to 
http://smartdots.com  or http://cydots.com or http://www.unonic.com
or http://dhs.org you will see a drop down menu listing (in each 
case) **dozens** of domains and sub-domains, etc where you are free to
help yourself, as long as the unique name of your site is not taken.
http://cydots.com gives away all the '.ms' domains the same way. And
they all -- cydots, smartdots, unonic, etc give lots of free webmaster
tools, if you want them; passworded web sites, hit counters, email,
etc.  'dhs.org' is out of Australia, and they give away lots of
dhs.org subdomains, and also 'n3.net'. They --'dhs.org' -- ask for a
five dollar donation for their work which can be paid through PayPal,
but all the '.tc', '.tf', and '.ms' domain names are totally free, and
they also offer email, and various webmaster tools

Every one of them works like re-directors, but they offer to 'cloak'
the real site you are at with whatever name you tell them. I am sure
there are more like that, those are the only ones I found thus far. I
do not know where '.ms' (smartdots.com) is located, but it must be
that same Adams Company, or at least they use the same domain
name-picking software that '.tf' (known to be Adams Company) uses.

So I suggest everyone stock up on domain names from all those 
countries.   PAT]

------------------------------

Reply-To: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org>
From: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Doctor and Hospital Bills
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:40:44 -0500


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very good! I wish I had thought of that
> line when Stormont-Vale Medical Center came to see me to collect on
> the *300 thousand* dollars I owed after my brain aneurysm surgery, two
> months in a coma and an additional month in the rehabilitation unit.
> Ever see a hospital/doctor bill bottom line of $300,000.00 after three
> months more or less in the hospital?  It almost caused me to have yet
> another heart attack!  PAT]

Two years ago, I was in intensive care for pancreatitis.  No mild
attack this, nine weeks in the hospital, plus another 6 at home.
Through all this time, no food, no water, I ate through a tube in my
arm.  Roughly $250k Insurance picked up most of the tab though.

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #620
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 28 15:11:21 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBSKBLh06869;
	Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:11:21 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:11:21 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412282011.iBSKBLh06869@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 #621

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:11:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 621

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Will 2005 Bring a Safer Internet? (Lisa Minter)
    Hacker Hits McDonald's China Web Site Over Taiwan (Lisa Minter)
    T-Online Launches No-Frills Internet Brand (Lisa Minter)
    Dueling Satellite Radio Rivals see Subscriber Jump (Telecom dailyLead)
    Speaking of VoIP (Tony P.)
    Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads (John Levine)
    Re: Drill Bit Size (Gordon S. Hlavenka)
    Re: Drill Bit Size (Justin Time)
    Re: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart (John Levine)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Will 2005 Bring a Safer Internet?
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:23:13 EST


by Larry Seltzer - eWEEK

Sometimes writing about security is just too easy. Making predictions
about next year is like this in some ways.

Let's pick some of the low-hanging fruit early. Even though most
spam-tracking companies show that spam already comprises 75 percent or
more of all e-mail, that proportion will go up in 2005. We are
approaching the situation in which, I have always assumed, users will
begin to withdraw from e-mail because it is so unpleasant. 

It seems to me that the consensus number at the end of last year was
at or just above 50 percent, so I'll assume it will go up another 50
percent of legit percentage, up to 87.5 percent. Of course, with an
overall number like that, there will be many days where 95 percent or
more of all e-mail is spam. No matter how good filters are, more and
more is going to get through.

Will authentication, the last great hope to save e-mail, make a
difference? We can hope that by the end of 2005 it will have taken
deep roots, but will we be in a position where domains can really
begin blocking and rejecting mail that isn't authenticated? That's the
ultimate goal, and I think it will take longer.

Perhaps this is some more low-hanging fruit. You might have noticed
that December has so far been a gangbusters month for vulnerability
reports. Microsoft is well-represented, not just on its own
controversial patch day, but with a separate report about the Windows
Firewall and an independent report about Internet Explorer.

But it's not just Microsoft. We've also had reports this month of
vulnerabilities in products from Cisco and Veritas, along with the 
Samba file-sharing system.

There were separate reports about the PHP Web programming system and
Mozilla-based Web browsers. And let's not forget the serious holes
Apple reported early this month.

December must have been the most bug-ridden month of 2004, but
researchers tell me that inventories of unpublished vulnerabilities
are running high. I think that months like December will become more
the norm than the exception in 2005.

We'll need some  new metric to quantify this, but  I think the average
number  of vulnerabilities reported  per month  in 2005  will increase
substantially over 2004.

Firefox Flaws, Phishing:

On a related point, we and others have been reporting that usage
of the Firefox browser has been increasing rapidly. I'm actually
skeptical of the numbers, but let's take them for granted for the sake
of argument.

If they're true, then Firefox and Mozilla are on track to reach the
point of penetration where malware programmers will begin targeting
them specifically.

I don't want to overstate things; Firefox has a long way to go
before its problem list rivals that of Internet Explorer, but it does
have problems, some of them serious. I pointed to a new one recently
and there are other fairly recent ones reported.

It's not hard to imagine attacks on Mozilla and Firefox originating
with spam messages aimed at them. "Subj: Attention Firefox Users --
Sign Up for Update Notification" or something along those lines. What,
you think only IE users are stupid enough to click through?

Speaking of user error, most of us pundits a year ago predicted an
increase in phishing, but boy, was there an increase in phishing! Most
of it is rather unimaginative stuff, simply trolling for Paypal
account information.

I've seen an increase recently in the cleverness of these attacks and
I think the attackers have barely scratched the surface of what is
possible. So, look for another large increase in the volume of
phishing attack e-mails, but look especially for an increase in the
quality of the attack.

Spyware got annoying enough in 2004 for the mainstream security
industry to start ramping up to attack it, either through their own
products or through buying established anti-spyware/-adware companies
(as Computer Associates did with PestPatrol).

Look for the security industry to try to push new anti-spyware
products, especially in the corporate market. In fact, this has
already begun. 

I hope, but won't predict, that buyers reject getting shafted on this
anti-spyware scam. This is a function that the anti-virus companies
should have taken on all along as part of what their products do. I'll
dig further into this subject soon.

To quote Peter Coffee quoting Bill Gates, "There is a tendency to
overestimate how much technology will change in the next two years,
and a similar tendency to underestimate how much things will change in
the next 10 years."

Ten years ago, most of us barely had our feet wet in the Internet. Who
would have thought it would be such a hostile place and that so much
of our attention would be spend trying to protect ourselves from
criminals running rampant? I can't predict that it will be a safer
place a year from now, but it will have to be in 10 years; there's a
limit to how much of this security stuff we can all tolerate.

<a href="mailto:larryseltzer@ziffdavis.com">Larry Seltzer</a> has
worked in and written about the computer industry since 1983.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Ziff-Davis.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml


[TELECOM Diges Editor's Note: I agree with Mr. Seltzer; the net is
going to get a lot worse before it gets better, if it ever does. I can
only speak for my little entry on the net, this Digest and its web
pages; but the spam to letigimate email ratio here almost always runs
in excess of 90 percent spam. Thus far today, for example, I have
dumped 356 items of spam from telecom mail alone. PAT]

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Hacker Hits McDonald's China Web Site Over Taiwan
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:25:55 EST


BEIJING (Reuters) - The Chinese-language Web site of fast food giant
McDonald's Corp. was broken into twice on Christmas by a hacker
protesting against its listing of Taiwan as a separate country, the
Beijing Youth Daily said on Monday.

The world's largest restaurant chain is expanding fast in China and
currently has 600 stores in what has become its eighth-largest market.

McDonald's English-language home page features a sign saying "I'm
going to McDonald's" pointing at a drop-down menu listing China and
Taiwan as separate "country/market" identities.

China has considered the self-ruled island of Taiwan part of its
territory since it split away from the mainland after the defeated
Nationalists fled there at the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949.

On Christmas night, the McDonald's Chinese home page
(www.mcdonalds.com.cn) was turned into a black-and-white picture of a
skull bearing the words "protest McDonald's official Web site listing
Taiwan as a country," the newspaper said.

On top of the skull were the English words "Chinese hacker."

The site could not be opened at all early on Monday but was
back to normal later in the day.

An official with McDonald's in Beijing said the company had no
immediate comment.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: T-Online Launches No-Frills Internet Brand
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:28:28 EST


FRANKFURT (Reuters) - Germany's dominant Internet service provider,
Deutsche Telekom unit T-Online International, has launched its
no-frills brand Congster in a fight back against German low-cost
rivals.

T-Online launched the Web site www.congster.de where clients can sign
up for Congster's low-cost Internet access, targeting users of cheaper
competitors such as freenet.de or United Internet with a stripped-down
Internet access.

Unlike T-Online and the rivals, Congster does not offer subsidies for
hardware needed for high-speed, or DSL, or for the sign-up fees
first-time users have to pay, targeting tech-savvy clients which
already have a DSL service but seek change.

"Congster is clearly aiming for customers who already have DSL, who
already have e-mail, have the hardware, and know how to set up their
PC to use it," said a spokesman for Congster, a fully-owned T-Online
subsidiary, on Tuesday.

On its Web site, Congster offers an online form with which prospective
customers can easily set up a letter cancelling their existing DSL
account with 15 of its rivals if they sign up with Congster.

T-Online's namesake brand, which connects 11.3 million users in
Germany to the Internet, is significantly more expensive than those
rivals as it offers additional services such as premium content,
e-mail and anti-virus software.

Congster, without these additional services, is offering its cheapest
rate at 3.99 euros per month including 2,000 megabytes of
data. Freenet charges 5.90 euros for the same data volume, and
T-Online's fee is 9.95 euros for just 1,500 megabytes.

T-Online, which its parent Telekom wants to reintegrate by buying back
all stock it does not own in a 3-billion euro $4.06 billion) bid, has
lost market share over the past 12 months amid a fierce price war for
DSL Internet access in Germany.

The Congster spokesman declined to say how many clients the new
service hoped to gain, or how many had already signed up.  He said
customer numbers could be reported next month. Telekom is due to
report customer numbers for the quarter to December on January 27.

T-Online stock, for which Telekom is offering 8.99 euros per share in
a tender offer that expires in February, traded unchanged at 9.74
euros by 3:57 a.m. EST.

Freenet stock was up 1.2 percent at 19.28 euros and United Internet
was unchanged at 19.75 euros. All three shares are constituents of
Germany's high-tech index TecDAX which was 0.1 percent lighter.

($1=.7386 Euro)


NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:09:45 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Dueling Satellite Radio Rivals See Jump in Subscribers


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18376&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Dueling satellite radio rivals see jump in subscribers
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Broadband takes U.K. by storm
* Telefonica privatization offers interesting lessons
* Blackstone eyes IPO for New Skies Satellite
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* In USTA's Telecom Bookstore: "Softswitch Architecture for VoIP"
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* What does the future hold for 3G?
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Bill signed exempting E-Rate from federal accounting rules

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18376&l=2017006


Legal and Privacy information at
http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp

SmartBrief, Inc.
1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20005

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Speaking of VoIP
Organization: ATCC
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 16:53:36 -0500


I got a call from Cox today. Apparently they'll be rolling out VoIP
service to compete with Vonage, Voicewing, etc in about two
months. The price will be $18.99 a month.

But then I realized, Cox is an FCC regulated voice carrier so all the
fees and crap will kick in and the price will be > $24.99 I pay now.

The guy trying to sell me this service was explaining my VoIP line isn't 
secure. I told him anyone with a half brain and a butt set could render 
pretty much any wire line communication insecure. As I explained, my 
line goes down to the NID where I disconnected and tagged the Verizon 
line. So it's an analog signal at that point. 

I love the scare tactics they try. 

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Cox is the cable company serving
Coffeyville. Cable One does Independence and south of town going
out Tenth Street to around Dearing, Kansas, then Cox takes over from
there south to Coffeyville, Tyro, Caney and the Oklahoma state line. 
PAT]

------------------------------

Date: 28 Dec 2004 05:41:56 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It seems like that Adams Company has
> a lot of domains they give away for free, just for asking, and taking.

No, Bob is right.  Somone in Germany paid to register net.tc, org.tc,
etc. and is for reasons of his own giving away subdomains.

That's fine, it's legal and honest, but if you use one of these
subdomains you're completely at the mercy of Mr. net.tc if he decides
to change his rules.  Personally, I'd rather pay the $10 and have a
domain that's harder to take away on a whim.

R's,

John

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The givers-away of free, remote
registered domains in the '.ms', '.tc' and '.tf' domains are all
using precisely the same templates and software, and all offer the
same webmaster's tool-kits, if, as you suggest, they are different
people/organizations. But instead of paying $10 for a domain you
could pay $5 for (any unlimited number of) domain names in the
'dhs.org' and 'n3.net' group, which, although they have USA-like
nomenclatures for their names, are based in Australia ( http://dhs.org )
All the above redirectors are good for guys who wish to run websites
using their own computers but keep their true identity secret.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 23:43:57 -0600
From: Gordon S. Hlavenka <nospam@crashelex.com>
Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com
Organization: Crash Electronics
Subject: Re: Drill Bit Size


Fred Atkinson wrote:

> Can anyone on here tell me what the standard bit size that is used by
> telephone installers to drill the holes for running standard, four
> pair telephone wire through (like drilling a hole through the
> baseboard into the floor to pull the wire in to wire a jack mounted on
> the baseboard)?

I have a 5/8" spade bit, 6 feet long with a 6 foot extension.  Spade
bits are easier to aim, IMO, than twist bits.  Standard caveats apply
wrt knowing what's ahead of your bit :-)

I also have a "shorty" that's only 18" long, for special occasions.

Gordon S. Hlavenka           http://www.crashelectronics.com
        Tragically, as many as 9625 out of every 10,000
                individuals may be neurotypical

------------------------------

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Drill Bit Size
Date: 28 Dec 2004 05:08:39 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Try one about a 1/16 in. larger than the diameter of the cable you are
feeding through the hole.  The size of the bit will vary slightly
between brands, but a 5/16 should handle the bulk of them.

------------------------------

Date: 27 Dec 2004 20:55:46 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


>> Completely agreed.  If VoIP is so great, it should be able to support
>> the same obligations as real telephony such as 911 and USF.

> Should email have similar "obligations"?

Of course not.  It doesn't purport to be telphony, and it doesn't
interoperate with the other billion phones on the face of the planet.

> So long as I know what I'm getting, I am perfectly happy paying
> for my "fake telephony".

> And, VoIP or no, the USF should be elimated.  Now.  Immediately.
> Yesterday, if possible.

I think you might enjoy Free World Dialup.  It's got no USF and no
pesky high cost users.

Regards,

John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies,
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, Mayor
"I shook hands with Senators Dole and Inouye," said Tom, disarmingly.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only is Free World Dialup *totally*
free, but you can interface with the public telephone network some
of the time, partly, also for free. For example, you can get no charge
incoming-only telephone numbers in the 360-227 group of numbers in 
Washington state. A person dialing that 360-227 number gets translated
into your Free World Dialup line. I think whoever offers that service
gives free voicemail with it as well, and email notification of any
voicemail message received. 

Now for outgoing calls, there is more of a problem. Right now, during
December and part of January, FWD is giving free outgoing calls as
well, dialing * plus the country code and the full ten digit number. 
Other than this holiday period, FWD only gives free outgoing calls on
the calls they don't have to pay for either, i.e. toll free 800
numbers. What you do in that case is *1 plus the ten digit toll free
number. Free World Dialup is not a bad deal at all for many folks. I
have an FWD number on one of my Think Pad laptops (the one with the
wireless 802.11 card in it) so I can walk around in my back yard and
get phone calls via the 360-227-xxxx number from anyone.   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.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #621
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 28 22:11:14 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBT3BD810426;
	Tue, 28 Dec 2004 22:11:14 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 22:11:14 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412290311.iBT3BD810426@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 #622

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 28 Dec 2004 22:10:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 622

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Surfing in Secret (Lisa Minter)
    Tracking Techniques (Lisa Minter)
    Keeping E-Mail Private (Lisa Minter)
    What Will the PC of 2005 Look Like? (Lisa Minter)
    NASA Television Now on Our Web Site (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Such Carnage is Hard to Believe! (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Re: Speaking of VoIP (John Levine)
    www.area-code.us (Mike Schoenberger)
    1st 1-900 Number Question on Millionaire Show (carl@mail.centuria.com)
    Re: Drill Bit Size (Tony P.)
    Looking For Users Manual For Bellsouth 4300GR Phone (eljainc@ameritech)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Surfing in Secret
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:31:29 EST


by Michael Fitzgerald - ExtremeTech

A famous cartoon from the early days of the Internet featured a dog
surfing his computer with the caption, "On the Internet, no one knows
you're a dog."
 
That cartoon implied a level of anonymity that doesn't really exist
online. You might tell your online pals you aren't a dog, but it
doesn't take much work for someone to figure out you visit
puppylove.com, have "Cat Marauder" on your Amazon wish list and spend
a lot of time in the DogzChew chatroom.
 
Now, you might be thinking that in truth, no one cares if you're a
dog. In fact, at a holiday party, a friend of mine asked me why
GhostSurf, a software package that helps you shield your online
privacy, was a selling point for his new PC. He didn't think he was
doing anything interesting online. Except shopping, checking out
various types of news sites, sending e-mail to clients and letting his
kids check out their favorite sites. All of these things could prove
very interesting, if not to governments and marketers then to bored
geeks and more malicious types.

But don't get paranoid. It's unlikely that you're being a victim to
keystroke logging or some other form of cyber-wiretapping. And most,
if not all, e-commerce sites use encryption software to protect their
orders. So, chances are slim that someone will capture your credit
card data as you type it in online.
 
But the IP address your computer has is tantamount to your home
address. It goes with you to every site you visit and gets recorded
along with all of your actions there, every time you go there. It's a
simple fact of Internet life that "sites do log stuff," says Simple
Nomad (Mark Loveless), a well-known white-hat hacker who is a senior
security analyst at toolmaker Bindview Corp. You actually may want
them to log at least some things about you, in order to get quick
access to a site or to place an order.
 
But Simple Nomad warns that you aren't just flitting around the
Internet unwatched. He impresses his teenage son by sitting in coffee
shops with his laptop and telling his son which joke in a chat room
made someone laugh or what their credit card number is. He uses a tool
called a sniffer to do this, in unsecure wireless network
environments.
 
Sniffing You Out

Sniffers do make it easy for others to find out whether you're a dog,
but they aren't all that common. They're generally not a threat to
someone on a home network with a firewall and good common sense about
what files not to open. But malicious hackers can break into logs of
Web sites and Internet Service Providers, which might contain things
such as your mother's maiden name, your passwords, your date of birth,
your credit card numbers and other types of personal
information. These can be used to build profiles of you, either for
identity theft or for other purposes.

Spyware
 
Then there's the scourge of spyware. You can read John C. Dvorak's
take on spyware and its various guises in PC Mag's 'Panic Over
Spyware.'

Typically, spyware is some innocuous-looking toolbar that lets you,
say, change the background color of sites you visit and is in fact
tracking what you do and sending information back to another
site. Spyware can be distributed automatically and even downloaded to
your computer without your knowledge, says Chris Wysopal, director of
development at Symantec Corporation. He warns that spyware spreaders
actually "are just throwing out a wide net and going after thousands
and thousands of people. That's more the way it goes on the Internet."
 
Foiling Criminals

So, how to avoid having your IP address become some criminal's window
into your life?

There are a series of tools to consider, and some simple, common-sense
steps to take that can help immensely.

First, the tools. Surf anonymously, which protects your privacy and
may help you reduce your spam levels and limit the amount of junklike
cookies that get dumped on your system. There are a wide variety of
tools available. A good sample can be found at the Electronic Privacy
Information Center. It covers 16 categories, including ways to
e-mail anonymously, surf anonymously and instant message securely.

Surfing anonymously might sound geeky, but it's not all that hard. The
basic premise involves using software to have your server mask your IP
address. It does this by taking, say, the URL you've typed into your
browser and sending the request via a different computer, which acts
as a proxy for the request; a go-between that cloaks who you
are. Good anonymizer tools will also use encryption, so that online
snoops can't just grab whatever traffic is going back and forth
between you and a Web site.

The main drawback to anonymizers is loss of surfing speed. Masking
your IP address will slow down your Web surfing, although it's less
noticeable in broadband environments.
 
Tools of the Trade

Three tools we like are Anonymizer 2004, Bypass Proxy Client 0.78 and
GhostSurf 2005 Platinum. All have encrypted communications, and all
use their own, company-controlled servers to keep your Web surfing
secret. Each is featured in 'Surf in Secret'.

The most basic is Anonymizer 2004, which sends any Web request you
make; going to Google, say, or buying a book on Amazon.com; first to
its own servers and then out to the Web, with a proxy IP address that
isn't yours. The service works well, but you are dealing with a single
source of servers; all Anonymizers; and it doesn't give you much else
than anonymous surfing for its $29.99 a year. You can, however, get a
series of other kinds of privacy tools for $99.95 a year.

At $49.95 a year, GhostSurf 2005 Platinum costs more than Anonymizer
2004, but it gives you a lot more, too. It's our favorite tool for
anonymous surfing, because it offers other tools, such as protection
for your instant messaging, and also a way to let you mark sites that
you want to allow to see your identity, such as a paid news site you
subscribe to.

Bypass Proxy Client 0.78 is also an excellent tool, but it's more for
advanced users. It requires some skill with software to use, and is
best for people who are unable to use Anonymizer or GhostSurf, perhaps
because their company IT department decides to block those
programs. One nice, though complicated, Bypass feature allows you to
route your Web traffic to a proxy server of your choosing.

If you're concerned about having your site requests going through
servers belonging to just one company, you might try software that
uses public servers to route your Web requests.  Steganos Internet
Anonym Pro 7 is a good tool in this category.

This app does take more time to set up than an application like
GhostSurf, since Steganos has to go out and search for public servers
to use as proxies, but it accelerates with use. It costs $59.95 a
year, and that nets you a spyware blocker, an Internet trace eraser
and a "shredder" feature.

The downside to software such as Steganos is that since the servers
are public, pieces of your Web surfing could be tracked. You also
can't encrypt your communications, so you could be tracked. There are
also free anonymizer tools available, though it's worth checking out
the background of any such free service.

Now, the habits. Wysopal notes that there are several simple things
people can do to protect themselves online:

Avoid the cookie monster. You can use your browser to set up a list of
the sites that can give you cookies. Don't let any other sites have
them, and don't accept their cookies.

Don't talk to strangers. Use pseudonyms for your e-mail and chat
accounts. Don't give your real name or information about yourself to
people you don't know well. Same goes for sites you're unfamiliar
with.

Don't fill out Web forms. The fewer places that have your personal
information, the more protected you are.

Use encryption where you can, and finally, when in doubt, fax. Wysopal
notes that no one has yet developed spyware for fax machines.

And that's just dog-gone good sense.

Michael Fitzgerald is an award-winning technology writer and
editor. His writing on technology appears in The Economist, Inc., MIT
Technology Review and a number of other publications. He's spoken at
numerous industry events and frequently appeared on CNN and other
major television networks.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 ExtremeTouch and Michael Fitzgerald.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Tracking Techniques
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:34:21 EST


Michael Fitzgerald - ExtremeTech

The classic techniques include things such as sniffing, which captures
all of the data coming from a connection and then analyzes
it. Sniffers originally were used to diagnose network performance. But
since they capture all of the data coming through a network, these
tools can be useful for mischief.

Sniffers might be a concern if you spend a lot of time surfing the Web
at your office, where your company has a right to track what you do
online.
 
But from home, you probably have little to fear from it. It would
require either dropping software undetected into a home computer, or
breaking into an ISP and do the same.
  
And even then, with encryption and Secure Sockets Layer-type
protections built into most Web sites that handle transactions,
there's a good deal of data that sniffers can't see, says Chris
Wysopal, director of development at Symantec Corporation.
 
He warns that it's far simpler for malicious cyber-types to write and
distribute spyware, or phishing, which involves building sites that
mimic a bank or retail site and then sending out mass e-mails alerting
people to an "emergency" such as the closing of their account if they
don't go to the site and give their personal information. These are
his top two concerns for privacy violations online.
 
While there are tools for battling spyware, both schemes are best
fought through avoidance. Don't download toolbars for your Web site or
other such packages unless you know the vendor is a legitimate one
(not always clear in the case of spyware, since adware can look like
spyware to some, and legitimate business use to others). And don't
believe any company that claims it needs your credit card number or
other personal information in order to preserve your account. It isn't
true.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, ExtremeTech and Michael Fitzgerald.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Keeping E-Mail Private
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:36:27 EST


by Michael Fitzgerald - ExtremeTech

Surfing anonymously is one thing. But wouldn't sending e-mail
anonymously be an online version of mash notes?
 
The quick answer is no. There are plenty of ways to protect your
identity when sending e-mail while still making sure that the person
who gets your e-mail knows it's from you. And there's good reason to
figure out how to do so. Unless you do something to shield your
e-mail, "it's basically a postcard," says Chris Wysopal, director of
development at Symantec Corporation. In other words, anyone at any ISP
can see the headers to your e-mail, which says who you are and who
it's going to, and can read it if they so choose. So can a hacker who
has compromised the ISP.

Wysopal recommends using encryption software such as PGP, which
effectively seals the envelope, though the headers; the to and from
addresses are still readable. But encryption continues to be a
challenge for most of us. That isn't so much because it's complicated;
it's much simpler than it once was; but because you can exchange
encrypted e-mail only with someone who uses the same software.
 
A simpler method, and one that also will shield your address, is to
use a re-mailer service such as Hushmail. These services strip off the
original address and put on a new one. It's like a forwarding service
in the real world, and it makes sure that unwelcome eyes can't see
your e-mail, know you sent it or who's getting it. You can read of
free services in PC Mag's 'Hiding Your Identity'.

Re-mailers range from easy to use to very difficult, as noted on
privacy advocate and author Andre Bacard's site dedicated to the
topic. They also can vary the level of anonymity (so yes, you could
send e-mash notes).
 
While it might seem simpler still to just set up a Webmail account
with a fake name, that's not as anonymous as you might think. For one
thing, if you use it from your home computer, and you don't use proxy
switching software to hide your IP address, it won't be hard for
someone to connect the IP address with the Webmail system.

Naturally, you could go to the public library or another publicly
available Internet site and use machines there. That does eliminate
the IP address problem. But even there, you have to remember that
unless you clear the browser cache and take other steps to erase your
tracks, the next user can figure out a lot of things about you.
           
NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Extreme Tech and Michael Fitzgerald.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: What Will the PC of 2005 Look Like?
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:39:38 EST


by Martyn Williams and Tom Krazit, IDG News Service

Consumers thinking about buying a new computer in 2005 might be better
off putting off their purchase until 2006. With few major changes in
PC hardware or software due over the next year, the PC of 2005 is
likely to look awfully similar to the PC of today.

Big changes aren't due until 2006, when the Longhorn operating system
from Microsoft, 64-bit applications, and optical drives based on the
Blu-ray Disc and HD-DVD formats will become available to the average
user.

Still, that doesn't mean there are no technologies worth looking out
for if you do plan to upgrade in 2005.

Chipping In:

Intel and Advanced Micro Devices are expected to unveil dual-core
chips -- which contain two processor cores on a single piece of
silicon -- by the end of 2005, although they probably won't appear in
mainstream PCs until well into 2006, says Stephen Baker, director of
industry analysis at NPD Techworld in Reston, Virginia.

Intel will likely boost the cache memory in its Pentium 4 processor
and AMD is expected to increase the clock speed of its Athlon 64, but
these changes will be incremental. A more substantial shift in
processor performance, the move to 64-bit computing, probably also
won't happen next year, even though Microsoft is expected to finally
release a 64-bit version of Windows XP in early 2005.

Bigger changes can be expected in chip sets, which handle the flow of
communication between the processor and the rest of a PC. A new series
of Intel chip sets supporting the PCI Express interface and DDR2
memory will trickle down to mainstream systems, or those priced at
about $800, in 2005, Baker says.

PCI Express will allow data to travel faster between the chip set and
peripheral hardware such as graphics cards and storage. Intel has
billed its introduction as one of its most important upgrades in a
decade. While that might be stretching it, mainstream users will begin
to see more and more products that take advantage of the increased
bandwidth in 2005, Baker says.

DDR2 will allow memory chips to move data at faster clock rates. The
older DDR standard is reaching the limit of its effectiveness as
memory clock rates exceed 400 MHz. Memory chip vendors are expected to
produce larger amounts of DDR2 in 2005, bringing costs down and
allowing vendors to put faster memory chips in cheaper PCs.

PCI Express and DDR Memory will also appear in notebooks from early
2005 with the introduction of Intela??s next-generation Alviso chip
set. Notebook sales have been growing faster than those of desktops
for several years, a trend that will continue into 2005, says Roger
Kay, vice president of client computing at IDC, in Framingham, Massa-
chusetts.

Technologies that make it easier to handle music, video, games, and
other multimedia are also on tap for 2005.

PC  vendors will  release more  PCs with  Microsoft's XP  Media Center
Edition 2005 operating  system, designed to make it  easy to burn DVDs
and  manage digital  media files,  as well  as pause  and  record live
television.

To help users handle their expanding collections of music and movie
files, PC vendors will also increase the storage capacity of hard
drives in mainstream PCs. Today they are typically between 80GB and
120GB. In 2005, expect to see $800 PCs with around 200GB of storage,
Baker says.

A disk technology called Serial ATA is also becoming established. It
includes a feature called Native Command Queuing (NCQ), which allows a
drive to manage multiple commands from the PC in whatever order it
deems most efficient, rather than the order in which they were
received. It can deliver a substantial performance boost to users, and
that's good news for data-heavy applications such as those involving
video.

In the optical disc space, users are likely to see incremental
increases in DVD read and write speeds. In the latter half of the year
the first PC drives supporting new, blue-laser based disc formats,
Blu-ray Disc and HD-DVD, are expected to make their way onto the
market. Both formats are aimed primarily at high-definition video and
can store several times more data than today's DVDs. Single-layer
Blu-ray Discs can store around 25GB, while HD-DVD isn't far
behind. Hewlett-Packard recently became the first to go on record with
its plans for shipping Blu-ray Disc PCs, saying it will offer them in
2005.

However, the move towards PCs with better multimedia features will
only work if they provide a simple, rewarding experience for users,
notes IDC's Kay.

PCs captured the hearts and wallets of buyers by making tasks such as
word processing much easier. Televisions and DVD players are also easy
to use. People won't want a PC in their living room if it doesn't
provide them with a good experience for their money, Kay says.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 IDG News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:04:23 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: NASA Television Now on Our Web Site


For persons who are interested, you can now watch and listen to NASA
(National Aurenotics and Space Administration) audio *and video* here
on the telecom web site.

Go to http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nasa.html to watch and
listen. In addition to news/documentaries programs, you will also be
able to hear radio transmissions between Houston, Canaveral and
whatver vessel is in orbit at the time.

I hope you will enjoy  this Telecom Digest Extra feature.

PAT

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:36:53 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Such Carnage is Hard to Believe!


I realize what I say next is not a telecom topic; but ... I say it and
hope you will give it some thought as I have several times today.

That disturbance of the earth over around s.e. Asia on Sunday has 
certainly taken its toll. AP Network news (in our td-extra section
on the web site) said as of Tuesday afternoon, USA time, the body
count was now over *fifty thousand* men, women and children, in
Sri Lanka and surrounding areas. 

Government authorities are instructing the living people to 'carry the
bodies as you find them out to the curb and leave them; we will do
mass disposal of the remains.'  It sort of reminds me of Monday
morning here in Independence, as the sanitary disposal trucks move
through the alleys collecting the garbage. I mean, can you even begin
to grasp or understand the horror of the whole scene in Sri Lanka?
Stacking the dead bodies at the curb where workers will take them away
over the next few days ....  

Meanwhile, the United Nations called on Dubya to do more than the
stingy pittance he offered. He said he would 'think about it'. Trouble
is, Dubya has gotten so badly in debt on account of Iraq, he does not
have a lot of money left over for things like alleviating human misery.


Patrick Townson

------------------------------

Date: 28 Dec 2004 20:50:53 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Speaking of VoIP
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> But then I realized, Cox is an FCC regulated voice carrier so all the
> fees and crap will kick in and the price will be > $24.99 I pay now.

> The guy trying to sell me this service was explaining my VoIP line
> isn't secure.

That's a pretty lame sales tactic.  He should have pointed out that
Cox's service has real 911, real operators, real battery backup so it
works when the power fails, and includes a real phone book listing.

Poking at their web site, I'm surprised to see that they don't bundle
long distance so if you don't like their not particularly cheap LD
service, you can use someone else's.

------------------------------

Subject: www.area-code.us
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:00:11 -0500
From: Mike Schoenberger <MIKE@cemedia.com>


Mark, Linc or Patrick,

I was unable to find another contact email so I hope that you receive
this and can forward my email to someone who can fix a link on this
site.

If you go to Codes -> Services -> Rocky Mountain Telco it goes to
http://www.rockymnttel.com/.

This is now a porn site for whatever reason!

Michael Schoenberger
Quality Assurance
Cutting Edge Media, Inc
1.800.561.9297 Ext 1119 =20
Fax 717.361.0860
mike@cemedia.com
www.CuttingEdgeMedia.com


"Exceeding Your Expectations is Our #1 Priority"

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I know Linc Madison reads this Digest 
now and then but I do not know that he has any control over that
web site other than possibly dropping it off of any listing he
maintains on his own web site. But there are numerous webmasters of
telecom related sites who read this Digest, and after they ascertain 
that the 'change in policy' at that web site was not the work of a
hacker and is, in fact real, they may choose to (a) either remove
it from any links at their own site or (b) contact the webmaster
there if they know who it is and ask what is going on. 

My opinion is the webmaster may have failed to pay his 'dues' to the
registrar of .com so his site was put up for sale, just like our
Internet History Org site was, (which Mikka, writing from the
numann mail server in Canada) assured me was perfectly proper. Maybe
 -- if this latest instance was a grab by a cybersquatter as my
internet-history.org was, he can get a place somewhere in the '.tf'
or '.tc' domain, like I did for the internet history archives.  PAT] 

------------------------------

Subject: 1st 1-900 Number? Question on Millionaire Show
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 00:40:10 +0000
From: <carl@mail.centuria.com>


Because of Christmastime, I am away from my usual email.
I am Carl Moore (cmoore@arl.army.mil).

On ABC-TV "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" show which aired last Friday
(Dec. 24), there was a question about the 1st 1-900 number (in 1980?).
The answer given was that it was used for Reagan-Carter debate (in
U.S. presidential campaign that year).  What about the 1-900-242-1611
used for Carter's call-in in 1977?  Notice that BOTH of these involved
President Carter.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The correct answer **should have been**
the 1977 call-in program. Someone should notify the producer of the
show and challenge his 'correct answer'.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Drill Bit Size
Organization: ATCC
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:37:53 -0500


In article <telecom23.621.7@telecom-digest.org>, nospam@crashelex.com 
says:

> Fred Atkinson wrote:

>> Can anyone on here tell me what the standard bit size that is used by
>> telephone installers to drill the holes for running standard, four
>> pair telephone wire through (like drilling a hole through the
>> baseboard into the floor to pull the wire in to wire a jack mounted on
>> the baseboard)?

> I have a 5/8" spade bit, 6 feet long with a 6 foot extension.  Spade
> bits are easier to aim, IMO, than twist bits.  Standard caveats apply
> wrt knowing what's ahead of your bit :-)

> I also have a "shorty" that's only 18" long, for special occasions.

5/8" seems huge. You can get CAT-5 through a quarter inch hole so I'd
recommend a long quarter inch bit. The 5/8" would be good for dropping
cable from the pole into the house but that's about all.

------------------------------

From: eljainc@ameritech.net
Subject: Looking For User's Manual For Bellsouth 4300GR Telephone
Date: 28 Dec 2004 14:50:36 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Hello,

I am looking for the users manual or any documentation on the
Bellsouth 4300GR 4-line telephone system. Does anybody have this in
PDF format?

Thanks in advance,

Mike McWhinney

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #622
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Dec 29 20:10:06 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBU1A5g21716;
	Wed, 29 Dec 2004 20:10:06 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 20:10:06 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412300110.iBU1A5g21716@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 #623

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 29 Dec 2004 20:10:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 623

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "Death Match" by Lincoln Child (Patrick Townson)
    Quadruple Play: Time Warner, Sprint Near Cell Phone Deal (Telecom Daily)
    Re: First 1-900 Number? Question on Millionaire Show (Anthony Bellanga)
    Re: Such Carnage is Hard to Believe! (David Clayton)
    Re: Such Carnage is Hard to Believe! (jmeissen@aracnet.com)
    Web Page Helps Tsunami Survivor Search (Lisa Minter)
    Navy SEALs Sue Associated Press Over Iraq Photos (Lisa Minter)
    Vioxx Unseats Porn in List of Top 2004 Junk Email (Lisa Minter)
    Re: The Secret Life of Phone Numbers (Phil McKerracher)
    Office Phones, Omega Phone, Iwatsu, 24 Button CHEAP!!! (TIA@thanks.com)
    Re: Beware Sprint Phone Rebates (Brad Houser)
    Re: www.area-code.us (Linc Madison)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 18:00:00 EST
From: Patrick Townson <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Book Review: "Death Match" by Lincoln Child


An interesting new book I read over the Christmas holiday was entitled
"Death Match" written by author Lincoln Child, published in April,
2004 by Doubleday division of Random House. The ISBN is 0-385-50670-8.

Another book by Mr. Child was titled "Utopia".

"Death Match" is a story about an imaginary Internet 'Dating/Match
Service' operating in New York City. This Internet Dating Service
is called 'Eden'. Unlike more 'primitive internet dating services'
which only ask a bunch of questions then proceed to match two 
people together (i.e. Yahoo, but not named in the book), the fictional
service known as 'Eden' is much more expensive (for example, like
'e-harmony.com' but, again, not named as such), and uses several
very complex computer algorythms to match people together and
costs a lot more money. Eden takes much pride in putting together
'super couples'; people who are matched at 95 percent or better in
all the aspects, offering a lifetime guarentee of a pefect mate.  

But, as Eden discovers, strange disasters begin to occur to the
couples they match up. One supercouple commits apparently a double-
suicide exactly two years to the day they first were introduced
through Eden. Then a few weeks later, a second 'supercouple' also 
die, and police say that was a double-suicide pact also. Eden decides
to investigate it further. They hire a forensic psychologist who had
been employed by the FBI as a profiler to look into the whole thing.    
He is given free reign to examine all the aspects of the way the
business is run, and he gets that free reign until he begins to
discover some ugly details about the company's founder, a recluse who
lives in a penthouse at the top of the Eden building with a very
sophisticated computer network they call 'Lisa', which is a take off
on the name 'Eliza' which I believe is or was a very large, very fast,
very intelligent computer at MIT which uses artificial intelligence. 

The story takes a number of interesting twists and turns and I think
you might enjoy it. Mr. Child has authored several best selling
thrillers, including co-authoring some books with Douglas Preston such
as 'Relic', 'The Cabinet of Curiosities', and 'Still Life With
Crows'. He lives with his family in Morristown, NJ.  


Patrick Townson

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:03:21 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Quadruple Play: Time Warner, Sprint Reportedly Near Cell Phone Deal


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18408&l=2017006


TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Quadruple Play: Time Warner, Sprint reportedly near cell phone deal
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Adelphia offers $300 million to settle SEC, DOJ investigations
* Level 3, France Telecom ink deal
* Qwest delays VoIP rollout
* Vonage extends free phone service offer to troops in Iraq
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Carrier Grade Voice Over IP -- Now at www.telecom-bookstore.com
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Internet, TV convergence still faces hurdles
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Federal court rules Minnesota can't regulate VoIP services

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18408&l=2017006

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 21:57:57 -0700
From: Anthony Bellanga <anthonybellanga@withheld on request>
Subject: Re: First 1-900 Number? Question on Millionaire Show


Please do NOT display my email address nor "reply-to" address
whatsoever in my posting. Thanks!

Carl Moore wrote:

> On ABC-TV "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" show which aired last Friday
> (Dec. 24), there was a question about the 1st 1-900 number (in 1980?).
> The answer given was that it was used for Reagan-Carter debate (in
> U.S. presidential campaign that year).  What about the 1-900-242-1611
> used for Carter's call-in in 1977?  Notice that BOTH of these involved
> President Carter.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The correct answer **should have been**
> the 1977 call-in program. Someone should notify the producer of the
> show and challenge his 'correct answer'.   PAT]

I seem to remember that the 1980 1-900 number for the Reagan-Carter
might have been the first widespread or known use of 900 for the new
"Dial-IT" pay-per-call function, these calls with their own special
rates. This 1980 activity was probably a "call to submit your vote or
opinion as to who won the debate".

The 1977 Carter radio call-in program hosted by CBS newsman Walter
Cronkite was still using the older "choke" or "mass calling" network
function of 1-900. AT&T had actually begun the "choke" or "mass call"
900 network back in 1970, and I understand that there were sporadic
uses throughout the 1970s, but apparantly they weren't as publicly
known or widespread.

The 1977 President Carter radio call-in special with 1-900-242-1611
was actually set to be FREE to the calling party, with either the
White House or CBS News picking up the tab from AT&T.

But except for that 1977 Carter radio call-in, the 1970s "mass
calling" 900 choke network was billed at regular tariffed
distance-based rates, based on the NPA-NXX code of the calling party
with respect to the 900-NNX code of the dialed number.

When AT&T changed 900 to "Dial-It" (pay-per-call) in 1980, they
totally re-vamped the 900-NXX codes in use, this time with specific
pay-per-call charges associated with specific (new) 900-NXX codes.

Initially (early 1980s), AT&T's "Dial-It" 900 was only 50-c per call,
or at most 50-c the first minute with 35-c each additional minute, but
by the mid-1980s, AT&T had all kinds of Dial-It 900 rates, each rate
based on the specific 900-NXX code of the dialed number, rates ranging
from either free (900-200 and 900-555 numbers at that time), or 25-c
per-call or per-minute, to as much as ten dollars a call, all rates
associated with specific 900-NXX codes.

Then by the late 1980s (post-divestiture), other competitive companies
began to provide their own pay-per-call 900 services (the use of the
term "Dial-It" is a trademark or servicemark of AT&T), specific
900-NXX codes also dedicated to specific service providers. And these
"other" service providers could have almost any kind of rates that
they chose.

Presently, AT&T has completely vacated the "900" business. They
vacated 500 "personal numbering" a few years ago as well. Other
"major" carriers have also eliminated 500 and/or 900 in recent years
too, the only remaining providers of 500 and 900 being mostly "sleaze"
companies (or in the case of 500, there is quite a bit of GPS or
"on-star" type carriers and access numbers).

But as for the "first" 900 numbers in use -- it is probably even
earlier than 1977, but the 1977 Carter radio call-in 900-242-1611 is
the first one that was made known nationally or widespread for most
people.

Anthony Bellanga

------------------------------

From: David Clayton <dcstar@XYZ.myrealbox.com>
Subject: Re: Such Carnage is Hard to Believe!
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:33:08 +1100


TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu> contributed the
following:

> I realize what I say next is not a telecom topic; but ... I say it and
> hope you will give it some thought as I have several times today.

> That disturbance of the earth over around s.e. Asia on Sunday has 
> certainly taken its toll. AP Network news (in our td-extra section
> on the web site) said as of Tuesday afternoon, USA time, the body
> count was now over *fifty thousand* men, women and children, in
> Sri Lanka and surrounding areas. 

 ......

This is sort of telecom related, as the areas hardest hit -- like the
west coast of Aceh province of Indonesia where the earthquake hit
hard, as well as the subsequent Tsunamis -- had all of their
telecommunications infrastructure crippled as well.

This means that people just don't know the amount of casualities in
those areas, while the places where the telecommunications
infrastructure was left relatively intact have been providing the
horrifying pictures we have all been seeing in the news.

It looks like over 100,000 may die as a direct result of the event,
many times more will have been injured, and many, many more will have
had their lives impacted.


Regards,

David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@XYZ.myrealbox.com
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
(Remove the "XYZ." to reply)

Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Everytime I turn on the news today, the
count has gone up another five or six thousand. Yesterday it was
forty-some thousand deaths, now this afternoon Yahoo News is saying
75,000, although AP had the figure as 73,000.  And the governments
there are instructing the survivors "stack the bodies up in piles
along the street curb, we'll get them disposed of as quickly as we
can."  PAT]

------------------------------

From: jmeissen@aracnet.com
Subject: Re: Such Carnage is Hard to Believe!
Date: 29 Dec 2004 21:18:13 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


In article <telecom23.622.6@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest Editor
<ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu> wrote:
 
> Meanwhile, the United Nations called on Dubya to do more than the
> stingy pittance he offered. He said he would 'think about it'. Trouble
> is, Dubya has gotten so badly in debt on account of Iraq, he does not
> have a lot of money left over for things like alleviating human misery.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/28/tsunami.diver/index.html

[American tsunami survivor] Faye Wachs said she was impressed by the
efforts of the Thai government and the International Committee for the
Red Cross, but "she was appalled at the treatment they got" from the
U.S. government, her mother said.

At the airport in Bangkok, other governments had set up booths to
greet nationals who had been affected and to help repatriate them, she
said.

That was not the case with the U.S. government, Wachs told her mother.
It took the couple three hours, she said, to find the officials from
the American consulate, who were in the VIP lounge.

Because they had lost all their possessions, including their documen-
tation, they had to have new passports issued.

But the U.S. officials demanded payment to take the passport pictures,
Helen Wachs said.

John Meissen                                   jmeissen@aracnet.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, how did Dubya know they were not
just a couple of 'terrorists' trying to sneak in and use the tsunami
thing as an excuse?  Anyway, Dubya has no spare money (right now, or
probably for a few decades at least) to spend on such foolishness. 
Every spare nickle has to go to Navy SEALS and Army guys in their
ongoing humane treatment of Iraqi terrorists -- err, prisoners. His
religious war against Islam has many more years to go.    PAT]

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: 'Simpsons' Web Page Helps Tsunami Survivor Search
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 16:02:05 EST



ROME (Reuters) - An Internet site set up by an Italian schoolboy, and
previously dedicated to "The Simpsons," is helping people track down
loved ones missing since the Indian Ocean tsunami disaster.

Valerio Natale, a 14-year-old high school student, says two missing
Italian holidaymakers -- Dario Collodi and Liliana Giordanino -- have
already been found thanks to postings on his web page:
http:/www.tuttosimpsons.altervista.org/index.htm.

"I was paging through the newspaper and saw lots of ads from people
looking for relatives," Natale told Reuters. "I asked myself, Why not
make a free site that can help everybody?  So I made a free site,
which used to be dedicated to the famous American cartoon family, the
Simpsons."

The site is devoted almost entirely to Italian citizens who
disappeared in Thailand, Sri Lanka, the Maldives and India when the
tsunami hit on Sunday, killing tens of thousands.

It lists the names and ages of those missing, email addresses and
phone numbers of worried friends and relatives, a link for photos of
the missing, plus useful phone numbers such as Italian consulates, and
hotels in Thailand.

The site has had 82,000 hits in two days, Natale said.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Navy SEALs Sue Associated Press Over Iraq Photos
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 16:04:12 EST


The suit, filed in San Diego Superior Court, said the pictures did not
depict abuse and instead put the lives of the soldiers at risk by
exposing their faces to the world.

"We believe AP's use of the photos and the manner in which they were
obtained were entirely lawful and proper," said Associated Press
attorney Dave Tomlin, who is representing the news agency and reporter
Seth Hettena.

The plaintiffs are identified only as "Six Navy SEALs and Two Jane
Does," and the suit indicates they have been allowed to file
anonymously by court order.

"By failing to conceal the identities of the Navy SEALs, Defendants
Seth Hettena and the AP have jeopardized the lives of Plaintiffs Six
Navy Seals and their families, as well as compromised their future
missions and careers," the suit said.

The U.S. Navy said it had nothing to do with the suit.

"The lawsuit is not a naval special warfare issue but rather a civil
matter undertaken by these individuals against The Associated Press,
which is being handled through the legal process available to all
Americans," said Taylor Clark, a spokesman for the Naval Special
Warfare Command.

An AP reporter discovered the photos, posted on the picture-sharing
site Smugmug.com, during research on another set of photos that
purportedly showed Navy SEALs abusing detainees.

Confronted with the photos, the Navy said this month it had launched
an investigation. The plaintiffs said in their suit that the photos
depicted regular special operations techniques and did not show abuse.

Jane Doe One, the lawsuit said, stored the photos on Smugmug.com,
among a collection of personal photographs. The suit said the two Jane
Does are wives of two of the SEALs, members of the elite Navy force
Sea-Air-Land.

The AP reported that the unnamed woman said the photos came from her
husband, who brought them from Iraq after his tour of duty. But the
suit denies that that was the case, or that she told the AP as much.

Distributed around the world, the AP reported the photos showed Navy
SEALs sitting on hooded and bound detainees, holding a gun to a
detainee's bloodied head, and placing a boot on the chest of a prone
man.

Other photos showed grinning U.S. personnel sitting or lying atop
three hooded prisoners in the bed of a pickup truck.

The Dec. 3 AP story quoted a spokesman for the Naval Special Warfare
Command as saying some of the photos could put the lives of the SEALs
at risk.

The suit, which claims invasion of privacy and intentional infliction
of emotional distress, seeks damages and an injunction barring further
distribution of the photos.

For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, Associated Press.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For up to the minute, five minutes in
length, news reports from Associated Press, look at our web site
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/AP.html .I, for one, am glad the
Associated Press has been so involved in the Iraqi Prisoner Abuse 
matter. As this entire stench slowly works its way up the chain of
command to the White House itself, its good to see some people care,
even if Dubya  does not seem to worry much about how long his
religious war against Islam takes or how much it costs, etc.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Vioxx Unseats Porn in List of Top 2004 Junk Email
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 16:05:12 EST


NEW YORK (Reuters) - Porn ads slipped down the list of top junk
e-mails in 2004, replaced by offers for arthritis drug Vioxx, ID theft
scams and stock pick information, America Online said.

Although "HOT LESBIAN ACTION" made the list of most frequently sent
junk e-mails, or spam, lurid displays of pornography are now more
easily blocked by filters offered by AOL and other Internet service
providers.

Harder to block were the ubiquitous penis enlargement ads that were
classified as online medication and not as sex ads.  Porn ads were
defined as "strictly skin and sex," an AOL spokesman said.

Spam has also changed considerably and now features deceptively simple
text messages and Web addresses that link to sites, according to AOL,
the world's largest Internet service provider and a unit of Time
Warner Inc. 

Junk e-mail senders have also gotten more sophisticated and are now
generally controlled by several top "king pin spammers," the company
said.

"This year's list was tilted more toward fraudulent and dubious scams
and schemes," said AOL spokesman Nicholas Graham.  And despite the
decrease in volume, the ads were "much more malicious and harmful to
consumers."

AOL on Tuesday said junk e-mails received by its subscribers had
dropped 75 percent, largely due to better built-in filters and blocks,
based on a poll of complaints it compiled.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought Vioxx was removed from the
market after they discovered how dangerous it was, causing death
and/or heart attacks in many cases. And I have not seen nearly as
much Vioxx email as I have seen Viagra and penis enlargement ads.
PAT] 

------------------------------

From: Phil McKerracher <phil@mckerracher.org>
Subject: Re: The Secret Life of Phone Numbers
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:58:52 GMT


Alan Burkitt-Gray <alan@burkitt-gray.com> wrote in message
news:telecom23.620.3@telecom-digest.org:

> I thought Digest fans would be interested in this programme on BBC
> Radio 4 tonight (Monday 27) at 20.00 GMT (3pm ET):

> It's available when broadcast from the BBC Radio Four website in
> RealAudio on http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/radio4.shtml?fm ...

Thanks, I enjoyed that, thanks for letting us know.

By the way, I went on a very interesting "backstage" tour of the
Science Museum store called "Birth of telecommunication" -- now booked
out until at least next May, but worth applying for if they run it
again (it's a trial).  Lots of fascinating early telegraphy
stuff. http://www.ingenious.org.uk


Phil McKerracher
www.mckerracher.org

------------------------------

From: <TIA@thanksforeverything.com>
Subject: Office Phones, Omega Phone, Iwatsu, 24 button CHEAP!!!
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 15:28:15 -0500


Please check out this item on E-Bay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5741124088&ssPageName=ADME:L:DS:US:8


Thanks for looking. 

------------------------------

From: Brad Houser <bradDOThouser@intel.com>
Subject: Re: Beware Sprint Phone Rebates
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:32:46 -0800
Organization: Intel
Reply-To: Brad Houser <bradDOThouser@intel.com>


Nate <nnord@maxitd.com> wrote in message
news:telecom23.616.4@telecom-digest.org:

> After my previous Sprint contract was up, I called to see about a
> phone/plan upgrade.  The salesman sold me a new plan and a new phone
> with a big rebate.  Well, the rebate was turned down because the
> "saleperson" never changed my original plan.  Called Sprint and after
> talking to two people (including a supervisor), they wouldn't do
> anything except say "talk to the rebate people".  I explained that the
> "rebate people" aren't the ones who screwed up.  They didn't seem to
> grasp this concept.  It looks like Sprint may have sold me a very,
> very overpriced phone.  Can you say lifelong loss of a Sprint
> customer?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is a typical tactic by Sprint.
> We have had other messages in the Digest from people who said Sprint
> was not honoring their rebates very well.   PAT]

Go down to your nearest Sprint store and ask to speak to the manager
and don't leave until they fix it. If they refuse, then start raising
your voice until you have scared off every new customer. Picket the
store. Be a nuisance.

Brad H.

------------------------------

Subject: Re: www.area-code.us
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:11:34 -0800
From: Linc Madison <lincmad@suespammers.org>
Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org
Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed


In article <telecom23.622.8@telecom-digest.org>, Mike Schoenberger
<MIKE@cemedia.com> wrote:

> Mark, Linc or Patrick,

> I was unable to find another contact email so I hope that you receive
> this and can forward my email to someone who can fix a link on this
> site.

> If you go to Codes -> Services -> Rocky Mountain Telco it goes to
> http://www.rockymnttel.com/.

> This is now a porn site for whatever reason!

The area-code.us site is an alias to areacode-info.com, which is John
Cropper & Eric Morson's site. The left-hand sidebar has human-readable
e-mail addresses for them. My guess would be Eric would be the best
individual to start with. The e-mail is his first initial last name at
areacode dash info dot com.

Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *  lincmad@suespammers.org
<http://www.LincMad.com> * 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 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #623
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Dec 30 17:42:42 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBUMgfW02910;
	Thu, 30 Dec 2004 17:42:42 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 17:42:42 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412302242.iBUMgfW02910@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 #624

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 30 Dec 2004 17:43:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 624

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Family, Friends Scan Internet for Tsunami Victims (Lisa Minter))
    Court Bars Regulation of Web Phone Service (Lisa Minter)
    FCC to Auction Spectrum for Advanced Wireless (Telecom dailyLead)
    Consumer Reports Story on Cellphone Providers (LB@notmine.com)
    Can Someone PINGing Really Screw Your Network? (BertieBigBollox)
    MSISDN Format For WLL Subscribers: Standard Conformance ?? (qazmlp)
    Telecom Definitions: Meaning For 'Seizure/Seizure Signal'? (Jack)
    Bells Dig In (Tony P.)
    Great Chicago Fire Question (Kay Olson)
    Connect to Skype With Multiple Phones Around the House (jaykchan)
    Re: Such Carnage is Hard to Believe! (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Vonage no Longer Shipping Linksys PAP2 (brmorris@yahoo.com)
    Re: Future of Cellular Phone (oookhc@hotmail.com)
    Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads (Joseph)
    Re: Drill Bit Size (Gordon S. Hlavenka)
    Re: QCTimes.com -- Spam Suit Nets $1 Billion (ldn20042002@yahoo.co.uk)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Family, Friends Scan Internet for Tsunami Victims
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:15:53 EST


HONG KONG (Reuters) - Distraught relatives and friends of those
missing after the most catastrophic tsunami on record are increasingly
turning to the Internet to search for loved ones.

In Hong Kong and Singapore to Australia, Britain, the United States
and Sweden, people are scanning through lists of names of victims and
posting bulletins to look for those missing.

"Today I am still searching the hospitals," said James Wong from Hong
Kong, as he looked through names and pictures of victims posted on the
Internet by hospitals in Phuket.

Wong is in Phuket to search for his daughter Rubina Wong, who was on
nearby Phi Phi Island with her fiance when the sea swept over the tiny
island.

"But I still harbour hope. Some people have been found even after
hanging in a tree for a day," Wong told Hong Kong television reporters
on Thursday.

The Thai government has also set up Web sites listing names of victims
 to examine ( http://www.phuketitcity.com, http://www.disaster.go.th )

Of the hundreds of bulletins posted on one of these sites, a handful
had good news for some.

"Now we can find the name of Miss Anneli Laitinen from Finland, but
we're not quite sure that she is the same person you are looking
for. I'm happy to inform you that she's still alive but injured," read
a message posted on a page for people looking for loved ones in Krabi
in Thailand.

Visitors to the sites have also posted heart-wrenching messages
looking for their parents, siblings and friends.

Other Web sites collating information and news about the disaster, aid
and volunteer efforts have also sprung up, such as
http://tsunamihelp.blogspot.com.

Aid agencies, such as the Red Cross and Oxfam, have also appealed for
donations, which can be made quickly online at:
http://www.redcross.org.hk, http://www.oxfam.org.hk

"Since the appeal went out on December 27, we have had responses
online. People can also download forms from the Internet and fax it
back to us. Others have also made donations directly to our accounts
or sent checks," said a spokeswoman for Red Cross in Hong Kong.

It has collected HK $32 million (US $4.1 million) to date,
which it will use to supply food, medicine and sleeping
materials to disaster victims.

MANY, MANY MISSING

Thousands of foreigners had been holidaying southern Thailand when
they went missing after a 9.0 magnitude undersea quake off the
Indonesian island of Sumatra.

The quake triggered tsunamis that slammed into Indonesia, India,
Thailand, Sri Lanka, Malaysia and other countries as far away as
Africa, killing more than 90,000 people.

Officially, only 212 foreign tourists have been reported as killed by
their home countries, but Thailand alone has said that at least 435
foreigners had died there.

Some 1,500 Swedes, 1,000 Germans, 600 Italians, 464 Norwegians, 294
Singaporeans, 277 Hong Kong residents, 219 Danes, 200 Finns and 200
Czechs have been reported as missing by their governments.

Valerio Natale, a 14-year-old Italian student, said two missing
Italian holidaymakers -- Dario Collodi and Liliana Giordanino -- have
already been found thanks to postings on his web page
http://www.tuttosimpsons.altervista.org/index.htm.

The site is devoted almost entirely to Italian citizens who
disappeared in Thailand, Sri Lanka, the Maldives and India.

"I was paging through the newspaper and saw lots of ads from people
looking for relatives," Natale told Reuters. "I asked myself, 'Why not
make a free site that can help everybody?' So I made a free site,
which used to be dedicated to the famous American cartoon family, the
Simpsons."

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A hell of a way to end the year, isn't
it? Every time I listen to the radio news at 
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/AP.html or read the news stories,
the body count keeps going up; now 115 thousand people killed in this
disaster, and no end in sight. On NASA television today members of the
press corps were having a press conference with the two men in the 
space station, and asked them, "have the folks back home told you
about the tragedy which happened in Indonesia and Sri Lanka and otehr
parts of Asia over Christmas?"  The men said they had been notified
of it, but that their sleeping and orbiting schedule had prevented
them from any first hand knowledge of it. The sanitation workers here
in Independence came around again today for their Thursday pickup and
sweep up day and I was reminded once again of the rules now in place
through that part of the world: 'Stack the bodies by the curb, we will
take them all away as soon as we are able.' God have mercy on all of
us.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 12:42:10 -0500
Subject: Court Bars Regulation of Web Phone Service


http://www.wilmingtonstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041229/ZNYT05/412290387/1004/local

New York Times

A federal appeals court upheld a lower court ruling yesterday that
prohibits the state of Minnesota from regulating Internet-based phone
calling as if it were a traditional telecommunications service.

Full story at:

http://www.wilmingtonstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041229/ZNYT05/412290387/1004/local

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/

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 12:21:23 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: FCC to Auction Spectrum for Advanced Wireless Services


Telecom dailyLead from USTA

http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18445&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* FCC to auction spectrum for advanced wireless services
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* AT&T in talks with Sprint
* The top 10 turnaround stories of 2004, according to Light Reading
* Verizon Wireless plans more upgrades for Florida in 2005
* Net2Phone eyes U.S. expansion
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* SUPERCOMM: TIA's and USTA's Premiere Event
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Adult content goes wireless
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* California to challenge FCC's VoIP ruling
EDITOR'S NOTE
* The dailyLead will not be published Friday

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18445&l=2017006

------------------------------

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Consumer Reports Story on Cell Phone Providers 
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:09:56 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


The new Consumer Reports magazine has a large story on cell phone
providers and cell phones.  You can get better info in this group, but
the mag has lots of info.  Will be very handy for those times when a
"friend" is looking for info.  I think the mag should be on newsstands
now.


LB

------------------------------

From: BertieBigBollox@gmail.com <BertieBigBollox@gmail.com>
Subject: Can someone PINGing Really Screw Your Network
Date: 30 Dec 2004 01:32:03 -0800
rganization: http://groups.google.com


Read somewhere that if someone continually pings your network, the
server will eventually fall over.

Seems a bit hard to believe. Surely one computer pinging would make
very little impact even on a DSL connection ... Would be a bit
unfortunate if this were the case and someone got hold of your static
IP :-)

Also, what about UDP floods? Are these different? Surely firewalls etc
would stop this sort of thing from happening?

------------------------------

From: qazmlp1209@rediffmail.com (qazmlp)
Subject: MSISDN Format For WLL Subscribers: Standard Conformance ??
Date: 29 Dec 2004 17:43:31 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


My understanding is as follows: -

Normal MSISDN is of the format: CC NDC SN
MSISDN for WLL subscribers is of the format: CC LAC SN .

I could see that, E.164 specification explains about the format: CC NDC
SN

But, I could not find any standard which explains about the MSISDN
format i.e.CC LAC SN, for WLL subscribers.

Could you please help?

------------------------------

From: Jack <jack@invalid.inv>
Subject: Telecom Definitions: Meaning For 'Seizure/Seizure Signal'?
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 18:45:25 -0500
Organization: NTT/VERIO


What does Seizure mean in telecom?  What is Seizure Signal?

TIA!

Jack

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Bells Dig In
Organization: ATCC
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 20:51:40 -0500


It seems the ILEC's are digging in to make the broadband market their
own.

This is disgusting to me. I call for the regulatory pendulum to swing
back. Clamp down now or else we'll all pay.

http://www.rednova.com/news/display/?id=114841

------------------------------

Subject: Great Chicago Fire Question
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:39:25 -0600
From: Kay Olson <K.Olson@capstonepress.com>


Pat Townsend,

I read your article, Telecom Disaster Recovery in 1871, on the web. I
am writing a children's book on the Great Chicago Fire and I have a
question. Do you know any details of the fire alarm system in place in
Chicago in 1871? I know that the wrong alarm box was pulled, which
sent fire fighters in the wrong direction. (I believe Mathias Schaffer
signaled his assistant to strike Box 342, which was a mistake. The
correct box was Box 319.  Then later, the assistant, William J. Brown,
took it upon himself to turn in a second alarm. Unfortunately, he
struck Box 342 for a second time.

My question is, what was the arrangement of these boxes -- how far
apart were they? I would like to have a clearer idea of how easy (or
difficult) it might have been to get the boxes confused. Any help you
could provide in finding the answer to this question would be most
appreciated.

Thanks for any reply you care to send.

Kay M. Olson
Editorial Director
Capstone Press

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The alarm boxes were a block or two
apart, but I know nothing about their numbering arrangments, etc. I
do know that they had hopes the fire could be confined to the west
side of Chicago, but a strong wind caused some burning embers to do
what was considered unthinkable at the time: Some chunks of burning
wood flew through the air *across the river* and landed in the 
middle of the Gas Works, on a gasometer, which was a huge, old-
fashioned control mechanism which pumped gas through the pipelines
of the city. The 'relatively harmless' (although nasty) fire which
had begun at 8:30 PM that Sunday night quickly expanded with that
horrendous explosion at the People's gas works on West 12th Street
about 11:45 PM same night. By midnight, or as soon as all the gas in
the pipelines had drained out, the gas lamps all over the city had
gone dark. 

Chicago Mayor William Mason and the members of the Common Council 
(what today is known as the Chicago City Council) at that point
decided it was time to declare a state of emergency and martial law.
Mayor Mason and the councilmen rode their horses over to the telegraph
office (which was the basis of my original article) and sent off
'wires' to the president advising him, and also to General Sheridan
asking him to please bring his troops ASAP, to maintain order and
prevent looting, etc. 

The firemen kept right on fighting the fire in the various locations
as best they could until early Monday morning when even worse
circumstances occurred: The fire once again jumped over the river
(that is, flying embers and burning wood flying through the air) and
landed -- in the most unfortunate of places -- on the water works
building, setting it on fire, and before long, it was out of order as
well. Water pumping and pressure in the pipes in those days was rather
sophisticated for their time; water from the river was diverted
through a stream nearby, through a waterwheel, which in turn operated
the hydrolic mechanism which pumped water through the pipes to
residences, to the firemen's hydrants and similar. Most of the water
works did not burn down, but the pumping mechanism was totally shot
as a result, and the trickle of water still running made the fire
fighting effort in vain (and the pumps had been working overtime for
several hours anyway at that point due to the fire.) What remains of
the old water works still stands today as a monument in Chicago. 

The fire continued to burn all day Monday and until early Tuesday
when a very heavy rain storm burned out what was still burning at
Fullerton Avenue on the north side. About 30 years after the fire,
in 1901, the Chicago Historical Society commissioned a book of
rememberances, saying as a preface, 'as more and more old people
die off, soon there will be no one left at all who was present at
the fire. This book will serve to tell everyone about that event.'
The same year, the Chicago Tribune, in its Sunday magazine also 
printed an interview with an employee of Western Union who had been
on duty in the telegraph office that Sunday night. 

When I was employed by the Chicago Public Library in the visually
handicapped radio reading service, I used that book 'Remberances of
the Great Fire' as a 13 week series in the programs I produced. 
Unfortunatly I no longer have my copy of the book and do not recall
any mention (of the several rememberances used) of how the alarm
system worked. Maybe some other reader here will know, or you might
be able to read it at the Historical Society Museum/Reading Room.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: jaykchan@hotmail.com
Subject: Connect to Skype with Multiple Phones Around the House?
Date: 30 Dec 2004 12:28:48 -0800


I am interested to use Skype to save money on long distance calls that
I made regularly to far east countries (and I really don't like the
trouble of using calling cards that keep reducing the minutes for no
reason). I intend to get a VoIP USB base unit from pcphoneline to
control Skype in the PC using USB; it has a phone jack that I can plug
my cordless phone into it. So far this seems like this will work. But
my PC will be in the basement; this means the VoIP USB phone connection
device will also be in the basement right next to the PC. I prefer to
make phone call in the living room and in the bedroom, not down there
in the basement. This means somehow I need to make the VoIP service
available in multiple locations in my house.

Can I connect multiple phone line to the VoIP USB base unit mentioned
above? Then I can run cables to various locations in my house. Running
cable is no big deal because I have already run cat-6 cables around the
house for networking. I can easliy change the cat-6 jack with a
phone-jack. What I am wondering is whether there will be any conflict
in the base unit if I plug a lot of phone lines into it. How to connect
many phone lines into it anyway? I mean ... physically?

How is the sound quality of using a USB phone with Skype (or with other
VoIP service provider)? My co-worker uses a headset that connects to
the sound card of the PC to talk to developer in Russia, and he has
good result. Does using USB phone give us an even better sound quality?

I have thought of using Vonage and a VoIP phone that connects to a LAN
jack. But I am forced to maintain a local phone service with Verizon
(in order to use their low cost DSL service), and I don't want to pay
$15 basic monthly rate for Vonage. This doesn't make economy sense to
keep both Verizon local service and Vonage basic package at the same
time. Because I am forced to keep Verizon local service, I would prefer
to get VoIP through Skype that is pay-as-you-go.
Thanks in advance for any input.

Jay Chan

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Such Carnage is Hard to Believe!
Date: 30 Dec 2004 11:53:38 -0800


TELECOM Digest Editor wrote:

> That disturbance of the earth over around s.e. Asia on Sunday has
> certainly taken its toll.

If such waves hit either the east or west coast of the U.S., how far
inland would the destruction be?  One mile?  Ten miles?  How much
shoreline (ie length) would be affected?

For example, say the wave were to hit Coney Island in Brooklyn NY,
how much of Brooklyn would've been destroyed?

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was an interesting article in
Yahoo News earlier today discussing this very topic. It appears there
is an area fifty or a hundred miles in the Pacific Ocean roughly off
the coast of San Jose/San Francisco which is very earthquake prone
according to siesmologists. I guess it is just a matter of time. You
may have also seen in the news that hungry crockodiles got washed 
ashore in the Indonesia area this week, and although the little guys
do not go out of their way to attack/eat humans, they certainly will
do so when they get aggravated/agitated enough to do so.   PAT] 

------------------------------

From: brmorris@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Vonage no Longer Shipping Linksys PAP2
Date: 29 Dec 2004 17:30:23 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I don't know if that is true, but I just bought a PAP2 from Amazon and
there was a loud humm/buzz, so I returned it and the next one had the
humm/buzz, too.  It is fairly loud, too!

------------------------------

From: oookhc@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Future of Cellular Phone
Date: 29 Dec 2004 19:53:26 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


There are many things that can be imagined. For example, a cellular
phone could project a "virtual keyboard" on a flat plane so that
people do not have to use the "real keyboard" to type anything; or the
cellular phone is with voice recognization function so that people can
just use their mouth to enable something; or a cellular phone could
work as a language translator so that people on the other hand could
speak in different languages ...

Well, they are just dreams in the near future. :) But it just depends
on your imagination to realize them.  The following links just provide
some basic principles from fundamental things:

http://www.ScienceOxygen.com/gadget1.html
http://www.ScienceOxygen.com/signal.html
http://www.ScienceOxygen.com/electrical.html

      Keep dreaming...

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: My High Hopes About Google Ads
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 20:48:11 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 28 Dec 2004 05:41:56 -0000, Telecom Digest Editor writes:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The givers-away of free, remote
> registered domains in the '.ms', '.tc' and '.tf' domains are all
> using precisely the same templates and software, and all offer the
> same webmaster's tool-kits, if, as you suggest, they are different
> people/organizations. But instead of paying $10 for a domain you
> could pay $5 for (any unlimited number of) domain names in the
> 'dhs.org' and 'n3.net' group 

[snip]

With your cheap registration you're going to get what you paid for it.
Considering that godaddy.com ( http://godaddy.com ) normally has major
common domains such as .com, .org, .net, .name, .biz and others at
normal prices of around $7 and often have sales on some domains as
cheap as $1 or $3.  Who knows what .tc will do in another year?!

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Makes me wonder why that idiot over
in Switzerland who deliberatly cybersquatted on my internet history
domain thought he was going to accomplish other than bad will. FYI,
http://internet-history.org (one of my domains) is now being run by
the Penis Enlargement Company, and I guess he wants several hundred
dollars to redeem it. Or, as Mikka, my erstwhile correspondent from 
the garynuman mail server in Alberta put it, I should quit my 
bellyaching, and face up to how overall rotten to the core the net
has gotten in the past few years. The main thing with .tc and .tf and
 .ms is they are outside the grasp of ICANN.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 22:56:17 -0600
From: Gordon S. Hlavenka <nospam@crashelex.com>
Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com
Organization: Crash Electronics
Subject: Re: Drill Bit Size


I wrote:

>> I have a 5/8" spade bit...

Tony P. replied:

> 5/8" seems huge. You can get CAT-5 through a quarter inch hole ...

Mea culpa -- I meant to say 5/16".  Kinda makes a difference, doesn't 
it? :-)


Gordon S. Hlavenka           http://www.crashelectronics.com
        Tragically, as many as 9625 out of every 10,000
                individuals may be neurotypical

------------------------------

From: ldn20042002@yahoo.co.uk
Subject: Re: QCTimes.com -- Spam Suit Nets $1 Billion
Date: 30 Dec 2004 04:48:08 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


This is very interesting. Thank you.

ldn20042002@yahoo.co.uk


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, but I have to wonder how much of
that billion dollars he will be able to collect. Probably little or
none of it.   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.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #624
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Dec 31 01:22:10 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBV6M9F06920;
	Fri, 31 Dec 2004 01:22:10 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 01:22:10 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412310622.iBV6M9F06920@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 #625

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 31 Dec 2004 01:22:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 625

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Red Cross Tsunami Victims' Web Site Overwhelmed (Lisa Minter)
    Silly Cell Phone "Ring Amplifier" (Thomas A. Horsley)
    Re: Can Someone PINGing Really Screw Your Network (Ed Clarke)
    Re: Can Someone PINGing Really Screw Your Network (Gene Berkowitz)
    VOIP (Don Nelsch)
    Re: Consumer Reports Story on Cell Phone Providers  (Joseph)
    Re: Telecom Definitions: Meaning For 'Seizure'? (Allen McIntosh)
    Re: Such Carnage is Hard to Believe! (John Levine)
    Phone Magazine From 1926 (Digest Reprint from Jim Haynes)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Red Cross Tsunami Victims' Web Site Overwhelmed
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:46:06 EST


GENEVA (Reuters) - A Red Cross Web Site to aid anxious relatives
locate survivors of the Indian Ocean tsunami disaster partially
crashed on Thursday after being overwhelmed by some 650,000 hits in
its first 24 hours, a spokesman said.

The Swiss-based International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRCS) was
installing a bigger server and hoped to have the site, which had
become almost impossible to access, up and running again on Friday,
Florian Westphal told Reuters.

"We have had a tremendous response ... the system is partially down,"
he said.

As a result of the technical problems, it was not possible to tell
just how many people had been able to find their loved ones through
the site -- www.familylinks.icrc.org system.

But a few people had called to have names removed, he added.

The site has special sections for the four worst-affected countries --
Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Thailand and India -- where the overwhelming
majority of the more than 125,000 deaths occurred.

Some 5,000 foreign tourists, mostly Europeans, are unaccounted for
after an earthquake off Indonesia sent a wall of water crashing into
coasts and devastated beach resorts around the Indian Ocean.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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, Reuters News Service.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

Subject: Silly Cell Phone "Ring Amplifier"
From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley)
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 22:37:43 GMT


No one had a pointer to any cell phone ring amplifiers when I was
looking for one a while back, so having time to kill over Christmas, I
made my own. Find the tale of the insanity at:

   http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley/phonetale/phonetail.html

>>==>> The *Best* political site <URL:http://www.vote-smart.org/> >>==+
      email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL      |
<URL:http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley> Free Software and Politics <<==+

------------------------------

From: Ed Clarke <clarke@cilia.org>
Subject: Re: Can Someone PINGing Really Screw Your Network
Date: 30 Dec 2004 23:15:50 GMT
Organization: Ciliophora Associates, Inc.
Reply-To: clarke@cilia.org


In article <telecom23.624.5@telecom-digest.org>, BertieBigBollox @
gmail.com wrote:

> Seems a bit hard to believe. Surely one computer pinging would make
> very little impact even on a DSL connection ... Would be a bit
> unfortunate if this were the case and someone got hold of your static
> IP :-)

Depends upon the relative speeds of the connections.  A fast ping from
an OC3 will hurt you a lot.

> Also, what about UDP floods? Are these different? Surely firewalls
> etc would stop this sort of thing from happening?

Not at all.  The traffic's on the line, whether or not it gets into a
computer is beside the point.  And in any case, you usually run into
DDOS (distributed denial of service) rather than DOS right now.

"De inimico non loquaris sed cogites." 

------------------------------

From: Gene S. Berkowitz <first.last@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Can someone PINGing Really Screw Your Network
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:31:31 -0500


In article <telecom23.624.5@telecom-digest.org>,
BertieBigBollox@gmail.com says:

> Read somewhere that if someone continually pings your network, the
> server will eventually fall over.

> Seems a bit hard to believe. Surely one computer pinging would make
> very little impact even on a DSL connection ... Would be a bit
> unfortunate if this were the case and someone got hold of your static
> IP :-)

> Also, what about UDP floods? Are these different? Surely firewalls etc
> would stop this sort of thing from happening?

Ping can be set to send up to 65,500 bytes per packet. Usually the
"ping of death" is sent from many sources at once.  Eventually the
server spends so much time replying to the pings, it can't get any
real work done.

A firewall will reject what it's told to reject.  That doesn't stop
the packets from arriving over your connection, consuming your
bandwidth.

--Gene

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:14:19 -0500
From: Don Nelsch <dnelsch@gmail.com>
Reply-To: Don Nelsch <dnelsch@gmail.com>
Subject: VOIP


Pat,

I have seen much discussion of Vonage and Skype, but very little of
Michael Robertson's (LINSPIRE) SiPphone.  Off hand, that looks to be a
decent service at very moderate cost.  What am I missing?

Don

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Off hand, I do not think anyone has 
ever written here or talked about the service. Maybe Mr. Robertson
does not have very good press for some reason. Can you tell us more
about the Linspire SiPphone service? If it is good, and inexpensive,
I might switch to it myself.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Consumer Reports Story on Cell Phone Providers 
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 16:44:03 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:09:56 -0500, LB@notmine.com wrote:

> The new Consumer Reports magazine has a large story on cell phone
> providers and cell phones.  You can get better info in this group, but
> the mag has lots of info.  Will be very handy for those times when a
> "friend" is looking for info.  I think the mag should be on newsstands
> now.

Take what Consumer Reports magazine has to say about cell phones with
a grain of salt.  In past "cellular" issues they poo-pooh'd some
carriers basically T-Mobile (then VoiceStream) because they didn't
have fallback to older first generation analog technology.  Guess
what?!  Lots of phones now being offered by *all* the carriers and
don't have analog.  They out and out refused to even look at
VoiceStream/T-Mobile because they are luddites and couldn't see what
was coming down the pike.  If you want good recommendations or
information about cellular service look at what they have to say, but
take it with a grain of salt.  They do much better testing washing
machines, riding lawn mowers or crash worthiness of automobiles.

------------------------------

From: Allen McIntosh <nospam@mouse-potato.com>
Reply-To: nospam@mouse-potato.com
Subject: Re: Telecom Definitions: Meaning For 'Seizure/Seizure Signal'?
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 20:52:52 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


Jack wrote:

> What does Seizure mean in telecom?  What is Seizure Signal?

You can find all this and more at a telecom glossary site.  Search for
"telecom glossary".  (You may have more luck with "seizing".)

He might also try searching the telecom glossaries we have on line
at our web site  http://telecom-digest.org .   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: 31 Dec 2004 01:59:38 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Such Carnage is Hard to Believe!
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> If such waves hit either the east or west coast of the U.S., how far
> inland would the destruction be?  One mile?  Ten miles?  How much
> shoreline (ie length) would be affected?

> For example, say the wave were to hit Coney Island in Brooklyn NY,
> how much of Brooklyn would've been destroyed?

Here on the east coast we have hurricanes and other storms, and a
storm surge is not altogether unlike a tsunami.  Most of the east
coast, from Cape Cod all the way to Miami, has barrier beaches in
front of shallow bays so a storm surge or tsunami would whack the
barrier beach pretty badly, but the energy would dissipate before
reaching the mainland.  Most of the construction close to the water is
now storm resistant, typically on pilings with breakaway construction
at ground level, and I'd think that design would resist a tsunami
pretty well.  Coney Island is unusual in that it's not a barrier beach
(that's why it is where it is) but I believe they do have seawalls
under the boardwalk, and it faces south while most waves arrive from
the east.

On the west coast, it depends on the topography which varies a lot.
In Santa Monica, for example, there is a high bluff which should limit
tsunami damage to the small amount of stuff below the bluff, while a
couple of miles south in Venice and Marina del Rey it's flat, and a
big wave would whack them.  Press reports remind us that tsunamis have
in living memory hit northern California and killed people, so they
should pay attention.

R's,

John

------------------------------

From: Telecom Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Phone Magazine From 1926
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:00:00 EST


Eleven years go in this Digest we were given a copy of an old 1926
internal telco magazine published by Southwestern Bell Telephone
Company. As we now approach a new year, I thought this reprint from
our archives might make very interesting reading. It was sent to us by
Jim Haynes.

PAT

   Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1993 14:19:29 -0500
   From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
   To: ptownson@gaak.LCS.MIT.EDU
   Subject: telephone.magazine.from.1926

   From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes)
   Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
   Subject: Telephony in 1926, Part 1 of ???
   Date: 18 Aug 1993 06:19:46 GMT
   Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
   Lines: 200

I was recently given a copy of the Southwestern Bell employee magazine
"Southwestern Telephone News", issue of October 1926, which was Volume
13, No. 10 and hence must have started publication about 1913.  This
article will be a summary of the contents; perhaps I'll type in or
review particular articles later.

The front cover shows a cable splicer hanging from a strand as he
splices an underground cable to an aerial cable in Dallas.

Repeated several times througout the issue is, "New Long Distance
rates and practices went into effect on October 1st.  Pamphlets giving
full information on these changes are available for all employees.
Study the rates carefully so that you can answer the questions of
subscribers."  I remember this attitude, that all employees should be
prepared to represent the company to the public, was later embodied in
a slogan, "To the public _you_ are the telephone company," that was
constantly presented to employees.

On page 2 is a photograph of sheep with their heads in the grass, and
an amusig caption: "Sheep (Eating) In July, our explanation that the
folks in the frontspiece were stacking wheat brought a protest from
Kansas that they were not stacking but were shocking wheat.  This time
we take no chances.  Grazing, as we remember, is the right term, but
we are not sheepherders. (Texas panhandle, please note.)"

The first article is a bio of Charles P. Cooper, former president of
Ohio Bell who was just elected vice-president of AT&T.

Next there are five pages with pictures reporting on a Telephone
Pioneers meeting in New York City.  Among other activities they
visited AT&T headquarters, Bell Labs, and New York Telephone
headquarters and were greeted by executives of those companies.  The
highlight was an address by Thomas A. Watson, who told of his
experiences as a colleague of Alexander Graham Bell.  This was
followed by a demonstration of talking movies, including one depicting
the invention of the telephone and narrated by Watson.

Then there is an article "Efficient and Courteous" by an anonymous
"counterman".  He tells of receiving a letter of commendation from a
customer.  Even though he had had to turn down the customer's request
for service he had fully explained why there was a shortage of
facilities in the customer's area, and the problems of the company in
extending its lines.

Then the medical director of AT&T writes to those who have just
returned from vacations, urging them to use their spare time during
the week as a "vacation all year."  He suggests they get out of doors,
do the essential chores, of course, but do something recreational.
"...forget as far as possible that you ever worked for the
Telephone Company."

The telephone exhibit at the Philadelphia Sesquicentennial Exposition
is described, with a reminder that the telephone was first exhibited
at the Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia 50 years earlier.
The 1926 exhibit includes a showing of motion pictures, two of which
are talking.  One of these features Thomas A. Watson [and is presumably
the same film that was shown to the Pioneers]; and the other "contrasts
the noisy operating room and crude apparatus of the eighties, when
boys were operators, with the central office of the present."

I guess in those days AT&T stock was marketed through telephone offices,
as there is an article about how an AT&T rights offering was handled.
There are accounts of company employees persuading the public to buy
stock, and also of people who threw away the rights documents, not
realizing they had monetary value.

There's a sort item about telephone operators assisting when there
was an explosion at a high school, and another showing the first
installation of a P.A. system in a school, with switching so that
music or voice can be had in any combination of rooms.

Then there is the second part of an article reprinted from _Telephony_
by an operator, Manta J. Elder, about her experiences.  There were
annual floods when the Marais-des-Cygnes overran its banks near
Ottawa, Kansas.  Many operators lived across the river from the
telephone office and had to cross the river in canoes and stay at the
office so they would be available.  Also severe winters when the
streets were impassable to vehicles and the company sent horses to the
residence of each operator to bring them to work.  Sleet storms in
February took lines down, so things were very quiet at the switchboard
until service was restored; and then everybody wanted to use the
telephone.  She tells of working the last day at an old switchboard
before cutover to a new one in a new office.  "The next day i went by
the old office, and my feet naturally led me up the old stairway.  If
I had known that I should see the salvaging force at their work, I
would never had have the courage to enter the old room.  The board was
already sadly wrecked.  It seemed to me that I was looking upon
something almost human, which was being made to suffer after years of
patient and loving service to a public which now gives it no thought.

     "As I walked on toward my home, I fell to thinking of the many
     and varied messages that had been carried through that old
     public servant.  The first news of special interest to all people
     handled through its channels was the news of Admiral Dewey's
     victory at Manila Bay, which occurred about three weeks after
     the installation of the board.

     "Service began on this old switchboard June 13, 1898, and
     except for one hour during President McKinley's funeral, until
     December, 1915, it was a living part of the community it so
     faithfully served."

She goes on to tell of the World War, and of the influenza epidemic.
Says that in earlier times the telephone operators often complained
that they were not appreciated by the public, but at the time of
writing most people are truly appreciative of their services.  A
little of the history of the company, which was originally the Kansas
City Telephone company, called the "Home" Company; at the time of
abandonment of the old switchboard the "Home" and "Bell" companies
were consolidated under the name of "The Kansas Telephone Company", in
the spring of 1915.  On January 1, 1926, the company was transferred
to Southwestern Bell.

Then there are three pages of managerial personnel changes, with some
portraits.  Then an article about formation of the Charles S.  Gleed
chapter of Telephone Pioneers in Kansas City, and an article about the
switchboard in St. Louis being extremely busy in the aftermath of the
St. Louis Cardinals winning the National League pennant.

A page of short items: Clemenceau quoted on the need for technical
experts to be aware of matters outside the scope of their expertise; a
comment on the article by "a counterman"; an article about the recent
AT&T stock issue; and a repeat of the item about new long distance
rates and practices.

Four pages with pictures about Bell Telephone Laboratores, and some
unrelated pictures of employees enjoying their summer vacations.

Two pages about Texas beginning a new billing method: instead of
billing all customers on the same day of the month they will spread
the billing dates throughout the month to smooth out the workload.

Two pages about handling mail in the headquarters mail room, the need
for good addresses, and the problem of customers sending cash in the
mail when paying their bills; an average of $15 a day is found in the
mail room when the supervisor has to open inadequately addressed mail.

Then a rather technical article, with schematic diagram, of a circuit
to simplify cutting phantom transpositions. (When a phantom circuit is
added to two existing circuits it is necessary to alter the way the
wires are transposed on the poles.  This must be done without
interrupting service on the exiting circuits any longer than
necessary.)

Two pages of service records, including portraits of seven men who
have worked a total of 185 years.

One page about the "first annual" Watermelon Festival in Hope, AR.

An article about keeping score on collection work; teams get points
for minimizing the need to communicate with subscribers to get them to
pay their bills.

Photographs of the new Norman, OK office, and an open house for
visitors.  Suggestions for Halloween costumes (illustrations) and two
pages of illustrations of ladies' fashion suggestions.  A page of
cartoons by "Stack", with a Halloween theme.

Three pages telling where every construction crew is working and what
jobs they are working on.  Some photos, including a cable splicer and
his helper with what appears to be a push cart containing their tools
and supplies.  A page with a map of the company's territory, showing
the locations of all lost-time accidents for the year.  Four pages of
social news: parties, retirements, contests won, other activities.
"Anyone at St.  Louis Toll who wants a thrill, should let Miss Hogan
take them riding in her Ford.  She misses other cars by a fender."

A page "What I Did Today" containing stories by operators of how they
assisted the public.  A page of poetry written by telephone people.

Inside back cover, a list of the principal management officers of the
company and their titles.  Back cover, an AT&T advertisement.  This
one shows operators being delivered to their office in a truck in a
howling blizzard; and the text tells how people take the telephone for
granted, how different life would be without it, and how 300,000
telephone people work to maintain dependable service.  


haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet

"Ya can talk all ya wanna, but it's dif'rent than it was!"
"No it aint!  But ya gotta know the territory!"
        Meredith Willson: "The Music Man"

------------------------------

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #625
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Dec 31 18:45:35 2004
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBVNjZQ15432;
	Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:45:35 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:45:35 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200412312345.iBVNjZQ15432@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 #626

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:45:00 EST    Volume 23 : Issue 626

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    VoicePulse Named Best of the Year by PC Magazine (Jack Decker)
    Calif. PUC Files Appeal To FCC's Vonage Decision -- Maybe (Jack Decker)
    Novel Idea Coming Soon to Cell Phones (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Inauguration Requires Boost In Bandwidth (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Wall-Mounted Cordless Phone (ed)
    VoIP Problem: No Incoming Calls! (Rick Merrill)
    Vonage Discussion Group Being Started (Vonage)
    Re: Consumer Reports Story on Cell Phone Providers (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: Consumer Reports Story on Cell Phone Providers (LB@notmine.com)
    Re: Consumer Reports Story on Cell Phone Providers (Tim@Backhome.org)
    Re: Such Carnage is Hard to Believe! (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: Silly Cell Phone "Ring Amplifier" (Clark W. Griswold, Jr.)
    Re: Drill Bit Size (Tony P.)
    Re: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart (Jeff C)
    Re: Connect to Skype with Multiple Phones Around the House (jaykchan)
    Re: Connect to Skype with Multiple Phones Around the House (Brad Houser)
    Help Hooking up Payphone (Lachlan Mullen)
    Re: Can Someone PINGING Really Screw Your Network? (John McHarry) 
    That's It, Folks!  (TELECOM Digest Editor)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@deleted on request>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:12:45 -0500
Subject: VoicePulse Named Best of the Year by PC Magazine


http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2004/Dec/1104225.htm

JAMESBURG, N.J., Dec. 31 /PRNewswire/ -- VoicePulse Inc. announced it
has been named Best of the Year by PC Magazine, honoring them as the
top residential and small office VoIP provider of 2004. PC Magazine
presented the award to VoicePulse after running comprehensive tests on
the service and the services of other major VoIP providers in today's
market.

VoicePulse's ease of installation, sound quality and free features
pushed the service provider to the top against competing services
including Vonage and AT&T's CallVantage. According to Craig Ellison,
PC Magazine's New Product Test Director, "VoicePulse does try to
differentiate itself from the other players in the field, specifically
with the amount of features offered in its plans."

"PC Magazine's review and testing process is the most rigorous I've
seen so far," says Ravi Sakaria, President and CEO of VoicePulse, "so
we are very pleased to receive this award from them. This was a huge
year for the VoIP industry and to be named the best provider is quite
an honor. The upcoming year promises to be even more exciting as we
continue to enhance our service and offer the best customer
experience."

VoicePulse also earned the PC World Best Buy award this past May. In
September, they were the highest rated VoIP provider in PC Magazine's
roundup that compared them to Vonage's DigitalVoice and AT&T's
CallVantage. DesignTechnica, a high-tech gadget review site awarded
VoicePulse the Editor's Choice award in December.

ABOUT PC MAGAZINE

PC Magazine (http://www.pcmag.com/), the most important technology
publication in the world, delivers authoritative, labs-based
comparative reviews of computing and Internet products to more than
6.6 million highly engaged technology buyers. PC Magazine defines
technology for e-business and is the only magazine with in-depth
reviews and accurate, repeatable testing from PC Magazine Labs placed
in the unique context of today's business technology landscape.

ABOUT VOICEPULSE

VoicePulse is a New Jersey based communications company that uses its
VoIP network to deliver advanced features and high-quality phone
service to residential and small-business consumers. The company leads
the industry in delivering innovative features and excellent customer
service.

For more information about VoicePulse, please contact:

Rima Vaghasiya,
732-339-5100
rima @ voicepulse.com
Web site: http://www.voicepulse.com/

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 Decker <jack-yahoogroups@deleted on request>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:54:00 -0500
Subject: Calif. PUC Files Appeal To FCC's Vonage Decision -- Maybe


http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/dailyarchives.jhtml?articleId=56900043

By Paul Kapustka

Setting itself up for a potential regulatory flip-flop, the California
Public Utilities Commission has filed a petition for review with the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit challenging the FCC's
recent decision to exempt Voice over IP provider Vonage Holdings from
state-by-state regulations -- a petition that the CPUC itself may seek
to overturn when new commissioners come on board Jan. 11.

The CPUC's petition, filed with the court on Dec. 22, asks that the
FCC's Vonage ruling be found "in excess of the Commission's statuatory
jurisdiction, authority, or limitations and is arbitrary, capricious,
an abuse of discretion and otherwise contrary to law." According to
Ellen LeVine, a counsel for the CPUC, interested parties have a 30-day
window to present oral arguments to the court before any action is
taken.

During that time, the CPUC itself may move to strike its own petition
 -- a seemingly schizophrenic action that actually makes sense given
the fact that the CPUC's recently acrimonious commissioner roster is
due for imminent overhaul, with two new appointees for 2005. The
outgoing commissioners, Democrats Carl Wood and Loretta Lynch, are
being replaced by Republican Steve Poizner and Democrat Dian
Grueneich, who were recently appointed to the posts by Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger.

While the CPUC's LeVine would not reveal details of the commissioners'
vote on the FCC/Vonage petition, sources close to the matter said the
commissioners were sharply divided on the issue. The CPUC could, in
fact, change its mind entirely on the subject when the new slate of
commissioners holds its first formal business meeting on Jan. 13 in
San Francisco.

Full story at:

http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/dailyarchives.jhtml?articleId=56900043

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/

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:37:53 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Novel Idea Coming Soon to Cell Phones


http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/reviews/chi-0412230033dec23,1,7058312.story?coll=3Dchi-technologyreviews-hed
http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/reviews/chi-0412230033dec23,1,5130275,print.story?coll=3Dchi-technologyreviews-hed

Novel idea coming soon to cell phones

Advertisement
By Doreen Carvajal
New York Times News Service

PARIS -- One day before too long, when your mobile telephone sounds,
it could be a novel calling to recount how the headstrong heroine
dumped the handsome heartbreaker. Or it might be a guidebook
surfacing at a critical moment in a crowded bar to provide you with
pickup lines in Spanish, French or German.

The increasing power of cell phones is fast shaping innovative forms
of compact culture: micro-lit, phone soap operas and made-for-mobile
dramas that can be absorbed in less time than it takes to flick
through a book introduction.

Today very few people are using so-called third-generation mobile
services, or smart phones, which allow users to browse the Internet
and watch videos.  But most cell phones sold these days have color
screens and the ability to receive picture messages. So media
companies are reinventing quaint old formulas with the aim of reaching
youthful customers.

"Are people going to read  `War and Peace' on their telephones?" asked
David  Harper, whose  company,  Wireless Ink,  in  Cold Spring,  N.Y.,
offers Web users cell phone-size  literature on such weighty themes as
the  zombie apocalypse.   "The answer  is probably  no. Right  now the
content on mobile devices is almost like early television."

Photo story

One pioneer is Media Republic, an Amsterdam company that is
successfully reaching young women with the mobile equivalent of the
French "roman photo," a sentimental genre of romantic still photos and
text that dates to the postwar period.

Dutch users register their mobile phones to follow the adventures of
the hormone-driven characters of "Jong Zuid," or "Young South," which
is now in production for its fourth season. Customers receive two
episodes daily, each with six photographs of well-known Dutch actors
and text describing the travails of glamorous young people seeking
their fortune in the big city.

A weekly subscription costs about $1.50, but most of the revenue comes
from an assortment of corporate sponsors who pay for product
placements, Web advertising and the exclusive rights to sponsor "Jong
Zuid" contests and promotions.

Media Republic and a partner are to produce a similar English-language
version, which will start appearing in Australia this month.

Called "My Way," it is calculated to appeal to young women, as did the
Dutch phone soap, which attracted 78,000 subscribers, 68 percent of
them women, with an average age of about 18.

Media Republic is planning to bring out other versions of the soap
opera early next year in Germany and in France, where its partner, NX
Publishing, is in the final stages of negotiation with major French
television channels, magazines and mobile telephone operators.

"Everybody is eventually moving to video on mobile, and this `roman
photo' concept is a bridge for those people who are not able to use
videos yet because they need a sophisticated telephone," said
Jean-Michel Blottiere, NX's chief executive.

Almost two-thirds of the 62 million cell phones shipped in Europe in
the last quarter were camera phones with color screens, according to
Canalys, a number to pick up substantially next quarter.

That hasn't stopped a number of companies from trying to exploit the
potential market. During the Asian Film Festival this month in
Singapore, MediaCorp, a local company, announced it was spending a
half-million dollars to produce 45 two-minute episodes of a
Chinese-language mobile video drama.

The giant British mobile-phone company Vodafone has struck a
partnership with 20th Century Fox to create a made-for-cell phone
video series, based on the television show "24," which will start
appearing next month in the first of 13 countries. (It will eventually
appear in the United States through Vodafone's partner Verizon
Wireless.) A British phone manufacturer, I-Mate, also has produced
"Cjaq," a 10-part thriller with video about five young people trapped
in a futuristic nightclub to which they were drawn by a hoax
text-message invitation.

Evolved into film

In Japan, major publishers such as Shinchosha and Kadoadwa Shoten have
created Web sites to offer telephone reading material. Japan is also
home to probably the most successful telephone venture. Earlier this
year a mobile novel jumped from phone screens to the silver screen,
evolving into a feature film, "Deep Love."

In the book industry in the United States, the initial reaction to
mobile-lit is: "Are you kidding?" as one veteran put it.

Still, some major New York publishing houses are pondering the
future. "We are paying attention, but we haven't entered the market
yet," said Kate Tentler, vice president and publisher for Simon &
Schuster Online.

In Europe, even some old-guard publishers have jumped into the mobile
format. The Munich-based Langenscheidt Publishing Group is a
traditional, family-run company that would seem an unlikely player in
this market. It has been publishing dictionaries, travel guides and
map books since 1856 and is run by the fourth generation of the
Langenscheidt family.

This month Langenscheidt started offering a phone-size flirting dictionary
that is its way of promoting international understanding. For about $5, the
service offers 600 or so phrases in the chosen language, and practical
advice including phonetic pronunciations of polite brushoffs.

The benefit, said Ina Kaese, who manages Langenscheidt's mobile
services, is that if you are a traveler in a foreign city in a busy
bar, your telephone can be your instant guide to romance. It is the
mobile equivalent of the 17th Century Cyrano de Bergerac, who famously
supplied lines to the lovelorn. But certainly not ones such as this:
"Will anybody be jealous if I invite you to a cocktail?"

Copyright 2004, Chicago Tribune

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 Chicago Tribune Company..

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:41:08 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Inauguration Requires Boost In Bandwidth


Take a look down near the bottom on Cingular's giving special access codes
for big-wigs.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=3Dstory&cid=3D1804&u=3D/washpost/20041229/tc
_washpost/a32469_2004dec28&printer=3D1=20


By Yuki Noguchi, Washington Post Staff Writer

Preparing wireless networks for an event like next month's
presidential inauguration has become as critical as erecting the
barricades and ordering the party platters.

Several hundred thousand VIPs, protesters, police officers and
onlookers are expected to make cellular calls on Jan. 20 from along
the parade route, convention halls and hotel lobbies in and around the
District. They'll also be sending pictures, messages and e-mail -- all
of which create a heavy volume of wireless traffic that eats up
network capacity.

To make sure everyone gets a share of the wireless signal, cell phone
companies -- like seasoned caterers -- must estimate attendance and
make sure there's enough to go around. When necessary, they're
ordering backup.

For Greg Meacham of Nextel Communications Inc., preparations for such
events begin at least six months beforehand, when the U.S. Secret
Service calls to tell him about a pending "national security special
event." Over the past year in various cities, those included the two
major national political conventions and the Group of Eight summit in
June.

"First, we evaluate the area for network coverage" and bolster the
network in high-traffic zones, said Meacham, vice president of federal
programs and homeland security for the Reston company.

For the inaugural events, Nextel will install temporary or permanent
equipment to boost coverage in such buildings as the MCI Center, Union
Station, the Convention Center and a number of big hotels to make sure
that subscribers will be able to complete calls or send their wireless
e-mails, he said. In case it needs emergency backup, Nextel also will
have three trucks with satellite-based temporary cell towers mounted
on them on standby in Dulles, he said.

Washington often hosts events that draw big crowds, so companies say
they've already built networks to handle spikes in traffic.

The Fourth of July typically draws 300,000 people to the National
Mall, according to Verizon Wireless's estimates. The dedication of the
National World War II Memorial in May drew about 250,000. And then
there are protest marches, the cherry blossoms and major traffic
accidents, all of which tend to dramatically increase calling.

The predictability of such events as the inauguration makes them
easier to plan for, said Tim Dykstra, Verizon Wireless's director of
system performance for the Washington-Baltimore area. Verizon Wireless
keeps usage logs of past events such as former president Ronald Reagan
(news - web sites)'s funeral, then it makes adjustments after each big
event, so it already has enough capacity to handle most events, he
said.

Cingular Wireless LLC, which recently acquired AT&T Wireless Services
Inc., should be in good shape for the inauguration because it now has
double its previous network capacity and plenty of room for spillover
traffic, said Frank T. Iovino, the company's vice president and
general manager for the Washington-Baltimore area.

"They've got Washington pretty well covered," Frank Dzubeck, president
of Washington-based telecom consultancy Communications Network
Architects Inc., said of the cellular phone companies. Although there
are known dead spots close to the White House and CIA (news - web
sites) headquarters in Langley where wireless signals are blocked for
security reasons, he said, most callers even in the busiest areas
shouldn't have problems.

Dzubeck added that pressure on cellular systems in downtown Washington
should be eased because Inauguration Day will be a holiday for federal
workers.

In case of unexpected problems or emergencies, Cingular said it offers
some politicians and emergency workers wireless priority access --
they can dial secret codes that ensure their calls get priority even
when a network is jammed.

Nextel, which has a big customer base among police and emergency
workers, anticipates a quadrupling of traffic from such workers during
the inauguration, Meacham said. To support them, Nextel will also keep
some workers at the multi-agency police command center to coordinate
public safety communications in case of an emergency.

Often what happens at the command center is more mundane, he said:
Public safety personnel need help figuring out how to use their
BlackBerry devices, or they want extra phone batteries.

Staff researcher Meg Smith contributed to this report.

Copyright 2004 The Washington Post Company.
Copyright 2004 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily.

*** 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 Washington Post Company and Yahoo News.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: ed <ejwood@comcast.net>
Subject: Wall-Mounted Cordless Phone
Date: 31 Dec 2004 10:36:02 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I'm looking for a cordless phone with a second handset that can be
mounted on the wall in the same way many base units do.  Any
suggestions?

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 09:56:16 -0500
From: Rick Merrill <RM@THROW.net>
Subject: VoIP Problem: No Incoming Calls!


My AttCallvantage VoIP places calls, but calls from outside the ATT
system cannot reach us.  IT HAS BEEN SIX DAYS!

We have children and elderly who may need to reach us. Is there no way
too get this problem elevated to "fix now!."?

Windows xp; Linksys router; Dlink TA; Motorolla modem; Comcast cable.


rick merrill at comcast . net


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your first paragraph gives a clue to
follow up on: 'Calls from outside the AT&T system cannot reach us.'
What does this mean exactly? Have you experienced this at all, that
is known calls you make do not get back to you on your VOIP. Is
'outside the AT&T system' referring to other (non-AT&T) voip lines
or other landline phones or?  The person(s) who try to call you, are
they getting an intercept message saying call cannot be completed,
or a re-order (fast busy) tone? Or is it ringing 'open', that is the
call 'gets through' to your local phone switch but does not actually
reach your phone, or ?  If the caller is getting intercepted either by
a message or reorder tone and they are outside your LATA it may be
that AT&T (in the process of opening a new exchange for their VOIP
phones) failed to get it correctly listed in the 'tables' that other
carriers use indicating your VOIP exchange is a working exchange. 

I experienced this once. Tried to reach a lady in northern Wisconsin
using my land line (defaulted to MCI for long distance). Every
attempt, I got an intercept recording 'not in service.' On a hunch, I
tried dialing 10288 *first*, forcing the call over AT&T, and then it
went through okay. Same central office both times, but MCI did not
have it in their routing tables as a valid exchange, thus, refused to
pass the call along. I tried explaining it to repair and the business
office, but go nowhere. Finally I spoke to a lady who said "I sort of
think I know what you are talking about; give me a number to reach you
at, I am going to have someone call you back." About 30 minutes later
I got a call from a man who identified himself as a 'network technican
for AT&T', in of all places, Denver, CO. He said he knew *exactly* what
the problem was ... (I said) "yeah but can you get MCI to make the
changes required."  Oh yeah, he said, they will listen to me, they
will do as I say. I will call you back in 30 minutes or so. Sure
enough, it got fixed.

As he explained it to me, Illinois Bell (local central office) handled
'translations' for AT&T and got it correct. In theory, whenever a new
central office opens, word of same is supposed to travel around the
network so that other phone companies can 'turn it on' also in their
switches. Sometimes one or another of them fail to do so, or do it
incorrectly. He told me, "MCI tried to turn it on also, but got a
comma or white space or something wrong in their file, so as far as
their switch was concerned, that exchange did not exist." When I forced
the call (via 10288) Illinois Bell, AT&T and Wisconsin Telephone all
got it correct. When I did one plus default through MCI (Illinois Bell
to MCI), it bounced.

When I *finally* reached the lady I was calling in Wisconsin all she 
knew was 'many times, my friends in Chicago cannot reach me, but
others get through okay' (the ones using Sprint or AT&T).

So ask your family/friends/whoever that is 'not on AT&T system' to 
try calling your VOIP. If *they* (or some of them) get through just
fine, try and isolate the number they used and the telco they used.
Also, I assume you have used your own landline phone or cell phone
to try calling the VOIP and see if you get through to yourself or 
not. Let us know how your experiments and tests work out. This may
not be the fault of CallVantage at all, but rather some telco (even
AT&T!) failing to install that phone number/exchange in the 'tables'
for others to see.  And please explain what you mean by 'cannot get 
through to me on VOIP phone'.  *At what point* does their call bounce
back?  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Vonage <webmaster@vonage-forum.com>
Subject: Vonage Discussion Group Started
Date: 30 Dec 2004 21:56:22 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


If you are at all interested, I just started a new Google Group
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/Vonage to support my efforts on
http://www.vonage-forum.com to provide a means of communications for
Vonage VoIP customers.

DC

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:07:37 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Consumer Reports Story on Cell Phone Providers


At 01:22 AM 12/31/04, Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
responded to Re: Consumer Reports Story on Cell Phone Providers:

> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:09:56 -0500, LB@notmine.com wrote:

>> The new Consumer Reports magazine has a large story on cell phone
>> providers and cell phones.  You can get better info in this group, but
>> the mag has lots of info.  Will be very handy for those times when a
>> "friend" is looking for info.  I think the mag should be on newsstands
>> now.

> Take what Consumer Reports magazine has to say about cell phones with
> a grain of salt.  In past "cellular" issues they poo-pooh'd some
> carriers basically T-Mobile (then VoiceStream) because they didn't
> have fallback to older first generation analog technology.  Guess
> what?!  Lots of phones now being offered by *all* the carriers and
> don't have analog.  They out and out refused to even look at
> VoiceStream/T-Mobile because they are luddites and couldn't see what
> was coming down the pike.  If you want good recommendations or
> information about cellular service look at what they have to say, but
> take it with a grain of salt.  They do much better testing washing
> machines, riding lawn mowers or crash worthiness of automobiles.

Depends on what you want to use the phone for and where. Coverage of
T-Mobile is still a bit spotty, even on interstates. But digital
coverage has improved for all networks. For emergency calls you best
carry an inactivated bag phone in the trunk (I still do), which will
let you call 911 almost anywhere.

There's also the issue of how much roaming the carrier will permit. In
England, using Virgin, I had trouble in Port Isaac, but friends using
Orange had no trouble at all. In Washington, if you're not on Verizon,
when you're in the Metro you're roaming. Sprint is the only other CDMA
carrier: everyone else is out of luck (or in luck, depending on your
attitude toward not getting calls for a few minutes).

Some newspapers will, from time to time, do a feature story about cell
phone reception in their city. The Washington Post does it about once
a year, testing all the carriers from some busy corners and from some
notorious dead zones. This is the most important information. I know
people who have poor reception in their own houses. Indeed, until they
put in a new tower a while ago, I often missed calls when I was in my
second-story suburban office. And my children, with different
carriers, had to go outside to make calls.

------------------------------

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: Consumer Reports Story on Cell Phone Providers
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 07:34:57 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


Joseph wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:09:56 -0500, LB@notmine.com wrote:

>> The new Consumer Reports magazine has a large story on cell phone
>> providers and cell phones.  You can get better info in this group, but
>> the mag has lots of info.  Will be very handy for those times when a
>> "friend" is looking for info.  I think the mag should be on newsstands
>> now.

> Take what Consumer Reports magazine has to say about cell phones with
> a grain of salt.  In past "cellular" issues they poo-pooh'd some
> carriers basically T-Mobile (then VoiceStream) because they didn't
> have fallback to older first generation analog technology.  Guess
> what?!  Lots of phones now being offered by *all* the carriers and
> don't have analog.  They out and out refused to even look at
> VoiceStream/T-Mobile because they are luddites and couldn't see what
> was coming down the pike.  If you want good recommendations or
> information about cellular service look at what they have to say, but
> take it with a grain of salt.  They do much better testing washing
> machines, riding lawn mowers or crash worthiness of automobiles.

Agreed.  The fact that they use "taste experts" for food and do not
ask some experts for tech stuff bothers me.  But he article is a
start, esp for those not into newsgroups <bg>

LB

------------------------------

From: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: Consumer Reports Story on Cell Phone Providers
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 06:00:17 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


Joseph wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:09:56 -0500, LB@notmine.com wrote:

> Take what Consumer Reports magazine has to say about cell phones with
> a grain of salt.  In past "cellular" issues they poo-pooh'd some
> carriers basically T-Mobile (then VoiceStream) because they didn't
> have fallback to older first generation analog technology.  Guess
> what?!  Lots of phones now being offered by *all* the carriers and
> don't have analog.  They out and out refused to even look at
> VoiceStream/T-Mobile because they are luddites and couldn't see what
> was coming down the pike.  If you want good recommendations or
> information about cellular service look at what they have to say, but
> take it with a grain of salt.  They do much better testing washing
> machines, riding lawn mowers or crash worthiness of automobiles.

One good piece of advice they do give is that none of the wireless
carriers give a squat about their customers.

The fact that service contracts are not pro-rated, at least in the
latter stages, is one good example.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 01:43:56 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Such Carnage is Hard to Believe!


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com commented on Re: Such Carnage is Hard to Believe!
on Date: 30 Dec 2004 11:53:38 -0800

> TELECOM Digest Editor wrote:

>> That disturbance of the earth over around s.e. Asia on Sunday has
>> certainly taken its toll.

> If such waves hit either the east or west coast of the U.S., how far
> inland would the destruction be?  One mile?  Ten miles?  How much
> shoreline (ie length) would be affected?

> For example, say the wave were to hit Coney Island in Brooklyn NY,
> how much of Brooklyn would've been destroyed?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was an interesting article in
> Yahoo News earlier today discussing this very topic. It appears there
> is an area fifty or a hundred miles in the Pacific Ocean roughly off
> the coast of San Jose/San Francisco which is very earthquake prone
> according to siesmologists. I guess it is just a matter of time. You
> may have also seen in the news that hungry crockodiles got washed
> ashore in the Indonesia area this week, and although the little guys
> do not go out of their way to attack/eat humans, they certainly will
> do so when they get aggravated/agitated enough to do so.   PAT]

It's a simple matter of geography -- how flat is the coast. I used to
live in Brooklyn, about 3 miles from Jamaica Bay, and about 5 miles
from the sea. I was at the 20 foot contour on the map. In Maine the 20
foot contour may well be practically on the beach. Even in Staaten
Island (Richmond), New York City there are places where there are high
hills right at the beach.  At a guess, a 20 foot wave would sweep most
coastal cities in the eastern US. Luckily, most of the Atlantic is not
seismically active. The Caribbean is active, however, and so is
Iceland.

The real question is whether there are two plates colliding under the
Atlantic: if there aren't, then major Tsunamis are unlikely.

The Pacific is subject to Tsunamis. There have been several reminders
of the Easter one in 1964 that sent 60 foot waves into
Alaska. (Luckily, much of the Alaskan coast is mountainous.)

------------------------------

From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <spamtrap100@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Silly Cell Phone "Ring Amplifier"
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 08:47:10 -0700
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) wrote:

> No one had a pointer to any cell phone ring amplifiers when I was
> looking for one a while back, so having time to kill over Christmas, I
> made my own. Find the tale of the insanity at:

>   http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley/phonetale/phonetail.html

Wow. I'm impressed big time. I thought the days of home breadboarding
were long gone.

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Drill Bit Size
Organization: ATCC
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:06:51 -0500


In article <telecom23.624.15@telecom-digest.org>, nospam@crashelex.com
says:

> I wrote:

>>> I have a 5/8" spade bit...

> Tony P. replied:

>> 5/8" seems huge. You can get CAT-5 through a quarter inch hole ...

> Mea culpa -- I meant to say 5/16".  Kinda makes a difference, doesn't 
> it? :-)

Indeed it does. It never hurts to have a set of bits though from 1" 
boring bits on down. 

------------------------------

From: Jeff C <jeff_c10@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: USTA Sends Strange Letter to Wal-Mart
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:27:34 -0800
Organization: Not organized enough to have an organization
Reply-To: jeff_c10@hotmail.com


On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 09:52:26 -0500, Rick Merrill <RM@THROW.net> wrote:

> What's this? Is it The latest in Cancelbot technique??

That was a forged post by a USENET vandal known as "hipcrime". Dippy
hates USENET, and especially it hates news.admin.net-abuse.email, so
it wrote a piece of abuseware known as "newsagent" that allows it to
forge supercede posts and force follow-ups to flood NANAE with
thousands of "WTF" posts such as yours.

What to do about it is simple. First, look at the headers of a few
forged posts, and filter on the commonly identifiable elements. Lately
dippy's been abusing news servers in American Universities. If you
subscribe to a service such as Supernews, the filtering is already
done for you. Second, if you feel you MUST reply to a dippyspew post,
look very carefully at where the post will be sent before you send it.
This will ensure that you don't accidentally pollute another group
thus doing dippy's vandalism for it. Third, now that you're immune to
this id10t, join in the defense by posting a message similar to this
one whenever you see a dippyspew in your newsgroup. The more people
who know about dippy, the less damage it can do.

------------------------------

From: jaykchan@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Connect to Skype with Multiple Phones Around the House?
Date: 31 Dec 2004 10:47:08 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


The tech support from the company who is selling the USB VoIP base
unit suggested me to use a cordless phone that has multiple remote
units; then I can put the remote cordless phone units in the living
room and in the bedroom.  I guess I just need to figure out which
multiple-units cordless phone is good, and I will be all set.

Jay Chan

------------------------------

From: Brad Houser <bradDOThouser@intel.com>
Subject: Re: Connect to Skype with Multiple Phones Around the House?
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:01:48 -0800
Organization: Intel
Reply-To: Brad Houser <bradDOThouser@intel.com>


<jaykchan@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:telecom23.624.10@telecom-digest.org:

> I intend to get a VoIP USB base unit from pcphoneline to
> control Skype in the PC using USB; it has a phone jack that I can plug
> my cordless phone into it.

(snippage)

> Can I connect multiple phone line to the VoIP USB base unit mentioned
> above?

You can connect one phone _line_ with multiple phones sharing the
line. When you have two or more phones in one house, all using the
same line, they are essentially connected in parallel. The only issue
is how many ringers can you ring at once, as they all use some of the
limited ring current capacity.  Most new phones use very little
current, so this should not be an issue. Old phones with mechanical
bells would stop ringing if you tried to put more than 5 on one telco
line.

> Then I can run cables to various locations in my house. Running
> cable is no big deal because I have already run cat-6 cables around the
> house for networking. I can easliy change the cat-6 jack with a
> phone-jack. What I am wondering is whether there will be any conflict
> in the base unit if I plug a lot of phone lines into it. How to connect
> many phone lines into it anyway? I mean ... physically?

Think of the phone line as a pair of wires, say green and red. The
green/red wire pair will connect from one jack to the next, to the
next, etc in a line or you can tie them all together in one place,
called a home run.  Just remember to wire green to green and red to
red. Usually green and red connect to the two center pins (3 and 2
respectively) in an RJ-11 jack.

Brad Houser

------------------------------

From: Lachlan  Mullen <lachlanmullen@gmail.com>
Subject: Help Hooking up Pay Phone
Date: 31 Dec 2004 14:24:50 -0800


Have any of you guys ever had your pay phone ask for an
"identification number"?

The company that made my phone is Rand of Phoenix, who is now out of
business.

I would love to get the phone working, but can't seem to find the
identification number which is needed to get a dial tone when the
phone is first set up.

Very strange.

------------------------------

From: John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Can Someone PINGing Really Screw Your Network
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 22:25:45 GMT


On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:31:31 -0500, Gene S. Berkowitz wrote:

> In article <telecom23.624.5@telecom-digest.org>,
> BertieBigBollox@gmail.com says:

>> Read somewhere that if someone continually pings your network, the
>> server will eventually fall over.appening?

> Ping can be set to send up to 65,500 bytes per packet. Usually the
> "ping of death" is sent from many sources at once.  Eventually the
> server spends so much time replying to the pings, it can't get any
> real work done.

Or, the pipe is flooded. Somebody did that a few years ago to one of
the free firewall gurus. He had to get his ISP to block it upstream.

------------------------------

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: That's It, Folks!
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:30:00 EST


Borowing a line from the old Looney Tunes cartoons of Warner Brothers,
and sounding like a stuttering rabbit, who pops his head out of the
curtain at the end of the show, I bring to an end the messages in
Volume 23, for year 2004 of this Digest. We will open tomorrow or
Sunday with Volume 24, and an all new round of messages and chances
for you to kick old Patrick around as needed. 

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.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************


   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V23 #626
******************************
